United States
Environmental Protection Office of Water EPA 816-R-98-018
Agency 4606 September 1998
&EPA Biological Indicators of Ground
Water - Surface Water Interaction
Update
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water-Surface Water
Interaction: An Update
prepared for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
prepared by
The Cadmus Group, Inc.
135 Beaver Street
Waltham, MA 02154
and
Tetra Tech EM Inc.
Chicago, IL
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water-Surface Water
Interaction: An Update
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction 1
II. Background 2
III. Sampling Methods 4
Bou-Rouch 4
Freezing Core 5
Air-lift 6
Colonization Corer 8
IV. Study Methods 8
Community Approach 9
Ecotoxicological Approach 10
V. Study Settings and Contaminants 12
VI. General Evaluation 12
References Cited in this Chapter 14
Table 1 Summary of Study Settings 16
Table 2 References to Annotated Bibliography 22
-------
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water-Surface Water Interaction: An Update
I. Introduction
Ground water contributes approximately 40 percent of the surface water discharge in river
systems of the United States (U.S. Geological Survey 1988). A growing volume of evidence
indicates that contaminants contained within this ground water discharge can have a significant
impact on surface water quality. As a result, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
has documented a series of methods for quantifying the local extent and quality of contaminated
ground water discharge (EPA 1991). Until recently these assessment methods consisted primarily
of hydrologic and physicochemical techniques to determine ground water flux and pollutant load
to surface water. This chapter documents a new body of research that is focusing on the use of
organisms that spend all or part of their life cycle living in contact with ground water, to
characterize zones of ground water and surface water interaction (the hyporheic zone). This new
research is also exploring methods to provide qualitative estimates of the ground water pollutant
load impact on these organisms, as an indicator of impacts on surface water quality. In the
approach presented in this document, the hyporheic zone is defined by the presence of a particular
suite of indicator organisms that can be withdrawn by wells; these organisms spend part of their
life cycle in surface water and part in ground water. This document describes techniques for
determining the presence of these micro-organisms.
There are other approaches for defining the hyporheic zone, based on physical parameters; the
boundary may be defined by the extent of the penetration of surface water into ground water as
indicated by physical-parameter values in the ground water that are similar to the values in the
surface water. The boundary of the zone can vary with the parameter used to define it. The size
of the hyporheic zone can vary seasonally and in response to drought. Research has not
determined how rapidly hyporheic-zone organisms spread following the episodes of extensive
surface-water intrusion into ground water that result from periods of flooding, or how rapidly the
extent of the zone varies seasonally or in response to drought..
Organisms are found at great depths beneath the land surface. In karst regions, microbes and
invertebrates can be found in caves and other openings at 100 meters or more beneath the earth's
surface. Bacteria exist in ground water thousands of feet below the land surface (Frederickson,
et al 1991). However, invertebrates are typically found within 1 to 10 meters of the earth's
surface in consolidated materials (Strayer 1994). Within this shallow ground water zone, many
macroscopic invertebrates have been identified. Furthermore, the species richness and
community structure of these organisms has been shown to change with alterations in ground
water quality. Therefore, the relative presence or absence of different communities or
populations of organisms may reflect the impact of changes in regional ground water quality.
As a result, the organisms living within the shallow ground water zone can serve as indicators of
the quality of the ground water resource (Job and Simons 1994).
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 2
The hyporheic zone exists
below, and is laterally
linked to, lakes and streams
and defines the area of
ground water-surface
water interaction (Figure
1). Within the hyporheic
zone, biological community
structure varies with depth
or distance from the
surface water body.
Invertebrate, protozoa, and
bacteria population
densities appear to decline
with depth (Strayer 1994),
. Benthic Zone
Stream
Hyporheic Zone
Figure 1 Hyporheic Zone
although high bacteria populations may be observed at great depths. Invertebrate and protozoa
species richness and community structure also change with depth. Invertebrate communities
within the hyporheic zone include a mixture of species that spend part of their life cycle in surface
waters and a few specialized ground water species (Bretschko 1992). The ground water dwelling
organisms decrease in relative abundance with depth. These generalized species distributions may
alter along preferential ground-water flowpaths, such as those found in karst terrain (Strayer
1994).
Macroinvertebrates living in the hyporheic zone, such as oligochaetes, isopods, and ostracods,
have evolved special adaptations to survive in a food-, oxygen-, space-, and light-limited
environment. Studies of these environments have been designed to determine the structure and
interactions of organisms within the hyporheic community. In fact, many hyporheic organisms
have yet to be identified. However, general ecological assumptions regarding species diversity
and abundance may be applied and assist in the evaluation of the hyporheic zone.
This chapter investigates the use of biological indicators as a tool to evaluate the interaction of
ground water and surface water. Section II of this chapter provides background information on
biological indicators related to ground water and surface water interaction. Section III provides a
discussion of several hyporheic zone organism sample collection and study methods. Section IV
discusses various study settings and contaminants. Finally, Section V provides a general
evaluation of the use of biological indicators as a tool in the evaluation of ground water and
surface water interaction.
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 3
II. Background
For many years, researchers have used planktonic, macroinvertebrate, and fish communities as
indicators of pollution in both freshwater and marine environments. For example, an increase in
abundance of benthic oligochaetes may indicate sewage pollution of a surface water body. Such
biological indicators can highlight the water quality impact resulting from pollutant load from a
variety of sources, including tributary discharge, upgradient point sources, atmospheric
deposition, or ground water discharge.
Biological monitoring is typically conducted as part of an integrated assessment strategy,
comparing biological measures of species, population, or community structure with measures of
water quality. Rapid bioassessment protocols have been employed in surface water programs
since the mid-1980s to assess the impact of multiple contaminants within aquatic ecosystems
(EPA 1996). These protocols are designed to assess how multiple contaminants affect living
systems over time, even when the concentration of any one contaminant in the system may be
below detection limits. By comparing the biological and water quality characteristics of
reference areas against the characteristics of impacted areas, the predictive power of the
empirical relationship is enhanced. Once the relationship between water quality and biological
characteristics is understood, water quality impacts can be objectively discriminated from habitat
effects, and control and rehabilitation efforts can be focused on the most important source of
impairment. This same rationale can be applied to the analysis of hyporheic organisms as
indicators of water quality. It is important, however, to consider if a biological change is the
result of hydrologic factors, rather than the result of contamination.
Hyporheic organisms provide an indicator of the impact of contaminated ground water discharge.
If polluted ground water is flowing into surface water, it is reasonable to predict that organisms
within the hyporheic zone will show the effects of pollution before organisms dwelling within the
water column. As a result, changes in hyporheic organisms and communities can serve as early
indicators of pollutants entering surface water through ground water discharge.
