Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Usability of Existing Volunteer Water Monitoring Data: What Can the Literature Tell Us? Cover

Usability of Existing Volunteer Water Monitoring Data: What Can the Literature Tell Us?

Open Access
|Nov 2019

References

  1. 1Au, J, Bagchi, P, Chen, B, Martinez, R, Dudley, SA and Sorger, GJ. 2000. Methodology for public monitoring of total coliforms, Escherichia coli and toxicity in waterways by Canadian high school students. Journal of Environmental Management, 58: 213230. DOI: 10.1006/jema.2000.0323
  2. 2Barrows, CW, Hoines, J, Vamstad, MS, Murphy-Mariscal, M, Lalumiere, K and Heintz, J. 2016. Using citizen scientists to assess climate change shifts in desert reptile communities. Biological Conservation, 195: 8288. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2015.12.027
  3. 3Bonney, R, Ballard, H, Jordan, R, McCallie, E, Phillips, T, Shirk, J and Wilderman, CC. 2009a. Public Participation in Scientific Research: Defining the Field and Assessing Its Potential for Informal Science Education. CAISE Inquiry Group Report. Washington, DC, USA.
  4. 4Bonney, R, Cooper, CB, Dickinson, J, Kelling, S, Phillips, T, Rosenberg, KV and Shirk, J. 2009b. Citizen Science: A Developing Tool for Expanding Science Knowledge and Scientific Literacy. BioScience, 59: 977984. DOI: 10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.9
  5. 5Boudreau, SA and Yan, ND. 2004. Auditing the Accuracy of a Volunteer-Based Surveillance Program for an Aquatic Invader Bythotrephes. Environ Monit Assess, 91: 1726. DOI: 10.1023/B:EMAS.0000009228.09204.b7
  6. 6Burgess, HK, DeBey, LB, Froehlich, HE, Schmidt, N, Theobald, EJ, Ettinger, AK, HilleRisLambers, J, Tewksbury, J and Parrish, JK. 2016. The science of citizen science: Exploring barriers to use as a primary research tool. Biological Conservation, The role of citizen science in biological conservation, 208: 113120. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.05.014
  7. 7Canfield, DE, Brown, CD, Bachmann, RW and Hoyer, MV. 2002. Volunteer Lake Monitoring: Testing the Reliability of Data Collected by the Florida LAKEWATCH Program. Lake and Reservoir Management, 18: 19. DOI: 10.1080/07438140209353924
  8. 8Coates, A. 2013. Volunteer Monitoring of Water Quality in New Zealand: Where does the Value Lie? (Thesis). Canterbury, New Zealand: University of Canterbury.
  9. 9Cox, TE, Philippoff, J, Baumgartner, E and Smith, CM. 2012. Expert variability provides perspective on the strengths and weaknesses of citizen-driven intertidal monitoring program. Ecological Applications, 22: 12011212. DOI: 10.1890/11-1614.1
  10. 10Delaney, DG, Sperling, CD, Adams, CS and Leung, B. 2008. Marine invasive species: validation of citizen science and implications for national monitoring networks. Biol Invasions, 10: 117128. DOI: 10.1007/s10530-007-9114-0
  11. 11Deutsch, WG and Ruiz-Córdova, SS. 2015. Trends, challenges, and responses of a 20-year, volunteer water monitoring program in Alabama. Ecology & Society, 20: 154163. DOI: 10.5751/ES-07578-200314
  12. 12Devictor, V, Whittaker, RJ and Beltrame, C. 2010. Beyond scarcity: citizen science programmes as useful tools for conservation biogeography. Diversity and Distributions, 16: 354362. DOI: 10.1111/j.1472-4642.2009.00615.x
  13. 13Dickinson, JL, Zuckerberg, B and Bonter, DN. 2010. Citizen Science as an Ecological Research Tool: Challenges and Benefits. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 41: 149172. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102209-144636
  14. 14Dyer, F, Harrison, E, Gruber, B, Nichols, S, Tschierschke, A and O’Reilly, W. 2014. Waterwatch data quality: an opportunity to augment professionally collected data sets. Proceedings of the 7th Australian Stream Management Conference, 27–30 Jul: 357362.
