DOCSLIB.ORG

Aquatic Biodiversity Assessment- a Pilot Study in Bumthang, Bhutan I © UWICE 2013

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Aquatic Biodiversity Assessment- a Pilot Study in Bumthang, Bhutan I © UWICE 2013 Aquatic Biodiversity Assessment -A Pilot Study in Bumthang, Bhutan Ugyen Wangchuck Institute for Conservation and Environment Aquatic Biodiversity Assessment- A pilot study in Bumthang, Bhutan I © UWICE 2013 Citation: Wangchuk, J. & Eby, L., (2013). Aquatic Biodiversity Assessment –A pilot study in Bumthang, Bhutan. Royal Government of Bhutan, UWICE Press, Bumthang. Disclaimer: Any views or opinion interpreted in this publication are solely those of the authors. They are not attributable to UWICE and the Royal Government of Bhutan; do not imply the expression of UWICE on any opinion concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area of its authorities. Layout and Design: Norbu Wangdi & Tshering Wangdi ISBN: 978-99936-678-3-4 II Aquatic Biodiversity Assessment- A pilot study in Bumthang, Bhutan Aquatic Biodiversity Assessment - A pilot study in Bumthang, Bhutan Ugyen Wangchuck Institute for Conservation and Environment Aquatic Biodiversity Assessment- A pilot study in Bumthang, Bhutan III IV Aquatic Biodiversity Assessment- A pilot study in Bumthang, Bhutan Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ v Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................vi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .................................................................... 1 1.1Significance of aquatic macroinvertebrates and vertebrates ................................................... 1 1.2 Status of freshwater biodiversity in the world ....................................................................... 2 1.3 Status of vertebrates and macroinvertebrates in Bhutan ........................................................ 3 1.4 Study Objectives: ................................................................................................................... 4 CHAPTER 2: STUDY AREA: METHODOLOGY AND DATA ANALYSIS ....................................... 5 2.1 Study area ............................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Data Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 7 CHAPTER 3: RESULTS: MORPHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF MAJOR TAXONOMIC GROUPS OF AQUATIC MACROINVERTEBRATES ......................................................................... 8 3.1 Coleoptera .............................................................................................................................. 8 3.2 Diptera .................................................................................................................................... 8 3.3 Ephemeroptera ....................................................................................................................... 9 3.4 Odonata ................................................................................................................................ 10 3.5 Plecoptera ............................................................................................................................. 11 3.6 Trichoptera ........................................................................................................................... 11 3.7 Sampling sites ...................................................................................................................... 12 3.7.1 Khekhartechhu_Tang (TK_1) ..................................................................................... 13 3.7.2 Gengaeergangchhu_Tang (TT_2) ............................................................................... 14 3.7.3 Shingkharchhu_Ura (SC-3) ......................................................................................... 16 3.7.4 Dhurchhu_Chokhor (DC_4) ....................................................................................... 18 3.7.5 Urukchhu_Chumme (URC-5) ..................................................................................... 20 3.7.6 Chummechhu_Chumey (CC_6) .................................................................................. 22 3.8 Synthesis of results ............................................................................................................... 23 3.8.1 Diversity of macroinvertebrates at different sampling sites. ...................................... 24 CHAPTER 4: WAYFORWARD AND CONCLUSION ....................................................................... 26 4.1 Wayforward .......................................................................................................................... 26 4.2 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 26 Reference .................................................................................................................................... 27 Annexure I Sampling Protocol for Diversity of Stream Macroinvertebrates ............................. 29 Annexure II. Data sheet .............................................................................................................. 32 Checklist of identified taxa from the sample plots ..................................................................... 40 Pictorial guide to Aquatic Macroinvetebrates. ........................................................................... 43 Appendix ................................................................................................................................... 54 Aquatic Biodiversity Assessment- A pilot study in Bumthang, Bhutan V List of Figures Figure 1. Map showing the study area and permanent plot .................................................................... 5 Figure 2. Morphological view of Coleoptera .......................................................................................... 8 Figure 3. Morphological view of Diptera ............................................................................................... 9 Figure 4. Morphological view of Ephemeroptera ................................................................................. 