129. McBride GB, Loftis JC, Adkins NC (1993) What do significance tests really tell us about the
environment? Environ Manage 17:423–432
130. Smith J, Beauchamp J, Stewart A (2005) Alternative approach for establishing acceptable
thresholds on macroinvertebrate community metrics. J North Am Benthol Soc 24:428–440
131. Bowman MF, Somers KM (2006) Evaluating a novel Test Site Analysis (TSA) bioassessment
approach. J North Am Benthol Soc 25:712–727
132. Stribling J, Jessup B, Gerritsen J (2000) Development of biological and physical habitat
criteria for Wyoming streams and their use in the TMDL process. Tetra-Tech, Owings Mills
133. Barbour M, Gerritsen J, Griffith G et al (1996) A framework for biological criteria for Florida
streams using benthic macroinvertebrates. J North Am Benthol Soc 15(2):185–211
134. Clarke R, Furse M, Gunn R et al (2002) Sampling variation in macroinvertebrate data and
implications for river quality indices. Freshw Biol 47:1735–1751
135. Kaufmann PR, Levine P, Peck DV et al (1999) Quantifying physical habitat in wadeable
streams. EPA/620/R-99-003, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC
136. Hose G, Turak E, Waddell N (2004) Reproducibility of AUSRIVAS rapid bioassessments
using macroinvertebrates. J North Am Benthol Soc 23:126–139
137. Houston L, Barbour M, Lenat D et al (2002) A multi-agency comparison of aquatic
macroinvertebrate-based stream bioassessment methodologies. Ecol Indic 1:279–292
138. Lyons J (2012) Development and validation of two fish-based indices of biotic integrity for
assessing perennial coolwater streams in Wisconsin, USA. Ecol Indic 23:402–412
139. Van Sickle J (2010) Correlated metrics yield multimetric indices with inferior performance.
Trans Am Fish Soc 139:1802–1817
140. Schoolmaster DR, Grace JB, Schweiger EW (2012) A general theory of multimetric indices
and their properties. Methods Ecol Evol 3:773–781
141. Langhans SD, Lienert J, Schuwirth N et al (2013) How to make river assessments comparable: a demonstration for hydromorphology. Ecol Indic 32:264–275
142. Wu W, Xu Z, Yin X et al (2014) Assessment of ecosystem health based on fish assemblages
in the Wei River basin, China. Environ Monit Assess 186:3701–3716
143. Lunde KB, Resh VH (2012) Development and validation of a macroinvertebrate index of
biotic integrity (IBI) for assessing urban impacts to Northern California freshwater wetlands.
Environ Monit Assess 184:3653–3674
144. Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32
145. Van Sickle J, Hawkins CP, Larsen DP et al (2005) A null model for the expected
macroinvertebrate assemblage in streams. J North Am Benthol Soc 24:178–191
146. Yoder CO, Barbour MT (2009) Critical technical elements of state bioassessment programs: a
process to evaluate program rigor and comparability. Environ Monit Assess 150:31–42
147. Commission E (2000) Water Framework 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. Off J Eur Community L327:1–73
148. Tonkin JD, Stoll S, Sundermann A et al (2014) Dispersal distance and the pool of taxa, but not
barriers, determine the colonisation of restored river reaches by benthic invertebrates. Freshw
Biol 59(9):1843–1855
149. Woods A, Omernik J, Brown D et al (1996) Level III and IV ecoregions of Pennsylvania and
the Blue Ridge mountains, the Ridge and Valley, and the central Appalachians of Virginia,
West Virginia, and Maryland. EPA/600/R-96/077, US Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC
150. Bryce S, Hughes R, Kaufmann P (2002) Development of a bird integrity index: using bird
assemblages as indicators of riparian condition. Environ Manage 30:294–310
151. Kanninen A, Vallinkoski V, Leka J et al (2013) A comparison of two methods for surveying
aquatic macrophyte communities in boreal lakes: implications for bioassessment. Aquat Bot
104:88–100
Principles for the Development of Contemporary Bioassessment Indices for. . .
