DOCSLIB.ORG

Minnesota Nutrient Criteria Development for Rivers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Minnesota Nutrient Criteria Development for Rivers Minnesota Nutrient Criteria Development for Rivers (Update of November 2010 Report) Draft, January 2013 wq-s6-08 Minnesota Nutrient Criteria Development for Rivers DRAFT January, 2013 Authors Steven Heiskary, Dr. R. William Bouchard, Jr. and Dr. Howard Markus Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Environmental Analysis and Outcomes Division Contributors Report Fish and macroinvertebrate data and metrics: Joel Chirhart, Kevin Stroom, John Sandberg, MPCA Environmental Analysis and Outcomes Division Data management: Bob Murzyn, MPCA Environmental Analysis and Outcomes Division Development and assistance with maps: Kris Parson, MPCA Environmental Analysis and Outcomes Division Manuscript Review Internal MPCA review (2009 draft) Kevin Stroom, John Sandberg, Angela Preimesberger: MPCA Environmental Analysis and Outcomes External: USEPA Region V-related review (2009 draft) Brian Thompson: USEPA Region V, Nutrient Criteria Coordinator Sylvia Heaton, Michigan DEQ; Region V RTAG member review Bob Miltner, Ohio EPA; Region V RTAG member review Dr. Shivi Selvaratnam Indiana Department of Environmental Management; Region V RTAG member review: External : USEPA Headquarters-related review (2009 draft) Dr. Walter K. Dodds, Kansas State University; Review for USEPA HQ Dr. Jan Stevenson, Michigan State University, Review for USEPA HQ Dr. Michael Paul, Tetra Tech Inc.; review for USEPA HQ External: Others (2010 draft) Dr. Lester Yuan and Dr. Susan Cormier were consulted on use of quantile regression analyses Sampling Field sampling for this project spanned several summers from 1999-2008 and involved various MPCA staff from Environmental Outcomes and Analysis Division including Lakes and Streams Unit, Biological Units and Flow and Groundwater Unit. Foreword This technical support document for Minnesota’s proposed river eutrophication criteria has undergone several revisions as a result of internal and external review, refinements in data analysis, and related factors. This revision of the 2010 draft document is a product of comments from and discussion with USEPA reviewers, Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, and other reviewers. Minor modifications are included to provide greater clarity in descriptions of data sets, statistical analyses, and justifications for the proposed criteria. Slight adjustments to the proposed criteria have been made as a part of this revision. Criteria, as proposed in this revision, will be used to develop rule language and further supported in the Statement of Need and Reasonableness (SONAR) that is developed in support of the rulemaking. The MPCA is reducing printing and mailing costs by using the Internet to distribute reports and information to our wider audience. For additional information, see the Web site: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-monitoring-and-reporting/biological-monitoring/stream- monitoring/stream-monitoring-algae.html Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................... 1 I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 3 II. STUDY DESIGN OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................ 7 III. METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS ........................................................................................ 10 A. RIVER NUTRIENT STUDY DATA COLLECTION ............................................................................................................. 10 1. River Nutrient Study: Overview of Data .................................................................................................... 10 2. River Nutrient Study: Study Area and Ecoregion Descriptions .................................................................. 11 3. River Nutrient Study: Morphometry, Watershed Area, and Flow Characterization ................................. 18 4. River Nutrient Study: Instrumented Diel Monitoring ................................................................................ 18 5. River Nutrient Study: Water Quality Sample Collection ........................................................................... 18 6. River Nutrient Study: Benthic Algae Collection [drawn from Lee 2002] ................................................... 19 B. BIOLOGICAL MONITORING DATASET ...................................................................................................................... 20 1. Habitat Assessment and Chemistry Sampling .......................................................................................... 20 2. Fish and Macroinvertebrate Sampling ..................................................................................................... 21 C. STORET DATASET ............................................................................................................................................. 21 IV. DATA ANALYSES ......................................................................................................................................... 21 A. DEFINITION OF RIVER NUTRIENT REGIONS ............................................................................................................... 21 B. RIVER NUTRIENT STUDY ANALYSES ........................................................................................................................ 24 1. Water Quality Relationships ..................................................................................................................... 