Skip to main content

Table 1 Fish community metrics, score values, and the index of biological integrity (IBI) for each group in the mesohabitats and land-use pattern

From: An influence of mesohabitat structures (pool, riffle, and run) and land-use pattern on the index of biological integrity in the Geum River watershed

Category Model metrics Expected response Mesohabitat pattern Land-use pattern
Ri-Ds (n = 5) Ru-Ds (n = 5) Po-Ds (n = 5) Fo-L (n = 5) Ag-L (n = 5) Ur-L (n = 5)
Ecological characteristics: species richness and composition M1: total number of native species Decrease 4.6 ± 0.89 3.4 ± 1.67 1.4 ± 0.89 4.6 ± 0.89 3.4 ± 1.67 2.2 ± 1.09
M2: total number of riffle-benthic species Decrease 3 ± 1.41 1.8 ± 1.09 1 ± 0 3 ± 1.41 1.4 ± 0.89 1 ± 0
M3: total number of sensitive species Decrease 4.2 ± 1.09 1.8 ± 1.09 1 ± 0 4.2 ± 1.09 1.4 ± 0.89 1 ± 0
M4: proportion of individuals as tolerant species Increase 3.4 ± 1.67 1 ± 0 1 ± 0 3.4 ± 1.67 1 ± 0 1 ± 0
Trophic composition M5: proportion of individuals as omnivore Increase 4.6 ± 0.89 1.8 ± 1.09 3 ± 2 4.6 ± 0.89 1.4 ± 0.89 1.8 ± 1.09
M6: proportion of individuals as insectivores Decrease 5 ± 0 4.2 ± 1.09 3 ± 2 5 ± 0 2.2 ± 2.19 3.4 ± 1.67
Fish abundance and health condition M7:total number of individuals Increase 4.6 ± 0.89 1.4 ± 0.89 1.4 ± 0.89 4.6 ± 0.89 2.6 ± 2.19 1 ± 0
M8: proportion of abnormal individual Increase 4.6 ± 0.89 4.2 ± 1.78 5 ± 0 4.6 ± 0.89 3.4 ± 1.78 3.4 ± 2.19
Model values of IBI 34 ± 0.65 19.6 ± 1.19 16.8 ± 1.35 34 ± 0.65 16.8 ± 0.88 14.8 ± 0.98
Mean IBI 22.6 ± 8.13
Criteria of ecological health Good-Fair Fair-Poor Poor-very poor Good-Fair Poor-very poor Poor-very poor