10 Figure 5. Morphological view of Odonata ............................................................................................ 10 Figure 6. Morphological view of Plecoptera ........................................................................................ 11 Figure 7. Lateral view of Trichoptera ................................................................................................... 12 Figure 8. Number of morphotypes detected in different Orders (TK_1) .............................................. 13 Figure 9. Number of morphotypes detected in each Order (TK_1) ...................................................... 14 Figure 10. Number of individual morphotypes detected within the different Orders (TT_2) .............. 15 Figure 11. Number individual macroinvertebrates detected within the different Orders (SC_3) ......... 17 Figure12. Number of species diversity in different orders SC_3 ......................................................... 17 Figure 13. Number of individuals found in different habitats by Order for SC_3 ............................... 18 Figure 14. Number of different morphotypes detected in each Order (DC_4) ..................................... 20 Figure 15. Number of individuals captured in each Order at URC_5. ................................................. 21 Figure 16. Number of morphotypes detected in each Order at URC_5. ............................................... 21 Figure 17. Diversity in different Orders................................................................................................ 23 Figure 18. Number of morphotypes identified at each sampling site. .................................................. 24 Figure 19. Diversity of species at different sampling sites. .................................................................. 25 List of Tables Table 1. Number of families and morphotypes in each Orders(TK_1 ) ............................................... 13 Table 2. Number of families and morphotypes by different orders TT-2 ............................................. 15 Table 3. Number of families and morphotypes by orders (SC_3) ........................................................ 17 Table 4. Number of families and morphotypes by order (DC_4) ......................................................... 19 Table 5. Summary of the resolution of identification for taxa. ............................................................. 24 List of Plates Plate 1. Sampling site TK_1 ................................................................................................................. 12 Plate 2. Sampling site TT_2 .................................................................................................................. 14 Plate 3. Sampling site SC_3 .................................................................................................................. 16 Plate 4. Sampling site DC_4 ................................................................................................................. 18 Plate 5. Sampling site URC_5 .............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks Bioblitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks BioBlitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event Natural Resource Report NPS/GOGA/NRR—2016/1147 ON THIS PAGE Photograph of BioBlitz participants conducting data entry into iNaturalist. Photograph courtesy of the National Park Service. ON THE COVER Photograph of BioBlitz participants collecting aquatic species data in the Presidio of San Francisco. Photograph courtesy of National Park Service. The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks BioBlitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event Natural Resource Report NPS/GOGA/NRR—2016/1147 Elizabeth Edson1, Michelle O’Herron1, Alison Forrestel2, Daniel George3 1Golden Gate Parks Conservancy Building 201 Fort Mason San Francisco, CA 94129 2National Park Service. Golden Gate National Recreation Area Fort Cronkhite, Bldg. 1061 Sausalito, CA 94965 3National Park Service. San Francisco Bay Area Network Inventory & Monitoring Program Manager Fort Cronkhite, Bldg. 1063 Sausalito, CA 94965 March 2016 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 Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Zootaxa: Description of the Larva and Pupa of Potamyia Phaidra
    Zootaxa 1357: 21–29 (2006) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ ZOOTAXA 1357 Copyright © 2006 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) Description of the larva and pupa of Potamyia phaidra Malicky and Chantaramongkol (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae) from southern Thailand TAENG ON PROMMI1, SURAKRAI PERMKAM2 & ROBERT W. SITES3* 1Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Thailand. E-mail: [email protected] 2Department of Pest Management, Faculty of Natural Resources, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Thai- land. E-mail: [email protected] 3Enns Entomology Museum, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected] *Corresponding author Abstract Larvae and pupae of Potamyia phaidra Malicky and Chantaramongkol (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae) were collected from montane streams in southern Thailand. Pupal identifications were based on genitalic features in common with described adults, and larvae were associated with the pupae. Herein, the final larval instar and pupa are described, diagnosed, and figured. Key words: Trichoptera, Hydropsychidae, Potamyia phaidra, larva, pupa, description, Thailand Introduction Southern Thailand is topographically diverse with flat agricultural regions punctuated by disjunct mountain ranges and associated waterfalls and streams. These numerous lotic systems harbor a diverse aquatic insect fauna. Our taxonomic understanding of these insects is very poor, especially of the immature stages. In one of very few papers addressing this fauna, Sites et al. (2001) provided keys and notes on the immatures of the families and genera of mayflies (Ephemeroptera) of the southernmost 10 provinces of Thailand. No documentation of the immature stages of Trichoptera exists for this region, nor for any other region of Thailand.