24 2. Exploratory Analysis of Nutrient-Biology Relationships............................................................................ 24 C. REFERENCE CONDITION ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................... 25 D. IDENTIFICATION OF NUTRIENT THRESHOLD CONCENTRATIONS ..................................................................................... 26 1. Quantile Regression and Changepoint Datasets ...................................................................................... 28 2. Metric Selection ........................................................................................................................................ 30 3. Biological Threshold Analyses ................................................................................................................... 30 4. Statistical Methods ................................................................................................................................... 31 5. Linking Nutrients to Biological Condition. ................................................................................................ 34 V. RESULTS ...................................................................................................................................................... 34 A. DIEL WATER QUALITY MONITORING RESULTS: RIVER NUTRIENT STUDY ........................................................................ 35 1. Diel Patterns of Dissolved Oxygen, Temperature, pH, and Specific Conductivity ..................................... 35 2. Annual Variation in Diel Dissolved Oxygen Flux in the Crow, Rum and Mississippi Rivers ....................... 39 B. WATER QUALITY PATTERNS AND RELATIONSHIPS: RIVER NUTRIENT STUDY.................................................................... 42 1. Relationships among Nutrients, Chlorophyll, and DO Flux ....................................................................... 44 2. Annual Variability of Total Phosphorus and Total Chlorophyll ................................................................. 59 3. Relationships among Nutrients, Water Chemistry and Biological Indicators: Exploratory Analyses ........ 63 C. REFERENCE CONDITION ANALYSIS RESULTS ............................................................................................................. 70 D. THRESHOLD CONCENTRATION DEVELOPMENT: RESULTS FROM QUANTILE REGRESSION AND CHANGEPOINT ANALYSES .......... 73 E. PERIPHYTON ANALYSIS: MPCA RIVER NUTRIENT AND USGS STUDIES ......................................................................... 78 VI. DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................................ 82 A. RELATIONSHIPS AMONG NUTRIENTS, ALGAE, STREAM CHEMISTRY AND BIOTA ............................................................... 82 B. NUTRIENT CRITERIA DEVELOPMENT ....................................................................................................................... 84 C. PERIPHYTON BIOMASS AS A NUMERIC TRANSLATOR FOR “NUISANCE ALGAL GROWTH” ...................................................... 88 D. CRITERIA RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NUTRIENTS, SESTON AND RELATED FACTORS ........................................................... 91 1. Northern River Nutrient Region Criteria Development ............................................................................. 92 2. Central River Nutrient Region Criteria Development ................................................................................ 93 3. Southern River Nutrient Region Criteria Development ............................................................................. 94 E. CRITERIA RECOMMENDATION FOR PERIPHYTON ALGAL BIOMASS AS A NUMERIC TRANSLATOR .........................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Seasonal and Diel Movements and Habitat Use of Robust Redhorses in the Lower Savannah River. Georgia, and South Carolina
    Transactions of the American FisheriesSociety 135:1145-1155, 2006 [Article] © Copyright by the American Fisheries Society 2006 DO: 10.1577/705-230.1 Seasonal and Diel Movements and Habitat Use of Robust Redhorses in the Lower Savannah River, Georgia and South Carolina TIMOTHY B. GRABOWSKI*I Department of Biological Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina,29634-0326, USA J. JEFFERY ISELY U.S. Geological Survey, South Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, 29634-0372, USA Abstract.-The robust redhorse Moxostonta robustum is a large riverine catostomid whose distribution is restricted to three Atlantic Slope drainages. Once presumed extinct, this species was rediscovered in 1991. Despite being the focus of conservation and recovery efforts, the robust redhorse's movements and habitat use are virtually unknown. We surgically implanted pulse-coded radio transmitters into 17 wild adults (460-690 mm total length) below the downstream-most dam on the Savannah River and into 2 fish above this dam. Individuals were located every 2 weeks from June 2002 to September 2003 and monthly thereafter to May 2005. Additionally, we located 5-10 individuals every 2 h over a 48-h period during each season. Study fish moved at least 24.7 ± 8.4 river kilometers (rkm; mean ± SE) per season. This movement was generally downstream except during spring. Some individuals moved downstream by as much as 195 rkm from their release sites. Seasonal migrations were correlated to seasonal changes in water temperature. Robust redhorses initiated spring upstream migrations when water temperature reached approximately 12'C. Our diel tracking suggests that robust redhorses occupy small reaches of river (- 1.0 rkm) and are mainly active diumally.
