Evaluation of Four Live-Sorting Methods for Use in Rapid Biological Assessments Using Macroinvertebrates

Abstract

Rapid bioassessment (RBA) techniques for evaluating river health are now commonplace and there is much debate on the best methods that should be used. One of the important features of RBA is subsampling of large qualitative or semi-quantitative samples to reduce the costs associated with handling and identifying animals. In Australia, the Australian River Assessment System (known as "AusRivAS") has been widely used since 1994 to monitor and assess river health. To test the efficacy of AusRivAS protocols, four live-sorting protocols, the standard Australian River Assessment Scheme (AusRivAS) and three suggested improvements, were evaluated in three habitat types and in clear and turbid rivers. The suggested improvements included using magnification during the live-sort process, separate sorting of coarse and fine fractions and increasing the amount of time or animals collected. There was no statistically significant difference between any of the trialed live-sort protocols in terms of the number of taxa collected compared to the number remaining, the community composition, the abundances of individual families collected, or the AusRivAS Observed/Expected taxa ratios. The lack of differences between the live-sort protocols suggests that technicians using the current standard AusRivAS protocols are able to effectively obtain a representative subsample of animals from the whole kick or sweep net qualitative sample. This has the advantage of cost savings because no retraining will be required, field procedures will remain uncomplicated and previous river health assessments will remain valid.