1.
Simaika, John P.; Stribling, James; Lento, Jennifer; Bruder, Andreas; Poikane, Sandra; Moretti, Marcelo S.; Rivers-Moore, Nick; Meissner, Kristian; Macadam, Craig R.
Towards harmonized standards for freshwater biodiversity monitoring and biological assessment using benthic macroinvertebrates Journal Article
In: Science of The Total Environment, vol. 918, pp. 170360, 2024, ISSN: 00489697.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Bioassessment, Biodiversity, Biomonitoring, Ecological condition, Inland water, Invertebrate, Lake, River, ws-bbma, wwqa-deliverable
@article{simaika_towards_2024,
title = {Towards harmonized standards for freshwater biodiversity monitoring and biological assessment using benthic macroinvertebrates},
author = {John P. Simaika and James Stribling and Jennifer Lento and Andreas Bruder and Sandra Poikane and Marcelo S. Moretti and Nick Rivers-Moore and Kristian Meissner and Craig R. Macadam},
url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0048969724004959},
doi = {10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.170360},
issn = {00489697},
year = {2024},
date = {2024-03-01},
urldate = {2025-04-11},
journal = {Science of The Total Environment},
volume = {918},
pages = {170360},
abstract = {Monitoring programs at sub-national and national scales lack coordination, harmonization, and systematic review and analysis at continental and global scales, and thus fail to adequately assess and evaluate drivers of biodiversity and ecosystem degradation and loss at large spatial scales. Here we review the state of the art, gaps and challenges in the freshwater assessment programs for both the biological condition (bioassessment) and biodiversity monitoring of freshwater ecosystems using the benthic macroinvertebrate community. To assess the existence of nationally- and regionally- (sub-nationally-) accepted freshwater benthic macroinvertebrate protocols that are put in practice/used in each country, we conducted a survey from November 2022 to May 2023. Responses from 110 respondents based in 67 countries were received. Although the responses varied in their consistency, the responses clearly demonstrated a lack of biodiversity monitoring being done at both national and sub-national levels for lakes, rivers and artificial waterbodies. Programs for bioassessment were more widespread, and in some cases even harmonized among several countries. We identified 20 gaps and challenges, which we classed into five major categories, these being (a) field sampling, (b) sample processing and identification, (c) metrics and indices, (d) assessment, and (e) other gaps and challenges. Above all, we identify the lack of harmonization as one of the most important gaps, hindering efficient collaboration and communication. We identify the IUCN SSC Global Freshwater Macroinvertebrate Sampling Protocols Task Force (GLOSAM) as a means to address the lack of globally-harmonized biodiversity monitoring and biological assessment protocols.},
keywords = {Bioassessment, Biodiversity, Biomonitoring, Ecological condition, Inland water, Invertebrate, Lake, River, ws-bbma, wwqa-deliverable},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Monitoring programs at sub-national and national scales lack coordination, harmonization, and systematic review and analysis at continental and global scales, and thus fail to adequately assess and evaluate drivers of biodiversity and ecosystem degradation and loss at large spatial scales. Here we review the state of the art, gaps and challenges in the freshwater assessment programs for both the biological condition (bioassessment) and biodiversity monitoring of freshwater ecosystems using the benthic macroinvertebrate community. To assess the existence of nationally- and regionally- (sub-nationally-) accepted freshwater benthic macroinvertebrate protocols that are put in practice/used in each country, we conducted a survey from November 2022 to May 2023. Responses from 110 respondents based in 67 countries were received. Although the responses varied in their consistency, the responses clearly demonstrated a lack of biodiversity monitoring being done at both national and sub-national levels for lakes, rivers and artificial waterbodies. Programs for bioassessment were more widespread, and in some cases even harmonized among several countries. We identified 20 gaps and challenges, which we classed into five major categories, these being (a) field sampling, (b) sample processing and identification, (c) metrics and indices, (d) assessment, and (e) other gaps and challenges. Above all, we identify the lack of harmonization as one of the most important gaps, hindering efficient collaboration and communication. We identify the IUCN SSC Global Freshwater Macroinvertebrate Sampling Protocols Task Force (GLOSAM) as a means to address the lack of globally-harmonized biodiversity monitoring and biological assessment protocols.
