DOCSLIB.ORG

Targeted Biological Assessment for Streams Within the West And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Targeted Biological Assessment for Streams Within the West And Targeted Biological Assessment of Streams in the West River and Rhode River Watersheds, Anne Arundel County, Maryland: 2012 Anne Arundel County, Maryland Department of Public Works Watershed, Ecosystem, and Restoration Services Targeted Biological Assessment of Streams in the West River and Rhode River Watersheds, Anne Arundel County, Maryland: 2012 August 2012 - Final Report Prepared for: Anne Arundel County Department of Public Works Watershed, Ecosystem, and Restoration Services Watershed Assessment and Planning Program 2662 Riva Road, P.O. Box 6675 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Prepared by: KCI Technologies, Inc. 936 Ridgebrook Road Sparks, Maryland 21152 West and Rhode Rivers Watersheds Year 2012 Targeted Biological Monitoring and Assessment CONTENTS Background and Objectives .................................................................................................................... 4 1 Methods ...................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Selection of Sampling Sites.................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Impervious Surface/GIS Analysis ........................................................................................... 9 1.3 Water Quality Sampling ........................................................................................................ 9 1.4 Physical Habitat Assessment ............................................................................................... 10 1.5 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling ................................................................................. 11 1.5.1 Sample Processing and Laboratory Identification .......................................................... 12 1.5.2 Biological Data Analysis................................................................................................... 12 1.6 Correlations ......................................................................................................................... 13 2 Results ....................................................................................................................................... 14 2.1 Impervious Surface Analysis ................................................................................................ 14 2.2 Water Quality ...................................................................................................................... 18 2.3 Physical Habitat Assessment ............................................................................................... 20 2.4 Benthic Macroinvertebrates ............................................................................................... 25 2.5 Quality Assurance/Quality Control ...................................................................................... 32 3 Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 32 3.1 Land Use and Impervious Surface ....................................................................................... 32 3.2 Water Chemistry ................................................................................................................. 32 3.3 Physical Habitat ................................................................................................................... 34 3.4 Biological Condition ............................................................................................................. 35 3.5 Integrated Assessment ........................................................................................................ 36 4 References ................................................................................................................................ 43 1 West and Rhode Rivers Watersheds Year 2012 Targeted Biological Monitoring and Assessment FIGURES Figure 1 – Study Area Vicinity Map .......................................................................................................... 7 Figure 2 – West and Rhode Rivers Subwatershed Map ........................................................................... 8 Figure 3 - Histogram showing the distribution of percent imperviousness for 26 targeted sites in the Rhode River watershed and 24 targeted sites in the West River watershed. ............................... 15 Figure 4 – Bioassessment Results Map .................................................................................................. 17 Figure 5 - RBP scores for 26 targeted sites in the Rhode River watershed and 24 targeted sites in the West River watershed .................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 6 - PHI scores for 26 targeted sites in the Rhode River watershed and 24 targeted sites in the West River watershed .................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 7 (a-f) – Histograms showing distributions of selected RBP metric values for 26 targeted sites in the Rhode River watershed and 24 targeted sites in the West River watershed. ..................... 24 Figure 8 - BIBI scores for 26 targeted sites in the Rhode River watershed and 24 targeted sites in the West River watershed .................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 9 (a-g) – Histograms showing distributions of individual BIBI metric values for 26 targeted sites in the Rhode River watershed and 24 targeted sites in the West River watershed. ..................... 28 Figure 10 - Natural Soil Groups in Anne Arundel County ...................................................................... 33 Figure 11 – Comparison of RBP and PHI habitat assessment scores for 50 targeted sites in the West and Rhode Rivers watersheds. ....................................................................................................... 