10th International Science Congress (ISC-2020).  International E-publication: Publish Projects, Dissertation, Theses, Books, Souvenir, Conference Proceeding with ISBN.  International E-Bulletin: Information/News regarding: Academics and Research

Application of Family Biotic Index in Assessment of two Rivers Affected by Oil Pollution in Assam, India

Author Affiliations

  • 1 Dept. of Life Sciences, Dibrugarh University, Assam, India

Int. Res. J. Environment Sci., Volume 5, Issue (11), Pages 35-40, November,22 (2016)


By using Family Biotic Index (FBI) two rivers viz. Dhansiri and its tributary river Kaliani were assessed from March, 2012 to February, 2014, dividing the entire period into four seasons as pre monsoon, post monsoon and winter. These two rivers were affected since its operation from the year, 2000 by the Numaligarh Oil Refinery of Assam. In the study, 23 genera and 2 tribes (Chironomidae family) belonging to 25 families of macro invertebrates have been recorded belonging to ten orders, four classes and three phyla. The annual FBI values were found to be lowest for the control area of Kaliani and most of the macro invertebrates that were found in that control area were relatively pollution intolerant. On the other hand, the point of effluent discharge (S6) of contaminated area receiving the refinery effluents with the highest FBI value has shown “Very poor” water qualities with severe organic pollution likely as the most of contributing families were highly tolerant to organic pollution.


  1. Rosenberg D.M. and Resh V.H. (1998)., Freshwater Biomonitoring and Benthic Macroinvertebrates., Chapman & Hall, New York.
  2. Hilsenhoff W.L. (1988)., Rapid field assessment of organic pollution with a family-level biotic., Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 7(1), 65-68.
  3. Bode R.W., Novak M.A. and Abele L.E. (1996)., Quality assurance work plan for biological stream monitoring in New York State., NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, N.Y., 89.
  4. Hauer F.R. and Lamberti G.A. (1996)., Methods in Stream Ecology., Academic Press.
  5. Plafkin J.L., Barbour M.T., Porter K.D., Gross S.K. and Hughes R.M. (1989)., Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in Streams and Rivers: Benthic macroinvertebrate and Fish., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington D.C.
  6. Barbour M.T., Gerritsen J., Snyder B.D. and Stribling J.B. (1999)., Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., USA.
  7. Mandaville S.M. (2002)., Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Freshwaters-Taxa Tolerance Values, Metrics, and Protocols., Project H-1 Soil & Water Conservation Society of Metro Halifax.
  8. Edmonson W.T. (1974)., A manual on methods for measuring production in aquatic environment., Academic Press, New York.
  9. Pennak R.W. (1989)., Fresh-water Invertebrates of the United States., Protozoa to Mollusca, 3rd edition, John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA.
  10. Merritt R.W. and Cummins K.W. (1996)., An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America., 3rd edition, Kendell/Hunt Publishing Company, Iowa.
  11. Hilsenhoff W.L. (1982)., Using a biotic index to evaluate water quality of streams., Technical Bulletin of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI.
  12. Murphy P. (1978)., The temporal variability in biotic indices., Environmental Pollution, 17, 227-236.
  13. Gratwicke B. (1999)., The effect of season on a biotic water quality index: A case study of the Yellow jacket and Mazowe rivers, Zimbawe., South African Journal of Aquatic Science, 24(1), 24-35.
  14. Zamora-Munoz C., Sainz-Cantero C.E., Sanchez-Ortega A. and Alba-Tercedor J. (1995)., Are biological indices BMPW and ASPT and their significance regarding water quality seasonally dependent? Factors explaining their variations., Water Research, 29, 285-290.
  15. Linke S., Bailey R. and Schwindt J. (1999)., Temporal variability of stream bioassessments using benthic macroinvertebrates., Freshwater Biology, 42, 575-584.