    [Show full text]
  • Data Quality, Performance, and Uncertainty in Taxonomic Identification for Biological Assessments
    J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 2008, 27(4):906–919 Ó 2008 by The North American Benthological Society DOI: 10.1899/07-175.1 Published online: 28 October 2008 Data quality, performance, and uncertainty in taxonomic identification for biological assessments 1 2 James B. Stribling AND Kristen L. Pavlik Tetra Tech, Inc., 400 Red Brook Blvd., Suite 200, Owings Mills, Maryland 21117-5159 USA Susan M. Holdsworth3 Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, US Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Mail Code 4503T, Washington, DC 20460 USA Erik W. Leppo4 Tetra Tech, Inc., 400 Red Brook Blvd., Suite 200, Owings Mills, Maryland 21117-5159 USA Abstract. Taxonomic identifications are central to biological assessment; thus, documenting and reporting uncertainty associated with identifications is critical. The presumption that comparable results would be obtained, regardless of which or how many taxonomists were used to identify samples, lies at the core of any assessment. As part of a national survey of streams, 741 benthic macroinvertebrate samples were collected throughout the eastern USA, subsampled in laboratories to ;500 organisms/sample, and sent to taxonomists for identification and enumeration. Primary identifications were done by 25 taxonomists in 8 laboratories. For each laboratory, ;10% of the samples were randomly selected for quality control (QC) reidentification and sent to an independent taxonomist in a separate laboratory (total n ¼ 74), and the 2 sets of results were compared directly. The results of the sample-based comparisons were summarized as % taxonomic disagreement (PTD) and % difference in enumeration (PDE). Across the set of QC samples, mean values of PTD and PDE were ;21 and 2.6%, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017
    Washington Natural Heritage Program List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017 The following list of animals known from Washington is complete for resident and transient vertebrates and several groups of invertebrates, including odonates, branchipods, tiger beetles, butterflies, gastropods, freshwater bivalves and bumble bees. Some species from other groups are included, especially where there are conservation concerns. Among these are the Palouse giant earthworm, a few moths and some of our mayflies and grasshoppers. Currently 857 vertebrate and 1,100 invertebrate taxa are included. Conservation status, in the form of range-wide, national and state ranks are assigned to each taxon. Information on species range and distribution, number of individuals, population trends and threats is collected into a ranking form, analyzed, and used to assign ranks. Ranks are updated periodically, as new information is collected. We welcome new information for any species on our list. Common Name Scientific Name Class Global Rank State Rank State Status Federal Status Northwestern Salamander Ambystoma gracile Amphibia G5 S5 Long-toed Salamander Ambystoma macrodactylum Amphibia G5 S5 Tiger Salamander Ambystoma tigrinum Amphibia G5 S3 Ensatina Ensatina eschscholtzii Amphibia G5 S5 Dunn's Salamander Plethodon dunni Amphibia G4 S3 C Larch Mountain Salamander Plethodon larselli Amphibia G3 S3 S Van Dyke's Salamander Plethodon vandykei Amphibia G3 S3 C Western Red-backed Salamander Plethodon vehiculum Amphibia G5 S5 Rough-skinned Newt Taricha granulosa
    [Show full text]
  • Trichoptera:Hydropsychidae) Based on DNA and Morphological Evidence Christy Jo Geraci National Museum on Natural History, Smithsonian Institute
    Clemson University TigerPrints Publications Biological Sciences 3-2010 Defining the Genus Hydropsyche (Trichoptera:Hydropsychidae) Based on DNA and Morphological Evidence Christy Jo Geraci National Museum on Natural History, Smithsonian Institute Xin Zhou University of Guelph John C. Morse Clemson University, [email protected] Karl M. Kjer Rutgers University - New Brunswick/Piscataway Follow this and additional works at: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/bio_pubs Part of the Biology Commons Recommended Citation Please use publisher's recommended citation. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Biological Sciences at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in Publications by an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact [email protected]. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc., 2010, 29(3):918–933 ’ 2010 by The North American Benthological Society DOI: 10.1899/09-031.1 Published online: 29 June 2010 Defining the genus Hydropsyche (Trichoptera:Hydropsychidae) based on DNA and morphological evidence Christy Jo Geraci1 Department of Entomology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20013-7012 USA Xin Zhou2 Biodiversity Institute of Ontario, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 Canada John C. Morse3 Department of Entomology, Soils, and Plant Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina 29634 USA Karl M. Kjer4 Department of Ecology, Evolution and Natural Resources, School of Environmental and Biological Sciences, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901 USA Abstract. In this paper, we review the history of Hydropsychinae genus-level classification and nomenclature and present new molecular evidence from mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) and nuclear large subunit ribosomal ribonucleic acid (28S) markers supporting the monophyly of the genus Hydropsyche.