35 Figure 12 – Correlation between RBP habitat assessment score and BIBI score for 50 targeted sites in the West and Rhode Rivers watersheds. ....................................................................................... 39 Figure 13 – Correlation between PHI habitat assessment score and BIBI score for 50 targeted sites in the West and Rhode Rivers watersheds. ....................................................................................... 40 Figure 14 - Correlation of Epifaunal Substrate Score with BIBI Score for 50 targeted sites in the West and Rhode Rivers watersheds. ....................................................................................................... 41 TABLES Table 1 – Sampling Sites and Corresponding Subwatersheds ................................................................. 5 Table 2 – RBP Low Gradient Habitat Parameters .................................................................................. 10 Table 3 – RBP Habitat Score and Ratings ............................................................................................... 11 Table 4 – PHI Coastal Plain Parameters ................................................................................................. 11 Table 5 – PHI Score and Ratings ............................................................................................................. 11 Table 6 - Biological Condition Scoring for the Coastal Plain Benthic Macroinvertebrates .................... 13 Table 7 – BIBI Scoring and Rating........................................................................................................... 13 Table 8 – Drainage Area and Imperviousness ........................................................................................ 15 Table 9 – Instream Water Quality Results ............................................................................................. 19 Table 10 – Physical Habitat Assessment Results ................................................................................... 22 Table 11 – Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (BIBI) Summary Data ........................................................ 25 Table 12 – Percent Abundance (by top 30 taxa) .................................................................................... 29 Table 13 – Percent Occurrence (by top 30 taxa) ................................................................................... 30 Table 14 – Chironomidae Analysis ......................................................................................................... 31 Table 15 - Baltimore average monthly precipitation and temperature data ........................................ 34 Table 16 – Consolidated Assessment Results ........................................................................................ 36 Table 17 – Station Biological Potential Matrix ....................................................................................... 37 Table 18 - Water quality exceedences by site. Colors correspond with the biological potential matrix in Table 14 using the RBP rating. ................................................................................................... 42 2 West and Rhode Rivers Watersheds Year 2012 Targeted Biological Monitoring and Assessment APPENDICES Appendix A: Site Summaries Appendix B: Bioassessment Results Maps Appendix C: QA/QC Procedures and Results Appendix D: Natural Soil Groups of Maryland Appendix E: Kendall Rank Correlations
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 1 Table 1. Current Taxonomic Keys and the Level of Taxonomy Routinely U
    Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Table 1. Current taxonomic keys and the level of taxonomy routinely used by the Ohio EPA in streams and rivers for various macroinvertebrate taxonomic classifications. Genera that are reasonably considered to be monotypic in Ohio are also listed. Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Species Pennak 1989, Thorp & Rogers 2016 Porifera If no gemmules are present identify to family (Spongillidae). Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Cnidaria monotypic genera: Cordylophora caspia and Craspedacusta sowerbii Platyhelminthes Class (Turbellaria) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nemertea Phylum (Nemertea) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Phylum (Nematomorpha) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nematomorpha Paragordius varius monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Ectoprocta monotypic genera: Cristatella mucedo, Hyalinella punctata, Lophopodella carteri, Paludicella articulata, Pectinatella magnifica, Pottsiella erecta Entoprocta Urnatella gracilis monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Polychaeta Class (Polychaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Annelida Oligochaeta Subclass (Oligochaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Hirudinida Species Klemm 1982, Klemm et al. 2015 Anostraca Species Thorp & Rogers 2016 Species (Lynceus Laevicaudata Thorp & Rogers 2016 brachyurus) Spinicaudata Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Williams 1972, Thorp & Rogers Isopoda Genus 2016 Holsinger 1972, Thorp & Rogers Amphipoda Genus 2016 Gammaridae: Gammarus Species Holsinger 1972 Crustacea monotypic genera: Apocorophium lacustre, Echinogammarus ischnus, Synurella dentata Species (Taphromysis Mysida Thorp & Rogers 2016 louisianae) Crocker & Barr 1968; Jezerinac 1993, 1995; Jezerinac & Thoma 1984; Taylor 2000; Thoma et al. Cambaridae Species 2005; Thoma & Stocker 2009; Crandall & De Grave 2017; Glon et al. 2018 Species (Palaemon Pennak 1989, Palaemonidae kadiakensis) Thorp & Rogers 2016 1 Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Informal grouping of the Arachnida Hydrachnidia Smith 2001 water mites Genus Morse et al.
