QUANTITATIVE ANALYSES OF PERIPHYTON BIOMASS AND IDENTIFICATION OF PERIPHYTON TAXA IN THE TRIBUTARIES OF OTSEGO LAKE, NY IN RELA-riON TO SELECTED ENVIRONMENTAL PARAMETERS
Stefanie H. Komorowski
Biological Field Station Cooperstown, New York
Occasional Paper No. 26. July, 1994
Biology Department State University College at Oneonta THIS MANUSCRIPT IS NOT A FORMAL PUBLICATION
The information contained herein may not be cited or reproduced without permission of the author or the S.U.N.Y. Oneonta Biology Department. This contribution has been modified from a NYSDEC Bureau of Fisheries, Safety and Health Manual provided by Mr. George Seeley, NYSDEC Fish Propagation Unit. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract i
Table of Contents...... iii
Introduction
Nutrient Concentrations 1
Water Quality 8
Physical Parameters 10
Macroinvertebrate Grazers 11
Seasonality ...... 12
Sampling 13
Objectives ...... 14
Methods
Selection and Characterization of Streams 14
Description and Use of Artificial SUbstrates.. . 15
Collection, Preparation, and Analysis of Samples 16
Monthly and Seasonal Average Data for Biomass and Parameters 18
Data Preparation ...... 18
Calculation of Bedrock and Soil Type Percents 19
Results
Stream Characterization ...... 20
Biomass , 22
Factors Affecting Periphyton Growth 27
iii Periphyton Taxa 31
Identification of Bedrock and Soil Type in the Otsego Lake
Watershed , 38
Land Use 40
Discussion
Overview...... 42
Stream Characterization , 42
Affects of the Parameters on Periphyton Biomass 43
Identified Periphyton Genera and Their Seasonal Succession 59
Bedrock and Soil Correlations 62
Affects of the Streams on Otsego Lake ...... •...... 64
References ...... 66
Appendices .• ...... •...... • ...... 71
iv ABSTRACT
Nine tributaries to Otsego Lake, Otsego County, NY; and the
Susquehanna River, its outlet, were studied to gain an understanding of the nutrient concentrations, periphytic biomass and taxa, and macroinvertebrate grazer populations. Specific streams were chosen based on the land use practices in their drainage basins. Four streams had watersheds dominated by agricultural activities. They generally had the highest yearly average of nutrient concentrations and periphyton biomass. The combined yearly averages of T-P04 equaled .057 mgtl, N03 equaled 1.08 mgtl, chlorophyll a equaled .691 mglm2/d, and ash-free dry weight equaled 133.86 mgtm2/d. Four other streams had watersheds that were primarily forested. They generally had a lower yearly average of nutrient concentrations and periphyton biomass.
The combined yearly averages of T-P04 equaled .037 mgtl, N03 equaled .46 mgtl, chlorophyll a equaled .314 mgtm 2/d, and ash-free dry weight equaled
2 58.47 mgtm /d. One stream 'flowed through an urban area. The T-P04 yearly average concentration was high in this stream (.334 mgtl). Nitrate and biomass yearly averages were low (N0 3 equaled .37 mgtl, chlorophyll a equaled .032 mgtm 2/d, and ash-free dry weight equaled 16.28 mg/m2/d). Other parameters that were measured in the streams were chlorides, turbidity, velocity, and temperature.
Temporal patterns were considered important factors affecting stream ecology throughout the year because our seasons vary greatly. The change of seasons initiated variations of nutrient concentrations and periphyton biomass and taxa. The highest seasonal averages of T.P04 and N03 in the agricultural streams occurred during the winter and in the forested stream in the summer. Periphyton biomass in the agricultural and forested streams was highest in spring. At the same time an increase in similar periphyton taxa communities and numbers of genera identified in each stream were found.
The initiation of agricultural best management practices (BMP's) in the agricultural areas of the Otsego Lake Watershed will reduce the potential of soil erosion and high nutrient concentrations entering the lake.
ii INTRODUCTION
In order to study the primary productivity, biomass, and diversity of periphyton taxa in streams, it is essential to learn what factors influence periphyton and how they effect their ecology. In this work, nine tributaries to
Otsego Lake, NY; 42 Q 43'N - 73Q 57'W (Iannuzzi 1991) and the Susquehanna
River, its outlet, were studied (Figure 1). Factors that were considered influential to periphyton ecology included nutrient concentrations, water chemistry, physical variables, and macroinvertebrate population densities, all of which change seasonally throughout the year.
The term periphyton has various definitions depending on the author.
The meanings range 'from simple, •... microfloral growth upon substrata" (Wetzel
1983) to more complex, .... zoogleal and filamentous bacteria, attached protozoa, rotifers, and algae, and also the free-living microorganisms found swimming, creeping, or lodged among the attached forms" (American Public
Health Association (APHA)1989). The definition best suited for trlis study includes the filamentous blue-green algae, filamentous green algae, and diatoms attached to artificial and natural substrates.
Nutrient Concentrations
Nutrient concentrations varied between the ten study sites due to storm events, land use practices in the stream basins, and characteristics of bedrock and soil type including soil erodability. Fluctuations of nutrient concentrations have an effect on the growth of periphyton.
Land use practices dominant in the Otsego Lake Watershed are (9 )
( 6)
( 5 )
( 2 )
(1) SUSQCEHANNA RIVER
Figure 1. Map of the Otsego Lake Watershed showing the names, locations, and numbers of the studied streams.
2 agriculture and forest as shown in Figure 2 (Sohacki 1974; Harman 1990; and
Iannuzzi 1991). Streams flowing through these agricultural areas tend to have higher nutrient concentrations than streams flowing through forested areas.
Singer ~ al.. (1975), Fuller (1987), and Bushong ~ .al., (1989) support this statement by suggesting that the fertilizers farmers use on the land will eventually reach the streams. Also, since the land has often been clear-cut for fields, less vegetation remains to incorporate the nutrients as they make their way to streams (Bushong mal., 1989). According to Bushong mal., (1989) the increase in nutrient concentrations of streams flowing through agricultural areas is reflected in the growth of periphyton. Sections of streams near cultivated fields usually have high densities and a large biomass of periphyton.
Conversely, streams flowing through forested areas usually are well shaded and have lower nutrient concentrations because most of the vegetation surrounding them fix any nutrients that are released when a storm event occurs
(Fuller 1987; Bushong mat., 1989; and McDiffett ~ al.. 1989). Urban land use is also present in the Otsego Lake Watershed. Wetzel (1983) stated that changes in urbanization are almost directly proportional to the increases in phosphorus concentrations of surface water. Sources of phosphorus include fertilizers from lawns, drainage water from storm sewers, and leaves (Wetzel
1983). This is a concern because one stream in this study flows through the
Village of Cooperstown and high concentrations of nutrients enter the stream quickly during precipitation events (Albright 1993).
Storm events influence periphyton growth, biomass, population densities, and taxa by adding nutrients to streams and by tearing old periphyton
3 '---I ! Iwaterbodies and wetlands
settlements
III agriculture
~:'::'~~forest and b~Jshland
Figure 2. Map of the Otsego Lake Watershed showing land cover. (Modified from Harman 1990)
4 filaments from the substrate (Fuller 1987 and Bushong .e.t a.t.. 1989). Heavy
rainfall causes the nutrient concentrations to increase by flushing the nutrients
from the fields into the streams (Fuller 1987). This increase in nutrient
concentration lasts for just a short time interval as described by McDiffett .e.t ai.,
(1989). As the storm continues, the nutrient concentrations increase followed
by an increase in the discharge of the stream. The nutrient peak occurs before
maximum discharge is reached. Once the peak is attained, the concentrations
begin to decrease during the latter stages of the storm event because the
nutrients, mostly from surface runoff, have been previously washed into the
streams.
Heavy rains cause strong currents and increase water velocities. In this
situation algal mats are ripped away which results in a decrease in diatom
populations and biomass of filamentous algae (Bushong .e.t ai., 1989; Horner .e.t at., 1990; Peterson .e.tai., 1990; and Dodds 1991). Biggs .e.tat., (1989) found
that disruption of periphytic mats by floods occurred not only because of the
shearing stress of the water velocity, but also from instability of the natural
substrate, and scouring action of suspended solids. Algal species differ in
attachment strength to the substrate depending on the current regime to which
they are adapted (Horner .e.t ai., 1990). Diatoms can attach themselves to the
substrate by a stalk, raphe, or mucilaginous pad to resist removal by strong
currents (Stevenson 1982). The irregular surface of the natural rock substrate
provides protection for diatoms and filamentous algae from the stress of water
velocity (Nielson .e.t .al., 1984 and Peterson .e.t .al., 1990). Cladophora, a filamentous genus, has adapted to fast water velocities by exploiting the texture
5 o'f rock in stream beds. Dudley.e.t ill., (1991) suggests that the pits and crevices in rocks serve as protection for algal basal filaments. Small propagules attach themselves in these microhabitats which create environments safe from scouring by fast currents and macroinvertebrate grazers. When ideal conditions exist, the propagules will grow into new mature filaments.
The types of bedrock in the nine stream basins tributary to Otsego Lake include shale and limestone shown in Figure 3 (Rickard .e.t £1., 1964 and
Iannuzzi 1991). A detailed description of each bedrock type is given in
Appendix A. The water chemistry of streams with shale bedrock does not change greatly since shale does not readily dissolve (Graham 1992).
Limestone is more easily dissolved. Calcium and magnesium ions are released from the limestone and act as buffering agents (Graham 1992).
Soils can influence stream water quality most often by way of runoff. The land use practices and soil characteristics determine the amount of nutrients that may wash into streams, which is associated with erosion.
Soil erosion is caused by rain, wind, and water freezing and thawing which results in high nutrient loss from the upper soils especially from farm lands (Brady 1974). The moisture content of soils in a stream1s basin before a storm event and the intensity of the storm event determine, in part, the amount of water, nutrients, and sediment that will reach the stream (Singer .e.t £1., 1975).
Generally, during a storm of low intensity on dry soil there will be very little runoff, added nutrients, or sediment concentrations in the stream water (Singer
.e.t £1., 1975). Conversely, high intensity storms for long periods on wet soils will cause an increase in runoff, nutrient concentrations, and sediment
6 HAY DE.N CREEK
(15)
(6 ) 4.8 Jan
(5) SHALE BEDROCK
C· :·:;-1 Dso EIJ Dot
(4 ) [t'-.,~~I p:::::[j.. " . Deh Sby
LIMESTONE BEDROCK
(2 ) Due DDon FVPU Dee
8--1 Dk DDdb u:"':;;'I. .. '\.t'-1 D d J
_Det E0;:g Dr
Figure 3. Map of the Otsego Lake Watershed showing the bedrock types in each stream basin, which is identified by the main stream that flows through it. (Modified from Rickard .e1.aL 1964)
7 concentrations in the stream water (Singer m.a.l.. 1975). In correlation with land
use practices, undisturbed, vegetated land surrounding a stream stores water
and slowly releases it over time (Power m.al., 1988). Power m.a!., (1988) also
stated. that land use disturbances, in which much of the vegetation has been
removed, decrease the water-holding capacity of the soil allowing larger
volumes of water to enter a stream at a faster rate. This, of course, depends in
part on soil conditions before a storm event. Figure 4 shows the distribution of
six general soil types that have been identified in the Otsego Lake Watershed
(Morrrs 1993). The soils are characterized into two groups based on the pH
range of each type, those "more" acidic (pH range of soil types 1, 8, and 2 =
4.2 - 7.8) and those "less" acidic (pH range of soil types 11, 5, and 6 = 5.3
8.4)(Morris 1990). Appendix B explains the calculation of the averaged pH
ranges.