The hyporheic zone is the primary focus for the use of biological indicators to assess contaminant
load from ground water discharge. Generally, the hyporheic zone may extend several meters
below the stream bottom and a few meters horizontally on the stream banks (Bretschko 1992). In
some cases, the hyporheic zone may extend over much larger areas. Stanford and others (1994)
have concluded that based on diverse and abundant macroinvertebrate fauna, in some cases the
hyporheic zone may extend over large areas of alluvial floodplains.
While some overlap of species between the top 10 to 15 cm of substrate (benthic zone) and
hyporheic zone exists, researchers have discovered organisms that live only in the hyporheic zone.
In fact, investigators use these organisms to delineate the extent of the hyporheic zone and
examine ground water and surface water interaction. For example, Lafont and others (1992)
found that the oligchaete worm Phallodrilus sp. appeared to be a good indicator of the magnitude
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 4
of exchange between a river and an adjacent aquifer. Furthermore, investigators can assess the
impact of pollutant load to the hyporheic zone by studying changes in relative community
structure and species populations. For example, the hyporheic zone is typically food and oxygen
limited. Sewage pollution increases available nutrients and may lead to the appearance and
dominance of epigean species (species that live near the ground surface) within the hyporheic
zone.
Organisms living in karst channels or subterranean caves, or those that spend only a portion of
their life cycle in the subsurface, can also indicate the presence of contaminated ground water.
Physiological changes within hyporheic organisms and changes in population distribution may
suggest the presence of a certain type of pollutant, such as nutrients, pesticides, or metals. For
example, ecotoxicological study methods examine the effects of acute or chronic pollutant
exposure on hyporheic organisms. Study methods are also being developed that examine changes
in population characteristics to determine ground water and surface water exchange and the
impacts of pollutants. For example, Malard and others (1996) divided cave-dwelling organisms
into three ecological categories: stygobites, stygophiles, and stygoxenes. Stygobites live their
whole lives in ground water, stygophiles live primarily in ground water but may also live in
surface water, and stygoxenes are epigean organisms that do not develop properly when found in
ground water. Ward and Stanford (1989) divided ground water organisms of alluvial aquifers
into two groups, those that temporarily move from the stream floor to the subsurface, such as
insect larvae, and those that live permanently below the surface and are rarely found on the stream
floor, such as choronimids and amphipods. Observed changes in hyporheic community structure
may serve as an indicator of pollutant load. However, little is known about the variety of
organisms residing in this ecosystem and most studies are still attempting to determine the
structure and distribution of the hyporheic community. Changes in community structure may also
reflect a change in other factors, such as short- or long-term precipitation patterns or amounts,
which can alter the near-stream hydraulic gradient (the slope and direction of the water table).
III. Sampling Methods
In the last ten years, a relatively small number of researchers has been responsible for much of the
published literature addressing the use of biological indicators in the hyporheic zone. New
biological-indicator methods are under constant development. Each of the methods described
below is designed to collect organisms living within a portion of the hyporheic zone. Most studies
completed to date use the Bou-Rouch sampler (Bou and Rouch, 1967), but there are variations
on this method, including the colonization corer and freeze corer. In addition, investigators have
recently developed a new method for sampling ground water organisms in karst aquifers. The
following discussions present a description of several sampling methods and associated
assumptions and limitations.
Bou-Rouch
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 5
The Bou-Rouch sampler consists of a calibrated pipe, called a standpipe, about 1.5 meter (m)
long and 2.5 centimeters (cm) in diameter. A steel cone seals the bottom of the standpipe; its
shape assists insertion into sediment. Ten centimeters from the steel cone there is a 15 cm
perforated screen section with 5 millimeter (mm) diameter holes. This screen section allows entry
of animals and sediment into the standpipe. Investigators drive the standpipe into the sediment
with a 2 kilogram (kg) weight. When collecting samples from streambank alluvium, a hole can be
dug to the water table before insertion of the pipe to reduce the chance of collecting non-
hyporheic organisms (Ward et al 1989). After standpipe insertion, the investigator removes the
weight and fits a pump to the top of the pipe. The pump pulls water, organisms, and sediment
into the standpipe through the screen section. The water, organisms, and sediment travel up the
standpipe and eventually through a 1-mm mesh sieve and silk plankton net. Dole-Olivier and
Marmonier (1992), who were studying the effects of storms on the vertical distribution of
organisms, left permanent standpipes in place over a 15 month period and sampled from them at
given intervals after storms.
Assumptions and limitations
The Bou-Rouch standpipe has only a small portion of its length (10-15 cm) open to the interstitial
(between-grain) environment. It can collect organisms only at the depth to which the investigator
places the open segment. This makes it useful for comparing organisms found at a specific depth
across a transect, but not for determining the vertical distribution of organisms at one site. In
order to obtain vertical distributions of species, the investigator must insert the standpipe into the
sediment several times at one site, to a different depth each time.
The Bou-Rouch method may result in inaccuracies in the number of animals depending on the size
of the corer used. Small standpipes (25 cubic cm) may collect a smaller proportion of large
sediment particles with which large animals are associated. Likewise, large standpipes (100
cubic cm) may collect a larger proportion of large particles and the large organisms associated
with them.
Freezing Core
The freezing core method (Stocker and Williams 1972) uses a standpipe similar to that of the
Bou-Rouch method, except the screen section covers the last 60 cm of the standpipe rather than
the last 15 cm. The investigator inserts the standpipe into the sediment by pounding with a sleeve
that fits over the pipe. After insertion, the investigator removes the sleeve and releases liquid
nitrogen into the standpipe tubing. The investigator removes the standpipe tubing after the liquid
nitrogen flows for 15 minutes. At the bottom of the standpipe, the nitrogen passes through the
holes in the pipe and freezes everything within a 10 cm radius of a 30 cm length of the pipe. The
investigator uses a winch to remove the standpipe from the sediment. Application of ice will
preserve the core for several weeks. For processing, the investigator cuts the standpipe into
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 6
10 cm sections and removes the core from the standpipe with a knife. Subsequent processing of
the sections involves melting, drying, and sieving. Researchers are experimenting with a variation
of this method that introduces electricity to paralyze the organisms before the liquid nitrogen
application.
Assumptions and limitations
The freezing core method is most useful for its preservation of animals and sediment in situ. It
also preserves the vertical distribution for depths up to a 30 cm. However, fewer animals can be
obtained with this method as compared to other methods. This reduction in sampling efficiency
may result from the ability of mobile animals to escape from the cold before freezing occurs. The
variation of the freezing core method that introduces electricity into the corer to paralyze or
"electroposition" the organisms before the liquid nitrogen application may increase efficiency.