  15. 15Engel, SR and Voshell, JR. 2002. Volunteer Biological Monitoring: Can It Accurately Assess the Ecological Condition of Streams? American Entomologist, 48: 164177. DOI: 10.1093/ae/48.3.164
  16. 16Fore, LS, Paulsen, K and O’Laughlin, K. 2001. Assessing the performance of volunteers in monitoring streams. Freshwater Biology, 46: 109123. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2001.00640.x
  17. 17Galloway, AWE, Tudor, MT and Haegen, WMV. 2006. The Reliability of Citizen Science: A Case Study of Oregon White Oak Stand Surveys. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 34: 14251429. DOI: 10.2193/0091-7648(2006)34[1425:TROCSA]2.0.CO;2
  18. 18Gonsamo, A and D’Odorico, P. 2014. Citizen science: best practices to remove observer bias in trend analysis. Int J Biometeorol, 58: 21592163. DOI: 10.1007/s00484-014-0806-8
  19. 19Gowan, C, Ruby, M, Knisley, R and Grimmer, L. 2007. Stream Monitoring Methods Suitable for Citizen Volunteers Working in the Coastal Plain and Lower Piedmont Regions of Virginia. Am Entomol, 53: 4857. DOI: 10.1093/ae/53.1.48
  20. 20Hochachka, WM, Fink, D, Hutchinson, RA, Sheldon, D, Wong, W-K and Kelling, S. 2012. Data-intensive science applied to broad-scale citizen science. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27: 130137. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2011.11.006
  21. 21Hoyer, MV, Wellendorf, N, Frydenborg, R, Bartlett, D and Canfield, DE, Jr. 2012. A comparison between professionally (Florida Department of Environmental Protection) and volunteer (Florida LAKEWATCH) collected trophic state chemistry data in Florida. Lake and Reservoir Management, 28: 277281. DOI: 10.1080/07438141.2012.736016
  22. 22Hoyer, MV, Winn, J, Canfield, DE, Jr. 2001. Citizen Monitoring of Aquatic Bird Populations Using a Florida Lake. Lake and Reservoir Management, 17: 8289. DOI: 10.1080/07438140109353976
  23. 23Jordan, RC, Gray, SA, Howe, DV, Brooks, WR and Ehrenfeld, JG. 2011. Knowledge Gain and Behavioral Change in Citizen-Science Programs. Conservation Biology, 25: 11481154. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01745.x
  24. 24Kobori, H, Dickinson, JL, Washitani, I, Sakurai, R, Amano, T, Komatsu, N, Kitamura, W, Takagawa, S, Koyama, K, Ogawara, T and Miller-Rushing, AJ. 2015. Citizen science: a new approach to advance ecology, education, and conservation. Ecol Res, 31: 119. DOI: 10.1007/s11284-015-1314-y
  25. 25Kosmala, M, Wiggins, A, Swanson, A and Simmons, B. 2016. Assessing data quality in citizen science. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14: 551560. DOI: 10.1002/fee.1436
  26. 26Kress, WJ, Garcia-Robledo, C, Soares, JVB, Jacobs, D, Wilson, K, Lopez, IC and Belhumeur, PN. 2018. Citizen Science and Climate Change: Mapping the Range Expansions of Native and Exotic Plants with the Mobile App Leafsnap. BioScience, 68: 348358. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biy019
  27. 27Loperfido, JV, Beyer, P, Just, CL and Schnoor, JL 2010. Uses and Biases of Volunteer Water Quality Data. Environ. Sci. Technol, 44: 71937199. DOI: 10.1021/es100164c
  28. 28McKinley, DC, Miller-Rushing, AJ, Ballard, HL, Bonney, R, Brown, H, Cook-Patton, SC, Evans, DM, French, RA, Parrish, JK, Phillips, TB, Ryan, SF, Shanley, LA, Shirk, JL, Stepenuck, KF, Weltzin, JF, Wiggins, A, Boyle, OD, Briggs, RD, Chapin, SF, Hewitt, DA, Preuss, PW and Soukup, MA. 2016. Citizen science can improve conservation science, natural resource management, and environmental protection. Biological Conservation, The role of citizen science in biological conservation, 208: 1528. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.05.015
  29. 29Moffett, ER and Neale, MW. 2015. Volunteer and professional macroinvertebrate monitoring provide concordant assessments of stream health. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 49: 366375. DOI: 10.1080/00288330.2015.1018913
  30. 30Muenich, R, Peel, S, Bowling, L, Haas, M, Turco, R, Frankenberger, J and Chaubey, I. 2016. The Wabash Sampling Blitz: A Study on the Effectiveness of Citizen Science. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 1. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.1
  31. 31Nerbonne, JF and Nelson, KC. 2004. Volunteer Macroinvertebrate Monitoring in the United States: Resource Mobilization and Comparative State Structures. Society & Natural Resources, 17: 817839. DOI: 10.1080/08941920490493837
  32. 32Nerbonne, JF and Vondracek, B. 2003. Volunteer Macroinvertebrate Monitoring: Assessing Training Needs through Examining Error and Bias in Untrained Volunteers. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 22: 152163. DOI: 10.2307/1467984
