Assessing coastal benthic macrofauna community condition using best professional judgement--developing consensus across North America and Europe.

Benthic indices are typically developed independently by habitat, making their incorporation into large geographic scale assessments potentially problematic because of scaling inequities. A potential solution is to establish common scaling using expert best professional judgment (BPJ). To test if experts from different geographies agree on condition assessment, sixteen experts from four regions in USA and Europe were provided species-abundance data for twelve sites per region. They ranked samples from best to worst condition and classified samples into four condition (quality) categories. Site rankings were highly correlated among experts, regardless of whether they were assessing samples from their home region. There was also good agreement on condition category, though agreement was better for samples at extremes of the disturbance gradient. The absence of regional bias suggests that expert judgment is a viable means for establishing a uniform scale to calibrate indices consistently across geographic regions.

[1]  Á. Borja,et al.  Ecological status assessment in the lower Eo estuary (Spain). The challenge of habitat heterogeneity integration: a benthic perspective. , 2008, Marine pollution bulletin.

[2]  Jean-Claude Dauvin,et al.  Paradox of estuarine quality: benthic indicators and indices, consensus or debate for the future. , 2007, Marine pollution bulletin.

[3]  R. Leemans,et al.  Comparing global vegetation maps with the Kappa statistic , 1992 .

[4]  S. Weisberg,et al.  The level of agreement among experts applying best professional judgment to assess the condition of benthic infaunal communities , 2008 .

[5]  H. Teixeira,et al.  Ecological Indicators for Coastal and Estuarine Environmental Assessment - A User Guide , 2009 .

[6]  S. Benyi,et al.  SEDIMENT QUALITY OF THE NY/NJ HARBOR SYSTEM: A 5-Year Revisit , 2003 .

[7]  Brian D. Fath,et al.  Review and evaluation of estuarine biotic indices to assess benthic condition , 2009 .

[8]  Angel Borja,et al.  An approach to the intercalibration of benthic ecological status assessment in the North Atlantic ecoregion, according to the European Water Framework Directive. , 2007, Marine pollution bulletin.

[9]  J. Word The infaunal trophic index, a functional approach to benthic community analyses , 1990 .

[10]  I. Muxika,et al.  The suitability of the marine biotic index (AMBI) to new impact sources along European coasts , 2005 .

[11]  Ángel Borja,et al.  The European water framework directive: A challenge for nearshore, coastal and continental shelf research , 2005 .

[12]  Juan Bald,et al.  Implementation of the European water framework directive from the Basque country (northern Spain): a methodological approach. , 2004, Marine pollution bulletin.

[13]  J. Rosen,et al.  A benthic index of biological integrity for assessing habitat quality in estuaries of the southeastern USA , 1999 .

[14]  S. Weisberg,et al.  Calibration and evaluation of five indicators of benthic community condition in two California bay and estuary habitats. , 2009, Marine pollution bulletin.

[15]  X. Montaudouin,et al.  Development of a multimetric approach to assess perturbation of benthic macrofauna in Zostera noltii beds. , 2009 .

[16]  S. J. Hall Physical disturbance and marine benthic communities: life in unconsolidated sediments , 1994 .

[17]  J. Dauvin,et al.  The ecological quality status of the Bay of Seine and the Seine estuary: use of biotic indices. , 2007, Marine pollution bulletin.

[18]  Roberto J. Llansó,et al.  Assessing estuarine benthic quality conditions in Chesapeake Bay: A comparison of three indices , 2008 .

[19]  J. Dauvin,et al.  “Using historical data, expert judgement and multivariate analysis in assessing reference conditions and benthic ecological status, according to the European Water Framework Directive”, , 2007 .

[20]  J. Dauvin,et al.  Polychaete/amphipod ratio revisited. , 2007, Marine pollution bulletin.

[21]  I. Muxika,et al.  The application of a Marine Biotic Index to different impact sources affecting soft-bottom benthic communities along European coasts. , 2003, Marine pollution bulletin.

[22]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[23]  Danielle G. Marty,et al.  海洋微生物群に対する3種類の油流出処理剤の効果(Marine Pollution Bulletin,10,1979) , 1980 .

[24]  Jacob Cohen A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

[25]  Á. Borja The biotic indices and the Water Framework Directive: the required consensus in the new benthic monitoring tools , 2004 .

[26]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  The Equivalence of Weighted Kappa and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient as Measures of Reliability , 1973 .

[27]  Other Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of The Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a Framework for Community Action in the Field of Water Policy (Water Framework Directive) , 2000 .

[28]  Torsten Berg,et al.  Current status of macroinvertebrate methods used for assessing the quality of European marine waters: implementing the Water Framework Directive , 2009, Hydrobiologia.

[29]  R. Alden,et al.  Statistical verification of the Chesapeake Bay benthic index of biotic integrity , 2002 .

[30]  Duncan A. Purdie Ecological Indicators for Coastal and Estuarine Environmental Assessment: A User Guide , 2010 .

[31]  S. Weisberg,et al.  An estuarine benthic index of biotic integrity (B-IBI) for Chesapeake Bay , 1997 .

[32]  Mats Blomqvist,et al.  Marine quality assessment by use of benthic species-abundance distributions: a proposed new protocol within the European Union Water Framework Directive. , 2004, Marine pollution bulletin.

[33]  R. Rosenberg,et al.  Macrobenthic succession in relation to organic enrichment and pollution of the marine environment , 1978 .

[34]  S. Weisberg,et al.  BENTHIC RESPONSE INDEX FOR ASSESSING INFAUNAL COMMUNITIES ON THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MAINLAND SHELF , 2001 .

[35]  Ángel Borja,et al.  Assessing the environmental quality status in estuarine and coastal systems: Comparing methodologies and indices , 2008 .

[36]  Stephen B. Weisberg,et al.  Relationships between benthic community condition, water quality, sediment quality, nutrient loads, and land use patterns in Chesapeake Bay , 2000 .

[37]  Donald D. MacDonald,et al.  Classifying probabilities of acute toxicity in marine sediments with empirically derived sediment quality guidelines , 2000 .

[38]  Brian H. McArdle,et al.  FITTING MULTIVARIATE MODELS TO COMMUNITY DATA: A COMMENT ON DISTANCE‐BASED REDUNDANCY ANALYSIS , 2001 .

[39]  Ángel Borja,et al.  A Marine Biotic Index to Establish the Ecological Quality of Soft-Bottom Benthos Within European Estuarine and Coastal Environments , 2000 .

[40]  Á. Borja,et al.  Assessing ecological integrity in marine waters, using multiple indices and ecosystem components: challenges for the future. , 2009, Marine pollution bulletin.

[41]  Michael Elliott,et al.  The Estuarine Quality Paradox, Environmental Homeostasis and the difficulty of detecting anthropogenic stress in naturally stressed areas. , 2007, Marine pollution bulletin.

[42]  Marti J. Anderson,et al.  A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance in ecology , 2001 .

[43]  E. Long,et al.  Calculation and uses of mean sediment quality guideline quotients: a critical review. , 2006, Environmental science & technology.

[44]  R. Valente,et al.  A review of approaches for classifying benthic habitats and evaluating habitat quality. , 2004, Journal of environmental management.