This "electropositioning" may eliminate the escape of organisms and therefore, increase the
number of organisms captured.
Air-lift
Malard and others (1994) developed the air-lift method for karst aquifers. Previously,
investigators could only collect samples from springs or caves when floods washed the organisms
into a collection device. However, organisms live throughout karst systems in fractures or other
areas not accessible to humans. The air-lift system enables sample collection from these areas.
Air-lift pumps are useful for sampling fauna because they contain no parts that can damage the
organisms. In addition, air-lift pumps install easily into observation wells. However, they are not
for use in production wells, since production wells alter the hydrology and thus, the ecology of
the sampled area.
Air-lift pumps (Figure 2) force compressed air to the bottom of a well through a small diameter
air injection pipe. At the bottom of the well, the air injection pipe feeds into a ground water
discharge pipe. Inside the discharge pipe, the air mixes with the water producing a mixture with a
relative density that is lower than that of the water in the well. This air-water mixture rises up the
discharge pipe to the ground surface, carrying fauna with it. At ground surface, the air-water
mixture containing the ground water fauna passes through a mesh collection filter.
For effective operation, investigators must balance the relationship between the densities of the
well water and the air-water mixture. Theoretically, one could compensate for a low water level
or a deep well by increasing the rate of air injection, thereby decreasing the density of the air and
water mix. In practice, at high injection rates, the air and water do not mix at all, and the air rises
by itself. In addition, the diameter of the discharge pipe and specific type of air injection
equipment are critical factors of effective air-lift method operation.
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 7
Groundwater
Discharge
Discharge Pipe
(Air and Water)
Iron Tube -
7-Kg Weight-
Air from Compressor
Air Injection Pipe
— ->- - Static Water Level
Dynamic Water Level (DL)
Figure 2 Design of the air-lift used for sampling groundwater invertebrates in deep wells
(Malard and others 1994).
Ward and Stanford (1989) used a similar method in an alluvial aquifer. Their method differed
from the air-lift method in that they pumped water directly, without the use of compressed air.
They lowered a tube into the 10 m deep wells and used a gasoline engine pump to collect samples.
Assumptions and limitations
The air-lift method is still in the early stages of development, however it appears quite useful. It is
difficult to examine sampling consistency with this method, because the sampling environment,
fractured rock, is highly irregular. Fractures may vary greatly in size and distribution.
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 8
Colonization Corer
Fraser and others (1996) developed a colonization corer that is a combination of a fauna sampler
and a hydrologic sampler. It allows hyporheic organisms to colonize artificial substrate.
Similarly, investigators have widely employed the use of an artificial substrate for sample
collection of benthic organisms. The colonization corer consists of an internal acrylic tube 160
cm long and 3.2 cm in diameter that contains an artificial substrate. Typically, the artificial
substrate is sediment with a vertical particle distribution matching that of the stream bed. The
tube consists of five sections with a distance between each section of 20 cm. Each section
contains 100 5-mm diameter holes. This tube fits inside an outer 4.2 cm diameter steel pipe. The
outer steel pipe has the same perforation configuration as the inserted acrylic tube. Therefore,
organisms can enter the corer through the holes and colonize the artificial substrate in the acrylic
tube. Protective steel caps seal the bottom and top of the colonization corer.
Attached to the outer pipe are five, 1.3 cm diameter steel pipes that provide access for water
collection and water level readings. Each of these small diameter pipes has two rows of 0.2 cm
diameter holes 55, 75, 95, 115, or 135 cm from the top of the pipe. To determine depth of water
collection and obtain water level readings, the investigator seals the small diameter pipes below
the desired row of holes or depth. The colonization corer is left in place for at least nine weeks to
allow fauna and organic matter to infiltrate to levels found in the natural environment. The
investigator pulls the tubes from the sediment with a winch and wraps the tube in plastic to keep
organisms from falling out. The investigator then cuts the inner acrylic tube into the 20 cm
sections and places the contents in plastic jars with preservative and stain.
Essafi and others (1992) also used an artificial substrate to retrieve Niphargus rhenorhodanensis.
They used a perforated pipe 10 cm in diameter and 50 cm long. The artificial substrate was five
stacked 6 mm mesh baskets containing clean, dry, local sediments. The artificial substrate was left
in place for one month.
Assumptions and limitations
The colonization corer obtained accurate results compared to the freezing core and standpipe
methods. It assumes, though, that the distribution of animals colonizing the corer is the same as
that in the sediment of the hyporheic zone, and that the artificial substrate correctly approximates
the real substrate. This method is more time consuming, because colonization requires several
weeks.
IV. Study Methods
The literature review (summarized in Table 2) completed for this chapter, identified two general
types of hyporheic-organism studies. The first is the community approach, in which researchers
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 9
determine abundance, location, and richness of species. The second is the ecotoxicological
approach, in which researchers expose organisms to specific pollutants, usually in the laboratory,
to determine lethal and sub-lethal doses which can then be extrapolated to the field. The
following discussion focuses on the community and the ecotoxicological approaches.
Community Approach
As previously stated, the community approach determines species abundance, location, and
richness. Species distribution in the hyporheic zone may indicate the direction and magnitude of
exchange between ground water and surface water. Pollutant presence in the hyporheic zone can
alter abundance, distribution, and diversity of hyporheic organisms. Investigations in polluted
aquifers or streams determine changes in hyporheic ecology with distance from the pollution
source, or note differences between generally polluted sites and unpolluted sites.
While some studies simply display raw data such as the number of species and number of
organisms in each sample, many studies use statistics to determine patterns in organism
distribution, accuracy of sampling methods, correlation with physical and chemical parameters,
etc. Methods used include Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), Non Centered Principal Component
Analysis, and Range Correlation. In addition, researchers use the following statistical software;
ADECO, TWINSPAN (community classification), STATISTIX, and DECORANA (ordination).
The community approach is heavily dependent on prior knowledge of unimpacted hyporheic zone
community structure. Because little is known about the organisms of this ecosystem, most studies
are still attempting to determine the structure and distribution of the hyporheic community in
order to provide a background for future studies on organisms as pollution indicators.
Background or "ambient" community structure characteristics are difficult to define. When the
general assumption is made that relatively low species diversity and perhaps presence of epigean
species may indicate a pollution problem at a site, other possible causes should be considered. In
addition, research indicates that the direction and magnitude of exchange between ground water
and surface water may be described by the vertical distribution of hypogean species (organisms
that live in the subsurface). These general assumptions rely on studies of benthic, surface, and
ground water environments.
