See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/348098087

Assessing the Role of Bioindicators in Freshwater Ecosystem

Article · July 2020

CITATIONS READS
11 4,529

2 authors:

D.K. Paul Dipty Kumari

Patna University Patna University
60 PUBLICATIONS 73 CITATIONS 2 PUBLICATIONS 11 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by D.K. Paul on 01 January 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

Assessing the Role of Bioindicators in Freshwater Ecosystem

Dipty Kumari¹, Dr. Dilip Kumar Paul²

¹Research scholar, Dept. of Zoology, Patna University, Patna, Bihar, India
²Associate Professor, Dept. of Zoology, Patna University, Patna, Bihar, India

Abstract
Industrialization and anthropogenic activities has led to environmental degradation of aquatic
ecosystem. In fresh water naturally occurring bioindicators are used to access the health of water
quality that gives a complete picture of the ecosystem. Certain criteria are set to choose a model
bioindicator such as sedentary life, abundance high tolerance to pollutants, population stability,
high accumulation capacity, etc. As per several study reported, biological assessment is preferred
over chemical analysis due to several advantage like less time consumption, easy sampling, cost
efficient, less chemical exposure and give information about long term exposure effect of stress
on organism. On the other hand, chemical analysis indicates about the current environmental
condition without its potential toxic impact on ecosystem. Distribution, abundance and diversity
of organism as well as bioaccumulation of toxins in them are regarded as sign of change in water
status. From plankton to benthic invertebrates there are various indicators like phytoplankton,
zooplankton, macrophytes, mollusks and other macro invertebrates. Therefore, the aim of this
review is to provide a basic insight into fresh water bioindicators and their role in assessment of
water quality. This will assist in suitable approach for assessment of ecosystem and lead to
quality control plan for aquatic system.

Keywords: bio-monitoring, bio-indicator, freshwater ecosystem, anthropogenic activities

INTRODUCTION

Freshwater ecosystems occupy only approximately 0.8% of the Earth’s surface but support
almost 6% of all known species (Xiong et al., 2020; Dudgeon et al., 2006). Biota in aquatic
ecosystems is usually exposed to diverse stress conditions, like natural environmental variations
and anthropological disturbs including the discharges of pollutants in water resources (Bertrand
et al., 2018). Urbanization is common land use alteration growing rapidly (Paul and Meyer,
2001). Most problematic is degradation of freshwater sources like ponds, lakes, wetlands, and etc
due to run off water that continuously adding up pollutants from different areas (Parmar et al.,
2016). The degradation of freshwater resources alters its physico-chemical and microbial
structure and poses a significant threat to aquatic life. Different forms of life on this earth are
interconnected and no single species actually can exist independent in nature. Nature has given
us the basic necessities of life. Fate of all the flora and fauna are related either directly or
indirectly. This whole flora and fauna is biodiversity. Both rural and urban areas are dependent

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:58

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

on this biodiversity for food and other necessary goods. It also provides ecosystem services. So
biodiversity loss can have significant consequences on humans as well as ecosystem.

For the assessment of health status of freshwater bodies the Ecologists have two choices, they
can go for either traditional chemical analysis or can opt for use of bioindicator species.
Bioindicators are the species or community of organisms that indicates change in its
environment. Through the application of Bioindicators we can predict the natural state of a
certain region or the level/degree of contamination (Khatri & Tyagi, 2015). Biomonitoring
provides additional and factual information concerning the present state and the past trends in
environmental behavior (Oertel and Salanki, 2003). They can also detect changes in the
environment due to presence of pollutants that affect biodiversity of the environment (Holt &
Miller, 2010). Some of the best examples of bioindicator includes plankton, macrophytes,
mollusks or other benthic invertebrate, fish and etc. There are some microorganisms which
produce stress protein due exposure in pollutants. Therefore, a bioindicator can be any organism
from plants to animals that shows response to pollutants present in the ambient environment.
Bioindicator resposes are generally classified as: i) Ecological change- change in population
density and species diversity ii) Behavioral change- includes change in feeding, movement, etc
iii) Physiological change- includes response like bioaccumulation, microbial activity
(Manickavasagam,et al., 2019)

Significance of Bioindicators
According to A. Gerhardt, bioindicator is a species or group of species that readily reflects the
abiotic or biotic state of an environment represents the impact of environmental change on a
habitat, community or ecosystem or is indicative of the diversity of a subset of taxa or the whole
diversity within an area. There are certain advantages of these bioindicators over performing
tradition chemical analysis (Manickavasagam et al., 2019; Parmar et al., 2016). Those are:
i) Bioindicators uses flora and fauna which gives clue about the cumulative effect of
chemical pollutants as well as habitat alteration over time.
ii) Physical and chemical parameters cannot identify the extent of environmental stress
on living organisms where as biological indicators have this property.
iii) Cost effective method as compared to high cost instrumentation for chemical analysis
of pollutants.
iv) These species have the ability to show hazardous effect of pollutants present in
ecosystem.
v) Chemical substances present in low amount can be detected in chemical assay but its
potential toxic effect can be shown only by the response of specie living there.
vi) Indirect impact of bioaccumulation is hard to determine in case of chemical assay.
Metal tends to accumulate in living organisms due to which they amplify in
organisms within food web. Such contaminants presence is hard to analyze in
chemical or physical assay.

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:59

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

vii) When factor becomes difficult to measure, e.g. residues of pesticides, organism
response to that chemical and helps to determine the presence of stress in the
environment.
Various ecologists have set the criteria according to which bioindicator are gouped. They are:
(Manickavasagam et al., 2019., Gerhardt vol 1., Jain et al., 2010)
i) Distribution must be wide.
ii) They must show restricted mobility, site specificity, low genetic variability, possess
narrow and specific ecological demands and tolerance
iii) They must be part of trophic system.
iv) They should not be omnivores.
v) Medium to long generation time
vi) They should have ecologically relevant position in their ecosystem
vii) They must show sensitivity towards specific pollutant
viii) The indicator organism should be representative for response action of the other taxa
or for even the whole ecosystem
ix) Easy sampling, sorting, storage, identification, maintain robust condition during
handling, culturable in the lab, cost and man power effectiveness.
x) In case of using sentinels, those organisms should accumulate and concentrate the
toxins to measurable level above those in the surroundings.
Organisms that accumulate contaminants from their food and/or habitat, and thus can be used to
provide an indirect estimate of environmental concentrations of such contaminants, are known as
'sentinels' (Johnson et al., 1993).