    [Show full text]
  • Physical Characteristics of Stream Subbasins in The
    PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF STREAM SUBBASINS IN THE SANOCKI PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF STREAM RIVER,SUBBASINS THE UPPER IN CEDAR RIVER, UPPER WAPSIPINICON ROCK SHELL ANDRIVER, UPPER WAPSIPINICON RIVER, UPPER CEDAR RIVER, SHELL ROCK OFR 99-471 RIVER, AND WINNEBAGO RIVER BASINS, SOUTHERN MINNESOTA AND NORTHERN IOWA MINNESOTA SOUTHEASTERN BASINS, RIVER, WINNEBAGO By Christopher A. Sanocki Open-File Report 99-471 Prepared in cooperation with the Minnesota Department of Transportation 99-471 OFR Mounds View, Minnesota 2000 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey 3K\VLFDO &KDUDFWHULVWLFV RI 6WUHDP 6XEEDVLQV LQ WKH 8SSHU :DSVLSLQLFRQ 5LYHU 8SSHU &HGDU 5LYHU 6KHOO 5RFN 5LYHU DQG :LQQHEDJR 5LYHU %DVLQV 6RXWKHUQ 0LQQHVRWD DQG 1RUWKHUQ ,RZD %\ &KULVWRSKHU $ 6DQRFNL $EVWUDFW Data that describe the physical characteristics of stream subbasins upstream from selected sites on streams in the Upper Wapsipinicon River, Upper Cedar River, Shell Rock River, and Winnebago River Basins, located in southern Minnesota and northern Iowa are presented in this report. The physical characteristics are the drainage area of the subbasin, the percentage area of the subbasin covered only by lakes, the percentage area of the subbasin covered by both lakes and marsh, the main-channel length, and the main-channel slope. Stream sites include outlets of subbasins of at least 5 square miles, and locations of U.S. Geological Survey high-flow, and continuous-record gaging stations. ,QWURGXFWLRQ Selected data for sites on streams at outlets of subbasins larger than about 5 square miles; at This is the 16th report in a series detailing locations of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) high- subbasin characteristics of streams in Minnesota flow, and continuous-record gaging stations and adjacent states.
