Sampling and Processing Aquatic and Terrestrial Invertebrates in Wetlands

Obtaining unbiased samples of aquatic and terrestrial invertebrates from wetlands provides unique challenges due to the varied life history strategies of invertebrates as well as the heterogeneity present within a wetland. Many sampling devices are useful in more than one sampling environment within a wetland but the effectiveness of most methods varies among and within wetlands as well as between users. In this chapter, we emphasize field collecting techniques and address laboratory sorting methods. When possible, the advantages and disadvantages of each method are listed and suggestions are provided to reduce bias and unwanted variability in sample collection. Sampling devices for benthic (grabs, single and multiple cores, nets, and artificial substrate), water-column (open cylinder, emergence trap, activity trap, sweep net), epiphytic (box samplers, quadrat samplers), flying terrestrial (aerial net, flight intercept trap, light trap, malaise trap), and non-flying terrestrial (sweep net, aspirator, vacuum sampler, Berlese-Tullgren funnel, mist net) invertebrates are presented and discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Buy Now

eBook EUR 85.59 Price includes VAT (France)

Softcover Book EUR 105.49 Price includes VAT (France)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Similar content being viewed by others

Bioassessment of benthic macroinvertebrates in wetlands: a paired comparison of two standardized sampling protocols

Influence of Sieve Mesh Size on Relationships between Macroinvertebrate Assemblage and Environmental Variables in Wetlands

Comparison of quantitative and semi-quantitative sampling methodologies for biomonitoring of Mediterranean streams using benthic macroinvertebrates: a case study from Greece