Water Quality
Two parameters of water quality that were measured in this study include nutrient concentrations and turbidity. Two nutrients that are of most concern are phosphorus and nitrogen. Both are essential to periphyton in the synthesis of DNA, enzymes, vitamins, hormones, amino acids, and energy during photosynthesis (Wetzel 1983 and Keeton m .a.l.. 1986). Excess amounts of these nutrients can cause an overgrowth of periphyton which has unfavorable impacts on both economics and water quality. An abundance of periphyton growth, Cladophora, for example, can inhibit recreational activities such as fishing and boating, may decrease the concentrations of dissolved oxygen in
8 (15 )
(9)
(6 )
(5) 4.8 Jon
(4)
SOIL :l:1.I:E MAJOR SOILS pH JWjGES [...... g 1 Lordstmm-Mardin-Bath 4.2 - 7.8 (2 ) ~ Chenango-Valois-Howard 4.4 - 7.8
fjf~~r~}lj 2 Mongaup-willdin-Levbath 4.5 - 6.2
f-=-=-~~ 11 Wayland-Raynhan-Canandaigua 5.3 - 8.2
I: :::::::: :1 5 Lansing-Conesus-Honeyoye 5.3 - 8.4
I I 6 Honeyoye-Farmington-Wassaic 5.4 - 8.0
Figure 4. Map of the Otsego Lake Watershed showing the general soil types in each stream basin, which is identified by the main stream that flows through it. (Modified from Morris 1993)
9 the water during night-time respiration and during decomposition when the filaments die, and may give off foul odors during the decomposition process
(Pitcairn m2.1., 1973). Periphyton are considered indicators of water quality because they can quickly respond to changes in their environment (Reisen m at., 1970; Nielson m .aJ,., 1984; and APHA 1989). Since these organisms readily incorporate nutrients, the study of biomass over a long period of time may indicate if the water is being polluted with excess nutrients (Nielson mgj.,
1984 and Welch mat., 1988).
Turbidity is an optical property of water which measures the scattering and absorption of light by particulate matter (Monitek 1990). Particulate matter
is com posed of u ••• discrete aggregations of matter... U wh ich vary in particle size, shape, and color (Monitek 1990). Turbidity may reduce the amount of light that reach periphyton. High turbidity measurements usually correspond with storm events.
Physical Parameters
Two important physical parameters to consider that influence the biomass and taxonomic structure of periphyton are solar light and water temperature (Stevenson 1982; Fuller 1987; Bushong mgj., 1989; and Munn m ill., 1989). It is the combination of both that impact periphyton seasonally.
Biomass of periphyton may be higher in shallow streams in areas that have no vegetative canopy with warm water temperatures as compared to deeper streams with dense canopy cover, and lower water temperatures (Munn mgj.,
1989). Fuller (1987) states that streams without vegetative cover tend to have
10 higher amounts of algal biomass than streams that are shaded. Jasper m.al.,
(1986) found a high correlation between light and photosynthetic rates; as light levels increased chlorophyil a measurements followed. Conversely, as light levels and water temperatures decreased, the growth rate slowed down because periphyton do not require as much energy in the winter as in the summer (Bushong mal.. 1989). Each of the ten sites studied in this experiment have different percentages of canopy cover.
Blum (1957) and Whitford mai., (1963) found that changes in water temperature initiated succession in periphyton assemblages from season to season.
Macroinvertebrate Grazers
Periphyton are a food source for macroinvertebrate grazers (Robinson m ai., 1986 and Hill ftl ill., 1988a). Their feeding may have an effect on the biomass of periphyton. Studies by Hill .e1 ill., (1987, 1988a), Dudley ftl ill.,
(1991), and Steinman .e1 ai., (1991) indicated that grazing by invertebrates can reduce the biomass, distribution, primary productivity, and community structure of periphyton. Ungrazed substrates continue through normal succession of early diatom dominance to later dominance of filamentous algal tufts (Lamberti
.e1 ai., 1983). However, grazed substrates remain in the early successional stages eXhibiting a single layer of diatoms and only propagules of filamentous algae (Lamberti .e1 ill., 1983). The once dominant, loosely attached species give way to the tightly attached prostrate species in an area that has been grazed by the macroinvertebrates (Hill.e1al., 1987 and Steinman .e.tal., 1991).
11 Seasonality
The factors just described, nutrient concentrations, water quality, physical variables, and presence of macroinvertebrate grazers, vary in their influence on periphyton biomass throughout the year due to the change of seasons. Figure 5 is a flow chart showing seasonality as the ultimate regulator of these factors and, in turn, biomass.
SEASONALITY ~~ PHYSICAL PARAMETERS PRECIPITATION (temperature and light) I STREAM STREAM STREAM NUTRIENTS TURBIDITY VELOCITY (phosphorus) (nitrogen) I PERIPHYTON BIOMASS
Figure 5. Diagram showing how seasonality can be the ultimate regulator of the selected parameters that simultaneously affect periphyton biomass.
The differences between the seasons can be quite extreme locally, since
Otsego Lake is located in the temperate zone. These continuous changes influence the growth rate, biomass, and taxonomic structure of periphyton
12 during a particular time of year. Nutrient concentrations are higher in streams during the rainy seasons because of the increase in surface runoff (Fuller
1987), therefore, more nutrients are available to be incorporated by periphyton
for growth. During severe storm events, commonly occurring in the spring and
fall, periphyton, both filamentous and diatomaceous, may be ripped away from
the substrate which may reduce the biomass for that particular season.
According to Whitford ~ ID., (1963) periphyton species present in the streams
vary from season to season due to the changes in the duration of sunlight and
the water temperature.
Sampling
Artificial substrates were used to collect monthly samples of periphyton.
Reasons for the use of these substrates aTe:
1. Artificial substrates are more efficient to use than natural
substrates because the surface area is known, the
texture is consistent, and they are easily transported to
the lab (APHA 1989).
2. The productivity, measured by chlorophyll a and ash
free dry weight analysis, is more easily estimated from a
substrate of known area.
3. Streams can be quantitatively measured and compared
to characterize them according to periphyton species
present and water quality (Ertl 1971).
13 Objectives
The four objectives of this study were:
1. To determine if streams flowing through agricultural areas have higher nutrient concentrations than streams f!owing through forested arisas.
2. To determine if streams with high concentrations of nutrients support high periphyton biomass.
3. To characterize the streams in the Otsego Lake Watershed based on nutrient concentrations and similar taxa present.
4. To identify any impacts the streams may have on the water quality of Otsego Lake.
METHODS
Selection and Characterization of Streams
There are over 20 streams tributary to Otsego Lake. Nine were chosen for this study because they represent the diversity of streams present in the
Otsego Lake watershed and they flow throughout the year (Albright 1992). The
Susquehanna River, the outlet from Otsego Lake, was also chosen to study.
Stream diversity, for selection purposes, refers to the course of a stream flowing through either agricultural, forested, or urban areas and over limestone or shale bedrock. Criteria used to define a stream as agricultural, forested, or urban were the acreage of land use categories in the streams' basins and the yearly average nutrient concentrations.
14 Description and Use of Artificial Substrates
In order to compare the streams quantitatively, artificial substrates were used. By doing this, the area of each sample and texture of each substrate from the streams were identical. The artificial substra.te was plexiglass (Reisen .e.t al..
1970 and Peterson m. ill., 1990). Materials used to construct the plexiglass holder were slate, wood, coat hanger wire, and plastic tubing (Figure 6).
PLASTIC TUBING
PLEXIGLASS
WIRE --tt'If]
Figure 6. Sketch of artificial substrate holder.
The slate base was approximately 20 cm x 15 cm. Two blocks of wood, approximately 8 cm x 2 cm x 6 cm were attached to the top of the slate. The blocks of wood were notched on the bottom so that thin pieces of wood could be placed under them to prevent the plexiglass plates from being set against the slate. The piece of coat hanger wire, approximately 23 cm long, was snugly fitted into plastic tubing to inhibit interference of metal ions. Four plexiglass
15 plates, each 5 cm x 10 cm and having a designated area of 45 cm 2 on each side, were fed onto the plastic coated coat hanger wire. Plastic tubing, with a larger diameter, was cut into five pieces. Each piece fit tightly between each plate and between the blocks of wood and the nearest plate. This procedure was necessary to prevent the plates from scraping against each other when the water was turbulent.
Each artificial substrate holder was piaced in an area of the stream that was deep enough to completely cover the plates and where the plates could receive as much incident light as possible. The holders were oriented so that the plates were parallel to the current. When necessary, heavy rocks were put near the sides of the holders for stabilization in faster currents. During the winter months, bricks were affixed to the bottom of the slate base to add weight to prevent the holders from being carried downstream by rapid currents and ice movements. This technique was not always successful.
Collection, Preparation, and Analysis of Samples
After 28 days of incubation in the streams, the plexiglass plates were removed and replaced with clean ones. After removal, the plates were placed in individual jars with stream water. As soon as the plates were brought back to the lab the periphyton was scraped off and prepared for chlorophyll a and ash free dry weight (AFDW) analysis.
For chlorophyll a analysis, periphyton samples were ·filtered using glass fiber filters (APHA 1989). The filters were then placed in vials and frozen until analysis could be performed. The periphyton samples for AFDW analysis were
16 also placed into vials and frozen until analysis could be performed.
Procedures for both analyses were based on those found in APHA
(1989). Procedures suggested by APHA and the procedures used in this study varied slightly. For chlorophyll a analysis, each filter paper disc was ripped into small pieces and placed in the tissue grinder with 2 ml of acetone, prepared as suggested by APHA. After grinding, the slu rry was poured into a centrifuge tube and 3 ml of acetone were used to rinse out the tissue grinder.
More acetone was added to the centrifuge tube if the green color was too dark to be within the .1 - 1.00 Angstrom range APHA suggests. The slurry was clarified by centrifugation. The procedures then followed were those under
"Spectrophotometric Determination of Chlorophyll" (APHA 1989).
Before the AFDW analysis could be performed, 30 ITt I capacity fused quartz crucibles were placed in a muffle furnace at 550 QC for one hour to burn off any contaminants (Sohacki 1990). All other procedures were followed as written in APHA under "Dry and Ash-Free Dry Weight". When the crucibles were used several times, a build-up of residue developed on the inner surface.
To thoroughly clean them, the crucibles were dipped in a potassium dichromate solution, set aside for about an hour, washed with hot water and Liqui-nox, and rinsed with glass distilled water, all the while being handled with gloved hands and stainless steel tongs (Sohacki 1990). The procedures for making the acid dichromate cleaning solution can be found in APHA (1989).
17 Monthly and Seasonal Average Data for Biomass and the Parameters
Biomass monthly averages were calculated from data collected 6 June
1991 to 20 November 1991 and from 8 January 1992 to 24 June 1992. The beginning and ending dates of each collection (13 total) are shown in
Appendix C. From February 1992 to June 1992, the monthly averages for the six parameters, total phosphorus (T.P04), nitrates (N03), chlorides (CI), turbidity (TRB), velocity (VEL), and water temperature (TMP), were calculated from 1991 data. The monthly temperature averages for streams 1, 2, 6, and 20 were from 1992 data. Biomass and the other parameter data were also calculated seasonally. The collection months were divided into seasons as follows: summer = June· August, fall = September· November, winter =
February and March, and spring =April· June.
Data Preparation
The baseline and storm event data for the six parameters collected in the nine tdbutaries and the Susquehanna River were recorded in spreadsheet format using Quattro Pro (Borland International, Inc. 1992). Measurements for
T-P04 • N03 , and CI were then integrated, using Sigma Plot (Jandel Scientific 1990) to accurately account for the differences in concentrations between baseline and storm event data during each month. By using integration, the concentrations of each parameter could be calculated for days when analysis of the parameters was not performed. The average monthly concentrations, therefore, include a concentration for every day of the sampling month.