    [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]
  • Biological Assessment of the Patapsco River Tributary Watersheds, Howard County, Maryland
    Biological Assessment of the Patapsco River Tributary Watersheds, Howard County, Maryland Spring 2003 Index Period and Summary of Round One County- Wide Assessment Patuxtent River April, 2005 Final Report UT to Patuxtent River Biological Assessment of the Patapsco River Tributary Watersheds, Howard County, Maryland Spring 2003 Index Period and Summary of Round One County-wide Assessment Prepared for: Howard County, Maryland Department of Public Works Stormwater Management Division 6751 Columbia Gateway Dr., Ste. 514 Columbia, MD 21046-3143 Prepared by: Tetra Tech, Inc. 400 Red Brook Blvd., Ste. 200 Owings Mills, MD 21117 Acknowledgement The principal authors of this report are Kristen L. Pavlik and James B. Stribling, both of Tetra Tech. They were also assisted by Erik W. Leppo. This document reports results from three of the six subwatersheds sampled during the Spring Index Period of the third year of biomonitoring by the Howard County Stormwater Management Division. Fieldwork was conducted by Tetra Tech staff including Kristen Pavlik, Colin Hill, David Bressler, Jennifer Pitt, and Amanda Richardson. All laboratory sample processing was conducted by Carolina Gallardo, Shabaan Fundi, Curt Kleinsorg, Chad Bogues, Joey Rizzo, Elizabeth Yarborough, Jessica Garrish, Chris Hines, and Sara Waddell. Taxonomic identification was completed by Dr. R. Deedee Kathman and Todd Askegaard; Aquatic Resources Center (ARC). Hunt Loftin, Linda Shook, and Brenda Decker (Tetra Tech) assisted with budget tracking and clerical support. This work was completed under the Howard County Purchase Order L 5305 to Tetra Tech, Inc. The enthusiasm and interest of the staff in the Stormwater Management Division, including Howard Saltzman and Angela Morales is acknowledged and appreciated.
    [Show full text]
  • CHIRONOMUS NEWSLETTER on CHIRONOMIDAE RESEARCH Co-Editors: Ruth CONTRERAS-LICHTENBERG Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Burgring 7, A-1014 WIEN, Austria Peter H
    CHIRONOMUS NEWSLETTER ON CHIRONOMIDAE RESEARCH Co-Editors: Ruth CONTRERAS-LICHTENBERG Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Burgring 7, A-1014 WIEN, Austria Peter H. LANGTON 5 Kylebeg Avenue, Mountsandel, Coleraine, Co. Londonderry, Northern Ireland, BT52 1JN - Northern Ireland Bibliography: Odwin HOFFRICHTER Institut f. Biologie I, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Hauptstrasse 1 D-79104 , Germany Treasurer: Trond ANDERSEN: Museum of Zoology, University of Bergen, Museplass 3, N-5007 Bergen - Norway ISSN 0172-1941 No. 13 September 2000 CONTENTS Chironomid Work in Munich to Continue ............................................................................................................... 1 New curator at the Zoologische Staatssammlung Munich ...................................................................................... 2 Contributions in SPIXIANA in Memory of Dr. Reiss.............................................................................................. 4 To Iya Kiknadze at 70................................................................................................................................................ 5 Current Research ....................................................................................................................................................... 7 Short – Communications ......................................................................................................................................... 19 Notice Board ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ceh Code List for Recording the Macroinvertebrates in Fresh Water in the British Isles
    01 OCTOBER 2011 CEH CODE LIST FOR RECORDING THE MACROINVERTEBRATES IN FRESH WATER IN THE BRITISH ISLES CYNTHIA DAVIES AND FRANÇOIS EDWARDS CEH Code List For Recording The Macroinvertebrates In Fresh Water In The British Isles October 2011 Report compiled by Cynthia Davies and François Edwards Centre for Ecology & Hydrology Maclean Building Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford, Wallingford Oxfordshire, OX10 8BB United Kingdom Purpose The purpose of this Coded List is to provide a standard set of names and identifying codes for freshwater macroinvertebrates in the British Isles. These codes are used in the CEH databases and by the water industry and academic and commercial organisations. It is intended that, by making the list as widely available as possible, the ease of data exchange throughout the aquatic science community can be improved. The list includes full listings of the aquatic invertebrates living in, or closely associated with, freshwaters in the British Isles. The list includes taxa that have historically been found in Britain but which have become extinct in recent times. Also included are names and codes for ‘artificial’ taxa (aggregates of taxa which are difficult to split) and for composite families used in calculation of certain water quality indices such as BMWP and AWIC scores. Current status The list has evolved from the checklist* produced originally by Peter Maitland (then of the Institute of Terrestrial Ecology) (Maitland, 1977) and subsequently revised by Mike Furse (Centre for Ecology & Hydrology), Ian McDonald (Thames Water Authority) and Bob Abel (Department of the Environment). That list was subject to regular revisions with financial support from the Environment Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Insects: Holometabola – Diptera, Suborder Nematocera
