Bevilacqua Maria Silvina, Vitório Amanda, Felix Rodrigo Weber, Ribeiro Enoque Gonçalves, Bozelli Reinaldo Luiz, Figueiredo-Barros Marcos Paulo, de Assis Esteves Francisco
Laboratório de Ecologia Aquática, Instituto de Biodiversidade e Sustentabilidade, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (NUPEM/UFRJ), Macae, Brazil.
Laboratório de Limnologia, Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Environ Monit Assess. 2020 Oct 17;192(11):708. doi: 10.1007/s10661-020-08676-6.
This study aimed to compare the efficiency of two different sizes of the Surber sampler to assess benthic macroinvertebrates in headwater streams in two Amazonian regions. Two Surber samplers of different sizes were used, one measuring 20 × 20 cm and the other 30 × 30 cm, both with a 0.25-mm net. The number of replicates taken was 6 for the smaller sampler and 3 for the bigger one, maintaining approximately the same total sampled area. The study was carried out in 12 headwater streams with different environmental conditions. Biological metrics were calculated for each size at each site and compared within each stream health category. A two-way analysis of similarities test was performed to compare the community structure assessed by each method at each stream. A normalized sampling effort was used to quantify the number of samples required to correctly sample each site. The data did not show a significant difference between the two sizes regarding the taxonomic recruitment and the community structure sampled at each stream, but differences were found between the two sizes in dominance values and in Shannon index scores for the natural sites. Furthermore, the smaller Surber was able to assess 70% of the estimated richness in all sites, which suggests that it is better to assess benthic macroinvertebrates than the larger Surber. Moreover, the smaller Surber is easier to transport in the field, reducing the effort of the technician, and takes less time to sort the material collected with it, which can reduce the sample processing effort, therefore reducing the cost of the project.
本研究旨在比较两种不同尺寸的苏伯采样器在评估亚马逊地区两个源头溪流底栖大型无脊椎动物方面的效率。使用了两种不同尺寸的苏伯采样器,一种尺寸为20×20厘米,另一种为30×30厘米,两者均配有0.25毫米的网。较小采样器的重复采样次数为6次,较大采样器为3次,以保持大致相同的总采样面积。该研究在12条具有不同环境条件的源头溪流中进行。在每个站点计算每种尺寸的生物指标,并在每个溪流健康类别中进行比较。进行了双向相似性分析测试,以比较每种方法在每条溪流中评估的群落结构。使用标准化采样工作量来量化正确采样每个站点所需的样本数量。数据显示,在分类群招募和每条溪流采样的群落结构方面,两种尺寸之间没有显著差异,但在自然站点的优势值和香农指数得分方面,两种尺寸之间存在差异。此外,较小的苏伯采样器能够评估所有站点估计丰富度的70%,这表明它在评估底栖大型无脊椎动物方面比大型苏伯采样器更好。此外,较小的苏伯采样器在野外更易于运输,减少了技术人员的工作量,并且对用其收集的材料进行分类所需的时间更少,这可以减少样本处理工作量,从而降低项目成本。