    [Show full text]
  • CHIRONOMUS Newsletter on Chironomidae Research
    CHIRONOMUS Newsletter on Chironomidae Research No. 25 ISSN 0172-1941 (printed) 1891-5426 (online) November 2012 CONTENTS Editorial: Inventories - What are they good for? 3 Dr. William P. Coffman: Celebrating 50 years of research on Chironomidae 4 Dear Sepp! 9 Dr. Marta Margreiter-Kownacka 14 Current Research Sharma, S. et al. Chironomidae (Diptera) in the Himalayan Lakes - A study of sub- fossil assemblages in the sediments of two high altitude lakes from Nepal 15 Krosch, M. et al. Non-destructive DNA extraction from Chironomidae, including fragile pupal exuviae, extends analysable collections and enhances vouchering 22 Martin, J. Kiefferulus barbitarsis (Kieffer, 1911) and Kiefferulus tainanus (Kieffer, 1912) are distinct species 28 Short Communications An easy to make and simple designed rearing apparatus for Chironomidae 33 Some proposed emendations to larval morphology terminology 35 Chironomids in Quaternary permafrost deposits in the Siberian Arctic 39 New books, resources and announcements 43 Finnish Chironomidae 47 Chironomini indet. (Paratendipes?) from La Selva Biological Station, Costa Rica. Photo by Carlos de la Rosa. CHIRONOMUS Newsletter on Chironomidae Research Editors Torbjørn EKREM, Museum of Natural History and Archaeology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway Peter H. LANGTON, 16, Irish Society Court, Coleraine, Co. Londonderry, Northern Ireland BT52 1GX The CHIRONOMUS Newsletter on Chironomidae Research is devoted to all aspects of chironomid research and aims to be an updated news bulletin for the Chironomidae research community. The newsletter is published yearly in October/November, is open access, and can be downloaded free from this website: http:// www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/chironomus. Publisher is the Museum of Natural History and Archaeology at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology in Trondheim, Norway.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Statistical Summaries of Selected Iowa Streamflow Data--Table 1
    Table 1 1 Table 1. Streamgages in Iowa included in this study. [no., number] Map Streamgage number Streamgage name Link to streamflow statistics for streamgage number (fig. 1) 1 05387440 Upper Iowa River at Bluffton, Iowa http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05387440_stats.docx 2 05387500 Upper Iowa River at Decorah, Iowa http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05387500_stats.docx 3 05388000 Upper Iowa River near Decorah, Iowa http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05388000_stats.docx 4 05388250 Upper Iowa River near Dorchester, Iowa http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05388250_stats.docx 5 05388500 Paint Creek at Waterville, Iowa http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05388500_stats.docx 6 05389000 Yellow River near Ion, Iowa http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05389000_stats.docx 7 05389400 Bloody Run Creek near Marquette, Iowa http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05389400_stats.docx 8 05389500 Mississippi River at McGregor, Iowa http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05389500_stats.docx 9 05411400 Sny Magill Creek near Clayton, Iowa http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05411400_stats.docx 10 05411600 Turkey River at Spillville, Iowa http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05411600_stats.docx 11 05411850 Turkey River near Eldorado, Iowa http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05411850_stats.docx 12 05412000 Turkey River at Elkader, Iowa http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05412000_stats.docx 13 05412020 Turkey River above French Hollow Creek at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1214/downloads/05412020_stats.docx
    [Show full text]
  • ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES
    ECOLOGY of NORTH AMERICAN FRESHWATER FISHES Tables STEPHEN T. ROSS University of California Press Berkeley Los Angeles London © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California ISBN 978-0-520-24945-5 uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 1 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 2 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 1.1 Families Composing 95% of North American Freshwater Fish Species Ranked by the Number of Native Species Number Cumulative Family of species percent Cyprinidae 297 28 Percidae 186 45 Catostomidae 71 51 Poeciliidae 69 58 Ictaluridae 46 62 Goodeidae 45 66 Atherinopsidae 39 70 Salmonidae 38 74 Cyprinodontidae 35 77 Fundulidae 34 80 Centrarchidae 31 83 Cottidae 30 86 Petromyzontidae 21 88 Cichlidae 16 89 Clupeidae 10 90 Eleotridae 10 91 Acipenseridae 8 92 Osmeridae 6 92 Elassomatidae 6 93 Gobiidae 6 93 Amblyopsidae 6 94 Pimelodidae 6 94 Gasterosteidae 5 95 source: Compiled primarily from Mayden (1992), Nelson et al. (2004), and Miller and Norris (2005). uucp-ross-book-color.indbcp-ross-book-color.indb 3 44/5/13/5/13 88:34:34 AAMM TABLE 3.1 Biogeographic Relationships of Species from a Sample of Fishes from the Ouachita River, Arkansas, at the Confl uence with the Little Missouri River (Ross, pers. observ.) Origin/ Pre- Pleistocene Taxa distribution Source Highland Stoneroller, Campostoma spadiceum 2 Mayden 1987a; Blum et al. 2008; Cashner et al. 2010 Blacktail Shiner, Cyprinella venusta 3 Mayden 1987a Steelcolor Shiner, Cyprinella whipplei 1 Mayden 1987a Redfi n Shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis 4 Mayden 1987a Bigeye Shiner, Notropis boops 1 Wiley and Mayden 1985; Mayden 1987a Bullhead Minnow, Pimephales vigilax 4 Mayden 1987a Mountain Madtom, Noturus eleutherus 2a Mayden 1985, 1987a Creole Darter, Etheostoma collettei 2a Mayden 1985 Orangebelly Darter, Etheostoma radiosum 2a Page 1983; Mayden 1985, 1987a Speckled Darter, Etheostoma stigmaeum 3 Page 1983; Simon 1997 Redspot Darter, Etheostoma artesiae 3 Mayden 1985; Piller et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Chironomidae Hirschkopf
    Literatur Chironomidae Gesäuse U.A. zur Bestimmung und Ermittlung der Autökologie herangezogene Literatur: Albu, P. (1972): Două specii de Chironomide noi pentru ştiinţă în masivul Retezat.- St. şi Cerc. Biol., Seria Zoologie, 24: 15-20. Andersen, T.; Mendes, H.F. (2002): Neotropical and Mexican Mesosmittia Brundin, with the description of four new species (Insecta, Diptera, Chironomidae).- Spixiana, 25(2): 141-155. Andersen, T.; Sæther, O.A. (1993): Lerheimia, a new genus of Orthocladiinae from Africa (Diptera: Chironomidae).- Spixiana, 16: 105-112. Andersen, T.; Sæther, O.A.; Mendes, H.F. (2010): Neotropical Allocladius Kieffer, 1913 and Pseudosmittia Edwards, 1932 (Diptera: Chironomidae).- Zootaxa, 2472: 1-77. Baranov, V.A. (2011): New and rare species of Orthocladiinae (Diptera, Chironomidae) from the Crimea, Ukraine.- Vestnik zoologii, 45(5): 405-410. Boggero, A.; Zaupa, S.; Rossaro, B. (2014): Pseudosmittia fabioi sp. n., a new species from Sardinia (Diptera: Chironomidae, Orthocladiinae).- Journal of Entomological and Acarological Research, [S.l.],46(1): 1-5. Brundin, L. (1947): Zur Kenntnis der schwedischen Chironomiden.- Arkiv för Zoologi, 39 A(3): 1- 95. Brundin, L. (1956): Zur Systematik der Orthocladiinae (Dipt. Chironomidae).- Rep. Inst. Freshwat. Drottningholm 37: 5-185. Casas, J.J.; Laville, H. (1990): Micropsectra seguyi, n. sp. du groupe attenuata Reiss (Diptera: Chironomidae) de la Sierra Nevada (Espagne).- Annls Soc. ent. Fr. (N.S.), 26(3): 421-425. Caspers, N. (1983): Chironomiden-Emergenz zweier Lunzer Bäche, 1972.- Arch. Hydrobiol. Suppl. 65: 484-549. Caspers, N. (1987): Chaetocladius insolitus sp. n. (Diptera: Chironomidae) from Lunz, Austria. In: Saether, O.A. (Ed.): A conspectus of contemporary studies in Chironomidae (Diptera).