Monthly turbidity averages were obtained by averaging the turbidity for
18 any storm events that occurred within the sampling months. Monthly velocity averages were calculated from center-stream velocity measurements and discharge data. The measured velocity and discharge readings were plotted against each other for each stream to create a regression line. Average monthly discharge for each stream was obtained by integration. These monthly discharge averages were plotted by hand on the x-axis of the graph. Average monthly velocity was estimated by drawing a line from each plotted discharge point to the regression line and then over to the center-stream velocity reading on the y-axis. See Appendix 0 for an example. Monthly temperature averages were calculated from stream water readings collected either once a week, once every two weeks, or once a month, depending on season and weather conditions.
Calculation of Bedrock and Soil Type Percents
A planimeter was used to measure the areas of the bedrock and soil types in the drainage basin of the nine tributaries in Figures 3 and 4. The areas were converted to percent acres in each drainage basin in order to easily compare bedrock and soil type within each basin and between basins. Also, representing the areas by percentages absorbed any inaccurate measurement of areas that occurred while the maps were being created.
19 RESULTS
Stream Characterization
The formula used to calculate the trophic level index for each stream in order to characterize each as agricultural, forested, or urban is shown in Figure
7. The data in Table 1 used in the formula were number of agricultural and forested acres and yearly average concentrations of T-P04 and N03 .
# agricultural acres yearly ave of yearly ave of + + # forested acres rr· P04] [NOs]
TROPHIC LEVEL AGRICULTURAL STREAMS: STREAM # INDEX 17 3.94 16 2.88 20 2.62 6 2.09
FORESTED STREAMS: 15 1.23 5 1.02 9 0.97 4 0.91
URBAN STREAM: 2 1.18
Figure 7. The general trophic condition of each stream basin was calculated by using the above formula. In this way, the stream basins were characterized as agricultural or forested by comparing the individual stream indices. Higher trophic values indicate more agricultural acres than forested acres in the
stream basin and higher yearly average total phosphorus (T-P04) and nitrate
(N03) concentrations.. Stream 2 was characterized as urban because the last type of environment the stream flows through before reaching the lake is residential which is highly influential to water quality of Otsego Lake. 20 STREAM STREAH AGR'L FOR'D P04 H03 Cl TRB VEL THP CHL A AFOW , TYPR ACRES ACRES .gll IIgtl ag/1 ntu I/S °C Ig/112/d IIg/1I2/d ------20 A 5380,68 4392.45 0,090 1. 31 8.07 24. 94 0.97 10.75 0,363 109.42 16 A 5202.46 2976.12 0.051 1. 08 6.13 7.58 2.22 12,15 I. 264 193.93 17 A 4502.10 1924.88 0.056 1. 55 9,84 18.45 1. 75 11. 26 0.833 183.32 6 A 1005.53 602.14 0.031 0.39 6.98 14. 30 1. 35 9.37 0.305 48, ?7
I'\) ...... 15 F 1103.60 1529.99 0.035 0.47 5.49 7. 22 1. 75 9.80 0.653 91. 55 5 F 530.49 683.99 0.023 0.22 3.80 4. 31 l. 22 9.52 0.130 26.23 9 F 388.71 460.68 0.058 0.69 10,73 29,16 l. 75 9,45 0.228 45 .64 4 F 430.26 1015.88 0.031 0.46 4. 70 9.24 I. 59 9,82 0,255 70,45
2 u 237.98 501.15 0.334 0.37 33.42 396,48 1.24 9.64 0.032 16.28
Table 1. The values listed in this table for the agricultural and forested acres and the total phosphorus and nitrate concentrations were used in the equation in Figure 7. The yearly averages of chloride, turbidity, velocity, water temperature, chlorophyll a, and ash-free dry weight are also listed for comparison. Streams 17, 16, 20, and 6 were characterized as agricultural, streams
15, 5, 9, and 4 were characterized as forested, and stream 2 was characterized as urban. The Susquehanna River, the main outlet of the lake, was not characterized as the other streams were because this study focused mainly on the land use practices and water quality in the watershed that affect Otsego
Lake.
Biomass
Biomass of periphyton in each stream was collected monthly over a one year period from 6 June 1991 - 24 Juna 1992. However, there is a gap in the data. Measurements from the end of November 1991 to the beginning of
January 1992 could not be collected at any of the sampling sites due to high water levels, fast water velocities, and ice cover on the streams. These conditions made it impossible to find and/or keep the artificial substrate holders in the streams. There were a total of 13 collections during the year.
In some streams the monthly collections are widely spaced, temporally, due to weather conditions or at other times, the artificial substrates may have been vandalized. Streams with a total of 13 monthly collections for ci-liorophyll a and ash-free dry weight (AFDW ) include 16, 17, and 20. Stream 6 had 13 monthly collections for AFDW only (see map in Figure 1 for location and name of the streams and Figure 8 for number of collections for each stream). The other streams vary in number of collections. The calculated monthly averages of chlorophyll a and AFDW for each stream during each collection period are shown in Appendix E.
22 Number of Number of chlorophyll a AFDW Stream # Collections Collections 1 9 9 2 3 4 4 10 9 5 10 11 6 11 13 15 9 9 16 13 13 17 13 13 20 13 13
Rgure 8. Total number of collections of chlorophyll a and ash-free dry weight for each stream over the collection year. There was a maxim um of 13 collections.
The yearly averages of periphyton biomass for each stream are shown in
Table 2. Stream 16 had the highest yearly averages of chlorophyll a (1.264 mg/m 2/d) and AFDW (193.93 mg/m2/d). The lowest yearly averages of chlorophyll a and AFDW were found in stream 2 (.032 mg/m2/d and 16.28 mg/m 2/d, respectively).
23 CHL a STREAM AFDW STREAM mglm21d # mglm2ld L
1.264 16 193.93 16 0.833 17 183.32 17 0.643 15 109.42 20 0.363 20 91.55 15 0.305 6 48.77 6 0.228 9 47.65 1 0.130 5 45.64 9 0.054 1 26.23 5 0.032 2 16.28 2
T-P04 STREAM N03 STREAM CI STREAM mgll # mgt! # mgt! #
0.334 2 1.55 17 33.42 2 0.090 20 1.31 20 10.73 9 0.058 9 1.08 16 9.84 17 0.056 17 0.69 9 8.07 20 0.051 16 0.61 1 7.18 1 0.035 15 0.47 15 6.98 6 0.031 4 0.46 4 6.13 16 0.031 6 0.39 6 5.49 15 0.023 5 0.37 2 4.70 4 0.020 1 0.22 5 3.80 5
TRB STREAM VEL STREAM TMP STREAM ntu # mls # ?C #
396.48 2 2.26 15 12.15 16 29.16 9 2.22 16 11.36 1 24.94 20 1.75 17 11.26 17 18.45 17 1.75 9 10.75 20 14.30 6 1.59 4 9.82 4 9.24 4 1.53 1 9.80 15 7.58 16 1.35 6 9.64 2 7.22 15 1.24 2 9.52 5 4.31 5 1.22 5 9.37 6 3.76 1 0.97 20 9.22 9
Table 2. The yearly averages of biomass and the remaining parameters for each stream in order from highest to lowest values are shown. (Chi a = chlorophyll a, AFDW = ash-free dry weight, T-P04 = total phosphorus, N03 = nitrate. C! = chloride, TRB = turbidity, VEL = velocity, and TMP = water temperature)
24 Table 3a shows the seasonal averages of periphyton biomass for the individual streams, seasonal averages for the streams during each season, and the overall seasonal averages for these streams. The chlorophyll a seasonal averages were highest during spring for both the agricultural (1.845 mg/m 2/d) and forested streams (.627 mg/m 2/d) and highest during summer in the urban stream (.045 mg/m 2/d). Chlorophyll a seasonal averages were lowest during fall for the agricultural (.148 mglm 2/d) , forested (.151 mg/m2/d), and the urban streams (.006 mg/m 2/d). The AFDW seasonal averages were highest during spring for both the agricultural (150.15 mg/m2/d) and forested streams (64.18 mg/m 2/d) and highest during fall in the urban stream (25.63 mg/m2/d). AFDW seasonal averages were lowest during summer in -the agricultural streams
(124.22 mg/m 2/d), winter in the forested streams, (3.16 mg/m2/d) and spring in the urban stream (1.39 mglm2/d). The overall seasonal averages of chlorophyll a and AFDW in the agricultural streams (.729 mg/m 2/d and 135.45 mg/m2/d, respectively) were more than twice as high as the overall seasonal averages in the forested streams (.300 mg/m2/d and 47.04 mg/m2/d, respectively). In the urban stream, the overall seasonal averages of chlorophyll a and AFDW were low (.026 mglm2/d and 15.36 mg/m2/d, respectively).
25 CHLOROPHYLL a- mglm2/d OVERALL SEASONAL Stream # Summer Fall Winter Spring AVERAGE 17 0.537 0.204 0.713 2.036 Agricultural 16 0.451 0.037 0.980 4.035 Streams 20 0.390 0.175 0.128 0.661 6 0.260 0.177 0.234 0.646
seasonal average 0.410 0.148 0.514 1.845 0.729
15 0.443 0.149 1.638 Forested 5 0.106 0.036 0.331 St-reams 9 0.251 0.079 0.413 4 0.248 0.341 0.159 0.124
seasonal average 0.262 0.151 0.159 0.627 0.300
Urban Stream 2 0.045 0.006 0.026
ASH-FREE DRY WEIGHT - mglm2/d OVERALL SEASONAL Stream # Summer Fall Winter Spring AVERAGE 17 164.30 259.07 105.67 191.03 Agricultural 16 148.21 80.90 386.93 254.52 Streams 20 134.70 122.12 25.90 110.27 6 49.65 73.04 16.17 44.78
seasonal average 124.22 133.78 133.67 150.15 135.45
15 67.08 106.26 138.02 Forested 5 37.45 16.43 2.38 24.80 Streams 9 63.05 31.59 3.94 70.08 4 63.03 98.36 23.81
seasonal average 57.65 63.16 3.16 64.18 47.04
Urban Stream 2 19.05 25.63 1.39 15.36
Table 3a. Shown are the seasonal averages and overall seasonal averages of biomass for the individual streams as well as the characterized streams. Seasonal average is the average of the four streams for a particular season. Overall seasonal average is the result of averaging the seasonal averages to compare agricultural, forested, and urban streams through the seasons. 26 Factors Affecting Perlphyton Growth
Appendices F and G list the monthly averages for each parameter monitored; total phosphorus (T-P04), nitrates (N03), chlorides (GI), turbidity
(TRB), velocity (VEL), and temperature (TMP) in all the streams during the year.
The yearly average of the parameters for each stream is shown in Table 2.
Stream 2 had the highest concentrations of T-P04 (.334 mg/l) and CI (33.42 mgtl) as well as the highest TRB average (396.48 ntu) during the year. Stream
17 had the highest concentration of N03 (1.55 mg/l), stream 15 had the highest average VEL (2.26 m/s), and stream 16 had the highest average TMP (12.15
QC) during the year. Stream 1 had the lowest yearly averages of T-P04 (.020 mg/l) and TRB (3.76 ntu) measurements during the year. Stream 5 had the lowest yearly averages of N03 and CI concentrations (.22 and 3.80 mg/l, respectively). The lowest yearly average VEL was in stream 20 (.97 m/s) and stream 9 had the lowest yearly average TMP (9.22 QC).
Tables 3b, 3c, and 3d show the seasonal averages of the T-P04, N03,
CI, TRB, VEL, and TMP measurements during the year between the agricultural, forested, and urban streams. For each parameter the seasonal averages in the individual streams, seasonal averages for the streams during each season, and the overall seasonal averages for these streams are given.