Types of bioindicator

There are different types of bioindicator from different perspective.

 On the basis of application of bioindicator, there are 3 groups of bioindicator (Gerhardt, vol-
1)

ECOLOGICAL INDICATOR BIODIVERSITY INDICATOR ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATOR

This includes species which shows Species richness of indicator taxon These are species or group of species
response as a representative for the is used as indicator for species that respond to any environmental
community. These species are richness of a community. stress or disturbance.
sensitive habitat fragmentation, Ex- benthic invertebrate community These are mainly helpful in
pollution or other stress. shows change in species richness due diagnosing environment for
Ex-macrophytes, certain species of to change in water quality, toxin environmental policy making.
phytoplankton strongly represents sensitive or tolerant species of Ex- sentinels, macroinvertebrate.
eutrophic water. microbial population.

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:60

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

 On the basis of aim of bioindication, 4 types of bioindicators are there (Gerhardt; Chojnacka
et al., 2014):
1) Compliance indicator- They help in perfect maintenance or restoration goals of
environment or ecosystem. Example- Assessment of fish characteristics helps in
sustainability of population or community as a whole.
2) Diagnostic indicator- These indicators are measured on individual or sub-organism level
(biomarker level). Ex- Biochemical analysis of organism. Dalzochio et al.,(2016), have
mentioned examples of biomarkers like, Biliary fluorescent aromatic compounds,
vitellogenin, cytochrome P4501A mRNA or protein, hepatic ethoxyresorufin-O-
deethylase (EROD) and metallothioneins (MT) are examples of biomarkers of exposure.
3) Early warning indicator- These indicators shows first sign of disturbances in the
environment. They reveal signs before most other species are affected because they show
quick response to environmental change.
Ex- Ants, alga Pseudo kirchneriella subcapitata demonstrated potential use as warning
system for climate change in freshwater ecosystem.
4) Accumulative indicator- Organisms like mussels, mosses, lichen helps to study the effect
of stress on different biological organization level. These are not damaged by stressor.
They must be abundant in order to provide enough tissues for analysis.
On the basis of several studies reviewed, following types of bioindicators are useful in
freshwater system:
Plant indicator
Phytoplankton and algae are useful indicator of water quality. Macrophytes have also emerged as
bioindicator in water body. Laet et al., (2019), showed bioaccumulation capacities of organic
pollutants by Eichhornia. crassipes and described it as potential bioindicator. Several studies
regarding phytoplankton use as indicator of eutrophic water are present like Anderson et
al.,(2020), Feng et al.,(2019), Mukherjee et al (2010) . Nutrient enriched water body can easily
be traced using diatoms, Microcystis aeruginosa,Chlorella vulgaris, Cladophora crispate and
many more. According to Yusuf(2020), the presence of organic pollution indicators are
Closterium sp, Navicula sp, Nitzschia sp, Synedra sp, Chlamydomonas sp, Cyclotella sp and
Anacystis sp.
Animal indicator
There are certain aquatic animals and zooplanktons which efficiently monitor the aquatic
environment (Manickavasagam et al., 2019; Jain at el., 2010). Pollutants like heavy metals,
pesticides, radioactive pollution, can be easily monitored. For example, accumulation indicators
like molluscs works well in monitoring metal pollution. According to Meili, 1991; Ullrich et al.,
2001, benthic invertebrates maintain an intimate association with lake and river sediments and
sediments often harbor the highest mercury concentrations in aquatic systems. Because there are
different tolerances to concentrations of dissolved oxygen among taxa, the respiratory modes of
macroinvertebrates are excellent traits to use as bioindicators of environmental conditions( Diaz
al 2015). Lencioni(2012) used chironomid as a successful bioindicator of water quality.

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:61

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Plecoptera (stoneflies), Trichoptera (caddisflies) are flies which are
pollution intolerant their higher percentage related to tolerant species at site indicates better
water quality (Jain et al, 2010). Similarly fish like Tilopia nilotica can be used to indicate iron,
manganese, nickel, lead, cadmium, zinc in different tissues with lethal effects and
bioaccumulation.
Zooplanktons
In general, the characteristics of zooplankton community structure are characterised by the
intrinsic factors including surface area, depth, trophic level, colour of water, and the biological
community of the lake (Rahkola-Sorsa 2008). Thus these can be use as a tool for determination
of ecological status of water. Ferdous zannatul and akm muktadir reviewed well on potentiality
of zooplanktons as bioindicator. Protozoans, rotifers, cladocera, copepods are indicators of
freshwater. Daphnia magna is a sensitive indicator for toxicity assessment of synthetic
detergents. Some studies showed that less zooplankton community indicate less nutrient
enriched. Zooplankton size also correlated with biotic and abiotic factors.
Cell and Genetic biology- According to Xiong et al, (2020), examination of cellular and sub
cellular components can give clue at molecular level about toxins or stress in ecosystem.
Damage to chromosome indicate presence mutagenic agent in environment. Example: Danio
rerio, a zebra fish generally used for genetic analysis (Dai et al., 2014).

