209
ACTA ZOOLOGICA BULGARICA
Aqua ic Ecology
Resea ch A icle
Ac a Zool. Bulg., June 2025, 77 (2): 209-217
Published online 14 June 2025
DOI: h ps://doi.o g/10.71424/azb77.2.002865
*Co esponding au ho : [email p o ec ed]g
h ps://www.ac a-zoologica-bulga ica.eu/2025/002865
E alua ion o he Wa e Quali y o he P iz en Ri e
(Koso o) using Ben hic Mac oin e eb a es as Bioindica o s
Ba dh Xë xa1*, Agim Gashi2 & As i Bilalli3
1School o Heal h Sciences, Uni e sum In e na ional College, P ish ina, 10000, Koso o; E-mail: [email p o ec ed]
2Depa men o Biology, Facul y o Ma hema ics and Na u al Sciences, Uni e si y o P ish ina “Hasan P ish ina”, P ish ina,
10000, Koso o; E-mail: agim.gashi@uni-p .edu
3Facul y o Ag ibusiness, Uni e si y o Peja “Haxhi Zeka”, Peja, 30000, Koso o; E-mail: [email p o ec ed]
Academic edi o : Vesela E imo a
Abs ac : This esea ch e alua ed he wa e quali y o he P iz en Ri e using mac oin e eb a es as bioindica o s,
gi en hei sensi i i y o en i onmen al changes and hei u ili y in assessing aqua ic ecosys em heal h.
Sampling was conduc ed a six si es (L1-L6) along he main cou se o he i e and wo mac oin e e-
b a e-based ecological indices we e employed o de e mine he wa e quali y s a us: he Family Bio ic
Index (FBI) and he ichness o axa o o de s Epheme op e a, Plecop e a and T ichop e a (EPT). We
iden i ied mac oin e eb a e axa o 28 amilies (22 axa o class Insec a and six - belonging o o he
mac oin e eb a e g oups). The alues o he indices ac oss he six sampling s a ions anged be ween
1.3 and 9.2 o EPT amily ichness and be ween 3.4 and 6.6 o FBI. Acco ding o he da a conce n-
ing mac oin e eb a es, he wa e o he P iz en Ri e was, o e all, o good quali y. The e was se e e
wa e quali y deg ada ion a wo downs eam loca ions, emphasizing he necessi y o enhanced wa e
esou ce managemen . The indings indica ed ha he di e si y and abundance o mac oin e eb a es
a ied ac oss di e en si es, e lec ing he ecological heal h o he i e and, indi ec ly, he impac s o hu-
man ac i i ies on wa e quali y. This esea ch p o ided insigh s in o he ecological heal h o he P iz en
Ri e , o e ing а aluable basis o u u e conse a ion and emedia ion e o s.
Key wo ds: bio ic index, ecological s a us, Koso o, mac oin e eb a es, P iz en Ri e , wa e quali y
In oduc ion
Wa e quali y in i e s is c ucial o he i ali y and
biodi e si y o aqua ic ecosys ems, di ec ly im-
pac ing he heal h o i e s and hei su ounding
basins. F eshwa e ecosys ems in Koso o ha e ex-
pe ienced conside able deg ada ion in ecen yea s
due o a ious human-induced p essu es, including
sewage discha ges, indus ial e luen s, wa e ex-
ac ion and i e bed e osion (Koso o En i onmen-
al P o ec ion Agency, Annual Repo 2022). These
ac i i ies ha e signi ican impac s on eshwa e
bio a, pa icula ly hose se ing as bioindica o s.
Aqua ic mac oin e eb a es a e widely used
o assessing aqua ic ecosys ems (Rosenbe g &
Resh 1993, Ba bou e al. 1995, Da is & Simon
210
Xë xa B., Gashi A. & Bilalli A.
1995, Bohme e al. 2004, Benne i e al. 2012). The
Wa e F amewo k Di ec i e (Di ec i e 2000/60/EC
2000) ad oca es he use o ben hic mac oin e e-
b a es as an e ec i e me hod o assessing i e
wa e quali y. The Di ec i e aims o p e en u -
he deg ada ion o aqua ic ecosys ems and o p o-
ec and enhance hei ecological s a us, o achie e
“good ecological s a us” o all su ace wa e s by
2027 (Di ec i e 2000/60/EC 2000).
The insec o de s Epheme op e a, Plecop e a
and T ichop e a (EPT) a e pa icula ly sensi i e in-
dica o s o wa e quali y due o hei sensi i i y o
a ious s esso s (Lena 1988, He ing e al. 2004).
These indices a e pa icula ly use ul in lo ic eco-
sys ems, whe e EPT axa domina e (Wallace e al.
1996, He man e al. 2015). The e alua ion o i e
and s eam quali y equen ly employs EPT me -
ics, which a e widely u ilised by s a e agencies as
pa o hei bioassessmen p og ammes ha inco -
po a e mac oin e eb a e communi ies (Ba bou e
al. 1995, Bonada e al. 2006, He ing e al. 2006).
These me ics a e among he bes indica o me ics
o measu ing e ec s ela ed o u banisa ion (Wang
& Kanehl 2003, Deacon e al. 2005, Cu ney e al.
