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