A Comparison of the Efficiency of Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Sampling Tools Used in Lotic Environmental Impact Assessment of Human Activities in A Tropical Mountain Stream in Eastern Uganda

Turyahabwe, Remigio; Mulinya, Caroline; Mulabbi, Andrew; Olowo, Moses

dc.contributor.author	Turyahabwe, Remigio
dc.contributor.author	Mulinya, Caroline
dc.contributor.author	Mulabbi, Andrew
dc.contributor.author	Olowo, Moses
dc.date.accessioned	2022-10-11T12:01:48Z
dc.date.available	2022-10-11T12:01:48Z
dc.date.issued	2022-03-11
dc.identifier.citation	Brua, R., Culp, J. & Benoy, G. (2011) Comparison of benthic macroinvertebrate communities by two methods: Kick- and U-net sampling. Hydrobiologia, 658(1), 293-302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10750-010-0499-x. Buss, D.F., Baptista, D.F. & Nessimian, J.L. (2003). Bases conceituais para a aplicação de biomonitoramento em programas de avaliação da qualidade da água de rios. Cadernos de Saude Publica, 19(2), 465-473. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0102-311X2003000200013. PMid:12764462. Buss, D.F., Carlisle, D.M., Chon, T.S., Culp, J., Harding, J.S., Keizer-Vlek, H.E., Robinson, W.A., Strachan, S., Thirion, C. &Hughes, R.M. (2015). Stream biomonitoring using macroinvertebrates around the globe: a comparison of large-scale programs. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187(1), 4132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10661-014-4132-8. Cunha, L.L., Maria I. B.A, Erika R. O, Virginia S. U (2019). Methods of sampling benthic invertebrates in lotic habitats: a spatial and temporal evaluation. Acta Limnologica Brasiliensia, 2019, (31), DOI. 10.1590/s2179-975x3917 De Pauw, N. Roels, D, & Fontoura, A.P. (1986). Use of artificial substrates for standardized sampling of macroinvertebrates in the assessment of water quality by the Belgian Biotic Index. Hydrobiologia. 133(3):237-58. Dickens, C.W., & Graham, P.M. (2002).The South African Scoring System (SASS) Version 5: rapid bioassessment method for rivers. African Journal of Aquatic Science, 2002, 27(1), 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.2989/16085914. 2002.9626569. Humphreys, J.E. Growns, L.G. Serafini, J.H. Hawking, A.J. Chick & Lake P.S (1998), macroinvertebrate sampling methods for lowland Australian rivers, Hydrobiologia. 364:209-218. Merritt, R. W. & Cummins, K. W. (1998). An introduction to the aquatic insects of North America, 3rd ed. Iowa, USA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. Pedigo, L. P., Buntin, G. D. &Bechinski, E. J. (1982). Flushing technique and sequential-count plan for green cloverworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) moths in soybeans. Environmental Entomology 11: 1223–1228. Shannon, C.E. &Weaver, W. (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication. 10th ed. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press; Southwood, T. R. E. (1978). Ecological methods with particular reference to the study of insects population, 2nd ed. London: Chapman & Hall. Stark, J. D. (1993). Performance of the Macroinvertebrate Community Index: Effects of sampling method, sample replication, water depth, current velocity, and substratum on index values. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 27(4): 463–478. Storey, A, W, Edward, D. H. D. & Gazey, P. (1991). Surber and kick sampling: A comparison for the assessment of macroinvertebrate community structure in streams of south-western Australia. Hydrobiologia 211(2): 111–121. A Comparison of the Efficiency of Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Sampling Tools Used in Lotic Environmental Impact Assessment of Human Activities in A Tropical Mountain Stream in Eastern Uganda 23 Thomaz, S.M. & Cunha, E.R. (2010). The role of macrophytes in habitat structuring in aquatic ecosystems: methods of measurement, causes and consequences on animal assemblages’ composition and biodiversity. Acta Limnologica Brasiliensia, 22(2), 218-236. http://dx.doi.org/10.4322/actalb.02202011. Thorp.J, Eileen M, McEwan.M,Flynn.F.F & Hauer (1985)., invertebrate colonisation of submerged wood in Cypress-Tupelo swamp and black water stream Am. Mdl. Nat.113: 56-68. Turyahabwe, R. Mulabbi, A. Asaba, J., & Olowo, M. (2021). Ecological responses of macroinvertebrates to an in-stream ecosystem restoration technique in a tropical Stream in Eastern Uganda. East African Journal of Environment and Natural Resources 3(1), 129-144	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://erepository.kafuco.ac.ke/123456789/142
dc.description.abstract	The study was aimed at comparing the efficiency of three macroinvertebrate sampling tools used in lotic environmental impact assessment of River Sipi including Surber sampler, rock-filled basket and Kick net sampling tools. The efficiency of the sampling tools was based on the data collected by each sampling tool, which was in turn used to calculate the Relative variation (RV) (efficiency), diversity, richness, and relative abundance, time taken to sort macroinvertebrate per sample and taxa assemblage. Data was analysed using a two-way ANOVA that was performed under the R Development Core Team 2010. The results indicated that despite the fact that all the sampling tools were efficient in sampling macroinvertebrates with RV<25%, both kick net and rock-filled basket obtained closely comparable efficiency results with Relative Variation ranging between 0.54-2% for the kick net and 1.4-3.6% for rock filled basket. Of the three sampling tools, the kick net was the most efficient, collecting a greater diversity of macroinvertebrate taxa (1.81±0.04) and a greater number of specimens (1444), abundance (66.4±0.25%), greater taxa richness (11±0.41) but required the biggest amount of time to sort macroinvertebrates (26±0.71minutes). In conclusion, the rock-filled basket served as the next best alternative efficient sampling tool to kick net in sampling macroinvertebrates	en_US
dc.language.iso	en	en_US
dc.publisher	Ghana Journal of Geography	en_US
dc.subject	Artificial substrates, Kick net, Relative variation, Rock-filled basket, sampling tools	en_US
dc.title	A Comparison of the Efficiency of Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Sampling Tools Used in Lotic Environmental Impact Assessment of Human Activities in A Tropical Mountain Stream in Eastern Uganda	en_US
dc.type	Article	en_US