Do SASS5 scores vary with season in the South African highveld? A case study on the Skeerpoort River, North West province, South Africa

References

• Armitage P, Moss D, Wright J, Furse M. 1983. The performance of a new biological water quality score system based on macroinvertebrates over a wide range of unpolluted running-water sites. Water Research 17: 333–347.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balzan MV. 2012. Associations of dragonflies (Odonata) to habitat variables within the Maltese islands: a spatio-temporal approach. Journal of Insect Science 12: 1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Carchini G, Solimini AG, Ruggiero A. 2005. Habitat characteristics and odonate diversity in mountain ponds of central Italy. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 15: 573–581.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chessman B. 2001. SIGNAL scoring system for river bioassessment by community groups. Canberra: Land & Water Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Chutter FM. 1972. An empirical biotic index of the quality of water in South African streams and rivers. Water Research 6: 19–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chutter FM. 1998. Research on the rapid biological assessment of water quality impacts in streams and rivers. WRC Report No. 422/1/ 98. Pretoria: Water Research Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Dallas HF. 1997. A preliminary evaluation of aspects of SASS (South African Scoring System) for the rapid bioassessment of water quality in rivers, with particular reference to the incorporation of SASS in a national biomonitoring programme. Southern African Journal of Aquatic Sciences 23: 79–94.
   Google Scholar
• Dallas HF. 2004. Seasonal variability of macroinvertebrate assemblages in two regions of South Africa: implications for aquatic bioassessment. African Journal of Aquatic Science 29: 173–184.
   Google Scholar
• Davies BR, Day JA, King J. 1986. The biology and conservation of South Africa's vanishing waters. Cape Town: Centre for Extra-Mural Studies, University of Cape Town.
   Google Scholar
• Davies SP, Jackson SK. 2006. The biological condition gradient: a descriptive model for interpreting change in aquatic ecosystems. Ecological Applications 16: 1251–1266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dias-Silva K, Cabette HS, Juen L, De Marco P. Jr 2010. The influence of habitat integrity and physical-chemical water variables on the structure of aquatic and semi-aquatic Heteroptera. Zoologia 27: 918–930.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickens CW, Graham PM. 2002. The South African Scoring System (SASS) Version 5 Rapid Bioassessment Method for Rivers. African Journal of Aquatic Science 27: 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Gratwicke B. 1998. The effect of season on a biotic water quality index: a case study of the Yellow Jacket and Mazowe rivers, Zimbabwe. Southern African Journal of Aquatic Science 24: 24–35.
   Google Scholar
• Hawkes HA. 1998. Origin and development of the biological monitoring working party score system. Water Research 32: 964–968.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawkins CP, Hogue JN, Decker LM, Feminella JW. 1997. Channel morphology, water temperature, and assemblage structure of stream insects. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16: 728–749.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill T, Neal C. 1997. Spatial and temporal variation in pH, alkalinity and conductivity in surface runoff and groundwater for the Upper River Severn catchment. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 1: 697–715.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodkinson I, Jackson J. 2005. Terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates as bioindicators for environmental monitoring, with particular reference to mountain ecosystems. Environmental Management 35: 649–666.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kilroy C, Biggs BJ. 2002. Use of the SHMAK clarity tube for measuring water clarity: comparison with the black disk method. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 36: 519–527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kingston S, Rosel P. 2004. Genetic differentiation among recently diverged delphinid taxa determined using AFLP markers. Journal of Heredity 95: 1–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenat DR, Crawford JK. 1994. Effects of land use on water quality and aquatic biota of three North Carolina Piedmont streams. Hydrobiologia 294: 185–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malmqvist B. 2002. Aquatic invertebrates in riverine landscapes. Freshwater Biology 47: 679–694.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McEvoy P, Goonan P. 2003. Salinity is not necessarily bad for biodiversity: case studies of invertebrates from South Australian streams and River Murray wetlands. Records of the South Australian Museum 7: 131–134.
   Google Scholar
• Quinn JM, Cooper AB, Davies-Colley RJ, Rutherford JC, Williamson RB. 1997. Land use effects on habitat, water quality, periphyton, and benthic invertebrates in Waikato, New Zealand, hill-country streams. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 31: 579–597.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Development Core Team. 2012. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at http://www.r-project.org.
   Google Scholar
• River Health Programme. 2005. State-of-Rivers Report: monitoring and managing the ecological state of rivers in the Crocodile (West) Marico Water Management Area. Pretoria: Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism.
   Google Scholar
• Rosi-Marshall EJ, Wallace JB. 2002. Invertebrate food webs along a stream resource gradient. Freshwater Biology 47: 129–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schälchli U. 1992. The clogging of coarse gravel river beds by fine sediment. Hydrobiologia 235: 189–197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vos P, Wepener V, Cyrus PD. 2002. Efficiency of the SASS4 rapid bioassessment protocol in determining river health: a case study on the Mhlathuze River, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Water SA 28: 13–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Witthüser K, Holland M. 2008. Hydrogeology of the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site. South Africa. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference of the International Association for Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics (IACMAG), Vol. 6. Mumbai: IACMAG. pp 4811–4817.
   Google Scholar