In Table 3b, the highest seasonal averages of T-P04 were during winter in the agricultural streams (.068 mgtl) and during summer in the forested streams
(.047 mg/l) and the urban stream (.680 mg/l). The lowest· seasonal averages of
T-P04 were during spring in the agricultural streams (.045 mg/l), fall in the forested streams (.026 mgll), and winter in the urban stream (.095 mgtl). The
27 TOTAL PHOSPHORUS - mgtl OVERALL SEASONAL Stream # Summer Fall Winter Spring AVERAGE 17 0.055 0.054 0.054 0.055 Ag ricultu ral 16 0.067 0.059 0.034 0.019 Streams 20 0.090 0.071 0.137 0.078 6 0.037 0.022 0.035 0.028
seasonal average 0.062 0.052 0.068 0.045 0.057
------.------.~~------~-~~.-----.--.-~--.------&------15 0.038 0.027 0.034 0.039 Forested 5 0.028 0.020 0.017 0.021 Streams 9 0.089 0.033 0.040 0.042 4 0.032 0.025 0.034 0.033 seasonal average 0.047 0.026 0.031 0.034 0.035
Urban Stream 2 0.680 0.103 0.095 0.146 0.256
NITRATE - mgll OVERALL SEASONAL Stream # Summer Fall Winter Spring AVERAGE 17 1.06 1.21 2.55 2.06 Agricultural 16 0.73 0.83 2.16 1.19 Streams 20 0.67 0.84 2.47 2.09 6 0.34 0.21 0.66 0.49
seasonal average 0.70 0.77 1.96 1.46 1.22
------.--~.-.------.-.----.------_.------.----._------.------.-- 15 0.45 0.21 0.79 0.56 Forested 5 0.29 0.08 0.32 0.20 Streams 9 0.69 0.29 0.68 1.10 4 0.72 0.26 0.38 0.29
seasonal average 0.54 0.21 0.54 0.54 0.46
Urban Stream 2 0.49 0.24 0.40 0.27 0.35
Table 3b. Shown are the seasonal averages and overall seasonal averages of total phosphorus and nitrates for the individual streams as well as the characterized streams. Seasonal average is the average of the four streams for a particular season. Overall seasonal average is the result of averaging the seasonal averages to compare agricultural, forested, and urban streams tt'lrough the seasons. 28 overall seasonal average of T-P04 was approximately 2.5 times greater in the urban stream (.256 mg/I) than in the agricultural (.057 mg/I) or forested streams
(.035 mg/I). The highest seasonal averages of N03 were during winter in the
agricultural streams (1.96 mg/I) and in the forested streams the same N03 average was measured during summer, winter, and spring (.54 mg/I). In the
urban stream, the highest seasonal average of N03 was during summer (.49 mg/I). The lowest seasonal averages of N03 were during summer in the agricultural streams (.70 mg/I) and during fall in the forested streams (.21 mg/I)
and the urban stream (.24 mg/I). The overall seasonal average of N03 was highest in the agricultural streams (1.22 mg/I) which was 2.5 times greater than the value in the forested streams (.46 mg/I) and the urban stream (.35 mg/I).
Table 3c shows that the highest seasonal average of CI in the
agricultural (10.69 mg/l) and forested streams (8.06 mg/I) occur-red in fall. In the
urban stream, the highest seasonal average of CI occurred in winter (87.71
mg/I). The lowest seasonal averages of CI occurred in spring for all the
characterized streams; agricultural 5.69 mg/I, forested 4.76 mg/I, and urban
16.91 mg/1. The overall seasonal average of CI in the urban stream (38.82 mg/I) was approximately five times greater than the overall seasonal average of CI in the agricultural (7.77 mg/I) and forested streams (6.27 mg/I). Seasonal turbidity
averages in the agricultural streams (20.87 ntu), forested streams (21.43 ntu),
and the urban stream (815.10 ntu) were highest during summer and lowest
during the fall (9.92 ntu, 2.49 ntu, and 78.82 ntu, respectively). The overall
seasonal average of TRB in the urban stream (306.09 ntu) was approximately
20 times greater than the overall seasonal averages in the agricultural (15.58
29 CHLORIDES - mg/l OVERALL SEASONAL Stream # Summer Fall Winter Spring AVERAGE 17 10.54 13.55 7.88 6.25 Agricultural 16 5.63 8.45 6.10 4.67 Streams 20 7.25 11.29 8.03 6.23 6 6.25 9.45 7.12 5.62
seasonal average 7.42 10.69 7.28 5.69 7.77 ------._.-----.-._.------.------ 15 4.09 7.08 7.95 4.59 Forested 5 2.69 5.58 4.13 3.64 Streams 9 12.35 13.65 8.97 6.29
seasonal average 5.79 8.06 6.48 4.76 6.27
Urban Stream 2 28.23 22.41 87.71 16.91 38.82
TURBIDITY - ntv OVERALL SEASONAL Stream # Summer Fall Winter Spring AVERAGE 17 20.50 14.73 20.04 17.69 Agricu~ural 16 9.26 8.60 7.47 3.84 Streams 20 30.12 13.97 28.28 25.08 6 23.58 2.37 10.45 13.30
seasonal average 20.87 9.92 16.56 14.98 15.58 ------~------.._------.--.------_._. __ ._.--.------ 15 11.42 1.65 6.10 6.53 Forested 5 5.45 1.55 4.98 4.71 Streams 9 57.45 4.45 14.12 16.77 4 11.38 2.32 10.89 11.48
seasonal average 21.43 2.49 9.02 9.87 10.70
Urban Stream 2 815.10 78.82 149.10 181.33 306.09
Table 3c. Shown are the seasonal averages and overall seasonal averages of chloride and turbidity for the individual streams as well as the characterized streams. Seasonal average is the average of the four streams for a particular season. Overall seasonal average is the result of averaging the seasonal averages to compare agricultural, forested, and urban streams through the seasons. 30 ntu) and forested streams (10.70 ntu).
The highest seasonal average water velocities were found during spring in the agricultural streams (2.13 m/s) and during winter in the forested streams
(2.26 m/s) and in the urban stream (1.46 m/s)(Table 3d). Summer was the season of the slowest water velocities; agricultural streams (1.25 m/s for both summer and fall), forested streams (1.38 m/s), and the urban stream (1.13 m/s).
The typical seasonal water temperature variations found in this climate were represented in the streams; warmest water temperatures during summer and coldest water temperatures during winter. The overall seasonal averages of both velocity and temperature were similar between the characterized streams.
Periphyton Taxa
Most periphyton were identified from the plexiglass plates in the artificial substrate holders. Identification in some streams was incomplete due to the loss of the substrate holders from the streams or ice cover. Cladophora glomerata,
Oscillatoria spp., and Vaucheria spp., were identified from the natural rock substrates or concrete spillways in the streams.
Table 4 lists the genera of periphyton that were identified, the collection period and stream number in which they were found, and the total number of streams in which they were found. A total of 15 genera were identified in' the nine tributaries and the Susquehanna River from May 1991 through June 1992.
Gomphonema olivaceum was the most common species, found in eight of the nine streams and in the Susquehanna River, especially in the spring. The most diverse month was April in which 11 different taxa were identified. Also evident
31 VELOCITY - mls OVERALL SEASONAL Stream # Summer Fall Winter Spring AVERAGE 17 1.55 1.56 2.00 2.08 Ag ricu Itu ral 16 1.60 1.57 3.05 3.37 Streams 20 0.70 0.73 1.35 1.41 6 1.16 1.15 1.67 1.66
seasonal average 1.25 1.25 2.02 2.13 1.66
15 1.74 1.97 3.25 2.77 Forested 5 1.01 1.05 1.58 1.53 Streams 9 1.50 1.59 2.00 2.13 4 1.28 1.26 2.21 2.01
seasonal average 1.38 1.47 2.26 2.11 1.81
Urban Stream 2 1.13 1.15 1.46 1.35 1.27
TEMPERATURE - 2C OVERALL SEASONAL Stream # Summer Fall Winter Spring AVERAGE 17 18.33 9.05 0.91 8.57 Ag ricultu ral 16 19.80 10.01 1.01 8.99 Streams 20 18.45 9.27 0.73 6.10 6 15.26 8.55 1.01 6.02
seasonal average 17.96 9.22 0.92 7.42 8.88
15 16.01 7.51 0.12 8.19 Forested 5 15.36 7.62 0.70 7.55 Streams 9 14.79 7.61 0.41 7.44 4 15.64 7.98 1.24 7.66
seasonal average 15.45 7.68 0.62 7.71 7.86
Urban Stream 2 15.00 9.10 1.16 6.92 8.05
Table 3d. Shown are the seasonal averages and overall seasonal averages of velocity and temperature for the individual streams as well as the characterized streams. Seasona.l average is the average of the four streams for a particular season. Overall seasonal average is the result of averaging the seasonal averages to compare agricultural, forested, and urban streams through the seasons.
