| Assessing benthic community condition in Chesapeake Bay: does the use of different benthic indices matter? | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 19052886 Owner: NLM Status: MEDLINE |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
Federal and state environmental agencies conduct several programs to characterize the environmental condition of Chesapeake Bay. These programs use different benthic indices and survey designs, and have produced assessments that differ in the estimate of the extent of benthic community degradation in Chesapeake Bay. Provided that the survey designs are unbiased, differences may exist in the ability of these indices to identify environmental degradation. In this study we compared the results of three indices calculated on the same data, and the assessments of two programs: the Chesapeake Bay Program and the Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment (MAIA). We examined the level of agreement of index results using site-based measures of agreement, evaluated sampling designs and statistical estimation methods, and tested for significant differences in assessments. Comparison of ratings of individual sites was done within separate categories of water and sediment quality to identify which indices summarize best pollution problems in Chesapeake Bay. The use of different benthic indices by these programs produced assessments that differed significantly in the estimate of degradation. A larger fraction of poor sites was classified as good by the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program's Virginian Province and MAIA benthic indices compared to the Chesapeake Bay benthic index of biotic integrity, although overall classification efficiencies were similar for all indices. Differences in survey design also contributed to differences in assessments. The relative difference between the indices remained the same when they were applied to an independent dataset, suggesting that the indices can be calibrated to produce consistent results. |
| | |
Authors:
|
Roberto J Llansó; Jon H Vølstad; Daniel M Dauer; Jodi R Dew |
Related Documents
:
|
9988516 - The role of isham: how developing and developed countries can benefit from it. internat... 20851696 - Opinion of gastroenterologists towards quality assurance in endoscopy. 9293426 - Percutaneous interventions to support failing hemodialysis fistulas and grafts. 10177306 - Quality mammography standards--fda. final rule. 18607666 - Determining the impact of walk kansas: applying a team-building approach to community p... 2656966 - A critical and comparative review of the prevention of drug and alcohol abuse in israel. |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: Journal Article Date: 2008-12-04 |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: Environmental monitoring and assessment Volume: 150 ISSN: 1573-2959 ISO Abbreviation: Environ Monit Assess Publication Date: 2009 Mar |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2009-02-09 Completed Date: 2009-04-06 Revised Date: 2009-05-11 |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 8508350 Medline TA: Environ Monit Assess Country: Netherlands |
Other Details:
|
Languages: eng Pagination: 119-27 Citation Subset: IM |
Affiliation:
|
Versar, Inc., 9200 Rumsey Rd., Columbia, MD 21045, USA. rllanso@versar.com |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
Animals Ecosystem Environmental Monitoring* / methods, statistics & numerical data Regression Analysis Residence Characteristics* Seawater* |
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: Detecting water quality patterns in New Hampshire's estuaries using National Coastal Assessment prob...
Next Document: Effects of Hurricane Katrina on benthic macroinvertebrate communities along the northern Gulf of Mex...