TY - JOUR
T1 - A comparative study of several types of indices for river quality assessment
AU - Gil-Rodas, Norma
AU - Guevara-Mora, Meyer
AU - Rivas, Gabriel
AU - Dávila, Gabriela
AU - García, Doris
AU - Contreras-Perdomo, Alejandra
AU - Alvizures, Pride
AU - Martínez, Mónica
AU - Calvo-Brenes, Guillermo
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors.
PY - 2023/8/1
Y1 - 2023/8/1
N2 - Water is vital for humans, plants, and animals; unfortunately, some anthropogenic activities adversely alter water quality (WQ). Many indicators can be used for WQ assessment; fortunately, extensive data can be simplified by using WQ indices (WQIs). The main difference among WQIs lies in the way of assessing pollution and the number and types of WQ indicators used; therefore, the selection of a reliable WQI should be the first step. This research aimed to compare several types of indices and evaluate their effectiveness. Eighteen sampling sites were monitored, and the selected indices showed different results. Biological indices exhibited a significant statistical correlation and yet different quality results. In addition, biological WQIs showed different outcomes from the physicochemical index. The high concentrations of phosphates, fecal coliforms, and biological oxygen demand, found in most rivers, were responsible for adversely influencing the quality results of the physicochemical index; however, their high concentrations found in some sampling sites had no adverse effect on the macroinvertebrate’s existence; therefore, biological WQ assessment showed better quality results than the physicochemical index. The Rapid Bioassessment Protocol index, based on visual habitat observations, proved to be an easy way to classify WQ and an adequate replacement for biological indices.
AB - Water is vital for humans, plants, and animals; unfortunately, some anthropogenic activities adversely alter water quality (WQ). Many indicators can be used for WQ assessment; fortunately, extensive data can be simplified by using WQ indices (WQIs). The main difference among WQIs lies in the way of assessing pollution and the number and types of WQ indicators used; therefore, the selection of a reliable WQI should be the first step. This research aimed to compare several types of indices and evaluate their effectiveness. Eighteen sampling sites were monitored, and the selected indices showed different results. Biological indices exhibited a significant statistical correlation and yet different quality results. In addition, biological WQIs showed different outcomes from the physicochemical index. The high concentrations of phosphates, fecal coliforms, and biological oxygen demand, found in most rivers, were responsible for adversely influencing the quality results of the physicochemical index; however, their high concentrations found in some sampling sites had no adverse effect on the macroinvertebrate’s existence; therefore, biological WQ assessment showed better quality results than the physicochemical index. The Rapid Bioassessment Protocol index, based on visual habitat observations, proved to be an easy way to classify WQ and an adequate replacement for biological indices.
KW - biological
KW - indices
KW - macroinvertebrates
KW - physicochemical
KW - water quality
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85170096652&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2166/wqrj.2023.029
DO - 10.2166/wqrj.2023.029
M3 - Artículo
AN - SCOPUS:85170096652
SN - 2709-8044
VL - 58
SP - 169
EP - 183
JO - Water Quality Research Journal
JF - Water Quality Research Journal
IS - 3
ER -