265
environment? Environ Manage 17:423–432
130. Smith J, Beauchamp J, Stewart A (2005) Alternative approach for establishing acceptable
thresholds on macroinvertebrate community metrics. J North Am Benthol Soc 24:428–440
131. Bowman MF, Somers KM (2006) Evaluating a novel Test Site Analysis (TSA) bioassessment
approach. J North Am Benthol Soc 25:712–727
132. Stribling J, Jessup B, Gerritsen J (2000) Development of biological and physical habitat
criteria for Wyoming streams and their use in the TMDL process. Tetra-Tech, Owings Mills
133. Barbour M, Gerritsen J, Griffith G et al (1996) A framework for biological criteria for Florida
streams using benthic macroinvertebrates. J North Am Benthol Soc 15(2):185–211
134. Clarke R, Furse M, Gunn R et al (2002) Sampling variation in macroinvertebrate data and
implications for river quality indices. Freshw Biol 47:1735–1751
135. Kaufmann PR, Levine P, Peck DV et al (1999) Quantifying physical habitat in wadeable
streams. EPA/620/R-99-003, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC
136. Hose G, Turak E, Waddell N (2004) Reproducibility of AUSRIVAS rapid bioassessments
using macroinvertebrates. J North Am Benthol Soc 23:126–139
137. Houston L, Barbour M, Lenat D et al (2002) A multi-agency comparison of aquatic
macroinvertebrate-based stream bioassessment methodologies. Ecol Indic 1:279–292
138. Lyons J (2012) Development and validation of two fish-based indices of biotic integrity for
assessing perennial coolwater streams in Wisconsin, USA. Ecol Indic 23:402–412
139. Van Sickle J (2010) Correlated metrics yield multimetric indices with inferior performance.
Trans Am Fish Soc 139:1802–1817
140. Schoolmaster DR, Grace JB, Schweiger EW (2012) A general theory of multimetric indices
and their properties. Methods Ecol Evol 3:773–781
141. Langhans SD, Lienert J, Schuwirth N et al (2013) How to make river assessments comparable: a demonstration for hydromorphology. Ecol Indic 32:264–275
142. Wu W, Xu Z, Yin X et al (2014) Assessment of ecosystem health based on fish assemblages
in the Wei River basin, China. Environ Monit Assess 186:3701–3716
143. Lunde KB, Resh VH (2012) Development and validation of a macroinvertebrate index of
biotic integrity (IBI) for assessing urban impacts to Northern California freshwater wetlands.
Environ Monit Assess 184:3653–3674
144. Breiman L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45:5–32
145. Van Sickle J, Hawkins CP, Larsen DP et al (2005) A null model for the expected
macroinvertebrate assemblage in streams. J North Am Benthol Soc 24:178–191
146. Yoder CO, Barbour MT (2009) Critical technical elements of state bioassessment programs: a
process to evaluate program rigor and comparability. Environ Monit Assess 150:31–42
147. Commission E (2000) Water Framework 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. Off J Eur Community L327:1–73
148. Tonkin JD, Stoll S, Sundermann A et al (2014) Dispersal distance and the pool of taxa, but not
barriers, determine the colonisation of restored river reaches by benthic invertebrates. Freshw
Biol 59(9):1843–1855
149. Woods A, Omernik J, Brown D et al (1996) Level III and IV ecoregions of Pennsylvania and
the Blue Ridge mountains, the Ridge and Valley, and the central Appalachians of Virginia,
West Virginia, and Maryland. EPA/600/R-96/077, US Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC
150. Bryce S, Hughes R, Kaufmann P (2002) Development of a bird integrity index: using bird
assemblages as indicators of riparian condition. Environ Manage 30:294–310
151. Kanninen A, Vallinkoski V, Leka J et al (2013) A comparison of two methods for surveying
aquatic macrophyte communities in boreal lakes: implications for bioassessment. Aquat Bot
104:88–100
Principles for the Development of Contemporary Bioassessment Indices for. . .
265