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Conservation Plan Benton Lake National Wildlife
    Glossary accessible—Pertaining to physical access to areas breeding habitat—Environment used by migratory and activities for people of different abilities, es- birds or other animals during the breeding sea- pecially those with physical impairments. son. A.D.—Anno Domini, “in the year of the Lord.” canopy—Layer of foliage, generally the uppermost adaptive resource management (ARM)—The rigorous layer, in a vegetative stand; mid-level or under- application of management, research, and moni- story vegetation in multilayered stands. Canopy toring to gain information and experience neces- closure (also canopy cover) is an estimate of the sary to assess and change management activities. amount of overhead vegetative cover. It is a process that uses feedback from research, CCP—See comprehensive conservation plan. monitoring, and evaluation of management ac- CFR—See Code of Federal Regulations. tions to support or change objectives and strate- CO2—Carbon dioxide. gies at all planning levels. It is also a process in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)—Codification of which the Service carries out policy decisions the general and permanent rules published in the within a framework of scientifically driven ex- Federal Register by the Executive departments periments to test predictions and assumptions and agencies of the Federal Government. Each inherent in management plans. Analysis of re- volume of the CFR is updated once each calendar sults helps managers decide whether current year. management should continue as is or whether it compact—Montana House bill 717–Bill to Ratify should be modified to achieve desired conditions. Water Rights Compact. alternative—Reasonable way to solve an identi- compatibility determination—See compatible use.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Parapsyche Species (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae: Arctopsychinae) of Western North America
    Zootaxa 4057 (4): 451–489 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2015 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4057.4.1 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:1EF572F1-5038-4032-9065-F6FD3D51DC0F Parapsyche species (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae: Arctopsychinae) of western North America DONALD R. GIVENS Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management, C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity; Campus Delivery 1177; Colorado State University; Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA. E-mail: [email protected] Table of contents Abstract . 451 Introduction . 451 Material and methods . 452 Genus diagnosis. 453 Diagnosis and discussion of species . 453 Parapsyche almota Ross 1938 . 453 Parapsyche elsis Milne 1936 . 458 Parapsyche extensa Denning 1949a . 463 Parapsyche spinata Denning 1949b . 467 Parapsyche turbinata Schmid 1968 . 471 Keys to western North American species of Parapsyche . 485 Acknowledgements . 487 References . 487 Abstract The adult female, pupa, and larva of the 5 western North American species of the arctopsychine genus Parapsyche—P. almota Ross 1938, P. elsis Milne 1936, P. extensa Denning 1949a, P. spinata Denning 1949b, and P. turbinata Schmid 1968—are reviewed. The female and larva of P. extensa are described for the first time. The larvae of P. spinata and P. turbinata are described for the first time. The chaetotaxy of the larval forms of western North American Parapsyche is discussed and scanning electron micrographs are presented. Keys to the females, known pupae, and larvae are provided. Distributional and biological data are also included. Key words: caddisfly taxonomy, description, chaetotaxonomy, larval keys Introduction This study initially focused on the association of the western North American larvae and adult females of Parapsyche extensa Denning 1949a, P.
    [Show full text]
  • In Baltic Amber 85
    Overview and descriptions of fossil stoneflies (Plecoptera) in Baltic amber 85 Entomologie heute 22 (2010): 85-97 Overview and Descriptions of Fossil Stoneflies (Plecoptera) in Baltic Amber Übersicht und Beschreibungen von fossilen Steinfliegen (Plecoptera) im Baltischen Bernstein CELESTINE CARUSO & WILFRIED WICHARD Summary: Three new fossil species of stoneflies (Plecoptera: Nemouridae and Leuctridae) from Eocene Baltic amber are being described: Zealeuctra cornuta n. sp., Lednia zilli n. sp., and Podmosta attenuata n. sp.. Extant species of these three genera are found in Eastern Asia and in the Nearctic region. It is very probably that the genera must have been widely spread across the northern hemisphere in the Cretaceous period, before Europe was an archipelago in Eocene. The current state of knowledge about the seventeen Plecoptera species of Baltic amber is shortly presented. Due to discovered homonymies, the following nomenclatural corrections are proposed: Leuctra fusca Pictet, 1856 in Leuctra electrofusca Caruso & Wichard, 2010 and Nemoura affinis Berendt, 1856 in Nemoura electroaffinis Caruso & Wichard, 2010. Keywords: Fossil insects, fossil