References

• Anderson JT, Smith LM (1996) A comparison of methods for sampling epiphytic and nektonic aquatic invertebrates in playa wetlands. J Freshw Ecol 11:219–224 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Anderson JT, Smith LM (1998) Protein and energy production in playas: implications for migratory bird management. Wetlands 18:437–446 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Anderson JT, Smith LM (1999) Carrying capacity and diel use of managed playa wetlands by nonbreeding waterbirds. Wildl Soc Bull 27:281–291 Google Scholar
• Anderson JT, Smith LM (2000) Invertebrate response to moist-soil management of playa wetlands. Ecol Appl 10:550–558 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Anderson AM, Haukos DA, Anderson JT (1999) Diet composition of three anurans from the playa wetlands of northwest Texas. Copeia 1999:515–520 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Anderson JT, Smith LM, Haukos DA (2000) Feather molt influence on diet selection of non-breeding green-winged teal in playas. J Wildl Manag 64:222–230 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Angradi TR, Pearson MS, Bolgrien DW, Jicha TM, Taylor DL, Hill BR (2009) Multimetric macroinvertebrate indices for mid-continent US great rivers. J N Am Bentholl Soc 28:785–804 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Armstrong DP, Nudds TD (1985) Factors influencing invertebrate size distributions in prairie potholes and implications for coexisting duck species. Freshw Inv Biol 4:41–47 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Benke AC (1984) Secondary production of aquatic insects. In: Resh VH, Rosenberg DM (eds) The ecology of aquatic insects. Praeger Publishers, New York, pp 289–322 Google Scholar
• Benke AC (1993) Concepts and patterns of invertebrate production in running waters. Ver Int Verein Limnol 25:15–38 Google Scholar
• Berry IL, Miller JA, Harris RL (1978) A chilling table for immobilizing insects. Ann Entomol Soc Am 71:126–128 Google Scholar
• Bland RG (1978) How to know the insects, 3rd edn. Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers, Dubuque Google Scholar
• Brandimarte AL, Anaya M (1998) Flotation of bottom fauna using a solution of sodium chloride. Verh Int Ver Theor Angew Limnol 26:2358–2359 Google Scholar
• Brandimarte AL, Shimizu GY, Anaya M, Kuhlmann ML (2004) Amostragem de invertebrados bentônicos. In: Bicudo CEM, Bicudo DC (eds) Amostragem em limnologia. RiMa, São Carlos Google Scholar
• Brinkhurst RO (1974) The Benthos of lakes. Macmillan Press Ltd./William Clowes and Sons Ltd., London Google Scholar
• Brinkman MA, Duffy WG (1996) Evaluation of four wetland aquatic invertebrate samplers and four sample sorting methods. J Freshw Ecol 11:193–200 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Brittain JE, Eikeland TJ (1988) Invertebrate drift – a review. Hydrobiologia 166:77–93 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Brooks RT (2000) Annual and seasonal variation and the effects of hydroperiod on benthic macroinvertebrates of seasonal forest (“vernal”) ponds in central Massachusetts, USA. Wetlands 20:707–715 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Chu HF, Cutkomp LK (1992) How to know the immature insects, 2nd edn. Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers, Dubuque Google Scholar
• Colon-Gaud JC, Kelso WE (2003) A suitcase trap for sampling macroinvertebrates in dense submerged aquatic vegetation. J Kans Entomol Soc 76:667–671 Google Scholar
• Conaway CH (1952) Life history of the water shrew (Sorex palustris navigator). Am Midl Nat 48:219–248 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Corkum LD, Hanes EC (1989) A laboratory aeration system for rearing aquatic invertebrates. Entomol News 100:169–172 Google Scholar
• Cummins KW (1962) An evaluation of some techniques for the collection and analysis of benthic samples with special emphasis on lotic waters. Am Midl Nat 67:477–504 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Cummins KW (1973) Trophic relations of aquatic insects. Annu Rev Entomol 18:183–206 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• De Szalay FA, Resh VH (1996) Spatial and temporal variability of trophic relationships among aquatic macroinvertebrates in a seasonal marsh. Wetlands 16:458–466 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Do MT, Harp JM, Norris KC (1999) A test of a pattern recognition system for identification of spiders. Bull Entomol Res 89:217–224 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Dodson SI (2001) Zooplankton communities of restored depressional wetlands in Wisconsin, USA. Wetlands 21:292–300 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Domínguez E, Molineri C, Pescador ML, Hubard MD, Nieto C (2006) Vol. 2 Ephemeroptera de Sud América. In: Adis J, Arias JR, Rueda-Delgado G, Wantzen KM (eds) Biodiversidad acuática en América Latina. Pensoft Publishers, Moscow Google Scholar
• Doupe RG, Horwitz P (1995) The value of macroinvertebrate assemblages for determining priorities in wetland rehabilitation: a case study from Lake Toolibin, Western Australia. J R Soc West Aust 78:33–38 Google Scholar
• Downing JA (1984) Sampling the benthos of standing water. In: Downing JA, Riegler FH (eds) A manual on methods for the assessment of secondary productivity in fresh waters, 2nd edn, IBP handbook 17. Blackwell Scientific Publishers, Oxford Google Scholar
• Downing JA, Cyr H (1985) Quantitative estimation of epiphytic invertebrate populations. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 42:1570–1579 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Dusoge K (1966) Compositions and interrelations between macrofauna living on stones in the littoral of Mikolajskie Lake. Ekol Pol 14:755–762 Google Scholar