Bioindicators as a tool for Research area:

Many research work has been done to show living organisms as potential bioindicator. Some of
the work that precisely defines the potentiality of aquatic organisms are:
Algae (benthic and pelagic) are increasingly being used as reliable environmental indicators in
streams and rivers globally (Lange et al., 2016; Wu et al., 2012) because they strongly respond to
environmental changes (Dong et al., 2016; Stevenson et al., 2010, Parmar et al 2016) Especially
three major properties merit their use in ecosystem monitoring (Hötzel and Croome, 1999): (i)
they have a high sensitivity to environmental changes, (ii) they are easy to sample, and (iii) most
species are cosmopolitan with well-known autecology (Porter, 2008; van Dam et al., 1994).
Bellinger(2015); Naicheng wu etal(2017), has also indicated potential use of algae as
bioindicator. A study conducted by Kshirsagar(2013), uses alage to determine water quality of
river Mula of Pune city in which he concluded that Scenedesmus quadricauda, Chlorella
vulgaris, Oscillatoria limosaand Melosira granulate are indicators of organic pollution. Algae
encountered from the river Mula at two sites reflected the eutrophic condition so they may be
used as an indicator of water quality. According to him Oscillatoria was common in all stations
which contaminated water. Palmer’s (1969) has shown that the genera like Oscillatoria,
Euglena, Scenedesmus, Chlamydomonas, Navicula, Chlorella, Nitzschia and Ankistrodesmus
were found in organically polluted. In a study conducted by sayeswara et al., (2011), showed the
phytoplankton diversity and the relationship between water quality of a pond situated in
Karnataka, India. During study 60 phytoplanktons were identified, the dominant species were
bacillariophyceae (31.6%) followed by chlorophyceae (28.33%), cyanophyceae (25%) and

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:62

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

euglenophyceae (15%) were abundant. Phosphate was found to be a critical element responsible
for biological productivity and varied in the range of 1.1mg/l to 1.9mg/l. Ansari et al.,( 2015),
found eutrophic indicator phytoplankton in a cemented pond receiving treated wastewater before
discharging into Tapi River. He also found that dominant group was chlorophyceae (52%)
followed by bacillariophyceae (30%) cyanophyceae with (14%) euglenophyceae at lowest with
4% which indicated nutrient enriched water. Author concluded that higher level of oxygen,
nitrate, phosphate, silicate was directly related with phytoplankton diversity. Among all the
parameters author showed a positive correlation between phosphate, nitrate, silicate, oxygen and
diverse group of phytoplankton. Several studies indicated major representative of
bacillariophyceae as: Cymbella cistula, Navicula subtillisma, Fragilaria capucina, Pinnula
rianobilis, Eunotia minor and Synedra ulna. Major representative of chlorophyceae was
Chlorella sp, Chlorococcum sp, Comarium sp, Cladorasp, Closterium sp, Cladophora sp,
spirogyra sp, Volvox sp and Ulothrix sp. Nitrate, phosphate and organic matter regulated the
growth of cynophycean. Major bioindicator of euglenophyceae are Euglena and Phacus (Hazra
et al., 2020).
Fungal communities can sense ambient environment and shows response by change in
community diversity and composition. Fungi are contributing to water self-purification and
naturally Preventing eutrophication (Muller et al 1987, Batko, 1975). In study conducted by
Godlewska (2009), pond with least organic matter showed most species of fungi and
straminipilus organisms are found in pond with least biogenic comopounds. High content of
organic matter and elevated physico-chemical parameters acts as limiting factor for them. Most
of the time changes in water quality are the reflection of anthropogenic activities. Species
richness and conidial production is higher in unpolluted streams. Fungi like e.g. Cercophora spp,
inhabitants of organic substrata are more common in polluted streams (Wong et al., 1998).
According to Hyde et al., 2016, fungi are sensitive to environmental change. Pietryczuk et al.,
(2018) reported that anthropogenically polluted rivers show higher taxonomic diversity of fungi.
In a work done by Yauhui Bai et al., (2018), the increase in organic carbon and nitrogen
concentrations in water improved the relative abundance of Schizosaccharomyces, which could
be used as a potential biomarker to reflect pollutant and nutrient discharge Hyphomycetes
communities (richness and composition) are also considered as integrative indicators for
freshwater quality. Another work by comic et al., (2010), on oligotrophic lake Ohrid, revealed
Aphanomyces laevis , a water mould, is an indicator of eutrophic water. Achlya Americana and
Saprolegnia hypogina are indicator of low nutrient concentration. The dynamics of the fungal
community in the littoral zone indicated aquatic fungi represents eutrophic water, such
phenomenon has also been reported by Rankovic (2004). According to Pascoal et al,( 2005), a
decline in the richness of aquatic hyphomycete species was found at polluted sites of the Ave
River basin and they also suggested that water chemistry was main factor regulating the structure
of hyphomycete communities (Sole et al., 2008). In another study conducted by Bai et al (2018)
on Chaibai River indicated, anthropogenic activity correlated with water quality and
mycoplankton community. Schizosaccharomyces could be used as a potential biomarker to

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:63

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

reflect pollutant and nutrient discharge as it was relatively abundant due to increased organic
carbon and nitrogen.
Zooplankton include diverse taxa like protists, rotifers, copepods and cladocerans, many of them
are microscopic. Some of the lab works have already indicated that zooplanktons significantly
shows response to excess nutrient load, negatively affected by microplastic, pesticides and
pharmaceuticals and personal care products(Xiong et al., 2020; Vargas et al., 2015). In a study
conducted by Wang et al.,(2010) largest density of rotifer was found in shallow lake Gehu where
inorganic nitrogen such as NO3ˉ and NO2ˉ helped in larger rotifer density. This is the case of
nutrient enrichment. B. angularis, B. calyciflorus, F.longiseta, Brachionus diversicornis,
Asplanchna were the indicator of high trophic status. Also certain groups like Trichocerca
cylindrica, T.pusilla, T.similis and Brachionus forficula were found at high temperature.
Vaidya(2017), successfully reviewed the potentiality of zooplankton and indicated that
zooplankton population size were correlated with biotic and abiotic parameters (pH, alkalinity,
temperature, dissolve oxygen, transparency, phosphate, chlorine). In his study he found that
Rotifers, Cladocerans, Copepods and Ostracods are common potential bioindicators of fresh
water. He also concluded that some species may be absent from polluted water but still those
species were had high tolerance level. Another work by Ismail et al(2016), revealed that high
abundance of Brachionus forficula, Brachionus nilsoni, and Trichocerca sp are strong indicator
of eutrophic water. Author found that total number of taxa in Harapan and Aman Lakes were 23
and 27. This study shows following pattern: rotifer sp.(64%), followed by Copepoda (29%) and
Cladocera (7%) and cocluded that zooplankton species distribution and abundance are influenced
by various environmental factors such as water transparency and chlorophyll-a content.
Several authors like, (Sumampouw and Risjani, 2014., Jain et al., 2010, Periera, 2012) worked
on macrophytes. Laet et al.,(2019), uses Eichhornia crassipes which was exposed to di-n-
hexylphthalate, pentabromodiphenyl ether, nitenpyram, acetamiprid and bis (3-tert-butyl-4-
hydroxy-6-methylphenyl) sulfide. As a result of short exposure, these chemicals are seen in roots
of E. crassipes. Typha sp. is a kind of bioindicator in inland wetlands and water bodies which
shows presence of cadmium and nickel pollutant where as juncus sp. served as indicator of zinc
pollution. Other work also rebealed non-rooted submerged Ceratophyllum demersum and rooted
submerged Potomogeton crispies for assessing heavy metals like cadmium, copper, iron, lead,
zinc and manganese in rivers(Jain et al., 2010). Even moss and liverworts assesses heavy metal
in ponds and wolffia globosa for cadmium contamination. Macrophytes are organisms with low
mobility and cannot avoid any combination of flow, nutrient availability and other physical and
chemical characteristics that influence their survival in aquatic systems. Thus, an assembly of
such organisms in a river or lake can be an effective indicator of the integrated combination of
the pressure and stress disorders that affect their habitat (Periera et al., 2012).
Macro invertebrates are extremely important in accessing the water quality. Lake biomonitoring
using species assemblages of benthic macroinvertebrates dates back to the beginning of the 20th
century (Cairns and Pratt, 1993). Some are pollution tolerant and some are pollution sensitive.
Animals like snails and bivalves have large size and limited mobility thus, they are preferred