Plecoptera, Eocene, paleobiogeography Zusammenfassung: In dieser Arbeit werden drei neue fossile Steinfliegen-Arten (Plecoptera: Nemouridae und Leuctridae) des Baltischen Bernsteins beschrieben: Zealeuctra cornuta n. sp., Lednia zilli n. sp., Podmosta attenuata n. sp.. Rezente Arten der drei Gattungen sind in Ostasien und in der nearktischen Region nachgewiesen. Sehr wahrscheinlich breiteten sich die Gattungen in der Krei- dezeit über die nördliche Hemisphäre aus, noch bevor Europa im Eozän ein Archipel war. Der gegenwärtige Kenntnisstand über die siebzehn Plecoptera Arten des Baltischen Bernsteins wird kurz dargelegt. Wegen bestehender Homonymien werden folgende nomenklatorische Korrekturen vorgenommen: Leuctra fusca Pictet, 1856 in Leuctra electrofusca Caruso & Wichard, 2010 und Nemoura affinis Berendt, 1856 in Nemoura electroaffinis Caruso & Wichard, 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Thesis the Assimti...Ation and Elwination of Cesium By
    THESIS THE ASSIMTI...ATION AND ELWINATION OF CESIUM BY FRESHWATER INVERTEBRATES Submitted by Tracy M. Tostowaryk Graduate Degree Program in Ecology In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Master of Science Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Fall 2000 QL 3bS.3b'5" .lb11 :2.0DO COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY November 6, 2000 WE HEREBY RECOMMEND THAT THE THESIS PREPARED UNDER OUR SUPERVISION BY TRACY M. TOSTOWARYK ENTITLED "THE ASSIMILATION AND ELIMINATION OF CESIUM BY FRESHWATER INVERTEBRATES" BE ACCEPTED AS FULFILLING IN PART REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE. Adviser Co-Adviser ii COLORADO STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES ABSTRACT OF THESIS THE ASSIMILATION AND ELIMINATION OF CESIUM BY FRESHWATER INVERTEBRATES Freshwater invertebrates are important vectors of radioactive cesium e34Cs and 137CS) in aquatic food webs, yet little is known about their cesium :uptake and loss kinetics. This study provides a detailed investigation of cesium assimilation and elimination by freshwater invertebrates. Using five common freshwater invertebrates (Gammarus lacustris, Anisoptera sp. nymphs, Claassenia sabulosa and Megarcys signata nymphs, and Orconetes sp.), a variety of food types (oligochaete worms, mayfly nymphs and algae) and six temperature treatments (3.5 to 30°C), the following hypotheses were tested: 1) cesium elimination rates are a positive function of water temperature; 2) cesium elimination rates increase with decreasing body size; 3) assimilation efficiencies range between 0.6 and 0.8 for diet items low in clay. Cesium loss exhibited first order, non-linear kinetics, best described by a two component exponential model. Cesium assimilation efficiencies were higher for invertebrates fed oligochaetes (0.77) and algae (0.80) than those fed mayfly nymphs (0.20).
    [Show full text]
  • Pseudotsuga Menziesii
    SPECIAL PUBLICATION 4 SEPTEMBER 1982 INVERTEBRATES OF THE H.J. ANDREWS EXPERIMENTAL FOREST, WESTERN CASCADE MOUNTAINS, OREGON: A SURVEY OF ARTHROPODS ASSOCIATED WITH THE CANOPY OF OLD-GROWTH Pseudotsuga Menziesii D.J. Voegtlin FORUT REJEARCH LABORATORY SCHOOL OF FORESTRY OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY Since 1941, the Forest Research Laboratory--part of the School of Forestry at Oregon State University in Corvallis-- has been studying forests and why they are like they are. A staff or more than 50 scientists conducts research to provide information for wise public and private decisions on managing and using Oregons forest resources and operating its wood-using industries. Because of this research, Oregons forests now yield more in the way of wood products, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Wood products are harvested, processed, and used more efficiently. Employment, productivity, and profitability in industries dependent on forests also have been strengthened. And this research has helped Oregon to maintain a quality environment for its people. Much research is done in the Laboratorys facilities on the campus. But field experiments in forest genetics, young- growth management, forest hydrology, harvesting methods, and reforestation are conducted on 12,000 acres of School forests adjacent to the campus and on lands of public and private cooperating agencies throughout the Pacific Northwest. With these publications, the Forest Research Laboratory supplies the results of its research to forest land owners and managers, to manufacturers and users of forest products, to leaders of government and industry, and to the general public. The Author David J. Voegtlin is Assistant Taxonomist at the Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, Illinois.
    [Show full text]
  • Rationales for Animal Species Considered for Species of Conservation Concern, Sequoia National Forest
    Rationales for Animal Species Considered for Species of Conservation Concern Sequoia National Forest Prepared by: Wildlife Biologists and Biologist Planner Regional Office, Sequoia National Forest and Washington Office Enterprise Program For: Sequoia National Forest June 2019 In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992.
    [Show full text]