32 , 1111 , IIII , , , I , IUIIii , 'ILL , mrn , mila :iuml , I , , , , , I , :, mWi TAXA : IIHIi 111-l11 IIHIII 1111-1111:1111-1111 1111·11111 11111·11111 111·111 III-Ill I llHl1 lll-lill tlll-11Il :1iI1-1I11: 'om IN ------_.. ------...... _----_._-- .. ~~ .. _.. -_ ...... _-- ...... -...... _- ...... -.- ...... _-- ... , , , , , ,, , , I Chlorophyta , : , , , I , , , , , . , , I ,,, , I , , , , , , ,, , ·, I , .I , 11,1,1,1 , , I I Cladophora :I, I, I, II :I,Ii IU,II Iii , III :1,11,11 , I : t ,i ,Ii :1,1,1,11 :11,11,11 :4,i,I,U , I , , I , , I 810llJcratti :11,11 , , , I :11 I , , :11 III I ------.".....-.- .. --_ ... -- ...... _-_ ...... ·_- ...... -...... --.... __ ...... -...... -.. ---- ...... --- ... __ ...----- ...... _. --_. -- Closterium :1 moniliforme , ------,... 5pJrogyra Bpp. , :17 :11 III :11 :1,11 : I,1,\1 -- ______------.....---- ...... _--.-_ ...... -- ...... ,, , , , , , UlothrJx Hpp. , , I , , :I,ll , :1,1,1,11 :1,1,11,1 I • , , · · , ,I , , :10 ...... --_ ..... _- -..-- -_...... _.. -. ~_ ..._._ .... ------._ ... ------...... _.. -. -.... _..... ,, , , , I , , I I , , Cyanophyta I I I I I , I , , I , , , , , , , , , I I •I ,,, ,, I , I I , I , , I , , , I , I, :11,10 OscJllatoriB spp. :11 , :11 :11 \I ·11,1,11,11 :1 , :20 I ------_. ------....-- ~ _. - -- -- ... --- .. --_ ... _-_ ...... -.. --_.- .. -.... _.. _----- .... _...... -...... -.. -- ...... _... _--_ .. _...... ---- .. -~_ .. _---._ .. -- . __ .. _-_ .. _--_ .. _... , , ·, , , , , ,, Chryoophyta , I .I , I , , , I : , , I , ·,,, , · I I , , I , , , , , I , , , , I · I , I , , , I , I , , I , I AchnBnthes spp. I , , , I , , I , , , iI,I,1I :I,llt ______--- .. __ --- _. _-.... -- "-" ...... _.. -__ ...-...... -...... -.....-.. _- .. _-_ ...... _- ...... _... _.. -... __ .. _.... --.. __ ..... " --.. -.- .. -..... -- .. __ .. -_.... -- --_.. -_ .. -.. -- , , , , W Coccone19 BPI'· :1 :1 , , :t 16 :1,I,n il ,I ,I, II , , :1 1 , :5.1 :11,11,11 :t,I,I,9,1l: , , , I I , I , W I , , , I I I , I , , :10 :II,II.!O ------·_.. _------" ._---_ ... -... -_ .. _- ...... -.. __ ...... -·...... _....-...... -...... _-- ...... _- .. --- .... -..... ----"--' --- .. _------.. _---- _. , I ,I , , Cymballa spp. , ., , I , :1 I :11 :l.',U,U: 1,1 :I.S • I , , , I I , , :10 , , ...... -- ...-.... -...... -.. --- ...... --..... _- -_. --...... _.. _. - ,, , I , , , , , Diatoms , , I , ., ,, , , , , , l , tJlongllta I , , I , I I I :11,11 :1,1 :11 ,, , I , , yulglJrc :1,\,i,li : , , ·I I II , :11,11,11 :1 II, I , , , I I I , I I :Ii , , I , , , :10 , .... _. ------.. -_. --- ~ ...... ·-...... --- ...... _...... _.. -.. -- ._-...... ·-- ...... -_ ..... -...-...... --.... _ , , I I , , Fragilaria spp. , , , I , 111,1 , III :11 ------_. -_ ...... _---- ... - .. -...... _----_. __ .... -...... -.... -...... -...... -.. -- ...... _.. -... -..... , , , , I ,, Gomp/Jonoma , , I , , I , I , , : I. SII, J, 15: I :1 , , , I I 01 i vLlccum : , : : ·I ·I I I , , :11,11,11 , ---- -"' - ---- ~ ------_ .. __ .. -...... -_ ..-...... _.. -...... -...... _....-...... _--- ...-...... _----.--- .. _----_ ... -_ .... _------._ I I , , , Meridion , : , I , , :1, II, Il :1,1,1,11 :1,11,11 :1.5 .1. t :1 :t I , ,• I , · :15, II t l1 :. circulare ,, : , I I It ,I ,1.1 III :11,11 :20 , ------_. ------.. _..... _- _.... ---_ ...... --_·.. __ ....._--.------._- ....------...... _--- -...... ------... ------_.---." ..-. I , , , ,, , Nayiculll SPP. I , , I , I :11,17,10 :1.2 1 4,11 : :1 :'I I' , , , , , , , :11,10 I , , , · , , · I : , , , -_.... _..--_. - -_ ..--- --... _. --- ...... --...... -.. -- .. --- .. -... _- ---.. --...... _. ------..--- --_. -----_.. --- -.------.. , · , ,, · Synedra ulna :S.I , , , , lilt II ,I,I II II ,I :\,1&,10 :15,",~O :S,6.U,ZO:S -- _. ------_.... -----. --_.- ...... -.. -.----._ .. _-- ...... -_ ...... _- .... -... _...... _-_ ... -.... __ .... __ .... __ .. _.. _.. _.-_ ...--. , I , I j tI :1,1,11 :4 , , :11 Vallcher spp. :4 , I • I :16 ------...... -.... -...-...... -.---_ ...... -...... · -... _- ....-...... -- ...... _.. _.... -...... _--_.- .... _-_ .. _-- I PiPIIU 1 I 4 I I I I I I 10 II ilCi _om Table 4. Listed are the identified genera during each collection month. The numbers in the boxes represent the stream in which each was found. Also shown are the number of streams each genera was found in and the number of taxa found each month. was the seasonal succession of the identified genera. The number of taxa identified in each season were 13 in spring and summer, 9 in fall, and 6 in winter. Although spring and summer had the same .number of identified taxa, the genera were common to more streams during spring than in summer.
Tables 5a, 5b, and 5c list the stream numbers and the names of periphyton identified during each season. Of all the streams, stream 17 was the most diverse having 13 periphyton taxa identified during the year. In terms of periphyton diversity in each stream during the seasons, streams 5 and 6 were the most diverse in summer with six genera, stream 4 was most diverse in fall with six genera, the Susquehanna River (stream 1) was most diverse in winter with four genera, and streams 16 and 20 were most diverse in spring with ten taxa. Communities of periphyton taxa found in agricultural streams were also found in forested streams. These tables show the general pattern of the spring season being dominant in the number of identified periphyton taxa and the number of streams in which they were found.
34 AGR'L STREAMS SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING
17 (13) Cocconeis Oscillatoria Meridion Gomphonema. spp. spp. circulare olivaceum Diatoma Fragilaria Cladophora vulgare spp. glomerata Osci/latoria Meridion spp. circulars Spirogyra Cocconeis spp. spp. Vaucheria Navicula spp. spp. Oiatoma vulgare CyrrtJella spp. Ulothrix spp. Diatoma elongata
16 (12) Cladophora Cladophora Meridion Gomphonema glomerata glomerata circulare olivaceum Cocconeis Spirogyra Diatoma Cladophora spp. spp. vulgare glomerata Oiatoma Meridian vulgare circulare Oscillatoria Cocconeis spp. spp. Navicula spp. Synedra ulna Diatoma vulgare Achnanthes spp. Diatoma elongata Vaucheria spp.
Table 5a. Listed are the agricultural streams and the genera of periphyton found during the seasons. The number in parentheses indicates the number of taxa identified in that stream. 35 AGR'L STREAMS SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING
6 (12) Cladophora Meridion Meridion Gomphonema glomerata circulare circulare olivaceum Cocconeis Cocconeis Synedra Cladophora spp. spp. ulna glomerata Navicula Synedra Oscil/atoria Merldion spp. ulna spp. circulare Synedra Synedra ulna ulna Diatoma Diatoma vulgare vulgare Closterium CyntJella moniliforme spp. Ulothrix spp. Diatoma elongata
20 (11) Cocconeis Cladophora Meridion Gomphonema spp. glomerata circulare olivaceum Oscillatoria Oscillatoria Cladophora spp. spp. glomerata Spirogyra Meridion spp. circulare Cocconeis spp. Navicula spp' Synedra ulna Diatoma vulgare CyntJella spp. Ulothrix spp. Osciliatoria spp.
Table 5a continued. Listed are the agricultural streams and the genera of periphyton found during the seasons. The number in parentheses indicates the number of genera identified in that stream.
36 FORESTED STREAMS SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING 5 (10) Cladophora Meridion Me ridion Gomphonema glomerata circulare circulare olivaceum Cocconeis Cocconeis Synedra Cladophora spp. spp. ulna glomerata Navicula Synedra Meridion spp. ulna circulare Synedra Gscillatoria Cocconeis ulna spp. spp. Diatoma Synedra vulgare ulna Cymbella Achnanthes spp. spp.
4 (9) Cladophora Cladophora Cladophora glomerata glomerata glomerata Meridion Meridion Me ridion circulare circulare circulare Cocconeis Cocconeis Navicula spp. spp. spp. Achnanthes Synedra spp. ulna Vaucheria Spirogyra spp. spp. Fragilaria spp.
15 (8) Cladophora Cladophora Gomphonema glomerata glomerata olivaceum Cocconeis Meridion Cladophora spp. circulare glomerara Cocconeis Meridion spp. circulare Ulothrix Cocconeis spp. spp. Synedra ulna Oiatoma vulgare Cymbella spp. Ulothrix spp.
9 (6) Cladophora Meridion Mendion Gomphonema glomerata circulare circulare olivaceum Cocconets Cocconets CiaC1ophora spp. spp. glomerata Vaucheria Ulothrix Mendion spp. spp. circulare Cocconeis spp. Ulothrix spp.
Table 5b. Listed are the forested streams and the genera of periphyton found during the seasons. The number in parentheses indicates the number of taxa identified in that stream.
37 URBAN STREAM SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING 2 (4) Gomphonema Navicula olivaceum spp. Achnanthes Ulothrix spp. spp. Navicula spp.
SUSQUEHANNA RIVER SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING 1 (10) Diatoma Synedra Synedra Gomphonema vulgare ulna ulna olivaceum Cymbella Cymbella Diatoma Navicula spp. spp. vulgare spp. Achnanthes Oscillatoria Cymbella Synedra spp. spp. spp. ulna Spirogyra CyrrtJel/a Achnanthes spp. spp. spp. Fragi/aria Diatorna spp. elongata
Table 5c. Shown are the urban stream and the Susquehanna River and the genera of periphyton found during the seasons. The number in parentheses indicates the number of taxa identified in that stream.
Identification of Bedrock and Soli Type in the Otsego Lake Watershed
General bedrock types identified in the Otsego Lake Watershed were shale and limestone (Figure 3). The percentage of each type in each stream basin is indicated on Table 6. Shale bedrock was dominant on the West side of the lake in stream basins 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, and 15. Limestone bedrock was dominant North of the lake in stream basins 16, 17, and 20. Six soil types were identified in the watershed (Figure 4). The average pH range of each soil type, varying in depths from 0-18 inches to 0-80 inches, was used to categorize the soil types. Low pH ranges were calculated in soil types 1 (4.2 -7.8), 2 (4.5
6.2), and 8 (4.4 - 7.8) (Figure 4). Slightly higher pH ranges were calculated in
38 BEDROCK BEDROCK %OFEACH % OF CMBN SmEAM # NAME TYPE BDRK TYPE BDRK TYPE 2 Opm shale 83.83 100 S Oso shale 16.17
4 Opm shale 74.82 100 S Oso shale 25.18
5 Opm shale 91.41 100 S Oso shale 8.59
6 Dpm shale 70.61 100 S Dso shale 29.39
9 Dpm shale 37.62 100 S Dso shale 58.72 Dot shale 3.67
15 Dpm shale 5.03 98.79 S Dso shale 37.33 Dot shale 53.65 Dch shale 2.78 Duc limestone 0.52 1.21 L Don limestone 0.69
16 Dso shale 0.96 15.32 S Dot shale 6.84 Dch shale 7.52 Due limestone 526 59.23 L Don limestone 46.78 Dec limestone 5.49 Dk limestone 1.70 Glacial Overburden 25.45 25.45 G.O.
17 Dot shale 1.86 11.20 S Sby shale 2.01 Dch shale 7.31 Due limestone 3.58 86.39 L Don limestone 35.75 Dec limestone 9.60 Dk limestone 6.16 Ddb limestone 12.82 Ddj limestone 6.02 Glacial Overburden 2.44 2.44 G.O.
20 Dpm shale 2.15 35.60 S Dso shale 9.55 Dot shale 11.66 Dch shale 12.24 Duc limestone 3.82 64,40 L Don limestone 21.20 Dcc limestone 5.83 Dk limestone 6.81 Ddb limestone 4.75 Ddj limestone 6.37 Dr limestone 9.65 Dct limestone 5.97
Table 6. Listed are the bedrock types, percent of each bedrock type, and the percent of the combined bedrock types .in each stream basin. The combined bedrock type was derived from adding the shale percentages and limestone percentages to obtain one overall percentage of each bedrock type. S = shale, L = limestone, and G.O. = glacial overburden. 39 soil types 5 (5.3 - 8.4), 6 (5.4 - 8.0), and 11 (5.3 - 8.2). Percentage of each soil type for each stream basin is indicated in Table 7. The "more N acidic soils were generally dominant on the West side of the lake in stream basins 2, 4, 5, and 9.
The Niess· acidic soils were generally dominant at the North end of the lake in stream basins 16, 17, and 20. Stream basins 6 and 15 also had "less" acidic soil, but are located on the West side of the lake.
Land Use
By viewing aerial photographs of the watershed, it was possible to identify the types of land use the streams and their tributaries flowed through (Figure 2).
Streams on the West side of the lake, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, and 15, flow mostly through-. forested land. Streams North of the lake, 16, 17, and 20, flowed through a mixture of agricultural and forested land, the former being more common.
Streams 15, 16, and 20 have wetland areas in their basins.