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:64

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

over other aquatic organisms. They are abundant in many types of freshwater environments and
are relatively easy to collect and identify (Elder & Collin, 1991). Different animals served as
good indicator of water quality. Researchers like (Moolman et al., 2007; Ibrahim, 2006; Swaileh
et al., 2001) regarded snail as suitable indicator for heavy metal contaminated sites because they
have the ability to accumulate metals in their tissues. According to Mahmoud et al., (2013), these
snails can accumulate Cu, Pb and Cd in high concentrations in their bodies; hence, they can be
used as bioindicators for heavy metals and observed the following sequence of accumulation in
decreasing order: Cleopatra bulimoides > Helisoma duryi > Bulinus truncatus >
Biomphalaria alexandrina >Physa acuta > Bellamya unicolor > Theodoxus niloticus.
Malinovska, (2019) and Kuklina et al (2014), also indicated about use of crayfish, a decapods, as
a bioindicator for long term water monitoring under industrial condition. These are responsive to
change in water quality. They show affinity for accumulating pollutants in their tissue.
According to solimini et al., (2006), in the profundal zone, oligochaetes and chironomids are
considered the most useful indicators of oxygen condition and trophic status (Sæther, 1979).
Both oxygen levels and sediment granulometry have been related to oligochetes species
distribution (Verdonschot, 1996). In a study conducted by ojiija et al (2016), the most abundant
taxa were Odonata (35.959%), Hemiptera (25.514%), Coleoptera (18.493%), and Diptera
(12.842%). Whereas the least abundant taxa were Ephemeroptera and Gastropoda, each
constituting 1.028% of all macroinvertebrates. He used score system to evaluate the water
quality of Nzovwe stream and concluded using these taxa that, the most abundant
macroinvertebrates were Dragonflies(27.226%), Water striders (13.185%), and Creeping water
bugs (10.274%), whereas the least abundant were Giant water bugs (0.514%) and
Backswimmers (0.514%) and the water quality of stream were either very clean nor very altered.
Gautam et al., (2014), worked on wetland and stated Wetlands are among the most productive
ecosystems in the world and are important for their ecological, economic, cultural and
recreational values. In their research they work on water quality assessment of Rampur Ghol,
Chitwan, Nepal and recorded composition pattern of aquatic macro-invertebrates. They also used
GRS-BIOS/ASPT to calculate the water quality , Shannon Weiner diversity index (H’) and
Piélou evenness index (e) to determine taxa richness of the macro-invertebrates and concluded
that their density icreased in rainy season because of growth of the youngs and decreased in dry
and winter because of slow growth. They found benthic population of aquatic taxa was
dominated by order Prosobranchia comprising 3 families i.e. Thiaridae, Viviparidae, and
Ampulariidae in dry and rainy season. family Viviparidae, Thiaridae and Ampulariidae (Pila
globosa) of order Prosobranchia indicates moderately tolerant of organic enrichment. The family
Baetidae was abundantly recorded in clean and less polluted sites which are intolerant to organic
pollution. They confirmed family Tubificidae as strong indicator of polluted water and
chironomid found at two sites indicated heavily polluted water. Presence of Mycidae, Potamidae
at some site indicated moderately tolerant of pollution. In their work they categorized moderately
tolerant and strong indicators of water quality.

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:65

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

One of the basic advantages of animal indicators over flora is easy counting. Some of the
significance of bioindicators are (Manickavasagam et al., 2019)
i) Practicality- practical way of investigation
ii) Indicates toxicity in its environment
iii) Monitors degree of contamination and check cleaning of environment for any
pollutants.
iv) Shows health status of water quality
v) Helps in creating conservation program.
Anthropogenic activities- effect resulting from human activity
Water is an essential source for life on earth. The whole biodiversity depends on it. Since
freshwater is finitely present on this earth, we need to conserve it. But opposite to conserving it,
various anthropogenic activities are detoriating its quality as well as ecosystem. And due to this,
supply of fine drinking water becomes a global problem. Although the general perception is that
the most severe degradation took place during the 20th century, palaeolimnological
investigations of lakes have, in many cases, evidenced a much earlier anthropogenic impact (e.g.
Bradshaw et al., 2005) Here some activities enlisted shown by various worker (Exall et al.,
2011), that creates problem for freshwater in both rural and urban areas:
i) Agricultural runoff- rain water brings up the nutrients and chemicals that include
halogenated hydrocarbon like pesticides, herbicides, chemical fertilizers toward the
water bodies which make water contaminated. They contribute nitrate, sulphate,
phosphate, etc causing eutrophication. It is estimated that around 70% of fresh water
is used in agriculture ( Baroni et al , 2007)
ii) Discharge from cracked sewage pipes- In the urban areas older sewage pipes gets
broken which may further add up the sewage discharge due to seepage followed by
run. It adds organic effluent increasing the nutrient load of water body.
iii) Industrial effluents- most of the developed and developing countries contributes
highly toxic pollutants to nearest water bodies. Due to this water becomes chemically
polluted. Dye industries, cosmetic industries, automobile manufacturing industries
and various other industries are among them. Contributes heavy metals, anti clumping
agent like ferrocyanide, impurities of trace elements, etc.
iv) Incomplete treated waste water discharge- waste water treatment plants release their
effluents into local water body. It carries chemicals due to incomplete treatment of
water.
v) Solid waste dumping
vi) Deforestation- It leads to soil erosion which are move to nearest local warter bodies
and add sediments.
vii) Poultry farming- Excretion of hormones from them has been cited as endocrine
disruption in wildlife. It creates pollutants like ammonia, nutrients, pathogens, trace
elements, pesticides, hormones, organic waste.

