Buss Daniel F, Carlisle Daren M, Chon Tae-Soo, Culp Joseph, Harding Jon S, Keizer-Vlek Hanneke E, Robinson Wayne A, Strachan Stephanie, Thirion Christa, Hughes Robert M
Laboratório de Avaliação e Promoção da Saúde Ambiental, Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, FIOCRUZ, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil,
Environ Monit Assess. 2015 Jan;187(1):4132. doi: 10.1007/s10661-014-4132-8. Epub 2014 Dec 9.
Water quality agencies and scientists are increasingly adopting standardized sampling methodologies because of the challenges associated with interpreting data derived from dissimilar protocols. Here, we compare 13 protocols for monitoring streams from different regions and countries around the globe. Despite the spatially diverse range of countries assessed, many aspects of bioassessment structure and protocols were similar, thereby providing evidence of key characteristics that might be incorporated in a global sampling methodology. Similarities were found regarding sampler type, mesh size, sampling period, subsampling methods, and taxonomic resolution. Consistent field and laboratory methods are essential for merging data sets collected by multiple institutions to enable large-scale comparisons. We discuss the similarities and differences among protocols and present current trends and future recommendations for monitoring programs, especially for regions where large-scale protocols do not yet exist. We summarize the current state in one of these regions, Latin America, and comment on the possible development path for these techniques in this region. We conclude that several aspects of stream biomonitoring need additional performance evaluation (accuracy, precision, discriminatory power, relative costs), particularly when comparing targeted habitat (only the commonest habitat type) versus site-wide sampling (multiple habitat types), appropriate levels of sampling and processing effort, and standardized indicators to resolve dissimilarities among biomonitoring methods. Global issues such as climate change are creating an environment where there is an increasing need to have universally consistent data collection, processing and storage to enable large-scale trend analysis. Biomonitoring programs following standardized methods could aid international data sharing and interpretation.
由于在解释源自不同方案的数据时存在挑战，水质机构和科学家越来越多地采用标准化采样方法。在此，我们比较了全球不同地区和国家监测溪流的13种方案。尽管评估的国家在空间上分布广泛，但生物评估结构和方案的许多方面是相似的，从而为可能纳入全球采样方法的关键特征提供了证据。在采样器类型、网目尺寸、采样周期、二次采样方法和分类分辨率方面发现了相似之处。一致的野外和实验室方法对于合并多个机构收集的数据集以进行大规模比较至关重要。我们讨论了各方案之间的异同，并提出了监测计划的当前趋势和未来建议，特别是针对尚未存在大规模方案的地区。我们总结了其中一个地区拉丁美洲的现状，并对这些技术在该地区可能的发展路径发表了评论。我们得出结论，溪流生物监测的几个方面需要额外的性能评估（准确性、精密度、鉴别力、相对成本），特别是在比较目标栖息地（仅最常见的栖息地类型）与全场地采样（多种栖息地类型）、适当的采样和处理工作量水平以及解决生物监测方法之间差异的标准化指标时。气候变化等全球问题正在营造一种环境，在这种环境中，越来越需要有普遍一致的数据收集、处理和存储，以便进行大规模趋势分析。采用标准化方法的生物监测计划有助于国际数据共享和解释。
