Open Access
Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst.
Number 421, 2020
Article Number 10
Number of page(s) 4
Published online 12 February 2020
  • Bo T, Doretto A, Laini A, Bona F, Fenoglio S. 2017. Biomonitoring with macroinvertebrate communities in Italy: what happened to our past and what's the future? J Limnol 76: 21–28. [Google Scholar]
  • Böhmer J, Rawer-Jost C, Zenker A. et al. 2004. Assessing streams in Germany with benthic invertebrates: Development of a multimetric invertebrate based assessment system. Limnologica 34: 416–432. [Google Scholar]
  • Bradley DC, Ormerod, SJ. 2002. Evaluating the precision of kick-sampling in upland streams for assessments of long-term change: the effects of sampling effort, habitat and rarity. Arch Hydrobiol 155: 199–221. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Burgazzi G, Guareschi S, Laini A. 2018. The role of small-scale spatial location on macroinvertebrate community in an intermittent stream. Limnetica 37: 319–340. [Google Scholar]
  • Carter JL, Resh VH. 2001. After site selection and before data analysis: sampling, sorting, and laboratory procedures used in stream benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring programs by USA state agencies. J N Am Benthol Soc 20: 658–682. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Doretto A, Piano E, Bona F, Fenoglio S. 2018. How to assess the impact of fine sediments on the macroinvertebrate communities of alpine streams? A selection of the best metrics. Ecol Indic 84: 60–69. [Google Scholar]
  • Everall NC, Johnson MF, Wood P, Farmer A, Wilby RL, Measham N. 2017. Comparability of macroinvertebrate biomonitoring indices of river health derived from semi-quantitative and quantitative methodologies. Ecol Indic 78: 437–448. [Google Scholar]
  • Flotemersch JE, Saavedra JM, Laffitte L, Laurenzano B, Bonardi MA, Blocksom KA. 2017. Benthic macroinvertebrate field sampling effort required to produce a sample adequate for the assessment of rivers and streams of Neuquén Province, Argentina. Limnologica 65: 55–60. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Ghani WMHWA, Rawi CSM, Hamid SA, Al-Shami SA. 2016. Efficiency of different sampling tools for aquatic macroinvertebrate collections in Malaysian streams. Trop Life Sci Res 27: 115–133. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Hauer FR, Resh VH. 2017. Macroinvertebrates. In Hauer FR, Lamberti GA eds. Methods in Stream Ecology. Cambridge: Academic Press, 297–320. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hughes RM, Peck DV. 2008. Acquiring data for large aquatic resource surveys: the art of compromise among science, logistics, and reality. J N Am Benthol Soc 27: 837–859. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Li J, Herlihy A, Gerth W. et al. 2001. Variability in stream macroinvertebrates at multiple spatial scales. Freshw Biol 46: 87–97. [Google Scholar]
  • Merritt RW, Fenoglio S, Cummins KW. 2017. Promoting a functional macroinvertebrate approach in the biomonitoring of Italian lotic systems. J Limnol 76: 5–8. [Google Scholar]
  • Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Friendly M. et al. 2017. Vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2. 42. [Google Scholar]
  • Quinn JM, Hickey CW. 1994. Hydraulic parameters and benthic invertebrate distributions in two gravel‐bed New Zealand rivers. Freshw Biol 32: 489–500. [Google Scholar]
  • R Core Team. 2017. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [Google Scholar]
  • Sánchez-Montoya MM, Vidal-Abarca MR, Suárez ML. 2010. Comparing the sensitivity of diverse macroinvertebrate metrics to a multiple stressor gradient in Mediterranean streams and its influence on the assessment of ecological status. Ecol Indic 10: 896–904. [Google Scholar]
  • Stark JD. 1993. Performance of the Macroinvertebrate Community Index: effects of sampling method, sample replication, water depth, current velocity, and substratum on index values. New Zeal J Mar Fresh 27: 463–478. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Storey AW, Edward DHD, Gazey P. 1991. Surber and kick sampling: a comparison for the assessment of macroinvertebrate community structure in streams of south-western Australia. Hydrobiologia 211: 111–121. [Google Scholar]
  • Tubić B, Popović N, Raković M, Petrovic A, Simić V, Paunović M, 2017. Comparison of the effectiveness of kick and sweep hand net and Surber net sampling techniques used for collecting aquatic macroinvertebrate samples. Arch Biol Sci 69: 233–238. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.