    [Show full text]
  • Delineation Percentage
    Lake Superior - North Rainy River - Headwaters Lake Superior - South Vermilion River Nemadji River Cloquet River Pine River Rainy River - Rainy Lake Little Fork River Mississippi River - Headwaters Leech Lake River Upper St. Croix River Root River Big Fork River Mississippi River - Winona Upper/Lower Red Lake Kettle River Mississippi River - Lake Pepin Mississippi River - Grand Rapids Mississippi River - La Crescent Crow Wing River Otter Tail River Mississippi River - Reno Mississippi River - Brainerd Zumbro River Redeye River Upper Big Sioux River Mississippi River - Twin Cities Snake River Des Moines River - Headwaters St. Louis River Rum River Lower Big Sioux River Lower St. Croix River Cottonwood River Minnesota River - Headwaters Cannon River Mississippi River - St. Cloud Long Prairie River Lake of the Woods Lower Rainy North Fork Crow River Mississippi River - Sartell Lac Qui Parle River Buffalo River Wild Rice River Minnesota River - Mankato Sauk River Rock River Redwood River Snake River Chippewa River Watonwan River Clearwater River East Fork Des Moines River Red River of the North - Sandhill River Upper Red River of the North Blue Earth River Red River of the North - Marsh River Roseau River Minnesota River - Yellow Medicine River Le Sueur River Little Sioux River Bois de Sioux River Cedar River Lower Minnesota River Pomme de Terre River Red Lake River Lower Des Moines River Upper Iowa River Red River of the North - Tamarac River Shell Rock River Two Rivers Rapid River Red River of the North - Grand Marais Creek Mustinka River South Fork Crow River Thief River Winnebago River Upper Wapsipinicon River 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% %Altered %Natural %Impounded %No Definable Channel wq-bsm1-06.
    [Show full text]
  • Tracing Sediment Sources with Meteoric 10Be: Linking Erosion And
    Tracing sediment sources with meteoric 10Be: Linking erosion and the hydrograph Final Report: submitted June 20, 2012 PI: Patrick Belmont Utah State University, Department of Watershed Sciences University of Minnesota, National Center for Earth-surface Dynamics Background and Motivation for the Study Sediment is a natural constituent of river ecosystems. Yet, in excess quantities sediment can severely degrade water quality and aquatic ecosystem health. This problem is especially common in rivers that drain agricultural landscapes (Trimble and Crosson, 2000; Montgomery, 2007). Currently, sediment is one of the leading causes of impairment in rivers of the US and globally (USEPA, 2011; Palmer et al., 2000). Despite extraordinary efforts, sediment remains one of the most difficult nonpoint-source pollutants to quantify at the watershed scale (Walling, 1983; Langland et al., 2007; Smith et al., 2011). Developing a predictive understanding of watershed sediment yield has proven especially difficult in low-relief landscapes. Challenges arise due to several common features of these landscapes, including a) source and sink areas are defined by very subtle topographic features that often cannot be detected even with relatively high resolution topography data (15 cm vertical uncertainty), b) humans have dramatically altered water and sediment routing processes, the effects of which are exceedingly difficult to capture in a conventional watershed hydrology/erosion model (Wilkinson and McElroy, 2007; Montgomery, 2007); and c) as sediment is routed through a river network it is actively exchanged between the channel and floodplain, a dynamic that is difficult to model at the channel network scale (Lauer and Parker, 2008). Thus, while models can be useful to understand sediment dynamics at the landscape scale and predict changes in sediment flux and water quality in response to management actions in a watershed, several key processes are difficult to constrain to a satisfactory degree.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of the Family Chironomidae (Diptera) of Finland
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 441: 63–90 (2014)Checklist of the family Chironomidae (Diptera) of Finland 63 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.441.7461 CHECKLIST www.zookeys.org Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Checklist of the family Chironomidae (Diptera) of Finland Lauri Paasivirta1 1 Ruuhikoskenkatu 17 B 5, FI-24240 Salo, Finland Corresponding author: Lauri Paasivirta ([email protected]) Academic editor: J. Kahanpää | Received 10 March 2014 | Accepted 26 August 2014 | Published 19 September 2014 http://zoobank.org/F3343ED1-AE2C-43B4-9BA1-029B5EC32763 Citation: Paasivirta L (2014) Checklist of the family Chironomidae (Diptera) of Finland. In: Kahanpää J, Salmela J (Eds) Checklist of the Diptera of Finland. ZooKeys 441: 63–90. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.441.7461 Abstract A checklist of the family Chironomidae (Diptera) recorded from Finland is presented. Keywords Finland, Chironomidae, species list, biodiversity, faunistics Introduction There are supposedly at least 15 000 species of chironomid midges in the world (Armitage et al. 1995, but see Pape et al. 2011) making it the largest family among the aquatic insects. The European chironomid fauna consists of 1262 species (Sæther and Spies 2013). In Finland, 780 species can be found, of which 37 are still undescribed (Paasivirta 2012). The species checklist written by B. Lindeberg on 23.10.1979 (Hackman 1980) included 409 chironomid species. Twenty of those species have been removed from the checklist due to various reasons. The total number of species increased in the 1980s to 570, mainly due to the identification work by me and J. Tuiskunen (Bergman and Jansson 1983, Tuiskunen and Lindeberg 1986).