Researchers are also studying variations in structure with time and the effect of weather,
streamflow, hydraulic gradient, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and other parameters. Studies
show high variability within hyporheic zone communities, even at unpolluted sites. At sites along
the South Platte River in Colorado, the dominant species at each site were often different,
although the same species may have been present at every site. Researchers attributed this finding
to the slow migration rates of organisms within ground water communities, thereby causing a
patchy distribution of species. Thus, investigations of ground water community structure are site-
specific and cannot be extrapolated. This also means that it is difficult to select an "indicator"
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 10
organism that signifies pollution presence or delineates the hyporheic zone. Biological indicators
by definition must be widespread, and occupy the same niche in the community at various sites.
Expertise required
The communtiy approach involves collection, preservation, and identification of hyporheic zone
organisms. Specifically, the community approach requires expertise in hyporheic organism
identification and knowledge of hyporheic zone community structure. Because this area of
research is fairly new, the level of expertise required for community approach studies may not be
widely available. However, as the background information on hyporheic zone ecology grows, so
will the pool of available expertise in hyporheic organism identification and community structure.
In addition, this method may require statistical analysis. Some studies may require simple
ANOVA's, but others may require more difficult packages that necessitate in-depth knowledge of
statistics. A comprehensive understanding of hydrochemistry and hydrology is needed in order to
make valid assumptions about the relationship of the community and organisms to the hydrologic,
hydrochemical and hydrogeologic setting.
Assumptions and limitations
The primary limitation of community approach studies is the lack of site-specific ambient or
background hyporheic zone community structure information. Given the apparent temporal and
spatial hetereogeniety of the hyporheic community, subtle pollution impacts may be diffult for
investigators to assess. However, the general assumption that low species abundance and
diversity may indicate the presence of pollution appears to be valid. Expanded communication
between ecologists and hydrologists will help to identify factors, in addition to water quality, that
can impact the extent and nature of communities.
Ecotoxicological Approach
There are two types of ecotoxicological studies; those that study acute and those that study
chronic toxicity. Acute toxicity studies determine pollutant concentration and exposure necessary
to kill one or more organisms. Typically, the result of an acute toxicity study is determination of
the lethal concentration that kills 50 percent of the study organisms or LC50. Within a given time,
chronic toxicity studies determine the effect of long-term pollutant exposure to an organism in
terms of physiological disruptions such as reproductive or digestive problems. Unlike the
community approach study methods, the ecotoxicological approach requires collection of live
hyporheic organisms. Therefore, sample collection method is a critical component of the
ecotoxicological approach.
Ideally, the ecotoxicological study approach would identify pollutant impacts by lack of
abundance of an expected hyporheic organism (acute toxicity) or changes within hyporheic
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 11
organisms (chronic toxicity). However, extrapolating LC50 bioassay1 results to assess hypogean
population dynamics is not advised because of the complex life cycle characteristics of hypogean
organisms (Gibert and others 1994). As with the community approach, prior knowledge of the
expected hyporheic organisms and community structure, and the hydrologic and hydrochemical
setting, are important components in assessing pollutant impact.
Expertise Required
The ecotoxicological approach requires personnel familiar with, and facilities that can follow,
toxicity testing protocols. In addition, this approach requires expertise in hyporheic organism
identification and biology. Facilities and personnel that perform general toxicity testing are
available, however hyporheic organisms require environmental conditions for survival that are not
well understood.
Assumptions and limitations
Because very little is known about hyporheic organisms under their normal conditions,
investigators find it difficult to determine chronic toxicity. Such studies are also more time-
consuming and it is difficult to detect changes in small organisms. Therefore, acute toxicity
studies dominate.
Ecotoxicological studies, by nature, cannot be entirely representative of an organism's response to
pollution because the studies are performed ex situ. In addition, the pollutant levels used in acute
toxicity studies may not be representative of the levels occurring in the ground water habitat.
Low diversity of taxa in the ground water environment may be due to chronic effects of pollution,
not a specific acute event. Low diversity may also be due to the nature of the ground water
environment, low light, oxygen and nutrients.
Studies using ground water organisms are difficult, because the organisms are not thought to
survive well outside of the ground water environment. In addition, their adaption to the ground
water environment makes them poor candidates for toxicological studies. The ground water
environment is low in dissolved oxygen (hypoxic) and very confined. Hyporheic organisms adapt
by reducing mobility, respiratory rates, and metabolic functions. For pollutants such as metals,
ground water organisms actually are much more resistant to impacts than surface or benthic
organisms (Notenbloom et al 1994).
V. Study Settings and Contaminants
1 an assay of pollutants, using living organisms; performed to show the effects of pollution on living
communities
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 12
Table 1 provides a summary of representative settings in which investigators have used biological
indicator methods. These studies may focus upon specific environment types such as a transect
across a river, a gravel bar, or a grid in a floodplain, or compare community structure across
environmental gradients such as the interface between karst and alluvial aquifers, a longitudinal
section of a riffle-pool sequence, or a survey along a river from its headwaters to its entrance into
a lake or another river. In addition, some studies may only observe the spatial or vertical
distribution of a single species.
Most studies summarized in the Table 1 investigate the effects of heavy metals from sewage or
other organic pollution. For example, studies of karst ground water systems indicate that surface
water organisms displace indigenous fauna during episodes of sewage pollution (Gibert et al
1994). Several studies address pesticide and nitrate pollution. These studies demonstrate that in
alluvial aquifers insect larvae tend to disappear in polluted areas, although crustaceans remain
present. In addition, abundance and species richness also declines in the polluted areas.
Overall, most of the current literature focuses on gathering background information on ground
water communities. These studies address vertical and spatial distributions of indicator species
and community richness relating to dissolved oxygen levels and temperature distribution.
Ecotoxicological studies primarily focus on the effects of cave-dwelling asellid isopods, low
oxygen levels on cave-dwelling amphipods, and chlorophenols and metals on interstitial copepods.
VI. General Evaluation
Because using ground-water organisms to evaluate the interaction of ground water and surface
water is a relatively new field, many differences remain in methodologies and definitions. For
example, investigators disagree on whether benthic organisms, such as insect larvae that live both
in the hyporheic and benthic zones, should be used to define the hyporheic zone. Ecologists need
to work closely with hydrologists, hydrogeologists and hydrochemists to determine what factors,
other than pollution, may impact the nature and extent of communities. Other factors include, but
are not limited to: climate, low light, oxygen and nutrients.
There has been difficulty in sampling the hyporheic zone for organisms because gravel and pebbles
dominate the alluvial hyporheic environment. Corers typically used in soil or other more cohesive
media are ineffective. Therefore, corer insertion distrupts the vertical distribution of sediment and
organisms and valuable information is lost. Investigators have developed methods to circumvent
this problem only to face problems with recovering an accurate number of organisms.