2010) and o documen ing eco e y o wa e qual-
i y a e decline o ac i i ies igge ing pollu ion
(C aw o d e al. 1992, Lydy e al. 2000).
Al hough nume ous s udies on eshwa e eco-
sys ems in Koso o ha e been ca ied ou in ecen
yea s, he majo i y o hem ocused p ima ily on he
axonomy and ecology o speci ic g oups (Gashi e
al. 2016, Ib ahimi e al. 2014, 2015, 2019, Xë xa e
al. 2019, Bilalli e al. 2020). A signi ican gap ex-
is s in wa e quali y assessmen esea ch in Koso o,
pa icula ly ega ding he applica ion o mac oin-
e eb a e-based bio ic indices (E emi e al. 2020,
Ib ahimi e al. 2021, Bilalli e al. 2022, Bucinca e
al. 2024).
This s udy aims o assess he wa e quali y o
he P iz en Ri e (Koso o) using wo mac oin e e-
b a e-based indices: he Family Bio ic Index (FBI)
and EPT ichness. By applying hese biological me -
ics, we seek o con ibu e o he unde s anding o
i e heal h in Koso o and o highligh he c i ical
ole o bioindica o s in eshwa e moni o ing and
managemen . The esul s, which ange om poo
o excellen ecological condi ions ac oss di e en
si es, highligh he need o ongoing biomoni o ing
and a ge ed es o a ion e o s, pa icula ly in he
lowe eaches o he i e . This esea ch con ibu es
o he la ge subjec o eshwa e ecology in Koso-
o by emphasising he need o use bioindica o s o
e ec i e wa e quali y moni o ing and managemen .
Ma e ials and Me hods
S udy a ea and sampling
The su ace wa e s in Koso o belong o he d ainage
basins o h ee seas: he Black Sea, he Ad ia ic Sea
o he Aegean Sea. The P iz en Ri e belongs o he
Ad ia ic Sea Basin and i is loca ed in Sou he n Ko-
so o and spans a o al leng h o 31 kilome es. The
P iz en Ri e o igina es om he Sha Moun ains
and lows h ough he S eckë Village be o e pass-
ing h ough he ci y o P iz en. I ul ima ely joins he
D ini i Ba dh Ri e (Fig. 1). Sampling was conduc -
ed once pe mon h in he P iz en Ri e a six loca-
ions along i s main cou se, anging om highe o
lowe al i udes. The locali ies (L1–L6) we e selec ed
based on al i ude, habi a cha ac e is ics and ease o
access o ensu e ep esen a i e sampling o wa e
quali y a ia ion along he main cou se o he P iz en
Ri e . All six sampling si es a e a pa o Eco egion
(ER) 6-Hellenic sensu Illies (1978).
Fig. 1. Map o Koso o wi h loca ion o he six sampling
locali ies (L1-L6) in he main cou se o he P iz en Ri e .
E alua ion o he Wa e Quali y o he P iz en Ri e (Koso o) using Ben hic Mac oin e eb a es as Bioindica o s
211
These si es co e a ange o al i udes and ge-
og aphic coo dina es, e lec ing a b oad spec um
o en i onmen al condi ions and a e desc ibed in
e ms o key a ibu es, including al i ude, la i ude,
longi ude and habi a ype (Table 1).
Measu emen s we e aken du ing an eigh -
mon h pe iod (Ma ch-Oc obe ) in 2019. Mac oin-
e eb a e specimens we e collec ed wi h a D- ame
ne wi h dimensions o 30×20 cm (600 cm2), ollow-
ing EN ISO 10870:2012 and EN 16150:2012 s and-
a ds. Samples we e aken once a mon h om all
a ailable habi a s ha ep esen ed mo e han 5% o
he o al habi a a ea on he sampling s e ch (mul i-
habi a sampling p ocedu e) om each o he six
sampling si es. The habi a s included i les ( lowing
wa e o e g a el o cobble subs a e); non- lowing
(deposi ional subs a e in ma gins o pools wi h no
low) and oo ma s (hanging oo s om bank eg-
e a ion and accumula ions o o ganic deb is).
Samples om each habi a we e p ocessed
sepa a ely, bu da a om each habi a we e com-
bined wi hin a si e o eplica ed o p o ide si e-le el
es ima es o abundance, ichness and EPT and FBI
me ic alues. The biological ma e ial was pooled
and ans e ed o sample con aine s (250 ml) and
p ese ed in 90% e hanol. The ben hic mac oin e -
eb a es we e iden i ied o amily le el based on hei
mo phological cha ac e is ics using a s e eomic o-
scope and ele an amily keys (Me i & Cummins
1996). Iden i ica ion o mac oin e eb a e samples
o his pu pose was done up o he amily le el.
Bio ic indices
Di e si y, abundance and ecological indices de-
i ed om mac oin e eb a es we e used o assess
wa e quali y a se e al sampling si es. In his s udy,
he wa e quali y was classi ied based on wo indi-
ces, he EPT Family Richness (Bode e al. 1997)
and he Hilsenho Family-le el Bio ic Index (FBI:
Hilsenho 1988, Bode e al. 1996).