    Glime, J. M. 2017. Aquatic Insects: Holometabola – Diptera, Suborder Nematocera. Chapt. 11-13b. In: Glime, J. M. Bryophyte 11-13b-1 Ecology. Volume 2. Bryological Interaction. Ebook sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists. Last updated 15 April 2021 and available at <http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology2/>. CHAPTER 11-13b AQUATIC INSECTS: HOLOMETABOLA – DIPTERA, SUBORDER NEMATOCERA TABLE OF CONTENTS Suborder Nematocera, continued ........................................................................................................... 11-13b-2 Chironomidae – Midges .................................................................................................................. 11-13b-2 Emergence ............................................................................................................................... 11-13b-4 Seasons .................................................................................................................................... 11-13b-5 Cold-water Species .................................................................................................................. 11-13b-6 Overwintering .......................................................................................................................... 11-13b-7 Current Velocity ...................................................................................................................... 11-13b-7 Diversity .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chironomidae of the Southeastern United States: a Checklist of Species and Notes on Biology, Distribution, and Habitat
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln US Fish & Wildlife Publications US Fish & Wildlife Service 1990 Chironomidae of the Southeastern United States: A Checklist of Species and Notes on Biology, Distribution, and Habitat Patrick L. Hudson U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service David R. Lenat North Carolina Department of Natural Resources Broughton A. Caldwell David Smith U.S. Evironmental Protection Agency Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usfwspubs Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons Hudson, Patrick L.; Lenat, David R.; Caldwell, Broughton A.; and Smith, David, "Chironomidae of the Southeastern United States: A Checklist of Species and Notes on Biology, Distribution, and Habitat" (1990). US Fish & Wildlife Publications. 173. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usfwspubs/173 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Fish & Wildlife Service at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in US Fish & Wildlife Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Fish and Wildlife Research 7 Chironomidae of the Southeastern United States: A Checklist of Species and Notes on Biology, Distribution, and Habitat NWRC Library I7 49.99:- -------------UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Fish and Wildlife Research This series comprises scientific and technical reports based on original scholarly research, interpretive reviews, or theoretical presentations. Publications in this series generally relate to fish or wildlife and their ecology. The Service distributes these publications to natural resource agencies, libraries and bibliographic collection facilities, scientists, and resource managers. Copies of this publication may be obtained from the Publications Unit, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Chironomidae ••
    Royal Entomological Society HANDBOOKS FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF BRITISH INSECTS To purchase current handbooks and to download out-of-print parts visit: http://www.royensoc.co.uk/publications/index.htm This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License. Copyright © Royal Entomological Society 2012 ROYAL ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON Vol. IX. Part 2. HANDBOOKS FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF BRITISH INSECTS DIPTERA 2. NEMA TO CERA : families TIPULIDAE TO CHIRONOMlDAE CHIRONOMIDAE •• . 121 By R. L. COE PAUL FREEMAN P. F. MATTINGLY LONDON Published by the Society and Sold at its Rooms .p, Queen's Gate, S.W. 7 31st May, 1950 Price TwentY. Shillings CHIRONOMIDAE 121 Family CHIRONOMIDAE. By R. L. CoE. FLIES of the family CHIRONOMIDA.E may be distinguished from other Nematocerous families of Diptera by the following combination of charac­ ters : Ocelli absent ; antennae hairy (especially in d') ; six to eight veins reaching wing-margin; one or both anal veins not reaching margin; vein M simple; cross-veins R-M and M-CU (latter when present) near middle of wing. The reduced mouthparts and the fact that the costa is not con­ tinued around the entire wing provide simple distinctions from CuLICIDAE, to which family some groups bear a superficial resemblance. The closely­ related CERA.TOPOGONIDA.E (" biting midges ") were formerly included in the CHIRONOMIDA.E (" non-biting midges"), and differ most obviously by the forked vein M ; head rounded behind instead of flattened ; postnotum without a distinct median longitudinal furrow or keel, which is present in most CHIRONOMIDA.E .