There are other general difficulties with using ground water organisms as indicators. The
methods are not sufficiently refined to provide quantitative estimates of pollution load. Therefore
the methods should be used in conjunction with chemical or other quantitative methods to
estimate pollutant load and ground water and surface water exchange. The use of biological
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 13
indicators is perhaps even more time consuming than chemical analyses. Investigators must
preserve, hand separate, count, and identify organisms. A single sample may yield hundreds to
thousands of organisms. In addition, because this is a new field and researchers are continously
discovering new organisms, there are very few people who can identify organisms to the species
level, although, in many cases identification to a higher taxic level may be sufficient.
Biological indicators can serve as effective tools for identifying areas generally impacted by
pollution loading and ground water and surface water exchange. Without testing for the presence
of multiple contaminants, changes in community structure or population can indicate current or
past contamination events. However, researchers have characterized very few hyporheic
organisms to date, and few researchers are familiar with hyporheic taxa. Sufficient research has
not yet been performed and standards have not yet been set, to determine if biological indicator
methods can be effectively applied in the assessment of ground water and surface water
interaction and pollutant loading to the hyporheic zone.
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 14
REFERENCES CITED IN THIS CHAPTER
Bou, C. and R. Rouch. 1967. "Un nouveau champ de recherches sur la faune aquatique
souterraine." C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, SerieD, 1967. v265 n4 p. 369-370.
Bretschko, G. 1992. "Differentiation between epigeic and hypogeic fauna in gravel streams."
Regulated Rivers: Research and Management, 1992. v7 p. 17-22.
Dole-Olivier, M. and P. Marmonier. 1992. "Spring ecotone and gradient study of interstitial
fauna along two floodplain tributaries of the River Rhone, France." Regulated Rivers:
Research and Management, 1992. v7 p. 103-115.
Essafi, K., J. Mathieu, and J. Beffy. 1992. "Spatial and temporal variations oiNiphargus
populations in interstitial aquatic habitat at the karst/floodplain interface." Regulated
Rivers: Research and Management, 1992. v7 p. 83-92.
Fraser, B., D. Williams, and K. Howard. 1996. "Monitoring biotic and abiotic processes across
the hyporheic/groundwater interface," 1996, Hydrogeology Journal v4 n2 p. 36-50.
Frederickson, J.K., Balkwill, D.L., Zachara, J.M., Li, S.M., Brockman, F.J., and Simmons, M.A.
1991. Physiological diversity and distributions of heterotrophic bacteria in deep
Cretaceous sediments of the Atlantic coastal plain. Applied Environmental Microbiology
57,402-411.
Gibert, J., D. Danielopol, and J. Stanford (eds.). 1994. Groundwater Ecology, Academic Press,
San Diego, 1994.
Job, C. and J. Simons. 1994. Ecological Basis for Management of Groundwater in the United
States: Statutes, Regulations, and a Strategic Plan, in Groundwater Ecology , Academic
Press, New York.
Lafont, M., A. Durbec, and C. Ille. 1992. "Oligochaete worms as biological describers of the
interactions between surface and groundwaters: a first synthesis." Regulated Rivers:
Research and Management, 1992. v7 p. 65-73.
Malard, F., J. Gibert, R. Laurent, and J. Reygrobellet. 1994. "The use of invertebrate
communities to describe groundwater flow and contaminant transport in a fractured rock
aquifer." Arch. Hydrobiol. 1994. v!31 nl p. 93-110.
-------
Biological Indicators of Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 15
Malard, F., S. Plenet, and J. Gibert. 1996. "The use of invertebrates in ground water monitoring:
a rising research field," Ground Water Monitoring Review, Spring 1996, p. 103-113.
Notenboom, J., S. Plenet, and MJ. Turquin. 1994. Groundwater Contamination and its Impact
on Groundwater Animals and Ecosystems, in Groundwater Ecology , Academic Press,
New York.
Stanford, J.A., J.V. Ward, and B.K. Ellis. 1994. Ecology of the Alluvial Aquifers of the
Flathead River, Montana, in Groundwater Ecology , Academic Press, New York.
Strayer, D.L. 1994. Limits to Biological Distributions in Groundwater, in Groundwater Ecology.
Academic Press, New York.
Stocker, Z. and D. Williams. 1972. "A freezing core method for describing the vertical
distribution of sediments in a streambed." Limnol. And Ocean. 1972. v!7 p. 136-138.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1991. A Review of Methods for Assessing
Nonpoint Source Contaminated Ground-Water Discharge To Surface Water. Office of
Water. EPA 570/9-91-010.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1996. Revision to Rapid Bioassessment Protocols
for Use In Streams and Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates, and Fish.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 1988. National Water Summary 1986 - Hydrologic Events and
Gound-Water Quality. USGS Water-Supply Paper 2325.
Ward, J. and J. Stanford. 1989. "Groundwater animals of alluvial river systems: a potential
management tool," IN: Grigg, N. S. (ed.), Proceedings of the Colorado Water
Engineering And Management Conference, Colorado Water Resources Research
Institute, Fort Collins, CO, 1989.
Ward. J., N. Voelz, and J. Harvey. 1989. "Groundwater faunas as indicators of groundwater
quality: the South Platte River system," 1989, Colorado Water Resources Research
Institute, 33 pp.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 16
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF STUDY SETTINGS
Geographic Location
Speed River
southern Ontario
Multiple
(review article)
Upper Arkansas River, Colorado
Convict Creek,
Sierra Nevadas,
California
Templeton,
New Zealand
Terrieu stream, near Montpellier,
France
Meuse River
St. Agatha, Holland
Setting
Multiple
Stream bed
Stream bed
Downgradient of sewage
disposal area
Fractured rock
Alluvium
Contaminant
a
Multiple
Heavy metals
Copper
Sewage
Sewage
Chlorophenols,
heavy metals
Notes Author
B. G. Fraser,
D. D. Williams,
K. W. F. Howard
J. Notenboom,
S. Plenet,
M.-J. Turquin
benthicb W. H. Clements
benthicb H. V. Leland,
S. V. Fend,
T. L. Dudley,
J. L. Carter
L. W. Sinton
F. Malard,
J. L. Reygrobellet,
J. Mathieu,
M. Lafont
crustacean; J. Notenboom,
acute toxicity K. Cruys,
J. Hoekstra,
P. van B eel en
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 17
TABLE 1
(CONTINUED)