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:66

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

viii) Discharge of wastewater from households of local near areas in rural and urban areas-
they can further contribute hazardous chemicals like CFCs(chlorofluorocarbon),
Pb(lead), nitrate, sulphate, pharmaceutical products and antibiotics.
ix) Littering around the water body in rural areas- It adds organic waste to water.
x) Domestic activities in rural areas
xi) Sedimentation – due to change in land use and agriculture habits. Activities such as
farming, clearing forests, building roads, and mining can add too much soil and
particulate matter in river and other freshwater sources.
xii) Mining- - It uses water in different processes. Certain minerals and their constituent
ions (Zn, Pb, cu, Fe, Ni) are there which are vulnerable to weathering process leech
out. Extraction activity, mineral processing, disposal of mine wastes, mine –
dewatering and post mining flooding leading to discharge of polluted water in local
water body.
xiii) E-waste- These contain toxic substances. Improper disposal in landfills pose threats to
ecosystem for future generation. It produces heavy metals like mercury, lithium, lead
and barium and makes water acidic and toxic. They can even lead to ground water
and freshwater bodies and makes water unfit for consumption (elytus.com).
xiv) Acid rain due to excess production of gases from industries and vehicles, causes
acidification of water.

Conclusion:
This paper is a quick review on potential use of bioindicators in freshwater for biomonitoring.
Biomonitoring is an ecofriendly tool for assessing the health status of fresh water body spatially
and temporally. These bioindicators are helpful in detecting natural or anthropogenic stress by
changing in itself by physiologically, chemically or behaviorally. Since there are certain
advantages over traditional chemical analysis, so this method of monitoring is popular with
ecologist nowadays. Biomonitoring can assess potential impact of toxins or other contaminants
on living organisms. After so many research conducted, various successful indicator species has
been suggested in groups like mollusk, macrophytes, crustaceans, zooplankton, microbes,
phytoplanktons and fishes. Several authors have defined different classes of bioindicator.
Different pollutants like industries effluent, agricultural runoff, metal toxicity, organic load are
assessable using different groups of bioindicators because single species cannot detect all kind of
changes or stress in water. Timely monitoring of water bodies can give early warning of
degrading environment. Biomonitoring programs are beneficial for implantation of various
government action plans for revival of fresh water. These entire action plans will finally help in
conserving for future. For future consideration, genomic study will fill the gap area of potential
impact of toxin at molecular level on aquatic organism.

10

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:67

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

References
Arumugam, V., Sivakami, R. and Premkishore, G.(2015).Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci, 4(5):
362-376
Abel, P. D., (1996), Water Pollution Biology. Taylor and Francis, London.
Alcorlo, P. Otero, M.; Crehuet, M.; Baltanas, A.; Montes, C.(2006).The use of the red swamp
crayfish (Procambarus clarkii, Girard) as indicator of the bioavailability of heavy metals in
environmental monitoring in the River Guadiamar (SW, Spain). Science of the Total
Environment, 366, issue 1,pg 380–390
Alloys, J. T.(2013). The use Of macro-invertebrates as bio-indicator for water pollution, Thesis
Anderson, D. M., Glibert, P. M., & Burkholder, J. M. (2002). Harmful algal blooms and
eutrophication: Nutrient sources, composition, and consequences. Estuaries, 25(4), 704–726.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02804901
Atko, A. Hydromycology – an overview. PWN,Warszawa, pp. 5-553, 1975
Bai, Yaohui., Wang, Qiaojuan., Liao, Kailingli., Jian, Zhiyu., Zhao, Chen and Qu, Jiuhui(2018).,
Fungal community as bioindicator to reflect anthropogenic activities in river ecosystem,
Frontiers in Microbiology, vol-9, article 3152
Ansari, E., Gadhia, M., & Ujjania, N. C. (2015). Phytoplankton Diversity and Water Quality
assessment of ONGC pond Hazira, international journal of research in environmental
sciences(IJRES), 1(1), 1-5.
Batiuk, R A, Orth, R. J., Moore, K. A., Dennison, W. C., Stevenson, J. C., Staver, L.W., Carter,
V., Rybicki, N. B., Hickman, R.E., Kollar, S., Bieber, S., Heasly, P.(1992).Chesapeake Bay
submerged aquatic vegetation habitat requirements and restoration targets: a technical synthesis.
Annapolis (MD): Chesapeake BayProgram. Vol. 83/92; p. 166–169
Bellinger, E. G., Sigee, D. C.(2015).Algae as bioindicators, chapter-3.
Bertrand, Lidwina., Monferran, M. Victoria., Mouneyrac, Catherine., Ame, M. Valeria(2018).
Native crustacean species as a bioindicator of freshwater ecosystem pollution: A multivariate and
integrative study of multi-biomarker response in active river monitoring, chemosphere 206, 265-
277
Bradshaw, E. G., Rasmussen, P., Odgaard, B.V. (2005). Mid-to late-Holocene land-use change
and lake development at Dallund Sø, Denmark: synthesis of multiproxy data, linking land and
lake. Holocene 15:1152–1162
C. De Vargas, S. Audic, N. Henry, J. Decelle, F. Mah_e, R. Logares, et al., Eukaryotic plankton
diversity in the sunlit ocean, Science 348 (6237) (2015) 1261605
Cosmic, L., Rankovic, B., Novevska, v and Ostojic, A.(2010). Diversity and dynamics of the
fungal community in Lake Ohrid, Vol. 9: 169–176
Chattopadhyay, C. and Banerjee, T. C.(2007).Temporal changes in environmental
characteristics and diversity of net phytoplankton in a freshwater lake, Turk J Bot, 287- 296.
Chojnacka, K. and Michalak, I.(2014).Ecyclopedia of toxicology, 3rd edition, effluentmonitoring
.