40 %OFEACH % OF CMBN STREAM # SOIL TYPE SOil TYPE SOil TYPE
2 1 72.70 100.00 A 8 27.30
4 1 20.60 50.00 A 2 5.90 50.00 B 5 50.00 8 23.50
5 1 18.92 62.16 A 2 40.54 37.84 B 5 37.84 8 2.70
6 1 31.71 60.98 B 2 2.44 39.03 A 5 60.98 8 4.88
9 1 39.13 60.87 A 2 21.74 39.13 B 5 39.13
15 1 15.15 81.83 B 2 3.03 18.18 A 5 75.76 6 1.52 11 4.55
16 5 3.00 97.50 B 6 92.50 2.50 A 8 2.50 11 2.00
17 5 10.56 85.72 B 6 65.22 14.29 A 8 14.29 11 9.94
20 1 6.85 77.63 B 2 15.53 22.38 A 5 14.16 6 59.82 11 3.65
Table 7. Listed are the soil types, percent of each soil type, and the percent of the combined soil types in each stream basin. The combined soil types means the soils with similar pH ranges were combined to obtain a percentage in each stream basin. Refer to Figure 4 for formal soil names. A = "more" acidic soil types 1, 2, and 8. B = "less" acidic soil types 5, 6, and 11.
41 DISCUSSION
Overview
This study was unique to Otsego Lake in that nine tributaries and one outlet were studied simultaneously, over a year, to characterize them in terms of land use, nutrient concentrations, periphyton biomass, and periphyton taxa.
The study of periphyton ecology can be difficult since so many factors contribute to variations in periphyton biomass seasonally. To measure each continuously for the purpose of defining trends would have required more work than was possible for us. The parameters measured for this study represent only a few of the many that could be monitored. Seasonality is an important parameter to consider. Locally, in the temperate zone, it is the ultimate regulator of fluctuations in the other environmental factors. Figure 5 shows a way in which physical parameters, weather, and water chemistry can be regUlated by seasonality and how periphyton biomass is effected by several factors at the same time.
Stream Characterization
The calculation of a trophic level index for each stream was used to characterize them as either agricultural, forested, or urban. The use of indices was an unbiased approach to group the streams based on a combination of data specific for each stream. As seen in Figure 7, the pertinent information used in the formula to calculate the indices were number of agricultural and forested acres and the yearly average concentrations of T-P04 and N03 . Table 1 shows the values of the variables in the formula.
42 Streams 16, 17, 20, and 6 were characterized as agricultural streams.
Based on the indices, higher values indicate more agricultural land and
generally higher nutrient concentrations.
Streams 15, 5, 9, and 4 were characterized as forested streams based
on the trophic level indices (Figure 7). The lower values indicate more forested
land than agricultural and generally lower nutrient concentrations.
Stream 2 was characterized as urban because it flowed through the
Village of Cooperstown. Of the ten sampling sites, the highest yearly average
concentrations of T.P04 (.334 mg/l) and CI (33.42 mg/I) were recorded for this stream, which is typical of urban streams (Wetzel 1983).
Affects of the Parameters on Periphyton Biomass
The 'first two objectives of this study were to determine (1) if streams
flowing through agricultural areas have higher nutrient concentrations than
streams flowing through forested areas and (2) if streams with high
concentrations of nutrients supported high periphyton biomass.
Streams 16, 17, and 20, located in the Northern section of the Otsego
Lake Watershed, flow mostly through agricultural land. The reduced amount of
vegetated areas between the fields and stream banks allow more nutrients from
runoff to enter the stream and incident light to reach the stream which
provides energy for photosynthesis and warms the water. This situation
provides an ideal environment for periphyton growth. Figure 9 shows the monthly averages of T-P04 and N03 concentrations during the collection year in the agricultural streams. Appendix F lists the monthly average values. The
43 Monthly Avoragos of T-P04 lor the Agricultural Streams 0.2 • 0.18
O.lS
0.14
en 0.12 . .§. 0.1 ~ 0 ~\" Q. . ~ 0.08 : 0.06 .
0.04
0.0:2 .
o Jun '91 Jul '91 b s.,pf91 Nov '91 Mar '92 Nx '92b Jun' '92 Jul '918 Aug '91 Oct '91 Feb '92 Nx '928 May '92 Oats 01 Collection
I: -- 20 --- 17 --- 16 -=-- 6
Monthly Averagos of N03 for the Agricultural Streams 31 ... ; /,\ I 1 IT\\ 2.5 :
2 ;;/, ~ ::::' /I! \ \ -= ! "- \\ -! 1.5 "'" 0 :::'" • 1-'"
:a-- e 0.5
a Jun 91 vul '91 b Sept'91 Nov 91 Mar 92 ADr 92b Jun '92 Jul '91" Aug '91 Oct '91 Feb '92 Apr '92a May 92 Date of Collection
-- 20 --- 17 --- 16 -=-- 6
Figure 9. The monthly averages of total phosphorus and nitrate durin.g the collection year are shown for the agricultural streams. 44 yearly average nutrient concentrations were generally higher in these streams.
The T-P04 and N03 concentrations for stream 16 were .051 mgJl and 1.08 mg/I, stream 17 were .056 mg/I and 1.55 mg/I, and stream 20 were .090 mg/I and 1.31
mg/l (Table 1 and Figure 10). These high measurements result from
Yellrfy Averll'ge5 of T-P04. N03, and CI for tne Cher8clen:z:&d Streams : ,6
1.4 --~ n- 30 1.2 r-- l- ~ 2'5 .§. I-- I-- i--- l'l 0 ;: 0.8 I-- r--- ~ ~ .. ,.- ..,. 0.6 I-- - - 0 .:l. 0- r- 10 ~ 0.4 - r- I-- ~ - f- '0l 1'2 r-- I- >-- c- -,.. ;'j II--- 5 1 ,;, [':': 1P:7 1['" ..,..., 1,.,- ~ n~ . ',1 :J rt 20 17 16 6 15 9 5 4 2 ChlirllCtorlZ&d Stream Numbers
iC:::J T·P04 0 N03 CJ Ci
Figure 10. The yearly averages of total phosphorus, nitrates, and chloride are shown for the agricultural streams (20, 17, 16, and 6), forested streams (15, 9, 5, and 4), and the urban stream (2).
nutrients being leached from the soil during storm events and directly entering
the streams. Sources of the nutrients could be chemical fertilizers and cow
manure used on the fields. Meyer ~ ill., (1988) state that the nitrates in streams
increase during winter because the vegetation on land is not incorporating
nutrients. Table 3b and Figure 11 show this trend.
45 Seasonal Average~ 01 Nltrw, In the Agricultural Slroams 3---~------
~ en E - 1.5 o'"' :z
0 - ---2
SUMMER FALL WlNT'ER SPRING SEASON
\ -a- 20 --- 17 ----- 16 ~ S
Figure 11. Shown are the seasona.l nitrate averages for each agricultural stream. The highest peak is in winter.
Table 1 and Figure 12 show the high yearly averages of chlorophyll a recorded for streams 16 (1.264 mglm2/d) and 17 (.833 mglm 2/d) and high yearly averages of AFDW recorded for streams 16 (193.93 mglm2/d), 17 (183.32 mg/m 2/d), and 20 (109.42 mg/m 2/d). This data upholds the statement that
agricultural streams support high yearly averages of biomass.
46 Venrly Avernge~ ':)1 ChI 0 nnd I,FOW lor the Characterized Streem~
Ic:::J Chi a 0 AFDW :
Figure 12. The yearly averages of chlorophyll a and ash-free dry weight are shown for the agricultural streams (20, 17, 16, and 6), forested streams (15, 9, 5, and 4), and the urban stream (2).
Figure 13 shows the monthly averages of chlorophyll a and AFDW in the
agricultural streams during the year. Monthly average values are shown in
Appendix E. In the agricultural streams, where the yearly averages of nutrient
concentrations and biomass were generally high, (an exception was low chlorophyll a for stream 20, .363 mg/m 2/d) another parameter that influenced
periphyton accum ulation in addition to nutrients was incident light that reached the streams. Studies by Hill mal., (1988b) and DeNicola ma[., (1992) found that an increase of incident light reaching a stream increased the biomass and
productivity of periphyton. The high yearly average water temperatures in
47 Monthlv Averages 01 Chi a lor the Agricultural Streams • 6- .' -~ 5-,-- .€ Cl ! 4-'------;-'-;--- • ~3------;'----'---\ \ - e Q. \\\ I, ~ 2~------,.:.--1---;';\\-- U / ! /~
o ~Ie e ~;::/~ Jun"91 'JuI'91b sept'91 Nov '91 , Mar '92 Apr '92b Jun '92 Jul '91. Aug '91 Oct '91 F"b '92 /l+>r '928 May '92 Date 01 Collection
iI --- 20 -- 17 -- 16 --€!- 6 I
Monthly Averages of AFDW for the AgrIcultural Streams 600 , I :; N -E Cl 1\ -.! :1 :z: I /\ g / \, .. 300 ' 3: ~I ~ / r\ Q \ : \ / / \ •.. 200 ~ .: c:(• 100
o Jun '91 Jul '91 b S<>pt'91 Nov '91 Mar '92 Apr '92b Jun '92 Jul '91e Aug '91 Oct '91 Feb '92 Ap< '92a May '92 Date of Collection
~ --- 20 -- 17 -- 16 -5- 6
Figure 13. Chlorophyll a and ash-free dry weight monthly averages in the agricultural streams are shown.
48 these streams (16 = 12.15 QC, 17 =11.26 QC, and 20 = 10.75 QC) also enhanced growth (Table 1 and Figure 14).
Yearfy Ayerages of TAB. VEL and TMP for the Chal'&C1erlZed Streams ::+------f-,...-.------r~:~Li:' I 400 ~ ,~! ...., ,', 00 ~ 10 l------::=------____=!' ~ ,j~l;~I' ,·1 ,'jl n "1'j I·, lc;() _ ~ 8'1---_· .nll.·.· · '~H... 1-- i I ! I :j}IH ; i 8 j ::1~1: 150 :: .n 1~1 A . Iii 4:,:n 100 > -. X 2+---+ ": ;\~ 0 .". "~I • ". ,', o-+-----".:J....l.;..1,LUl-l:..:.lfSJ-~.>l-l:..:..Lp:1_L.l!Io:.l....l;..;J.p::l-J-~~...... J...... ~ 20 17 III 6 15 9 5 " 2 C~zed Stream Numberl
Figure 14. The yearly averages of turbidity, velocity, and temperature are shown for the agricultural streams (20, 17, 16, and 6), forested streams (15, 9, 5, and 4), and the urban stream (2).
Despite the high nutrient concentrations in stream 20, the high yearly average turbidity (24.94 ntu) and low yearly average velocity (.97 m/s) may be the cause of the low chlorophyll a yearly average (Table 1). Blockage of sunlight by the particulate matter suspended in the water can decrease the amount of light incident on a stream which then decreases photosynthetic activity and chlorophyll production. According to Horner maI., (1990) and
Dodds (1991), faster velocities may increase the exchange rate of nutrients
49 and wastes between the water and periphyton which then can enhance algal growth. With the slower velocities in stream 20, an efficient exchange of nutrients and water was not occurring.
Stream 6 was an exception because this agricultural stream did not have high yearly averages of nutrient concentrations (T-P04 =.031 mg/I and 2 N03 = .39 mg/I) or biomass (chlorophyll a =.305 mg/m /d and AFDW =48.77 mg/m2/d, Table 1). Although the trophic level value for stream 6 was higher than those for the forested streams, the yearly average nutrient concentrations were lower than those in some forested streams. Even though there were more agricultural acres than forested acres in the basin, most of stream 6 was bordered by forest areas (Harter 1993). Nutrient runoff from the agricultural areas in this basin may have been taken up mostly by the vegetation before the nutrients were able to reach the stream. Low nutrient concentrations, lack of sunlight, and cooler water temperatures (yearly average = 9.37 QC) -could cause periphyton biomass in stream 6 to be low. Hill Sll gj., (1988b) and
DeNicola .e1 gj., (1992) stated that shaded streams usually limit periphyton
biomass.