SUMMARY OF STUDY SETTINGS
Geographic Location
Chalamont
Dombes Forest, France
Merrybranch Cave,
White County, Tennessee
Eastern North America formerly
glaciated sites, unglaciated sites,
and Coastal Plain
Clinch River,
Virginia and artificial
experimental sites
Setting
Forest drainage canal
sediment
Karst aquifer
Streamside hyporheic zones,
two springs
Gravel/cobble
stream bed
Contaminant
Low oxygen levels
Cadmium, zinc, total
residual chlorine
a
Heavy metals
Notes
amphipod
isopod; acute
toxicity
benthicb
Author
F. Hervant,
J. Mathieu, D. Garin,
A. Freminet
A. D. Bosnak,
E. L. Morgan
D. L. Strayer,
S. E. May,
P. Nielsen,
W. Wollheim,
S. Hausam
W. H. Clements,
D. S. Cherry,
J. C. Cairns, Jr.
Elam's Run and Shayler Run,
southwestern Ohio
None—stream
Heavy metals
R. W. Winner,
M. W. Boesel,
M. P. Farrell
Southern Ontario,
Canada
Sand gravel, cobble
underlain by clay
D. Dudley Williams
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 18
TABLE 1
(CONTINUED)
SUMMARY OF STUDY SETTINGS
Geographic Location
South Platte River,
Colorado
South Platte River,
Colorado
Maple River,
northern Michigan
Flathead River,
Montana
Rhine River,
France
Rhone River,
France
Rhone River,
France
Setting
Pleistocene and
Recent alluvium
Gravel alluvium
Sandy alluvium
Pleistocene alluvium
Gravel alluvium
None given
None given
Contaminant Notes Author
J. V. Ward,
N. J. Voelz,
J. H. Harvey
R. W. Pennak,
J. V. Ward
a
microbial S. Hendricks
ecology
J. A. Stanford,
J. V. Ward
a
M. Creuze des
Chatelliers.
P. Marmonier,
M. J. Dole-Olivier, E.
Castella
Sewage, F. Malard, S. Plenet,
heavy metals J. Gibert
a
effect of M. J. Dole-Olivier,
storms P. Marmonier
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 19
TABLE 1
(CONTINUED)
SUMMARY OF STUDY SETTINGS
Geographic Location
Rhone River,
near Lyon, France
Rhone River,
near Lyon, France
Setting Contaminant Notes
Glaciofluvial sediment Heavy metals effect of
pumping
Glaciofluvial sediment General pollution low flow,
efficacy of
bank filtration
Author
J. Gibert,
P. Marmonier,
V. Vanek, S. Plenet
C. M. Schmidt,
P. Marmonier,
S. Plenet, M. Creuze
des Chatelliers,
J. Gibert
Rhone River tributaries,
France
Alluvium and karst
M. Chafiq, J. Gibert,
P. Marmonier,
M. J. Dole-Olivier,
J. Juget
Loire, Galaure,
and Drac Rivers,
France
Loire-pebble, gravel,
and sand. Galaure-varies
Drac-boulders,
pebbles, gravel
L. Maridet,
J. G. Wasson,
M. Phillipe
Rhine Valley alluvium,
Rhone River, France
Gravel (Rhine Valley),
gravel and sand (Rhone)
oligochaetes
M. Lafont,
A. Durbec, C. Ille
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 20
TABLE 1
(CONTINUED)
SUMMARY OF STUDY SETTINGS
Geographic Location
Rhone River floodplain,
France
Verna and Pissoir sites,
French Jura
Lone des lies Nouvelles, old
channel of Rhone River, France
Oberer Seebach,
northern Alps, Vienna
Rhone River, France and
Sycamore Creek, Arizona
Sonoran Desert, Arizona
Notes:
a = The purpose of the st
Setting
Former meandering and
braided channels
Karst/floodplain interface
Floodplain spring
Unsorted gravel
Gravel
Sand and gravel
udy was to determine spatia
Contaminant Notes Author
a
P. Marmonier,
M. J. Dole-Olivier,
M. Creuze des
Chatelliers
a
K. Essafi, J. Mathieu,
J. L. Beffy
S. Plenet, J. Gibert,
P. Vervier
a
harpacticoid A. Verena Kowarc
copepods
E. H. Stanley,
A. J. Boulton
a
A. J. Boulton,
H. M. Valett,
S. G. Fisher
1 or temporal distribution and variation of interstitial communities or, ir
some cases, of individual taxa.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction Page 21
TABLE 1
(CONTINUED)
SUMMARY OF STUDY SETTINGS
b = Some studies were done on benthic, not hyporheic, zones.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
TABLE 2
REFERENCES TO ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Page 22
Author
Citation
Reference to Annotated
Bibliography
Bencala, K.
Bosnak, A. D.. and E. L. Morgan
Bou, C. and R. Rouch
Boulton, A. J, H. M.Valett, and
S. G.Fisher
Bretschko, G.
Castro, N. and G. Hornberger
"A perspective on stream-catchment connections." J. N.
Am. Benthol. Soc. 1993. v!2 nl p. 44-47.
"Acute toxicity of cadmium, zinc and total residual
chlorine to epigean and hypogean ispods (Asellidae)."
NSSBulletin. 1981. v43 nl p.12-18.
"Un nouveau champ de recherches sur la faune
aquatique souterraine." C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Serie D,
1967. v265 n4 p. 369-370.
"Spatial distribution and taxonomic composition of the
hyporheos of several Sonoran Desert streams." Archiv
fur Hydrobiologie, 1992. v!25 nl p. 37-61.
"Differentiation between epigeic and hypogeic fauna in
gravel streams." Regulated Rivers: Research and
Management, 1992. v7 p. 17-22.
"Surface-Sub surf ace Water Interactions in an Alluviated
Mountain Stream Channel." Water Resources Research
1991. v27n7p.!613-1621.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 23
TABLE 2
(CONTINUED)
REFERENCES TO ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Author
Citation
Reference to Annotated
Bibliography
Chafiq, M., J. Gibert, P. Marmonier,
M. J. Dole-Olivier, and J. Juget
Clements, W. H.
Clements, W. H., D. S. Cherry, and
J. C. Cairns, Jr.
Crueze des Chatelliers, M.,
P. Marmonier, M. J. Dole-Olivier, and
E. Castella
Crommentuijnn, T., J. Brils, and
N. van Straalen
Danieolopol, D.
"Spring ecotone and gradient study of interstitial fauna
along two floodplain tributaries of the River Rhone,
France." Regulated Rivers: Re search and Management,
1992. v7 p. 103-115.
"Benthic invertebrate community responses to heavy
metals in the Upper Arkansas River Basin, Colorado." J.
N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 1994. v!3 nl p.30-44
"Impact of heavy metals on insect communitiies in
streams: a comparison of observational and experimental
results." CanJ. Fish. Aq. Sci., 1988. v45 p.2017-2025.