11

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:68

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

Cairns, J. Jr and Pratt J. R.(1993). A history of biological monitoring. using benthic

macroinvertebrates. In Rosenberg, D. M. and V. H. Resh eds. Freshwater monitoring and benthic
macroinvertebrates. Chapmann and Hall New York, pp: 10-27.
Dudgeon. D., Arthington, A. H., Gessner, M. O., Kawabata, Z. I., Knowler, D. J. &et al.,(2006).
Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges, Biol. Rev. 81
(2) 163–182.
Dai, Y. J., Jia, Y. F., Chen, N. and et al;( 2014) Critical review ; Zebrafish as a model system to
study toxicology, Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 11–17.
Dalchio, T., Rodrigues, G. Z. P., Gehlen, I. E. P. G. and Silva, L. B. D(2016).Int Aquat Res,
8:283–298
Das, S., Elavarasi, A., Somasundharan, P.L., and Khan, S.A.,(2009). Biosorption of heavy metals
by marine bacteria: potential tool for detecting marine pollution, J. of Environ. Health, 9(1/2),
38-43.
Diaz, J. E. S., Lopez, E. L.(2015). Biological Indicators of Water Quality: The Role of Fish and
Macroinvertebrates as Indicators of Water Quality, 643-661.
Dong, T, Wychen, S. V., Nagle, N., Pienkos and Laurens, L. M. L.(2016). Impact of biochemical
composition on susceptibility of algal biomass to acid-catalyzed pretreatment for sugar and lipid
recovery, Algal Research, vol-18, pp 69-77
Duggan, I. C., Green, J. D., and Shiel, R. J.(2001). Distribution of rotifers in North Island, New
Zealand, and their potential use as bioindicators of lake trophic state, Rotifera IX, pp. 155-164.
Elder, J.F., & Colins, J.J. (1991). Freshwater M olluscs as Indicators of Bioav ailability and
Toxicity of Metals in Surface Water Systems, Environmental Contamination and Toxicology,
122, 37-79. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4612-3198-1_2.
European Environmental Agency(EEA)(1999).Nutrients in European Ecosystems.
Environmental Assessment Report No. 4. Copenhagen: European Environmental Agency, P -
155
Exall, k., Rochfort, Q. and Marsalek, J.(2011). Measurement of cyanide in urban snowmelt and
run off, Water quality research journal of Canada, 46(2) ;137
Pihan, F. and Vaulfleury, A. D.(2000). The snail as a target organism for the evaluation of
industrial waste dump contamination and the efficiency of its remediation, Ecotoxicol Environ.
Saf., vol. 46, pp. 137–147
Farrapeira, C. M. R., Mendes, E. S., Dourado, J., and Guimarães, J.(2010). Coliform
accumulation in Amphibalanus amphitrite (Darwin, 1854) (Cirripedia) and its use as an organic
pollution bioindicator in the estuarine area of Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil, Braz. J. Saf., vol. 46,
pp. 137–147, 2000, 70(2), 301-309.
Feng, C., Jia, J., Wang, C., Han, M., Dong, C., Huo, B., … Liu, X. (2019). Phytoplankton and
bacterial community structure in two chinese lakes of different trophic status. Microorganisms,
7(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms7120621

12

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:69

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

Gautam, B., Maskey, R., Sapkota, R. P. and Dangol, D. R.(2014).Aquatic Macro-invertebrates

as Bio-indicators: An Approach for Wetland Water Quality Assessment of Rampur Ghol,
Chitwan, Nepal
Gerhardt, A., Biomonitor species and their use in biomonitoring, Environmental Monitoring, vol
1
Hazra, M. and kumari, D.(2020).Phytoplankton in eutrophicated pond water : A Review,
Advances in science and technology, pp 87-94, ISBN : 978-81-946375 -0-9
Holt, E. A. and. Miller, S. W.(2010), Bioindicators : Using organisms to measure environmental
impacts, Nature Education Knowledge 3(10):8
Hötzel, G., & Croome, R. (1999).A Phytoplankton Methods Manual for Australian Freshwaters.
LWRRDC Occasional Paper 22/99.
https://elytus.com/blog/e-waste-and-its-negative-effects-on-the-environment.html

Hyde, K. D., Hongsanan, S., Jeewon, R., Bhat, D. J. et al.(2016).Fungal diversity notes 367-
490:taxonomic and phylogenetic contributions to fungal taxa. Fungal Diversity80, 1–270.
Ibrahim,M. M.(2006), energy allocation in biomphalaria alexandrina snails in rsponse to
cadmium exposure and schistosoma mansoni infection, Exptl. Parasitol, 112 : 31-36
Ismail, A. H. and Adnan, A. M. M.(2016).Zooplankton Composition and Abundance as
Indicators of Eutrophication in Two Small Man-made Lakes, Trop Life Sci Res,
doi: 10.21315/tlsr2016.27.3.5
Jain, A., Singh, B.N., Singh, S.P., Singh, H.B. and Singh, S., (2010).Exploring biodiversity as
bioindicators for water pollution. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Biodiversity,
Development and Poverty Alleviation, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, India. Uttar Pradesh State
Biodiversity Board
Joanna B.(2006).Bioindicators: types, development, and use in ecological assessment and
Research, Environ Bioind.1:22–39
Kopciuch, R. G., Berecka , B., Bartoszewicz, J. and Buszewski, B(2004).Polish Journal of
Environmental Studies Vol. 13, No. 5, 453-462
Kshirsagar, A. D.(2013).Use of Algae as a Bioindicator to Determine Water Quality of River
Mula from Pune City, Maharashtra (India), Universal Journal of Environmental Research and
Technology, Volume 3, Issue 1: 79-85
Kuklina, I., Sladkova, S., Kouba, A., Kholodkevich, S., Kozak, P.,(2014).Investigation of
chloramine-T impact on crayfish Astacus leptodactylus (Esch., 1823) cardiac activity.
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 21, 10262–10269.
Laet, C. D., Matringe, T., Petit, E. and Grison, C.(2019).Eichhornia Crassipes : a powerful
bioindicator for water pollution by emerging pollutants, Nature, Scientific reports 9,
Article number: 7326
Lange, K., Toownsend, C. R., Matthaei, C. D.(2016).A trait based framework for stream alga
communities, Ecol. Evol. 6, 23-36.