The Hilsenho FBI is calcula ed by mul iplying
he numbe o indi iduals in each amily by an as-
signed ole ance alue o ha amily. Assigned ole -
ance alues ange om 0 o 10 and inc ease as wa e
quali y declines (Hilsenho 1988, Bode e al. 1996):
1
1
𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 =∑𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖
𝑠𝑠
𝑖𝑖=1 𝑥𝑥 𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑖
∑𝑛𝑛𝑖𝑖
𝑠𝑠
𝑖𝑖=1
, 2
,
whe e ni and i we e he numbe o indi idu-
als and he ole ance, espec i ely, o he i h am-
ily and S = he numbe o amilies included in he
analysis.
The EPT axa ichness index (numbe o EPT
axa: Bode e al. 1997) uses he insec g oups which
a e conside ed o be sensi i e o pollu ion and,
he e o e, should inc ease wi h inc easing wa e
quali y. The index is mos ly sui ed o assessing he
impac o o ganic pollu ion, deg ada ion in s eam
mo phology, acidi ica ion, as well as gene al deg a-
da ion. The EPT index is equal o he o al numbe
o amilies ep esen ed wi hin hese h ee o de s in
he sample. I le els a e: < 2; 2-5; 6-10 and > 10.
Resul s
We eco ded 28 amilies o mac oin e eb a e axa
collec ed ac oss all s udy si es, 22 o which we e o
class Insec a (o de s Dip e a, Coleop e a, Odona a,
T ichop e a, Epheme op e a and Plecop e a) and six
we e non-insec axa (Gas opoda, Hi udinea, Oli-
gochae a, Amphipoda). We collec ed 2305 indi idu-
als o wo phyla (A h opoda and Annelida) om he
six sampling s a ions. The o al ichness o mac oin-
e eb a e axa wi hin a sample eplica e anged om
1.3 o 9.2 o EPT ichness and om 3.4 o 6.6 o he
FBI sco e. In he ben hic auna o he Ri e P iz en,
he p edominan axonomic g oup consis ed o in-
sec s om he o de Epheme op e a, which accoun -
ed o 880 indi iduals o 38.17% o he o al numbe
o collec ed o ganisms. The o de T ichop e a was
he subdominan g oup, wi h 386 indi iduals, ep e-
sen ing 14.22% o he o al sample. O he no able o -
de s include Plecop e a wi h 286 indi iduals (12.41%)
and Dip e a wi h 285 indi iduals (12.36%).
Table 1. Cha ac e is ics o sampling si es (L1-L6) including geog aphic e e ences and habi a .
Code Sampling si e Al i ude (m a.s.l.) La i ude Longi ude Habi a
L1 P e all 1664 42°16.10’N 20°95.33’E Lo ic
L2 S edska 1242 42°41.31’N 20°04.38’E Lo ic
L3 Reçan 532 42°17.03’N 21°21.74’E Lo ic
L4 Ma ash 410 42°14.71’N 21°20.66’E Lo ic
L5 Pa k Qy e i 402 42°10.00’N 20°14.47’E Lo ic
L6 Vlashnje 364 42°08.02’N 20°11.05’E Lo ic
212
Xë xa B., Gashi A. & Bilalli A.
We eco ded axa o Hi udinea (9%), Amphi-
poda (7%) and Oligochae a (5%). Some g oups, on
he o he hand, we e unde ep esen ed, accoun ing
o less han 2% o all axa, such as o de Odona a
(11 indi iduals), class Gas opoda (14 indi iduals)
and o de Coleop e a (19 indi iduals). The amily
Bae idae (Epheme op e a) exhibi ed he wides eco-
logical dis ibu ion, occu ing a all sampling si es
wi h a o al o 454 indi iduals. The dis ibu ion o
he 22 insec amilies was as ollows: Epheme op-
e a (5 amilies), Plecop e a (4 amilies), T ichop-
e a (6 amilies), Dip e a (4 amilies), Coleop e a (2
Table 2. Mac oin e eb a e composi ion, p esence and pe cen age in he six locali ies.
Taxa composi ion L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6 %
Families o Epheme op e a + + + + - - 38.17
Bae idae + + + + + + 51.8
Caenidae + + + + - - 8
Hep ageniidae + + + - - - 13.2
Epheme idae + + + - - - 11
Epheme ellidae + + + + + - 16
Families o Plecop e a + + + - - - 12.41
Pe lidae + + + - - - 16.5
Pel ope lidae + + + - - - 22.7
Capniidae + + + - - - 24.8
Nemou idae + + - - - - 36
Families o T ichop e a + + + - - - 14.22
Limnephilidae + + + - - - 23.8
Philopo amidae + + - + - - 19.2
Rhyacophilidae + + + - - - 25.5
Lep oce idae + + + - - - 10
Hyd opsychidae + + + - - - 12
Glossosoma idae + + + + - - 9.5
Families o Dip e a + + + + + - 12.36
Chi onomidae - - - - + + 21.4
Simuliidae - - - - + + 32.6
Tipulidae - - - - + + 31
Blepha ice idae - - - - + + 15
Families o Odona a - - - + + + 0.3
Gomphidae - - - + + + 0.3
Families o Coleop e a + + + + - - 0.7
Elmidae + + - + - - 0.5
Psephenidae + + + - - - 0.2
Families o Oligochae a - - - + + + 5
Lumb iculidae - - - + + + 2.3
Tubi icidae - - - + - + 3.7
Families o Amphipoda ++++++ 7
Gamma idae ++++++ 7
Families o Hi udinea - - - + + + 9
E pobdellidae - - - + + + 9
Families o Gas opoda - - + + - - 1
Lymneidea - - + + - - 0.3
Physidae - - + + - - 0.7
E alua ion o he Wa e Quali y o he P iz en Ri e (Koso o) using Ben hic Mac oin e eb a es as Bioindica o s
213
amilies) and Odona a (1 amily). Non-insec ami-
lies included Oligochae a (2 amilies), Amphipoda
(1 amily), Hi udinea (1 amily) and Gas opoda (2
amilies) (Table 2). Aqua ic insec s cons i u ed he
p edominan aunal g oup, ep esen ing o e 79%
o all collec ed indi iduals and accoun ed o ap-
p oxima ely 78.5% o all iden i ied amilies. Spa ial
pa e ns in axonomic composi ion indica ed ha
EPT amilies, known o hei sensi i i y o pollu-
ion, we e p ima ily associa ed wi h ups eam (L1
and L2) and mids eam (L4) sampling loca ions. In
con as , pollu ion- ole an amilies, such as Chi-
onomidae, Tubi icidae and Lumb iculidae, we e
mo e p e alen a downs eam si es (L5 and L6),
which we e si ua ed nea densely popula ed a eas.