"Structure of interstitial assemblages in a regulated
channel of the River Rhine (France)." Regulated Rivers:
Research and Management., 1992. v7 p. 23-30.
"Influence of cadmium on life-history characteristics of
Folsomia Candida (Willem) in an artificial soil
substrate." Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety
1993. v26 p. 216-227.
"Groundwater fauna associated with riverine aquifers."
J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 1989. v8 nl p. 18-35.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 24
TABLE 2
(CONTINUED)
REFERENCES TO ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Author
Citation
Reference to Annotated
Bibliography
Danieolopol, D. and P. Marmonier
Dole-Olivier, M. J and P. Marmonier
Essafi, K., J. Mathieu, and J. L. Beffy
Findlay, S., D. Strayer, C. Goumbala, and
K. Gould
Findlay, S.
Fraser, B. G., D. D. Williams, and
K. W. F. Howard
"Aspects of research on groundwater along the Rhone,
Rhine, and Danube." Regulated Rivers: Research and
Management, 1992. v7 p. 5-16.
"Effects of spates on the vertical distribution of the
interstitial community." Hydrobiologia, 1992. v230 p.
49-61.
"Spatial and temporal variations ofNiphargus
populations in interstitial aquatic habitat at the
karst/floodplain interface." Regulated Rivers: Research
and Management, 1992. v7 p. 83-92.
"Metabolism of streamwater dissolved organic carbon in
the shallow hyporheic zone." Limnol. And Ocean.
1993. v38n7p. 1493-1499.
"Importance of surface-subsurface exchange in stream
ecosystems: The hyporheic zone." Limnol. And Ocean.
1995.v40nl p. 159-164.
"Monitoring biotic and abiotic processes across the
hyporheic/groundwater interface," 1996, Hydrogeology
Journal v4 n2 p. 36-50.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 25
TABLE 2
(CONTINUED)
REFERENCES TO ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Author
Citation
Reference to Annotated
Bibliography
Freilich, J.
Gibert, J., D. Danielopol, and J. Stanford
(eds.)
Gibert, J., P.Marmonier, V. Vanek, and
S. Plenet
Glazier, D., and J. Gooch
Hakenkamp, C., H. Valett, and
A. Boulton
Harvey, J. and K. Bencala
"A method for tagging individual benthic
macroinvertebrates." J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 1989. v8
n4 p. 351-354.
Groundwater Ecology., Academic Press, San Diego,
1994.
"Hydrological exchange and sediment characteristics in a
riverbank: relationship between heavy metal and
invertebrate community structure." Canadian Journal of
Fisheries and Aquatic Science 1995. v 52 p. 2084-2097.
"Macroinvertebrate assemblages in Pennsylvania (USA)
springs." Hydrobiologia, 1987. v!50 p. 33-43.
"Perspectives on the hyporheic zone: integrating
hydrology and biology. Concluding remarks." J. N. Am.
Benthol. Soc. 1993. v!2 nl p.94-99.
"The effect of streambed topography on surface-
subsurface water exchange in mountain catchments."
Water Resources Research, 1993. v29 nl p. 89-98.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 26
TABLE 2
(CONTINUED)
REFERENCES TO ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Author
Citation
Reference to Annotated
Bibliography
Hendricks, S.
Hervant, F., J. Mathieu, D. Garin, and
A. Freminet
Holland, M. and J. Stanford
Kowarc, A. Verena
La Baugh, J., D. Rosenberry, and
T. Winter
"Microbial ecology of the hyporheic zone: a perspective
integrating hydrology and biology." J. N. Am. Benthol.
Soc. 1993. v!2 nip. 70-78.
"Behavioral ventilatory, and metabolic responses to
severe hypoxia and subsequent recovery of the hypogean
Niphargus rhenorhodanensis and the epigean
Gammarusfossarum" Physiological Zoology 1995.
v68 n2 p. 223-244.
"Issues and research needs in valuing ground water: an
ecosystem perspective," manuscript for the conference
Clean Water and the American Economy, Oct. 19-21,
1992.
"Depth distribution and mobility of a harpacticoid
copepod within the bed sediment of an alpine brook."
Regulated Rivers: Research and Management., 1992. v7
p. 57-63.
"Groundwater contribution to the water and chemical
budges of Williams Lake, Minnesota, 1980-1991." Can
J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1995. v 52 p.754-767.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 27
TABLE 2
(CONTINUED)
REFERENCES TO ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Author
Citation
Reference to Annotated
Bibliography
LaFont, M., A. Durbec, and C. Ille
Leland, H. V., S. V. Fend, T. L. Dudley,
and J. L. Carter
Lodge, D., D. Krabbenhoft, and R. Striegl
Malard, F., J. Gibert, R. Laurent, and
J. Reygrobellet
Malard, F., S. Plenet, and J. Gibert
"Oligochaete worms as biological describers of the
interactions between surface and groundwaters: a first
synthesis." Regulated Rivers: Research and
Management., 1992. v7 p. 65-73.
"Effects of copper on species composition of benthic
insects in a Sierra Nevada, California, stream."
Freshwater Biology 1989. v21 p. 163-179.
"A positive relationship between groundwater velocity
and submersed macrophyte biomass in Sparkling Lake,
Wisconsin." Limnol. And Ocean. 1989. v34 nl p. 235-
239
"A new method for sampling the fauna of deep karstic
aquifers." C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Sciences de la vie.
1994. v317 p. 955-966.
"The use of invertebrates in ground water monitoring: a
rising research field," Ground Water Monitoring
Review, Spring 1996. p. 103-113.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 28
TABLE 2
(CONTINUED)
REFERENCES TO ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Author
Citation
Reference to Annotated
Bibliography
Malard, F., J. L. Reygrobellet, J. Mathieu,
and M. Lafont
Maridet, L., J. G. Wasson, and
M. Philippe
Millham, N. and B. Howes
Marmonier, P., M. J. Dole-Olivier, and M.
Creuze des Chatelliers
Notenboom, J., K. Cruys, J. Hoekstra, and
P. van Beelen
"The use of invertebrate communities to describe
groundwater flow and contaminant transport in a
fractured rock aquifer." Arch. Hydrobiol. 1994. v!31 nl
p. 93-110.
"Vertical distribution of fauna in the bed sediment of
three running water sites: influence of physical and
trophic factors." Regulated Rivers: Research and
Management., 1992. v7 p. 45-55.
"Freshwater flow into a coastal embayment:
Groundwater and surface water inputs." Limnol. And
Ocean. 1994. v39 n 8 p.1928-1944.