• Edmondson WT, Winberg GG (eds) (1971) A manual on methods for the assessment of secondary productivity in fresh waters. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford Google Scholar
• El-Emam MA, Madsen H (1982) The effect of temperature, darkness, starvation and various food types on growth, survival and reproduction of Helisoma duryi, Biomphalaria alexandrina and Bulinus truncatus (Gastropoda: Planorbidae). Hydrobiologia 88:265–275 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Elliott JM (1977) Some methods for the statistical analysis of benthic invertebrates, 2nd edn. Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside Google Scholar
• Elliott JM, Drake CM (1981) A comparative study of seven grabs used for sampling benthic macroinvertebrates in rivers. Freshw Biol 11:99–120 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Elmberg J, Numi P, Pöysä H, Sjöberg K (1992) Do intruding predators and trap position affect the reliability of catches in activity traps? Hydrobiologia 239:187–193 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Errington PL (1963) Muskrat populations. Iowa State University Press, Ames Google Scholar
• Euliss NH, Swanson GA, Mackay J (1992) Multiple tube sampler for benthic and pelagic invertebrates in shallow wetlands. J Wildl Manag 56:186–191 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Euliss NH Jr, Mushet DM, Johnson DH (2002) Using aquatic invertebrates to delineate seasonal and temporary wetlands in the prairie pothole region of North America. Wetlands 22:256–262 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Fahy E (1972) An automatic separator for the removal of aquatic insects from the detritus. J Appl Ecol 9:655–658 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Fairchild WL, O’Neil MC, Rosenberg DM (1987) Quantitative evaluation of the behavioral extraction of aquatic invertebrates from samples of sphagnum moss. J N Am Bentholl Soc 6:281–287 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Fernández HR, Domínguez E (eds) (2001) Guía para la determinación de los Artrópodos Bentónicos Sudamericanos. Editorial Universitaria de Tucumán, Serie: Investigaciones de la UNT, Tucumán, Argentina Google Scholar
• Flanagan JF, Rosenberg DM (1982) Types of artificial substrates preferable for sampling freshwater benthic macroinvertebrates. In: Cairns J (ed) Artificial substrates. Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor Google Scholar
• Geraci CJ, Zhou X, Morse JC, Kjer KM (2010) Defining the genus Hydropsyche (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae) based on DNA and morphological evidence. J N Am Bentholl Soc 29:918–933 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Gerberg EJ (1970) Manual for mosquito rearing and experimental techniques. American Mosquito Control Association Bulletin Number 5, Selma Google Scholar
• Gerking SD (1957) A method for sampling the littoral macrofauna and its application. Ecology 38:219–226 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Gernes MC, Helgen JC (2002) Indexes of Biotic Integrity (IBI) for large depressional wetlands in Minnesota. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, St. Paul Google Scholar
• Gonzalez SJ, Bernadi X, Ruiz X (1996) Seasonal variation of waterbird prey in the Ebro Delta rice fields. Colon Waterbird 19:135–142 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Hargeby A (1986) A simple trickle chamber for rearing aquatic invertebrates. Hydrobiologia 133:271–274 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Helburg LB (1979) A new technique for coating insect traps. J Arboric 5:247–248 Google Scholar
• Hester FE, Dendy JS (1962) A multiple sampler for aquatic macroinvertebrates. Trans Am Fish Soc 91:420–421 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Huener JD, Kadlec JA (1992) Macroinvertebrate response to marsh management strategies in Utah. Wetlands 12:72–78 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Hyvönen T, Nummi P (2000) Activity trap and corer: complementary methods for sampling aquatic invertebrates. Hydrobiologia 432:121–125 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Iowa State University (2012) Bugguide: identification, images, and information for insects, spiders and their kin. http://bugguide.net
• Jónasson PM (1954) An improved funnel trap for capturing emerging aquatic insects with some preliminary results. Oikos 5:179–188 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Kajak Z (1971) Benthos of standing water. In: Edmondson WT, Winberg GG (eds) A manual on methods for the assessment of secondary productivity in fresh waters. Blackwell Science Publications, Oxford Google Scholar
• Kajak Z, Dusoge K, Prejs A (1968) Application of the flotation technique to assessment of absolute numbers of benthos. Ekol Pols 16:607–620 Google Scholar
• Kaston BJ (1978) How to know the spiders. Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers, Dubuque Google Scholar
• Keith LH (1991) Environmental sampling and analysis: a practical guide. CRC Press, Boca Raton Google Scholar
• Kerans BL, Karr JR, Ahlstedt SA (1992) Aquatic invertebrate assemblages: spatial and temporal differences among sampling protocols. J N Am Bentholl Soc 11:377–390 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• King RS, Richardson CJ (2002) Evaluating subsampling approaches and macroinvertebrate taxonomic resolution for wetland bioassessment. J N Am Bentholl Soc 21:150–171 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Klemm DJ, Lewis PA, Fulk F, Lazorchak JM (1990) Macroinvertebrate field and laboratory methods for evaluating the biological integrity of surface waters. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC Google Scholar