No ably, en i onmen ally sensi i e amilies such as
Nemou idae, Rhyacophilidae, Limnephilidae and
Lep oce idae we e dominan in he less dis u bed
sec ions.
The indings p o ide an unde s anding o he
i e ’s ecological s a us. The compa ison o mean
alues o he EPT amily ichness, ac oss six sam-
pling s a ions in he P iz en Ri e indica ed a i-
a ions be ween hese pa ame e s (Table 4). These
indices, as de ined by Schmid -Kloibe & Nijboe
(2004) e lec he sensi i i y o axa o a ia ions in
wa e quali y condi ions. Mode a e le els o an h o-
pogenic impac we e obse ed a s a ion L3 (Table 3)
likely a ibu able o hei p oximi y o u ban a eas.
The EPT index sco es a moni o ing si e L1 in-
dica ed “excellen ” wa e quali y. Simila ly, he FBI
alues o his si e also placed i wi hin he highes
wa e quali y ca ego y, u he con i ming i s clas-
si ica ion as “excellen .” A moni o ing s a ion L2,
he EPT index sugges ed “ e y good” wa e quali y,
a classi ica ion con i med by he co esponding FBI
sco e. In con as , he FBI sco es a sampling si es
L3 and L4 indica ed “mode a e” and “good” qual-
i y ca ego ies, espec i ely. The alues o he EPT
index a hese si es consis en ly classi ied he wa e
quali y as “good.” Howe e , he wo downs eam
sampling si es, L5 and L6, exhibi ed subs an ially
lowe wa e quali y. Bo h EPT and FBI indices
classi ied hese si es wi hin he “bad” wa e quali y
ca ego y, indica ing signi ican en i onmen al deg-
ada ion (Tables 3, 4).
In L1, he ups eam sampling si e, he FBI is
3.4, he dominance o good and e y good ami-
lies aligns wi h he “Excellen ” ecological s a us.
Ins ead, a L5 and L6 wi h an FBI o 6.6 and 6, he
p e alence o e y poo amilies co esponds o he
“Bad” ecological s a us (Table 3).
Ou indings on he bio ic indices in he P iz-
en Ri e o e signi ican insigh s in o he ecologi-
cal heal h o he sampled loca ions (Tables 3, 4).
Fo ins ance, a si e L1, whe e he EPT alue was
9.2, he ela i ely high abundance o sensi i e o -
ganisms e lec ed he excellen wa e quali y. In
con as , a si e L5, an EPT alue o 1.3 indica ed a
no able absence o hese axa, sugges ing poo wa-
e quali y and co obo a ing he o e all classi ica-
ion o “Bad” ecological s a us.
Table 3. Values o he FBI o he six sampling si es in he P iz en Ri e .
Locali ies (L1-L6) Family Bio ic Index (FBI) Wa e quali y
P e alla-L1 FBI=3.4 Excellen
S edska-L2 FBI=3.9 Ve y good
Reçan-L3 FBI=5.5 Mode a e
Ma ash-L4 FBI=4.7 Good
Pa k Qy e i-L5 FBI=6.6 Bad
Vlashnje-L6 FBI=6 Bad
Table 4. Values o he EPT index o he six sampling si es in he P iz en Ri e .
Locali ies Bio ic Index-EPT
Family Richness Wa e quali y
P e alla-L1 EPT=9.2 Excellen
S edska-L2 EPT=8.1 Ve y good
Reçan -L3 EPT=4 Good
Ma ash-L4 EPT=3.6 Good
Pa k Qy e i-L5 EPT=1.3 Bad
Vlashnje-L6 EPT=1.5 Bad
214
Xë xa B., Gashi A. & Bilalli A.
Discussion
F eshwa e mac oin e eb a es a e widely ecog-
nised as key bioindica o s o i e ine ecosys em
heal h, wi h changes in hei communi y s uc u e
se ing as eliable indica o s o he ecological
s a us o aqua ic sys ems (Menezes e al. 2010).
