Abstract
The methodological standards of monitoring programs recommend collecting material from stones, but this community is often absent in slow-flowing waters, whereas a great number of localities do offer bryophytic material for sampling. In order to investigate whether the kind of substrate (epilithic or bryophytic) influences the diatom-based biomonitoring results the structure of diatom assemblages from 13 anthropogenically altered springs were investigated. To examine differences between diatom assemblages, the species richness of diatom assemblages, H′ (Shannon-Wiener diversity index), Trophic Diatom Index (TDI) and Specific Pollution sensitivity Index (SPI) were compared. The TDI and SPI differed significantly (P = 0.002 and P = 0.004) between springs located in villages and springs away from villages, and did not differ significantly between epilithic and bryophytic samples (P > 0.05). No significant differences in species richness or the diversity index (H′) (P > 0.05) were found between the epilithic and bryophytic diatom assemblages. This study suggests that both the kinds of substrates can be successfully used for diatom-based water-quality biomonitoring in mesotrophic and eutrophic environments.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