• Lauff GH, Cummins KW, Eriksen CH, Parker M (1961) A method for sorting bottom fauna samples by elutriation. Limnol Oceanogr 6:462–466 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lenat DR (1988) Water quality assessment of streams using a qualitative collection method for benthic macroinvertebrates. J N Am Bentholl Soc 7:222–233 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lima AP, Magnusson WE (2000) Does foraging activity change with ontogeny? An assessment for six sympatric species of postmetamorphic litter anurans in central Amazonia. J Herpetol 34:192–200 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lopretto EC, Tell G (eds) (1995) Ecosistemas de aguas continentales. Metodologías para su estudio. First Edition. Ediciones Sur, La Plata, Argentina Google Scholar
• Lytle DA, Martínez-Muñoz G, Zhang W, Larios N, Shapiro L, Paasch R, Moldenke A, Mortensen EM, Todorovic S, Dietterich TG (2010) Automated processing and identification of benthic invertebrate samples. J N Am Bentholl Soc 29:867–874 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Mackey AP, Cooling DA, Berrie AD (1984) An evaluation of sampling strategies for qualitative surveys of macro-invertebrates in rivers, using pond nets. J Appl Ecol 21:515–534 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• MacLeod N (2007) Automated taxon identification in systematics: theory, approaches and applications. CRC Press, Boca Raton BookGoogle Scholar
• Marshall SA (2006) Insects: their natural history and diversity with a photographic guide to insects of eastern North America. Firefly Books, Buffalo Google Scholar
• Mason W, Yevich P (1967) The use of Phloxine B and rose bengal stains to facilitate sorting benthic samples. Trans Am Microsc Soc 86:221–223 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• McDaniel B (1979) How to know the mite and ticks. Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers, Dubuque Google Scholar
• Mereta ST, Boets P, Bayih AA, Malu A, Ephrem Z, Sisay A, Endale H, Yitbarek M, Jemal A, Meester LD, Goethals PLM (2012) Analysis of environmental factors determining the abundance and diversity of macroinvertebrate taxa in natural wetlands of southwest Ethiopia. Ecol Inf 7:52–61 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Merritt RW, Cummins KW (1996) An introduction to the aquatic insects on North America. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque Google Scholar
• Merritt RW, Cummins KW, Burton TM (1984) The role of aquatic insects in the processing and cycling of nutrients. In: Resh VH, Rosenberg DM (eds) The ecology of aquatic insects. Praeger, New York Google Scholar
• Merritt RW, Cummins KW, Berg MB (2008) An introduction to the aquatic insects of North America. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., Dubuque Google Scholar
• Mudroch A, Azcue JM (1995) Manual of aquatic sediment sample. Lewis, Boca Raton Google Scholar
• Mudroch A, MacKnight SD (1991) Bottom sediment sampling. In: Mudroch A, MacKnight SD (eds) Handbook of techniques for aquatic sediments sampling. CSR Press, Boca Raton Google Scholar
• Murkin HR, Abbott PG, Kadlec JA (1983) A comparison of activity traps and sweep nets for sampling nektonic invertebrates in wetlands. Freshw Invertebr Biol 2:99–106 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Murkin HR, Wrubleski DA, Reid FA (1994) Sampling invertebrates in aquatic and terrestrial habitats. In: Bookhout TA (ed) Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitats. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda Google Scholar
• Neckles HA, Murkin HR, Cooper JA (1990) Influences of seasonal flooding on macroinvertebrate abundance in wetland habitats. Freshw Biol 23:311–322 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• New TR (1998) Invertebrate surveys for conservation. Oxford University Press, Oxford Google Scholar
• Paetzold A, Tockner K (2005) Effects of riparian arthropod predation on the biomass and abundance of aquatic insect emergence. J N Am Bentholl Soc 24:395–402 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Parker AD, Uzarski DG, Ruetz CR III, Burton TMN (2009) Diets of yellow perch (Perca flavescens) in wetland habitats of Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron. J Freshw Ecol 24:347–355 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Pehrsson O (1984) Relationships of food to spatial and temporal breeding strategies of mallards in Sweden. J Wildl Manag 48:322–339 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Peltzer PM, Lajmanovich RC (2007) Amphibians. In: Iriondo MH, Paggi JC, Parma MJ (eds) The middle Paraná River: limnology of a subtropical wetland. Springer, New York Google Scholar
• Pieczynski E (1961) The trap method of capturing water mites (Hydracarina). Ekol Pol Ser B:111–115 Google Scholar
• Rawson DS (1947) An automatic closing dredge and other equipment for using in extremely deep waters. Limnol Oceanogr 18:2–8 Google Scholar
• Resh VH, Jackson JK (1993) Rapid assessment approaches to biomonitoring using benthic macroinvertebrates. In: Rosenberg DM, Resh VH (eds) Freshwater biomonitoring and benthic macroinvertebrates. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp 195–233 Google Scholar