Nume ous s udies ha e es ablished ha sensi i e
insec axa o he o de s Epheme op e a, Plecop-
e a and T ichop e a (EPT) a e pa icula ly obus
indica o s o high ecological quali y, o en exhib-
i ing ele a ed le els o axonomic ichness, di e -
si y and abundance (Me cal e 1989, Rosenbe g &
Jackson 1993, Be lin & Thiele 2002, Wallin e al.
2003). These axa a e commonly associa ed wi h
clean, well-oxygena ed wa e s and minimal an h o-
pogenic dis u bance. Sla e ska-S amenko iĆ e al.
(2011) u he emphasised ha high EPT species
ichness ypically cha ac e ises na u al o nea -na -
u al aqua ic en i onmen s.
In he p esen s udy, a o al o 28 mac oin e -
eb a e amilies we e iden i ied, indica ing conside -
able biodi e si y. Insec axa, and pa icula ly mem-
be s o he EPT o de s, domina ed he assemblages,
accoun ing o 79% o all iden i ied axa. This mi -
o s indings om he Lepenc Ri e s udy by E emi
e al. (2020) which epo ed 34 amilies wi h insec s
comp ising 79.41% o he communi y. Howe e , a
ma ked decline in EPT ichness was obse ed a he
downs eam si es (L5 and L6), accompanied by a
concu en inc ease in pollu ion- ole an axa such
as Chi onomidae, Tubi icidae and Lumb iculidae.
These axa a e well-documen ed indica o s o poo
wa e quali y and a e associa ed wi h low dissol ed
oxygen le els and high o ganic pollu ion (Rosen-
be g & Resh 1993). This pa e n o communi y
composi ion is also consis en wi h indings om
BUCINCA e al. (2024) who epo ed simila aunal
shi s in downs eam ibu a ies o he Ibë Ri e ,
pa icula ly nea u ban se lemen s.
EPT axa comp ised mo e han 64% o all
collec ed insec specimens (Table 2, Fig. 2) a pa -
e n consis en wi h p e ious indings om simila
egional s udies. Fo ins ance, E emi e al. (2020),
Ib ahimi e al. 2021, Bilalli e al. 2022, Bucinca
e al. 2024) epo ed a dominance o EPT axa in
ups eam sec ions o i e s in Koso o, e lec -
ing wa e quali y condi ions anging om good o
mode a ely impac ed. Ea lie esea ch on he P iz-
en Ri e by Shuk iu (1979) iden i ied 96 mac o-
in e eb a e species, wi h EPT axa ep esen ing
he mos di e se and abundan g oups, indings ha
closely align wi h hose o he cu en s udy. In bo h
cases, Epheme op e a eme ged as he o de wi h he
highes axonomic ichness, pa icula ly he amily
Bae idae, unde sco ing hei ecological e sa ili y
and adap i e capaci y ac oss a ying condi ions.
The spa ial ends in bio ic index alues u -
he suppo hese indings. The Family Bio ic In-
dex (FBI) and he EPT Family Richness Index p o-
ided complemen a y assessmen s o wa e quali y.
Ups eam si es exhibi ed low FBI alues and high
EPT ichness, indica i e o clean wa e and mini-
mal human impac . In con as , downs eam si es
we e cha ac e ised by ele a ed FBI sco es and di-
minished EPT ichness, classi ying hem as ha ing
poo o bad wa e quali y. These bio ic index esul s
unde sco e he ecological consequences o in ensi-
ied u ban p essu es a downs eam loca ions. In e -
media e si es (L3 and L4) e lec ed ansi ional eco-
logical condi ions, whe e he bene icial in luence
o ups eam conse a ion was g adually o se by
g owing pollu ion loads. The coexis ence o sensi-
i e amilies such as Nemou idae, Rhyacophilidae
and Limnephilidae wi h mo e ole an axa sugges s
a deg ee o ecological esilience, al hough signs o
s ess we e e iden .
The ecological deg ada ion o downs eam
segmen s can be a ibu ed o se e al an h opogenic
s esso s, including u ban uno , di ec sewage dis-
Fig. 2. Rep esen a i es o amilies o Epheme op e a.
a) Epheme ellidae b) Epheme idae
E alua ion o he Wa e Quali y o he P iz en Ri e (Koso o) using Ben hic Mac oin e eb a es as Bioindica o s
215
cha ge and al e a ions o physical habi a s uc u e.
The downs eam sampling si es a e loca ed nea u -
ban a eas and a e cha ac e ised by in ensi e u ban-
isa ion (Fig. 1), condi ions commonly associa ed
wi h signi ican en i onmen al s esso s – simila o
he indings epo ed by Ib ahimi e al. 2021. These
indings co obo a e he conclusions o (Wang &
Kanehl 2003) who epo ed a nega i e co ela ion
be ween wa e shed u banisa ion and EPT ich-
ness. Field obse a ions du ing he cu en s udy
con i med he p esence o solid was e, un ea ed
o poo ly ea ed was ewa e discha ge and o he
o ms o pollu ion pa icula ly nea densely popu-
la ed o indus ialised a eas.