The West side of Otsego Lake is mostly forest land that streams 4, 5, 9, and 15 flow through. Nutrient concentrations were generally low due to the vegetative canopy along the banks. Monthly averages of T-P04 and N03 in the forested streams are shown in Figure 15. In contrast to the agricultural
streams, the forested streams generally had low yearly averages of nutrient
concentrations, biomass, and water temperature (Table 1, Figures 10, 12, and
14). Mostly vegetated basins and tree canopies along the banks incorporate
50 Monthly Averages of T·P04 for the Fore'!ted Strearrul 014------
0.12---··----
o,-~---
0. ! 0.08 ~ \~ o 0 06------____,;"iIl,>,~------...-----____,--_, ~ .-:- / ,,"" ..:. ' - \ '\, 0,04-'----;;;---r"'------'~~~-----f.-----c-7'7'--.=_-=~-- j
O.02--c:--.....,.--./-r------...".~"..-=~~/-7'--'--~--;7"'----""""~~
0 ...'------,------Jun '91 Jul '91 b S<>pt'91 Nov '91 Mar '92 Apr '92b Jun '92 Jul '91a Aug '91 Oct '91 Feb '92 Apt '92a May '92 Date 01 Collection
'---1~--9 --~ ~4
Monthly Avel1l9" 01 N03 for the Forested Streams 2,5,..,,------
i I 2: il \ 15-'-·------'c------\ 0; ! 8 ..~ z ~ ,~ - '. """, ..,... '. -- . .., ..... ;", // ~ o:~i;:=:-~~
vun 9' "wi 91 b Sept'9' Nov 91 "'a; '''2 Apr '92b Jun '92 Jul'C!1a ,~ug 91 Oct'91 Feb'92 ".Dr'92a May '92 Date 01 Collection
---1~--9 --~-=-4
Figure 15. Total phosphorus and nitrate monthly averages during the collection year are shown of the forested streams.
51 nutrients, shade the streams, and maintain cooler water temperatures.
Periphyton biomass measurements were low, in part. due to these conditions.
Considering all the measurements taken from stream 5, it represents a typical forested stream. The low yearly averages of chlorophyll a and AFDW
(. 130 mg/m 2/d and 26.23 mg/m2/d, respectively) where probably due to the low yearly averages of T-P04 and N03 (.023 mg/I and .22 mg/I, respectively) as well as the low yearly average water temperature (9.52 QC) caused by the vegetative canopy (Table 1).
Stream 4 was the only forested stream that was not shaded at the sampling site. The yearly average water temperature was 9.82 QC, just .93 QC below the yearly average for an agricultural stream. With light not a limiting factor, then the low chlorophyll a and AFDW measurements (.255 mg/m2/d, and
70.45 mg/m 2/d, respectively) may have been due to the low yearly average concentrations of T-P04 and N03 (.031 mg/I and .46 mg/I, respectively,Table 1).
Stream 15 had low yearly average T-P04 (.035 mg/I) and NOs (.47 mg/I) concentrations and cooler water temperatures (yearly average =9.80 QC, Table
1). The latter caused by the surrounding vegetation. Despite the low nutrient concentrations, the yearly average of chlorophyll a (.643 mg/m 2/d) was higher than stream 20 (an agricultural stream) and the yearly average of AFDW
(91.55 mg/m2/d) was comparable to the yearly averages for the agricultural streams. The higher yearly average chlorophyll a in stream 15 may have been due to VEL and TRB, the same parameters that may have caused the lower chlorophyll a yearly average in stream 20. In stream 15, the yearly average
52 VEL was faster (2.26 m/s) and the yearly average TRB was lower (7.22 ntu) than in stream 20 (Table 1).
Stream 9 is an exception to forested stream trends. Although the trophic level value was low, the yearly average concentrations of T-P04 and N03
(.058 mg/I and .69 mg/I, respectively) were much higher than those in the other forested streams (Table 1 and Figure 10). The yearly average of T.P04 in stream 9 was higher than three agricultural streams. Aerial photographs show a long section of stream 9 as having forest land on the North side and agricultural land on the South side. The higher nutrient concentrations, especially T-P04, apparently result from the stream flowing adjacent to this working farm.
Phosphorus ions tend to adsorb onto sediment particles (Meyer .e.t sil., 1988).
As sediment is eroded from the land surface and stream banks during a storm, the adsorbed phosphorus ions are transported to the stream. Runoff could enter the stream since the land does slope in that direction. Strip farming began in
1993, which helps to reduce the amount of runoff and sediment that could potentially reach the stream (Harter 1993). Two more possible sources of runoff are the nearby condominiums and the road, which occasionally borders the stream.
Even though nutrient concentrations were high, the biomass yearly averages were quite iow in stream 9 (chlorophyll a =.228 mg/m2/d and AFDW
= 45.64 mglm 2/d, Table 1 and Figure 12). This could be due to the coolest yearly average of water temperature (9.22 QC). The low biomass measurements may also be caused by the high yearly average turbidity (29.16 ntu).
The yearly average concentrations of T-P04 and CI in stream 2, the
53 urban stream I were nearly three times greater than yearly average concentrations in the other streams (Table 1 and Figure 10). Total phosphorus averaged .334 mg/I and CI averaged 33.42 mg/1. These high averages were not consistent throughout the collection year. Appendix F shows the variations between the months. High averages of T-P04 were found in the summer months (Table 3b). Sources are domestic wastewater, runoff from rooftops, paved areas and sidewalks. High averages of Cl were found in the winter months (Table 3b and Figure 16).
SOUOfla! A'I'8f'IlQSS 01 Chloride In the Urban Stream 90
ao 1\
70 / \
60 / \ -I:Il .! 50 / \ ~ 40 / \ I 30 / \ ~ ?O \ ~
10 SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING SEASON
Figure 16. Shown are the seasonal chloride averages for the urban stream. The highest average was found in winter.
De-icing salt used by residents in the Village of Cooperstown was the main source of CI entering the stream. Storm events initiated these sudden changes
'in the parameter concentrations.
54 During storm events the rainwater transports nutrients from the various sources in the village directly to the stream. In Cooperstown, there are fewer vegetated areas, in contrast to forested and agricultural stream banks, to reduce the amount of nutrients getting into the stream, therefore, stream 2-reacts differently than the other streams during a storm event. Nutrient concentrations and stream discharge quickly increase and then peak shortly after a storm begins, sometimes within minutes, and then they decrease at a bit slower rate as the storm continues (Albright 1993). The other streams, having more of a buffering area near the stream banks, do not respond to storm events as quickly; the increases and decreases are-more gradual (Albright 1993).
Without vegetated areas along the banks (of stream 2 in the village) to absorb excess water and nutrients, nutrient concentrations and stream discharge increase rapidly and to a greater degree than the other streams.
Stream 2 had the lowest yearly average of chlorophyll a (.032 mglm 2/d) and AFDW (16.28 mg/m 2/d, Table 2 and Figure 12). The cool water temperatures (yearly average = 9.64 QC) and shade probably inhibited some periphyton growth, but the most important factor may have been storm events.
As previously mentioned, the discharge increased rapidly, especially with no buffering zone. The current can become so swift at times that periphyton may have been torn away from the plexiglass plates or the arti'ficial substrate holder was carried downstream by the current. These conditions in this stream are not favorable for periphyton growth.
Only broad generalizations can be made based on the explanations given for the high and low yearly averages of the biomass measurements in the
55 agricultural, forested, and urban streams. The use of nutrient concentrations to only roughly estimate what the periphyton biomass could be seems acceptable, but should not be based solely on them. This statement is derived from a study done by Biggs .e1 al.. (1989). They suggest periphyton be analyzed simultaneously with hydrological factors and not base the periphyton changes on nutrient concentrations alone. Each stream is unique in the way periphyton reacts to the influences of limiting factors. These influences either enhancing or inhibiting periphyton growth, vary seasonally. Therefore, seasonality, in this geographic location, seems to be the regulator of periphyton biomass changes. Nutrient concentrations, incident light, and water temperatures, velocity, and turbidity are influential parameters, but there are many more (such as oxygen and silicon concentrations, type of natural substrate in the stream bed, and depth of stream) in a stream environment and as many as possible shou Id be considered when estimating periphyton biomass.
Regression analyses of biomass and the parameters in each stream shown in Tables 8 and 9 support the above statement by Biggs msil., (1989).
Chlorophyll a as weli as AFDW were compared to the individual parameters
(Table 8). The low regression values indicate no strong relationships between the biomass and these factors. Biomass changes cannot be explained by just one parameter. Table 9 shows the regression values between chlorophyll a as well as AFDW and the combination of all the parameters studied in each stream. The increased r2 values are evidence that periphyton biomass changes are influenced by several factors simultaneously. Other parameters,
56 in addition to those measured in this study, must be influencing biomass changes, indicated by the r2 values not being 100%. Since stream 2 lacks sufficient monthly biomass measurements, regression analysis could not be calculated.
Regression Analyses for Chlorophyll a and Each Parameter
Stream # .1_._4 L_._L-_a 15 16 17 2.Q
T- P04 0.118 0.331 0.023 0.008 0.363 0.093 0.106 0.056 0.017
N03 0.258 0.067 0.015 0.195 0.108 0.218 0.049 0.088 0.004
CI 0.140 0.183 0.084 0.213 0.362 0.083 0.169 0.051 0.301
TRB 0.012 0.060 0.020 0.065 0.040 0.024 0.132 0.402
VEL 0.110 0.048 0.209 0.565 0.102 0.269 0.543 0.142 0.062
TMP 0.027 0.028 0.040 0.117 0.001 0.046 0.144 0.033 0.003
Table 8. Shown are the results (r2 values) of regression analyses between chlorophyll a and the individual parameters in each stream. Low r2 values indicate no single parameter can explain the changes in biomass during the collection year. Monthly averages 'from Appendices E, F, and G were used in these analyses.
57 Regression Analyses for AFDW and Each Parameter
Stream # 1 4 5 6 9 15 16 17 20
T-P04 0.246 0.003 0.009 0.051 0.039 0.026 0.047 NOa 0.348 0.113 0.039 0.008 0.404 0.237
CI 0.110 0.028 0.203 0.560 0.016 0.008 0.095 0.004
TRB 0.070 0.264 0.003 0.031 0.187 0.009 0.007 0.183
VEL 0.235 0.303 0.157 0.086 0.061 0.179 0.249 0.022 0.049
·rMP 0.379 0.002 0.331 0.007 0.225 0.158 0.178 0.205
Table 8 continued. Shown are the results (r2 values) of regression analyses between ash-free dry weight and the individual parameters in each stream. Low r2 values indicate no single parameter can explain the changes in biomass during the collection year. Monthly averages from Appendices E, F, and G were used in these analyses.
Stream # Chi a AFDW
1 0.522 0.676 4 0.570 0.885 5 0.478 0.582 6 0.660 0.309 9 0.978 0.491 15 0.832 0.848 16 0.795 0.625 17 0.390 0.133 20 0.599 0.395
Table 9. The regression analyses of chlorophyll a as well as ash-free dry weight and the six parameters combined (total phosphorus, nitrates, chlorides, turbidity, velocity, and water temperature) are shown. Higher r2 values indicate that several parameters, collectively, influence periphyton biomass changes. Monthly averages from Appendices E, F, and G were used in these analyses.
58 Identified Periphyton Genera and Their Seasonal Succession
The third objective of this study was to characterize the streams based on a correlation between nutrient concentrations and periphyton genera identified. Seasonal average T-P04 and N03 concentrations were compared to the seasonal appearance of genera identified in the individual agricultural and forested streams, Genera identified in the agricultural streams were then compared to identified genera in the forested streams.
The nine tributaries in this study could be characterized based on the combination of land use and nutrient concentrations, but not on periphyton genera that were identified. Both agricultural and forested streams showed a general increase in the number of genera found in spring and contained similar combinations ot genera. This indicated that it was not nutrients alone that favored certain periphyton genera. There was a seasonal trend in their appearance. As stated previously, seasonal variations in the presence of genera are due mainly to incident light and water temperatures (Whitford ~ gl.,1963).