• Resh VH, McElravy EP (1993) Contemporary quantitative approaches to biomonitoring using benthic macroinvertebrates. In: Rosenberg DM, Resh VH (eds) Freshwater biomonitoring and benthic macroinvertebrates. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp 159–194 Google Scholar
• Rosenberg DM, Resh VH (1982) The use of artificial substrates in the study of freshwater benthic macroinvertebrates. In: Cairns J Jr (ed) Artificial substrates. Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, pp 175–235 Google Scholar
• Sandberg G (1969) A quantitative study of Chironomid distribution and emergence in Lake Erken. Arch Hydrobiol Suppl 35:119–201 Google Scholar
• Selego SM, Rose CL, Merovich GT Jr, Welsh SA, Anderson JT (2012) Community-level response of fish and aquatic macroinvertebrates to stream restoration in a third-order tributary of the Potomac River, USA. Int J Ecol. Article ID 753634. doi:10.1155/2012/753634
• Shervette VR, Aguirre WE, Blacio E, Cevallos R, Gonzalez M, Pozo F, Gelwick F (2007) Fish communities of a disturbed mangrove wetland and an adjacent tidal river in Palmar, Ecuador. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 72:115–128 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Smith DG (2001) Pennak’s freshwater invertebrates of the United States: Porifera to Crustacea, 4th edn. Wiley, New York Google Scholar
• Somers KM, Reid RA, David SM (1998) Rapid biological assessments: how many animals are enough? J N Am Bentholl Soc 17:348–358 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Sublette JE, Dendy JS (1959) Plastic material for simplified tent and funnel traps. Southwest Nat 3:220–223 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Swanson GA (1978) A water column sampler for invertebrates in shallow wetlands. J Wildl Manag 42:670–672 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Thorp JH, Covich AP (2001) Ecology and classification of North American freshwater invertebrates. Academic, San Diego Google Scholar
• Thorp JH, Covich AP (eds) (2010) Ecology and classification of North American freshwater invertebrates, 3rd edn. Academic, San Diego Google Scholar
• Toft JD, Simenstad CA, Cordell JR, Grimaldo LF (2003) The effects of introduced water hyacinth on habitat structure, invertebrate assemblages and fish diets. Estuaries 26:746–758 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Turner AM, Trexler JC (1997) Sampling aquatic invertebrates from marshes: evaluating the options. J N Am Bentholl Soc 16:694–709 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Veselka WE IV (2008) Development of volunteer-driven indices of biological integrity for wetlands in West Virginia. MS Thesis, West Virginia University, Morgantown Google Scholar
• Wallace JB, Grubaugh JW, Whiles MR (1996) Biotic indices and stream ecosystem processes: results from an experimental study. Ecol Appl 6:140–151 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Waters TF (1965) Interpretation of invertebrate drift in streams. Ecology 46:327–333 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Watson AT, O’Neill MA, Kitching IJ (2004) Automated identification of live moths (Macrolepidoptera) using Digital Automated Identification System (DAISY). Syst Biodivers 1:287–300 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Weller MW (1994) Freshwater marshes: ecology and wildlife management, 3. University Minnesota Press, Minneapolis Google Scholar
• Wetzel RG, Likens GE (1979) Limnological analyses. W.B. Saunders Company, Philadelphia Google Scholar
• Whiteside MC, Lindegaard C (1980) Complementary procedures for sampling small benthic invertebrates. Oikos 35:317–320 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Whitman RL, Inglis JM, Clark WJ, Clary RW (1983) An inexpensive and simple elutriation device for separation of invertebrates from sand and gravel. Freshw Invertebr Biol 2:159–163 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Whittier TR, Van Sickle J (2010) Macroinvertebrate tolerance values and an assemblage tolerance index (ATI) for western USA streams and rivers. J N Am Bentholl Soc 29:852–866 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Wiggins GB, Mackay RJ, Smith IM (1980) Evolutionary and ecological strategies of animals in annual temporary pools. Archiv Für Hydrobiol Suppl 58:97–206 Google Scholar
• Winterbourn MJ, Gregson KLD (1981) Guide to the aquatic insects of New Zealand. Entomol Soc N Z Bull 5:1–80 Google Scholar
• Worswick JM Jr, Barbour MT (1974) An elutriation apparatus for macroinvertebrates. Limnol Oceanogr 19:538–540 ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Zilli FL, Marchese MR (2011) Patterns in macroinvertebrate assemblages at different spatial scales. Implications of hydrological connectivity in a large floodplain river. Hydrobiologia 663:245–257 ArticleGoogle Scholar

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Division of Forestry and Natural Resources and Environmental Research Center, West Virginia University, 6125, Morgantown, WV, 26506-6125, USA James T. Anderson
2. Laboratorio de Bentos, Instituto Nacional de Limnología, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técncias, Universidad Nacional del Litoral, Ciudad Universitaria S/N, Santa Fe, 3000, Argentina Florencia L. Zilli, Luciana Montalto & Mercedes R. Marchese
3. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias, Universidad Nacional del Litoral, Ciudad Universitaria, Santa Fe, 3000, Argentina Florencia L. Zilli, Luciana Montalto & Mercedes R. Marchese
4. Division of Plant and Soil Sciences, West Virginia University, 6108, Morgantown, WV, 26506-6108, USA Matthew McKinney & Yong-Lak Park

1. James T. Anderson