13

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:70

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

Laskowski R., Hopkin, S. P.(1996b) Effect of Zn, Cu, Pb, and Cd in snail Helix aspersa.
Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 34: 59-69
Lencioni, Valeri(2012).Chironomids as bioindicatorsof environmental quality in mountain
springs, Freshwater science, 31(2):525-541
Madhav, S., Ahamad, A., Singh, A. K., Kushawaha, J., Chauhan, J. S. and Sharma,
S.(2019).Water Pollutants : Sources and Impacts on the environment and human health, Sensors
in water pollutants monitoring: role of material, pp 43-62
Mahmoud, Kadria M. A., Taleb, Hoda M. A. Abu(2013).Fresh water snails as bioindicator for
some heavy metals in the aquatic environment, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, African Journal of
Ecology, 51, 193–198 .
Mandaville, S. M.(2002).Benthic macroinvertebrates in freshwater- Taxa tolerant values, metrics
and protocols.
Malinovska, viktorria., Lozek, Filip., Kuklina, I., Cisar, P., and Kozak, P.(2020).Crayfish as
bioindicators for monitoring ClO2 : A Case study from a Brewery water treatment facility,
Water, 12(1), 63.
Meili, M.(1991).The coupling of mercury and organic matter in the biogeochemical cycle:
towards a mechanistic model for the boreal forest zone. Water Air Soil Pollut. 56.
Moolman, L., Van Vuren, J.H.J. and Wepener, V. (2007).Comparative studies on the uptake and
effects of cadmium and zinc on the cellular energy allocation of two freshwater gastropods,
Ecotox. Environ. Safety, doi:10.1016/j.ecoenv.2006.12.017
Mukherjee, B., Nivedita, M., & Mukherjee, D. (2010).Plankton diversity and dynamics in a
polluted eutrophic lake, Ranchi. Journal of Environmental Biology, 31(5 SUPPL.),827- 839.
Müller E., Loeffler W.(1987), Outline of mycology.PWRiL, Warszawa
Oertel, Nandor and Salanki, Janos(2003)Biomonitorig and bioindicators in aquatic ecosystem,
modern trends in applied aquatic ecology, pp 219-246.
Ojiija, F. and Laiser, H.(2016).MacroInvertebrates As Bio Indicators Of Water Quality In
Nzovwe Stream, In Mbeya, Tanzania, international journal of scientific & technology research
volume 5, issue 06
Omar, W. M. W.(2010).Perspectives on the use of algae as biological indicators for monitoring
and protecting aquatic environments, with special reference to Malaysian freshwater ecosystems,
Tropical life science research, 21(2), 51-67
P. Alcorlo., M. Otero., M. Crehuet., A. Baltanas and C. Montes (2006).The use of red swamp
crayfish(Procambarus clarkia, Girard) as indicator of bioavailability of heavy metals in the
environmental monitoring in the river Guadiamar( SW, Spain), The Science of Total
Environment, 366(1), 380-390
Parmar, T. K., Deepak, Rawtani., Agrawal, Y. K.(2016).Bioindicators : The Natural Indicator of
Environmental Pollution, Frontiers in Life Science, vol 9, No 2, 110-118
Palmer, C.M. (1969).Composite rating of algae tolerating organic pollution. Journal of
Phycology., 5: 78-82

14

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:71

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

Pascoal, C., Marvanova, L., and Cassio, F.(2005).Aquatic hyphomycete diversity in streams of
Northwest Portugal. Fungal Diversity, 19, 109–128.
Peterson, W. T.(1986).The effects of seasonal variations in stratification on plankton dynamics in
Long Island Sound. In: Bowman MJ, Yentsch CM, PetersonWT, editors. Tidal Mixing and
plankton dynamics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. Vol. 17 Lecture Notes in Coastal and Estuarine
Studies; p. 225–319. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4966-5_11
Pennuto, C.M.; Lane, O.P.; Evers, D.C.; Taylor, R.J.; Loukmas, J.(2005).Mercury in the northern
crayfish, Orconectes virilis (Hagen), in New England, USA. Ecotoxicology, 14, 149-162.
Pereira, S. A., Trindade, C. R. T., Albertoni, E. F. and Silva, C. P.(2012).Aquatic macrophytes
as indicators of water quality in subtropical shallow lakes, southern Brazil, Acta Limnologica
Brasiliensia, vol 24, No. 1, p. 52-63
Pietryczuk, A., Cudowski, A., Hauschild, T., Swislocka, M., Wiecko, A., and Karpowicz,
M.(2018).Abundance and species diversity of fungi in rivers with various contaminations.
Current. Microbiology 75, 630–638. doi: 10.1007/s00284-017-1427-3
Porter, S. D., Mueller, D. K., Spahr, N. E., Munn, M. D., Dubrovsky, N. M.(2008).Efficacy of
algal metrics for assessing nutrient and organic enrichment in flowing waters, Freshw Biol
53:1036–1054. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2007.01951.x
Rahkola-Sorsa M. University of Joensuu(2008), The structure of zooplankton community in
large boreal lakes and assessment of zooplankton methodology. PhD diss.
Rankovi ́c B (2004).The fungal community of Lake Sjenica,Serbia. J Freshw Ecol 19:325–332
Rosenberg, D. M.(1992).Freshwater biomonitoring and chironomidae, Netherlands of Aquatic S.
Ecology,26, (2-4), 101-122.
Manickavasagam., C. Sudhan., Bharathi and S. Anand(2019).Bioindicators in aquatic
Sayeswara, H. A., Goudar, M. Anand., and Manjunatha, R.(2011).Water quality evaluation and
phytoplankton diversity of Hosahalli pond, Shivamogga, Karnataka(India), Int. J. Chem. Scie. :
9(2), 805-815.
Sæther, O. A.( 1979) Chironomid communities as water quality indicators, Holarct. Ecol. 2: 65–
74.
Saulovic, Durdija., Biocanin, Rade., and Rodriguez, Bibiana., Bioindicators in human
Environment.
Shashi, shekhar, T. R., Kiran, B. R., Puttaiah, E. T., Shivaraj, Y., and Mahadevan, K. M.(2008).
Journal of environmental biology, 29(2), 233-236.
Solimini, A. G., Free, G., et al(2006).Using Benthic Macroinvertebrates to Assess Ecological
Status of Lakes Current Knowledge and Way Forward to Support WFD Implementation,
institute for environment and sustainability, EUR 22347EN
Somani, vaishali, U.(2016).phytoplankton diversity of karave pond, navi Mumbai, Maharastra,
sacon envis, vol. 12, (1)
Sondergaard, M. and Jeppesen, E.(2007).Anthropogenic impacts on lakes and stream
ecosystems, approaches to restoration, Journal of applied ecology, 44, 1089-1094 Science
learning hub, Bioindicator(2009)