Despi e he i e ’s inhe en capaci y o sel -
pu i ica ion, he cumula i e e ec s o sus ained
an h opogenic p essu es ha e led o a p onounced
decline in mac oin e eb a e di e si y in down-
s eam eaches. A si es L5 and L6, mac oin e e-
b a e assemblages we e composed almos exclu-
si ely o highly ole an oligochae es, e lec ing a
se e e educ ion in ecological quali y. This deg a-
da ion is clea ly cap u ed by bo h he EPT ichness
and FBI me ics. These indings a e consis en wi h
es ablished ecological p inciples and p e ious e-
sea ch (Lena & Pen ose 1996, Schmid -Klöbe &
Nijboe 2004) which emphasises he ulne abili y
o EPT axa o en i onmen al deg ada ion and he
e icacy o bio ic indices in moni o ing wa e quali y
changes.
The esul s o his s udy highligh he signi ican
impac o an h opogenic ac i i ies on he ecological
s a us o he P iz en Ri e . Ups eam eaches se e
as ecological e e ence poin s, suppo ing di e se
and sensi i e mac oin e eb a e communi ies unde
ela i ely undis u bed condi ions. In con as , down-
s eam a eas unde sco e he u gen need o a ge ed
wa e quali y managemen s a egies, including pol-
lu ion con ol and habi a es o a ion. The obse ed
spa ial a ia ion in mac oin e eb a e communi y
s uc u e, axonomic di e si y and bio ic index al-
ues ac oss he six sampling si es e eals a clea en i-
onmen al g adien : om ela i ely p is ine ups eam
habi a s o ecologically deg aded downs eam sec-
ions. The obse ed a ia ion in bio ic indices clea ly
demons a es hei di e en ial sensi i i y o en i-
onmen al deg ada ion and hei u ili y in de ec ing
spa ial changes in en i onmen al condi ions and as-
sessing he ecological heal h o i e ine ecosys ems..
O e all, hese indices p o ed e ec i e o assessing
spa ial a ia ions in wa e quali y and o in o ming
u u e i e basin managemen e o s.
The cu en s udy o e s c i ical insigh s in o
he ecological in eg i y o he P iz en Ri e and he
ex en o an h opogenic impac s on wa e quali y
along i s cou se.
Conclusion
The p esence and composi ion o mac oin e e-
b a e axa iden i ied in his s udy sugges ed ha he
wa e quali y o he P iz en Ri e could be classi-
ied as good. This s udy cons i u es a p elimina y
e o o e alua e he wa e quali y o he P iz en
Ri e in Koso o using biological quali y elemen s
de i ed om mac oin e eb a es. While o e ing
aluable mac oin e eb a e bioindica o da a o
assessing wa e quali y, he esea ch highligh s he
c i ical need o u u e s udies o inco po a e mo e
equen moni o ing and a b oade ange o biologi-
cal indica o g oups. Such app oaches a e essen ial
o a comp ehensi e unde s anding o he ecologi-
cal s a us o hese eshwa e ecosys ems.
The esul s emphasize he u gen need o con-
se a ion measu es, pa icula ly in u ban and down-
s eam a eas, o add ess pollu ion sou ces and p e-
se e he ecological in eg i y o he P iz en Ri e .
Fu u e esea ch could ocus on explo ing empo al
a ia ions in bio ic indices and expanding he spa-
ial scope o sampling o include addi ional ibu a -
ies and po en ial pollu ion sou ces.
Re e ences
Ba bou M. T., S ibling J. B., & Ka J. R. 1995. Mul ime ic
app oach o es ablishing bioc i e ia and measu ing bio-
logical condi ion. In Da is W. S. & Simon T. P. (Eds.),
Biological assessmen and c i e ia: Tools o wa e e-
sou ce planning and decision making (pp. 63-77). Boca
Ra on, FL: Lewis Publica ions.
Benne i C.J., Pe ez-Bilbao A. & Ga ido J. 2012. Mac oin e e-
b a es as indica o s o wa e quali y in unning wa e s: 10
yea s o esea ch in i e s wi h di e en deg ees o an h o-
pogenic impac s. In: Voudou is K. (Ed.): Ecological Wa e
Quali y-Wa e T ea men and Reuse, InTech pp. 95-122.
Be lin A. & Thiele V. 2002. T ichop e a in assessmen and
classi ica ion o s eams in he lowlands o no heas e n
Ge many. In Mey W. (Ed.): P oceedings o he 10 h In e -
na ional Symposium on T ichop e a (pp. 481-490). No a
Supplemen a En omologica.
Bilalli A., Ib ahimi H., G apci-Ko o i L., Musliu M., Geci D.,
& Gashi A. 2022. The composi ion and abundance o he
mac oin e eb a e auna in he Leqina Lake, Na ional
Pa k Bjeshkë e Nemuna, Koso o. Ecological Enginee ing
& En i onmen al Technology 23 (6), 173.
Bilalli A., Musliu M., Ib ahimi H., & Si ec I. 2020. New eco ds
o he s one ly auna (Insec a: Plecop e a) o Koso o.
Na u a C oa ica 29 (1): 29-36.
Bode R. W., No ak M. A., & Abele L. A. 1996. Quali y assu -
ance wo k plan o biological s eam moni o ing in New
Yo k S a e. NYS Depa men o En i onmen al P o ec ion,
216
Xë xa B., Gashi A. & Bilalli A.