"Spatial distribution of interstitial assemblages in the
floodplain of the Rhone River." Regulated Rivers:
Resear ch and Management, 1992. v7 p. 75-82.
"Effect of ambient oxygen contcentration upon the acute
toxicity of chlorophenols and heavy metals to the
groundwater copepod Parastenocaris germanica
(Crustacea)." Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety
1992. v24 p. 131-143.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 29
TABLE 2
(CONTINUED)
REFERENCES TO ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Author
Citation
Reference to Annotated
Bibliography
Notenboom, J., S. Plenet, and
M.-J. Turquin
Palmer, M.
Pennak, R. and J. Ward
Pennak, R. W. and J. V. Ward
Plenet, S., J. Gibert, and P. Vervier
"Groundwater contamination and its impact on
groundwater animals and ecosystems," pp. 477-504, IN:
Gibert, J., D. L. Danielopol, J. A. Stanford (eds.),
Groundwater Ecology, Academic Press, San Diego,
1994.
"Experimentation in the hyporheic zone: challenges and
prospectus." J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 1993. v!2 nl p.
84-93.
"Interstitial faunal communities of the hyporheic and
adjacent groundwater biotopes of a Colorado mountain
stream." Arch. Hydrobiol. Supp., 1986. v74 n3 p. 356-
396.
"New cyclopoid copepods from interstitial habitats of a
Colorado mountain stream." Trans. Amer. Micro. Soc.
1985. v!04n3 p. 216-222.
"A floodplain spring: an ecotone between surface water
and groundwater." Regulated Rivers: Research and
Management, 1992. v7 p. 93-102.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 30
TABLE 2
(CONTINUED)
REFERENCES TO ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Author
Citation
Reference to Annotated
Bibliography
Reid, J.
Schmidt, C. M., P. Marmonier, S. Plenet,
M. Creuze des Chatelliers, and J. Gibert
Sinton, L. W.
Smock, L., J. Gladden, J. Riekenberg
Stanford, J.
"Acanthocyclopspennaki n. sp. (Copepoda:
Cyclopoida) from the hyporheic zone of the South Platte
River, Colorado, USA." Trans. Amer. Micro. Soc.
1992. vllln4p.269-277.
"Bank filtration and interstitial communities. Example of
the Rhone River in a polluted sector (downstream of
Lyon, Grand Gravier, France)." Hydrogeologie, 1991.
n3 p.217-223.
"The macroinvertebrates in a sewage-polluted aquifer."
Hydrobiologia 1984. vl!9 p. 161-169.
"Lotic macroinvertebrate production in three
dimensions: channel surface, hyporheic, and floodplain
environments." Ecology 1992. v73 n3 p.876-886.
"The ecology of surface and groundwater interactions:
ramifications for re-authorization of the Clean Water
Act," A Congressional briefing paper presented June 11,
1993.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 31
TABLE 2
(CONTINUED)
REFERENCES TO ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Author
Citation
Reference to Annotated
Bibliography
Stanford, J. A. and J. V. Ward
Stanford, J. A. and J. V. Ward
Stanford, J. A. and J. V. Ward
Stanley, E. H. and A. J. Boulton
Sterba, O., V. Uvira, P. Mathur, and
M. Rulik
Stocker, Z. and D. Williams
"An ecosystem perspective of alluvial rivers:
connectivity and the hyporheic corridor." J. N. Am.
Benthol. Soc. 1993. v!2 nl p. 48-60.
"Management of aquatic resources in large catchments:
recognizing interactions between ecosystem connectivity
and environmental disturbance," pp. 99-124. IN:
Naiman, R. J. (ed.), Water shed Management, Springer-
Verlag, New York, 1992, 542 pp.
"The hyporheic habitat of river ecosystems," Nature,
1988, v335n!685 p. 64-66.
"Hydrology and the distribution of hyporheos:
perspectives from a mesic river and a desert stream." J.
N. Am. Benthol. Soc.1993. v!2 nl p. 79-83.
"Variations of the hyporheic zone through a riffle in the
R. Morava, Czechoslovakia." Regulated Rivers:
Research and Management 1992. v7 p. 31-43.
"A freezing core method for describing the vertical
distribution of sediments in a streambed." Limnol. And
Ocean. 1972. v!7 p. 136-138.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 32
TABLE 2
(CONTINUED)
REFERENCES TO ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Author
Citation
Reference to Annotated
Bibliography
Strayer, D. L., S. E. May, P. Nielsen,
W. Wollheim, and S. Hausam
Triska, F., J. Duff, and R. Avanzino
Valett, H., J. Morrice, C. Dahm,
M. Campana
Ward, J. V. and J. A. Stanford
Ward, J. V., N. J. Voelz, and
J. H. Harvey
White, D.
"An endemic groundwater fauna in unglaciated eastern
North America." Can. J. Zoology 1995. v73 p. 502-508.
"Influence of exchange flow between the channel and
hyporheic zone on nitrate production in a small
mountain stream." Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 1990. v47
p. 2099-2111.
"Parent lithology, surface-groundwater exchange, and
nitrate retention in head water streams." Limnology and
Oceanography, 1996. v 41 n2 p. 333-345.
"Groundwater animals of alluvial river systems: a
potential management tool," IN: Grigg, N. S. (ed.),
Proceedings of the Colorado Water Engineering And
Management Conference, Colorado Water Resources
Research Institute, Fort Collins, CO, 1989.
"Groundwater faunas as indicators of groundwater
quality: the South Platte River system," 1989, Colorado
Water Resources Research Institute, 33 pp.
"Perspectives on defining and delineating hyporheic
zones." J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 1993. v!2 nl p. 61-69.
-------
Biological Indicators and Ground Water - Surface Water Interaction
Page 33
TABLE 2
(CONTINUED)
REFERENCES TO ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Author
Citation
Reference to Annotated
Bibliography
Williams, D.
Williams, D.
Williams, D.
Williams, D.
Winner, R.W., M. W. Boesel, and
M. P. Farrell
"Changes in freshwater meiofauna communities along
the groundwater-hyporheic water ecotone." Trans.
Amer. Micro. Soc. 1993. vl!2 n3 p. 181-194.
"Towards a biological and chemical definition of the
hyporheic zone in two Canadian rivers." Freshwater
Biology, 1989. v22 p. 189-208.
"Evaluation of a standpipe corer for sampling aquatic
interstitial biotopes." Hydrobiologia 1981. v83 p. 257-
260.
"A counterstaining technique for use in sorting benthic
samples." Trans Amer Micro Soc. 1974. v? p. 152-
154.
"Insect community structure as an index of heavy metal
pollution in lotic ecosystems." Can. J. Fish. Aq. Sci.
1980. v37 p. 647-655.
------- |