4.7 Article

Classification efficiency of the B-IBI comparing water body size classes in Chesapeake Bay

期刊

ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS
卷 63, 期 -, 页码 144-153

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.12.010

关键词

B-IBI; Benthos; Biotic index; Estuary; Water body; Chesapeake

资金

  1. University of Alicante

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (B-IBI) was developed and is currently employed for environmental assessment in Chesapeake Bay. The index consists of a variety of benthic community metrics (e.g. abundance, biomass, diversity, stress tolerance groups, etc.) scored by thresholds applied to seven benthic community habitats (tidal freshwater, oligohaline, low mesohaline, high mesohaline mud, high mesohaline sand, polyhaline mud, and polyhaline sand) This index was verified as being a sensitive and robust tool for summarizing the status of benthic communities. In our study we tested the classification efficiency of the index using new benthic data by characterizing each sample a priori as degraded or undegraded using criteria of sediment contaminant levels, bioassays and bottom dissolved oxygen levels. A primary objective of our study was to test the classification efficiency of the B-IBI in small water bodies connected to larger water bodies of the mainstems of the large rivers of Chesapeake Bay, as well as the efficiency of the index over time (1990 through 2009). The B-IBI was affected by the size of the water body, e.g., index accuracy was higher for water bodies in small watersheds in lower salinity habitats, whereas large water bodies of the mainstem of rivers were better classified by the B-IBI in habitats with higher salinities. Across the seven benthic habitat types overall correct classification was moderate to low and lower for correctly classifying undegraded sites. In general the index metrics showed some deficiencies that suggest improvements could be made by recalibrating existing metric thresholds or selecting new suitable metrics. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据