Di ision o Wa e , Bu eau o Moni o ing and Assessmen ,
S eam Biomoni o ing Uni , Albany, NY.
Bode R. W., No ak M. A., & Abele L. A. 1997. Biological s eam
es ing. NYS Depa men o En i onmen al P o ec ion,
Di ision o Wa e , Bu eau o Moni o ing and Assessmen ,
S eam Biomoni o ing Uni , Albany, NY.
Bohme J., Rawe -Jos C., Zenke A., Meie C., Feld C., Biss R.,
He ing D. 2004. Assessing S eams in Ge many wi h Ben hic
In e eb a es: de elopmen o a Mul ime ic In e eb a e
Based Assessmen Sys em. Limnologica 34: 416-432.
Bonada N., P a N., Resh V. H., & S a zne B. 2006. De elop-
men s in aqua ic insec biomoni o ing: A compa a i e
analysis o ecen app oaches. Annual Re iew o En o-
mology 51: 495-523.
Bucinca A., Bilalli A. Ib ahimi H., Sla e ska-S amenko ić V.,
Mi ić-Kopanja D., Hinić J., & G apci-Ko o i L. 2024.
Wa e quali y assessmen in he Ibë Ri e Basin (Koso o)
using mac oin e eb a e and ben hic dia om indices. Jou -
nal o Ecological Enginee ing 25 (6): 63-72.
C aw o d C. G., Wangsness D. J., & Ma in J. D. 1992. Reco e y
o ben hic-in e eb a e communi ies in he Whi e Ri e
nea Indianapolis, Indiana, USA, ollowing implemen-
a ion o ad anced ea men o municipal was ewa e .
A chi ü Hyd obiologie 126 (1): 67-84.
Cu ney T. F., B igh bill R. A., May J. T., & Wai e I. R. 2010.
Responses o ben hic mac oin e eb a es o en i onmen al
changes associa ed wi h u baniza ion in nine me opoli an
a eas. Ecological Applica ions 20 (5): 1384-1401.
Da is W. S. & Simon T. P. (Eds.). 1995. Biological assessmen
and c i e ia: Tools o wa e esou ce planning and deci-
sion making. Boca Ra on, FL: Lewis Publica ions.
Deacon J. R., Soule S. A., & Smi h T. E. 2005. E ec s o u ban-
iza ion on s eam quali y a selec ed si es in he seacoas
egion in New Hampshi e. U.S. Geological Su ey Sci-
en i ic In es iga ions Repo 2005-5103: 1-18.
EN 16150:2012 Eu opean Commi ee o S anda diza ion
(CEN). Wa e quali y – Guidance on p o- a a mul i-habi a
sampling o ben hic mac o-in e eb a es om wadeable
i e s. B ussels: CEN.
EN ISO 10870:2012 Eu opean Commi ee o S anda diza-
ion (CEN). 2012. EN ISO 10870:2012 – Wa e quali y
– Guidelines o he selec ion o sampling me hods and
de ices o ben hic mac oin e eb a es in esh wa e s.
B ussels: CEN.
E emi F., Z. By yçi P., Ismaili M., Fe oshi O., Yme i P., Shala-
Abazi A., Muja-Baj ak a i N., & Czikkely M. 2020. The
use o mac oin e eb a e-based bio ic indices and di e si y
indices o e alua e he wa e quali y o he Lepenci Ri e
Basin in Koso o. Jou nal o En i onmen al Science and
Heal h Pa A: Toxic/Haza dous Subs ances & En i on-
men al Enginee ing 55 (6): 748-758.
EU Wa e F amewo k Di ec i e – 2000/60/EC o he Eu opean
Pa liamen and o he Council o 23 Oc obe 2000 es ab-
lishing a amewo k o Communi y ac ion in he ield o
wa e policy. O icial Jou nal o he Eu opean Communi-
ies: L 327, 22.12.2000.
Gashi A., Shabani E., G apci-Ko o i L., Bislimi K., Maxhuni
Q., & Ib ahimi H. 2016. Con ibu ion o he knowledge o
ish auna o Koso o wi h a special no e on some in asi e
species. Tu kish Jou nal o Zoology 40: 64-72.
He ing D., Johnson R. K amm S., Schmu z S., Szoszkiewicz K.,
& Ve donscho P. 2006. Assessmen o Eu opean S eams
wi h Dia oms, Mac ophy es, Mac oin e eb a es and Fish:
A Compa a i e Me ic-Based Analysis o O ganism Re-
sponse o S ess. F eshw. Biol. 51: 1757-1785.
He ing D., Moog O. Sandin L., & Ve donscho P. 2004. O e -
iew and Applica ion o he AQEM Assessmen Sys em.
Hyd obiologia 516: 1-20.
He man M. R. & Nejadhashemi A. P. 2015. A e iew o mac-
oin e eb a e- and ish-based s eam heal h indices.
Ecohyd ology & Hyd obiology 15: 53-67.
Hilsenho W. L. 1988. Rapid ield assessmen o o ganic pollu-
ion wi h a amily-le el bio ic index. Jou nal o he No h
Ame ican Ben hological Socie y 7 (1): 65-68.