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents 2
    Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists (SAFIT) List of Freshwater Macroinvertebrate Taxa from California and Adjacent States including Standard Taxonomic Effort Levels 1 March 2011 Austin Brady Richards and D. Christopher Rogers Table of Contents 2 1.0 Introduction 4 1.1 Acknowledgments 5 2.0 Standard Taxonomic Effort 5 2.1 Rules for Developing a Standard Taxonomic Effort Document 5 2.2 Changes from the Previous Version 6 2.3 The SAFIT Standard Taxonomic List 6 3.0 Methods and Materials 7 3.1 Habitat information 7 3.2 Geographic Scope 7 3.3 Abbreviations used in the STE List 8 3.4 Life Stage Terminology 8 4.0 Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species 8 5.0 Literature Cited 9 Appendix I. The SAFIT Standard Taxonomic Effort List 10 Phylum Silicea 11 Phylum Cnidaria 12 Phylum Platyhelminthes 14 Phylum Nemertea 15 Phylum Nemata 16 Phylum Nematomorpha 17 Phylum Entoprocta 18 Phylum Ectoprocta 19 Phylum Mollusca 20 Phylum Annelida 32 Class Hirudinea Class Branchiobdella Class Polychaeta Class Oligochaeta Phylum Arthropoda Subphylum Chelicerata, Subclass Acari 35 Subphylum Crustacea 47 Subphylum Hexapoda Class Collembola 69 Class Insecta Order Ephemeroptera 71 Order Odonata 95 Order Plecoptera 112 Order Hemiptera 126 Order Megaloptera 139 Order Neuroptera 141 Order Trichoptera 143 Order Lepidoptera 165 2 Order Coleoptera 167 Order Diptera 219 3 1.0 Introduction The Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists (SAFIT) is charged through its charter to develop standardized levels for the taxonomic identification of aquatic macroinvertebrates in support of bioassessment. This document defines the standard levels of taxonomic effort (STE) for bioassessment data compatible with the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioassessment protocols (Ode, 2007) or similar procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Trends at Minnesota Milestone Sites
    Water Quality Trends for Minnesota Rivers and Streams at Milestone Sites Five of seven pollutants better, two getting worse June 2014 Author The MPCA is reducing printing and mailing costs by using the Internet to distribute reports and David Christopherson information to wider audience. Visit our website for more information. MPCA reports are printed on 100% post- consumer recycled content paper manufactured without chlorine or chlorine derivatives. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North | Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 | www.pca.state.mn.us | 651-296-6300 Toll free 800-657-3864 | TTY 651-282-5332 This report is available in alternative formats upon request, and online at www.pca.state.mn.us . Document number: wq-s1-71 1 Summary Long-term trend analysis of seven different water pollutants measured at 80 locations across Minnesota for more than 30 years shows consistent reductions in five pollutants, but consistent increases in two pollutants. Concentrations of total suspended solids, phosphorus, ammonia, biochemical oxygen demand, and bacteria have significantly decreased, but nitrate and chloride concentrations have risen, according to data from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) “Milestone” monitoring network. Recent, shorter-term trends are consistent with this pattern, but are less pronounced. Pollutant concentrations show distinct regional differences, with a general pattern across the state of lower levels in the northeast to higher levels in the southwest. These trends reflect both the successes of cleaning up municipal and industrial pollutant discharges during this period, and the continuing challenge of controlling the more diffuse “nonpoint” polluted runoff sources and the impacts of increased water volumes from artificial drainage practices.
    [Show full text]