  33. 33Newman, G, Wiggins, A, Crall, A, Graham, E, Newman, S and Crowston, K. 2012. The future of citizen science: emerging technologies and shifting paradigms. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10: 298304. DOI: 10.1890/110294
  34. 34Nicholson, E, Ryan, J and Hodgkins, D. 2002. Community data – where does the value lie? Assessing confidence limits of community collected water quality data. Water Science and Technology, 45: 193200. DOI: 10.2166/wst.2002.0395
  35. 35Obrecht, DV, Milanick, M, Perkins, BD, Ready, D and Jones, JR. 1998. Evaluation of Data Generated from Lake Samples Collected by Volunteers. Lake and Reservoir Management, 14: 2127. DOI: 10.1080/07438149809354106
  36. 36O’Leary, N, Vawter, AT, Wagenet, LP and Pfeffer, M. 2004. Assessing Water Quality Using Two Taxonomic Levels of Benthic Macroinvertebrate Analysis: Implications for Volunteer Monitors. Journal of Freshwater Ecology, 19: 581586. DOI: 10.1080/02705060.2004.9664738
  37. 37Oscarson, DB and Calhoun, AJK. 2007. Developing vernal pool conservation plans at the local level using citizen-scientists. Wetlands, 27: 8095. DOI: 10.1672/0277-5212(2007)27[80:DVPCPA]2.0.CO;2
  38. 38Paul, JD, Buytaert, W, Allen, S, Ballesteros-Cánovas, JA, Bhusal, J, Cieslik, K, Clark, J, Dugar, S, Hannah, DM, Stoffel, M, Dewulf, A, Dhital, MR, Liu, W, Nayaval, JL, Neupane, B, Schiller, A, Smith, PJ and Supper, R. 2018. Citizen science for hydrological risk reduction and resilience building. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water, 5: e1262. DOI: 10.1002/wat2.1262
  39. 39Penrose, D and Call, SM. 1995. Volunteer Monitoring of Benthic Macroinvertebrates: Regulatory Biologists’ Perspectives. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 14: 203209. DOI: 10.2307/1467735
  40. 40Raddick, MJ, Bracey, G, Gay, PL, Lintott, CJ, Murray, P, Schawinski, K, Szalay, AS and Vandenberg, J. 2010. Galaxy Zoo: Exploring the Motivations of Citizen Science Volunteers. Astronomy Education Review, 9. DOI: 10.3847/AER2009036
  41. 41Reynoldson, T, Hampel, L and Martin, J. 1986. Biomonitoring networks operated by schoolchildren. Environmental Pollution Series A, Ecological and Biological, 41: 363380. DOI: 10.1016/0143-1471(86)90027-9
  42. 42Safford, H and Peters, CA. 2017. Citizen Science for Dissolved Oxygen Monitoring: Case Studies from Georgia and Rhode Island. Environmental Engineering Science, 35: 362372. DOI: 10.1089/ees.2017.0218
  43. 43Sarnelle, O, Morrison, J, Kaul, R, Horst, G, Wandell, H and Bednarz, R. 2010. Citizen monitoring: Testing hypotheses about the interactive influences of eutrophication and mussel invasion on a cyanobacterial toxin in lakes. Water Research, 44: 141150. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2009.09.014
  44. 44Savan, B, Morgan, AJ and Gore, C. 2003. Volunteer Environmental Monitoring and the Role of the Universities: The Case of Citizens’ Environment Watch. Environmental Management, 31, 05610568. DOI: 10.1007/s00267-002-2897-y
  45. 45Shelton, AM. 2013. The accuracy of water quality monitoring data: a comparison between citizen scientists and professionals.
  46. 46Silvertown, J. 2009. A new dawn for citizen science. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24: 467471. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2009.03.017
  47. 47Stepenuck, KF. 2013. Improving Understanding of Outcomes and Credibility of Volunteer Environmental Monitoring Programs – ProQuest (Dissertation). Madison, Wisconsin, USA: The University of Wisconsin – Madison.
  48. 48Stepenuck, KF and Genskow, KD. 2018. Characterizing the Breadth and Depth of Volunteer Water Monitoring Programs in the United States. Environmental Management, 61: 4657. DOI: 10.1007/s00267-017-0956-7
  49. 49Stepenuck, KF, Wolfson, LG, Liukkonen, BW, Iles, JM and Grant, TS. 2011. Volunteer monitoring of E. coli in streams of the upper Midwestern United States: a comparison of methods. Environ Monit Assess, 174: 625633. DOI: 10.1007/s10661-010-1483-7
  50. 50Storey, R, Wright-Stow, A, Kin, E, Davies-Colley, R and Stott, R. 2016. Volunteer stream monitoring: Do the data quality and monitoring experience support increased community involvement in freshwater decision making? Ecology and Society, 21. DOI: 10.5751/ES-08934-210432
  51. 51Valdes, C, Ferreirae, M, Feng, T, Wang, H, Tempel, K, Liu, S and Shaer, O. 2012. A collaborative environment for engaging novices in scientific inquiry. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces, 109118. New York, NY, USA: ITS ’12. ACM. DOI: 10.1145/2396636.2396654
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.222 | Journal eISSN: 2057-4991
Language: English
Submitted on: Dec 9, 2018
Accepted on: Aug 7, 2019
Published on: Nov 21, 2019
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2019 Kelly Albus, Ruthanne Thompson, Forrest Mitchell, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.