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.Chironomid (Chironomidae: Diptera) Checklist from Nahuel Huapi National Park, Patagonia, Argentina
    Revista de la Sociedad Entomológica Argentina ISSN: 0373-5680 [email protected] Sociedad Entomológica Argentina Argentina DONATO, Mariano; MASSAFERRO, Julieta; BROOKS, Stephen J. Chironomid (Chironomidae: Diptera) checklist from Nahuel Huapi National Park, Patagonia, Argentina Revista de la Sociedad Entomológica Argentina, vol. 67, núm. 1-2, 2008, pp. 163-170 Sociedad Entomológica Argentina Buenos Aires, Argentina Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=322028482015 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative ISSN 0373-5680 Rev. Soc. Entomol. Argent. 67 (1-2): 163-170, 2008 163 Chironomid (Chironomidae: Diptera) checklist from Nahuel Huapi National Park, Patagonia, Argentina DONATO, Mariano*, Julieta MASSAFERRO** and Stephen J. BROOKS*** *Laboratorio de Sistemática y Biología Evolutiva (LASBE), Museo de La Plata, Paseo del Bosque s/n (1900), La Plata, Argentina; e-mail: [email protected] **Laboratorio de Biodiversidad, INIBIOMA - CONICET, San Martín 24, (8400) Bariloche, Argentina; e-mail: [email protected] ***Department of Entomology, Natural History Museum, London SW7 5BD, United Kingdom; e-mail: [email protected] Lista de los quironómidos (Chironomidae: Diptera) del Parque Nacional Nahuel Huapi, Patagonia, Argentina RESUMEN. Este trabajo presenta el primer catálogo de taxones modernos y subfósiles de la familia Chironomidae (Insecta: Diptera) del Parque Nacional Nahuel Huapi en Patagonia, Argentina. La fauna catalogada contiene 104 especies en 48 géneros y 6 subfamilias para la fauna moderna y 52 morfotipos en 36 géneros y 4 subfamilias para la fauna subfósil.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Aquatic Community and Water
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Integrated Aquatic Community and Water Quality Monitoring of Wadeable Streams in the Klamath Network – Annual Report 2011 results from Whiskeytown National Recreation Area and Lassen Volcanic National Park Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/KLMN/NRTR—2014/904 ON THE COVER Crystal Creek, Whiskeytown National Recreation Area Photograph by: Charles Stanley, Field Crew Leader Integrated Aquatic Community and Water Quality Monitoring of Wadeable Streams in the Klamath Network – Annual Report 2011 results from Whiskeytown National Recreation Area and Lassen Volcanic National Park Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/KLMN/NRTR—2014/904 Eric C. Dinger, and Daniel A. Sarr National Park Service 1250 Siskiyou Blvd Southern Oregon University Ashland, Oregon 97520 August 2014 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientific studies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series provides contributors with a forum for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Zootaxa, Diptera, Chironomidae
    ZOOTAXA 752 Notes and recommendations on taxonomy and nomenclature of Chironomidae (Diptera) MARTIN SPIES & OLE A. SÆTHER Magnolia Press Auckland, New Zealand MARTIN SPIES & OLE A. SÆTHER Notes and recommendations on taxonomy and nomenclature of Chironomidae (Diptera) (Zootaxa 752) 90 pp.; 30 cm. 3 December 2004 ISBN 1-877354-76-7 (Paperback) ISBN 1-877354-77-5 (Online edition) FIRST PUBLISHED IN 2004 BY Magnolia Press P.O. Box 41383 Auckland 1030 New Zealand e-mail: [email protected] http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ © 2004 Magnolia Press All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored, transmitted or disseminated, in any form, or by any means, without prior written permission from the publisher, to whom all requests to reproduce copyright material should be directed in writing. This authorization does not extend to any other kind of copying, by any means, in any form, and for any purpose other than private research use. ISSN 1175-5326 (Print edition) ISSN 1175-5334 (Online edition) Zootaxa 752: 1–90 (2004) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ ZOOTAXA 752 Copyright © 2004 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) Notes and recommendations on taxonomy and nomenclature of Chironomidae (Diptera) MARTIN SPIES1 & OLE A. SÆTHER2 1 c/o Zoologische Staatssammlung München, Münchhausenstr. 21, D-81247 München, Germany; e-mail: [email protected] 2 Museum of Zoology, University of Bergen, Muséplass 3, N-5007 Bergen, Norway; e-mail: [email protected] Table of contents Abstract . 3 Introduction . 5 Methods and material . 5 General remarks . 7 Comments on individual taxa .
    [Show full text]