15

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:72

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

Schilderman, P. A. E. L., Moonen, E. J. C., Mass, L. M., Welle, I. and Kleinjans, J. C.

S.(1999).Use of crayfish in biomonitoring studies of environmental pollution of the river Meuse,
Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, vol. 44, 3, p.241-252
Sole, M., Fetzer, I., Wennrich, R., Sridhar, K. R., Harms, H., and Krauss, G.(2008).Aquatic
hyphomycete communities as potential bioindicators for assessing anthropogenic stress, Science
of the Total Environment, 389, issue 2-3, 557–565. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.09.010
Sumampouw, O.J. and Risjani, Y.(2014).Bacteria as Indicators of Environmental Pollution,
International Journal of Ecosystem, 4(6): 251-258
Swaileh, K.M. ; N. Rabay'a; R. Salim; A. Ezzughayyar, and A.A. Rabbo (2001).Levels of
trace metals and effect of body size on metal content of land snail Levantina hierosylima
from the west bank-Palestine, Journal of Environ. Eng. 36(7):1373-88.
Tiwari, D., and shukla, M.(2007).Algal biodiversity and trophic status of some temporary water
bodies of Kanpur, Nature environment and pollution technology, vol-6, No. 1, pp. 85-90.
Ullrich, S.M., Tanton, T.W. and Abdrashitova, S.A.(2001).Mercury in the aquatic environment:
a review of factors affecting methylation, Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Tech. 31, 241–93
Vaidya, S. R.(2017).Use of zooplankton as bioindicators for the management of aquatic
diversity: A review, International Journal of Biology Research, Volume 2; Issue 1, pp14-15.
Van Dam H., Mertens A. & Sinkeldam, J.(1994).A coded checklist and ecological indicator
values of freshwater diatoms from the Netherlands. Netherlands Journal of Aquatic Ecology 28:
117–133.
Verdonschot, P.F.M(1996).Oligochaetes and eutrophication; an experiment over four years in
outdoor mesocosms, Hydrobiologia 334:169-183
Villantes, Y. I. L. and Nuneza, O. M.(2015).Macroinvertebrates as bioindicators of water quality
in Labo and Clarin rivers, Misamis occidental, Philippines, International Journal of Biosciences,
vol 6, No- 9, p. 62-73
Xiong, W., P. Ni, Y. Chen, Y. Gao, S. Li, A. Zhan(2019).Biological consequences of
environmental pollution in running water ecosystems: a case study in zooplankton, Environ.
Pollut., 252, pp. 1483-1490.
Walsh, G. E.(1978).Toxic effects of pollutants on plankton. In: Butler GC, editor. Principles of
ecotoxicology. New York (NY): Wiley. Chapter 12; p. 257–274.
Wang S, Xie P, Geng, H.(2010).The relative importance of physicochemical factors and
crustacean zooplankton as determinants of rotifer density and species distribution in lakes
adjacent to the Yangtze River, China. Limnologica, 40: 1–7.
Wong, M. K. M., Goh, T. K., Hodgkiss, I. J., Hyde, K. D., Ranghoo, V. M., Tsui, C. K. M., Ho,
Wai-Hong., Wong, W. S.W. and Yuen, Tsz-Kit(1998).Role of fungi in freshwater ecosystems,
Biodiversity and conservation, 7, 1187–1206, doi: 10.1023/A:1008883716975
Wu, Naicheng., Dong, Xuhui., Liu, Yang., Wang, Chao., Annette Baattrap,
Pedersen(2017).Using river microalgae as indicators for freshwater biomonitoring : Review of
published research and future directions, Ecological Indicators, 81, 124-131.

16

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:73

Journal of Interdisciplinary Cycle Research ISSN NO: 0022-1945

Xiong, Wei., Huang, Xuena., Chen, Yiyong., Fu, Ruiying., Du, Xun., Chen, Xingyu., Aibin,
zhan(2020).Zooplankton biodiversity monitoring in polluted freshwater ecosystem: A technical
review, Environmental science and ecotoxicology, 1 , 100008.
Yusuf, Z. H.(2020).Phytoplankton as bioindicators of water quality in Nasarawa reservoir,
Katsina State Nigeria, Acta Limnologica Brasiliensia, vol 32
Zannatul, F. and muktadir, A.(2009).A Review: Potentiality of zooplankton as bioindicator,
American Journal of Applied Science, 6(10), 1815-1819

17

Volume XII, Issue IX, September/2020 Page No:74

View publication stats