Ib ahimi H., Bilalli A. Gashi A., Xë xa B., G apci-Ko o i L.,
& Musliu M. 2021. The impac o inhabi ed a eas on he
quali y o s eams and i e s o a high alpine municipali y
in sou he n Koso o. Ecological Enginee ing & En i on-
men al Technology 22 (3): 42-50.
Ib ahimi H., Gashi A., G apci-Ko o i L., Zhushi-E emi F., Bi-
lalli A., & Musliu M. 2015. New dis ibu ion and species
eco ds o caddis lies (Insec a: T ichop e a) om he Re-
public o Koso o. En omological News 125 (4): 229-238.
Ib ahimi H., Kuçi R. Bilalli, A., Musliu M., Vehapi V., Gashi
A., G apci-Ko o i L., & Geci D. 2019. New addi ions o
he caddis ly auna (Insec a: T ichop e a) o he Sha
Moun ains in Koso o. Ecologica Mon eneg ina 23: 40-46.
Ib ahimi H., Kučinić, M., Gashi A., & G apci-Ko o i L. 2014.
T ichop e a biodi e si y o he Aegean and Ad ia ic Sea
basins in Koso o. Jou nal o Insec Science 14 (209): 1-8.
Illies J. 1978. Limno auna Eu opaea: A checklis o he animals
inhabi ing Eu opean inland wa e s, wi h an accoun o hei
dis ibu ion and ecology (2nd ed.). Gus a Fische Ve lag.
Koso o En i onmen al P o ec ion Agency. 2022. Annual Re-
po on he S a e o he En i onmen o 2021. P ish ina,
Go e nmen o Koso o.
Lena D. R. 1988. Wa e quali y assessmen o s eams using
a quali a i e collec ion me hod o ben hic mac oin e -
eb a es. Jou nal o he No h Ame ican Ben hological
Socie y 7 (3): 222-233.
Lena D. R. & Pen ose D. L. 1996. His o y o he EPT axa ich-
ness me ic. Bulle in o he No h Ame ican Ben hological
Socie y 12 (13): 279-290.
Lydy M. J., C aw o d C. G., & F ey J. W. 2000. A compa ison
o selec ed di e si y, simila i y and bio ic indices o
de ec ing changes in ben hic-in e eb a e communi y
s uc u e and s eam quali y. A chi es o En i onmen al
Con amina ion and Toxicology 39: 469-479.
Menezes S., Bai d D. J. & Soa es A. M. 2010. Beyond axonomy:
a e iew o mac oin e eb a e ai ‐based communi y
desc ip o s as ools o eshwa e biomoni o ing. Jou nal
o Applied Ecology 47 (4): 711-719.
Me i R. W. & Cummins K. W. 1996. An in oduc ion o he
aqua ic insec s o No h Ame ica (3 d ed.). Kendall/Hun
Publishing Company.
Me cal e J. L. 1989. Biological wa e quali y assessmen o
unning wa e s based on mac oin e eb a e communi ies:
His o y and p esen s a us in Eu ope. En i onmen al Pol-
lu ion 60 (1-2): 101-139.
Resh V. H. & Jackson J. K. 1993. Rapid assessmen app oaches
in ben hic mac oin e eb a e biomoni o ing s udies. In
Rosenbe g D. M. & Resh V. H. (Eds.): F eshwa e bio-
moni o ing and ben hic mac oin e eb a es (pp. 195-233).
Chapman and Hall.
E alua ion o he Wa e Quali y o he P iz en Ri e (Koso o) using Ben hic Mac oin e eb a es as Bioindica o s
217
Schmid -Kloibe A. & Nijboe R. C. 2004. The e ec o axo-
nomic esolu ion on he assessmen o ecological wa e
quali y classes. Hyd obiologia 516: 269-283.
Shuk iu A. 1979. Ecological condi ioning and zoning dis ibu ion
o mac ozooben hos in he Bis ica Ri e o P iz en (Doc-
o al disse a ion). Uni e si y o Zag eb, Zag eb, C oa ia.
Sla e ska-S amenko ić V., Pauno ić M., Miljano ić B., Kos o
V., Ris o ska M. & Mi e a D. 2011. Wa e quali y assess-
men based on he mac oin e eb a e auna- he Pcinja Ri e
case s udy. Wa e Resea ch and Managemen 1 (2): 63-69.
Wallace J. B., G ubaugh J. W., & Whiles M. R. 1996. Bio ic
indices and s eam ecosys em p ocesses: Resul s om
an expe imen al s udy. Ecological Applica ions 6 (1):
140-151.
Wallin M., Wiede holm T., & Johnson R. K. 2003. Guidance
on es ablishing e e ence condi ions and ecological s a us
class bounda ies o inland su ace wa e s. CIS Wo king
G oup 2.3, Re cond, pp. 1993.
Wang L. & Kanehl P. 2003. In luences o wa e shed u baniza-
ion and ins eam habi a on mac oin e eb a es in cold
wa e s eams. Jou nal o he Ame ican Wa e Resou ces
Associa ion 39 (5): 1181-1196.
Xë xa B. L., Sa o i M., Gashi A., & Ga ollia J.-L. 2019. Fi s
checklis o may lies (Insec a, Epheme op e a) om
Koso o. ZooKeys 874: 69-82.
Recei ed: 21.01.2025
Accep ed: 11.06.2025