Table Sa shows the identified periphyton genera in each agricultural stream during each season. There is a seasonal trend of genera diversity. The greatest number of genera in each stream appeared in the spring. Table 3b shows the seasonal average concentrations of T-P04 and N03 for each agricultural stream. The number of genera identified in each of those streams in spring ranged from 7 ' 10, However, difference in the T- P04 (.019 •.078 mg/I) and N03 (.49 - 2.09 mgtl) concentrations between those streams in the spring was greater. Taxa found in all four streams were Gomphonema olivaceum,
59 Cladophora glomerata, Meridion circulare, and Diatoma vulgare. Clearly, more
periphyton genera will appear in spring and similar combinations of genera will
appear in the streams despite the variation in nutrient concentrations between
the streams.
In general, ttle same trends described for the agricultural streams were
found in the forested streams. T2ble 5b shows the identified periphyton genera
in each forested stream during each season. Table 3b shows the seasonal
average concentrations of T-P04 and N03 for the forested streams. Periphyton were identified from the plexiglass plates in the artificial substrate holders.
During some seasons, especially winter, the artificial substrate holders were
either unretrlevable or lost (see Appendix E for dates of missing data).
Therefore, the trends are not as. clear as in the agricultural streams. An
increase in the number of genera in spring is seen in streams 9 and 15, the
same number of genera found in summer were also found in spring in stream 5,
and stream 4 had the least number of genera in the spring. Again, nutrient
concentrations varied between the streams in spring (T-P04 = .021 - .042 mg/I
and N03 = .20 - 1.10 mgll) and the same genera were found. In stream 5, 9, and 15, similar identified genera included G. olivaceum, C. glomerata, M.
circulare, and Cocconeis spp. Cladophora glomerata and M. circulare were also
common to stream 4.
Although the overall seasonal averages of nutrient concentrations were
higher in the agricultural streams than forested streams, several genera were
common to them. For example, stream 20 had one of the highest seasonal averages of T-P04 and N03 concentrations and stream 5 had the lowest
60 seasonal average concentrations of T-P04 and N03, yet nine periphyton taxa were common in both streams throughout the year; G. olivaceum, C. glomerata,
M. circulare, Cocconeis spp., Navicula spp., Synedra ulna, D. vulgare, Cymbel/a spp., and Oscillatoria spp. (Tables 3b, Sa and 5b).
Table 4 displays the seasonal trends of periphyton genera succession by indicating the dates and streams in which they were found. Genera that were identified in three seasons and had the greatest frequency in spring or summer were Cladophora giomeratB, Cocconeis spp., and Diatoma vulgare.
Whitton (1970) stated that C. glomerata prefers high light intensities which was supported by this study as it was identified in eight streams in the spring and seven streams in the summer. Another correlation between the studies was the decrease in frequency during fall. According to Whitton (1970), fall is the time of year when the filaments break off and only the basal fragments remain.
Ulothrix spp., Gomphonema olivaceum, and Navicula spp., were identified in two seasons and they were all most frequently found in spring. Whitford ~ .a.!.,
(1963) aiso found G. o/ivaceum and Navicula spp. in spring and early summer, however, their collections were from natural substrates. S. ulna was identified during all seasons, but most frequently in spring. Nielson.e.t W., (1984) also found Synedra spp. all year on an artificial substrate. Whitford.e1 aI., (1963) found S. ulna in spring and early summer on rocks in North Carolina streams.
Meridian circulare was identified from late fall to early summer, but seemed to prefer the cooler temperatures since it appeared most frequently in winter and early spring. Other genera identified during cooler water temperatures included Spirogyra spp., Oscillatoria spp., and Fragilaria spp. According to
61 Sm ith (1965) fall is the season of active vegetative growth for Spirogyra spp.
Fragilaria spp. were identified during late summer and early winter in this study.
Correlating with these results are findings by Nielson §;.1 ai., (1984) in which
Fragilaria spp. were also identified during the same seasons and on artificial substrates, but in the Spokane River, WA. Identified genera that did not appear frequently were Closterium moniliforme , (only in stream 6), Achnanthes spp.,
Cymbel/a spp., Diatoma elongata, and Vaucheria spp.
Bedrock and Soil Correlations
The correlations between bedrock and soil types found in the individual basins of the agricultural streams were quite consistent (Table 10). Streams 16,
17, and 20 had a greater proportion of limestone than shale bedrock and a greater proportion of soil type B ("less" acidic). This correlation was not consistent in the basin of stream 6. Although soil type B was dominant as for the other agricultural streams, the basin was composed of 100% shale bedrock.
Bedrock and soil type correlations found in the forested stream basins were also quite consistent (Table 10). Streams 4, 5, and 9 had 100% shale bedrock and had a greater proportion of soil type A ("more" acidic) in their basins. An exception to this correlation was stream 15. Although shale bedrock was dominant, a greater proportion of soil type B ("less" acidic) was identified in this basin.
The bedrock and soil types in the basin of stream 2 were similar to those in the forested stream basins. The entire basin was shale and the only soil type was type A, the "more" acidic soil.
62 % OF CMBN % OF CMBN STREAM # BEDROCK TYPE SOIL TYPE
2 100.00 S 100.00 A
4 100.00 S 50.00 A 50.00 B
5 100.00 S 62.16 A 37.84 B
6 "iOO.OO S 60.98 B 39.03 A
9 100.00 S 60.87 A 39.13 B
15 98.79 S 81.83 B 1.21 L 18.18 A
16 59.23 L 97.50 8 5.32 S 2.50 A 25.45 G.O.
17 86.39 L 85.72 B 11.20 S 4.29 A 2.44 G.O.
20 64.40 L 77.63 B 35.60 S 22.38 A
Table 10. Listed are the percentages of the combined bedrock types and percentages of the combined soil types to show correlations in the stream basins. Shale stream basins tend to be common under soil type A ("more" acidic) and limestone stream basins tend to be common under soil type B ("less" acidic), however, there are exceptions. S = shale, L = limestone, and G.O. = glacial overburden.
63 Affects of the Streams on Otsego Lake
The fourth objective of this study was to identify any impacts the streams may have on the water quality of Otsego Lake. Concentration of nutrients that enter the lake from its tributaries are of great concern. Nutrients can originate from non-point sources such as agricultural lands and urban areas. Movement of T-P04 , NOs, CI , and sediment into the streams by soil erosion can be controlled by soil conservation practices and proper landscaping techniques.
The two working farms on the West side of Otsego Lake and approximately 80% of the farms in the northern section of the watershed do follow soil conservation methods (Harter 1993).
Examples of conservation practices are 1) conservation til/age 2) strip cropping and 3) establishment of vegetated strips. The purpose of conservation tillage is to allow some crop residue to remain on the field after harvesting it. This natural land ·coverY reduces the impact of rain drops, increases soil moisture holding capacity, and reduces soil compaction by lesser use of machinery on the field, aI/ of which decrease the possibility of soil erosion (Anonymous 1988 and Harter 1993). Strip cropping is done on hillsides to reduce erosion by altering rows of crops with sad which slows water flow from the fields to the stream (Anonymous 1988). Vegetative filter strips are established on areas of crop land that are alongside streams, ponds, or other water sources (Anonymous 1988). Grass, trees, and other vegetation are planted to reduce soil erosion and runoff of nutrients and pesticides
(Anonymous 1988), Water quality is improved by this method. If these practices are continued the concentrations of nutrients and sediment entering
64 the lake will be heid at a minimum.
Streams on the West side of the lake pose less threat to the lake since most of the basins are undisturbed forest land and hayfields. However, the potential exists for these forested lands to be logged. If harvested in a way as to clear-cut an area, soil erosion during storm events may alter a stream ecosystem and eventually the proximity of the lake near the mouth of the stream.
Stream 2, the urban stream, does contribute to pollution in Otsego Lake.
The phosphorus and chloride loading into the lake were very high in this stream compared to the other streams in the study (Table 2). As explained earlier, the
T-P04 and NOs concentrations were high during certain seasons due to few buffer zones, storm events, and use of de-icing salts.
Preventative measures can be taken by residents in the Village of
Cooperstown and around Otsego Lake to reduce urban runoff into the streams and lake. Yards can be landscaped by planting trees and grass to prevent soil erosion. Rainwater from driveways and rooftops can be re-directed to grassy areas to increase absorption into the soil. Decks or sidewalks should be constructed of materials that will allow rainwater to soak in and direct it down into the soil. Drainage water from paved areas should be collected by building trenches made of gravel to filter the water into the soil (Harman 1991).
65 REFERENCES
Albright, M. 1992-1993. Personal Communication. Biological Field Station,R.D. #2, Box 1066, Cooperstown, NY 13326
Anonymous. 1978. Stevens Water Resources Data Book srd ed. Leupold and Stevens, Inc., OR.
Anonymous. 1988. Conservation System Workshop Manual. University of Illinois College of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service. Pp. 5-4, 5 6, and 5-8.
APHA, AWWA, WPLF. 1989. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. American Public Health Association, NY.
Biggs, B.J.F. and M.E. Close. 1989. Periphyton biomass dynamics in gravel bed rivers: the relative effects of flows and nutrients. Freshwater Biology 22: 209-231.
Blum, J.L. 1957. An ecological study of the algae of the Saline River, MI. Hydrobiol. 9: 361-408.
Brady, N.C. 1974. The Nature and Properties of Soils. 8th ed. Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., NY.
Bushong, S.J. and R.W. Bachman. 1989. In situ nutrient enrichment experiments with periphyton in agricultural streams. Hydrobiol. 178: 1-10.
DeNicola, D.M., K.D. Hoagland, and S.C. Roemer. 1992. Influences of canopy cover on spectral irradiance and periphyton assemblages in a prairie stream. J.N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 11: 391-404.
Dodds, W.K. 1991. Micro-environmental characteristics of filamentous algal communities in flowing freshwaters. Freshwater Biology. 25: 199-209.
Dudley, T.L. and C. M D'Antonio. 1991. The effects of substrate texture, grazing, and disturbance on macroalgal establishment in streams. Eco!. 72: 297-309.
Ertl, M. 1971. A Quantitative Method of Sampling Periphyton from rough substrates. Limnol. Oceanogr. 16:576-577.
66 Fuller, A.L. 1987. A study of nutrient loading/limitation in the four main tributaries to Otsego Lake. in 20th Ann. Rep., S.U.N.Y. Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., S.U.N.Y. Oneonta, Oneonta, NY
Graham, S. 1992. Personal Communication. Biological Field Station,R.D. #2, Box 1066, Cooperstown, NY 13326
Harman, W.N. 1990. Otsego Lake Watershed Geographic Information System Poster. S.U.N.Y. Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., Cooperstown, NY
Ibid., 1991; 2nd printing. The Lake Book: a guide to reducing water pollution at home. Otsego Lake Watershed Planning Report #1. Dccas. Pap. No. 22. S.U.N.Y. Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., S.U.N.Y, Oneonta, Oneonta, NY
Harter, J. 1993. Personal Communication. USDA Soil Conservation Service, R.D. #4, Box 430, Cooperstown, NY 13326.
Hill, W.A. and A.W. Knight. 1987. Experimental analysis of the grazing interaction between a may fly and stream algae. Eco!. 68: 1955-1965.
Ibid., 1988a. Concurrent grazing effects of two stream insects on periphyton. Limnol. Oceanogr. 33: 15-26.
Ibid., 1988b. Nutrient and light limitation of algae in two Northern California streams. J. PhycoL 24: 125-132.
Horner, R.A., E.B. Welch, M.A.Seeley, and J.M. Jacoby. 1990. Responses of periphyton to changes in current velocity, suspended sediment and phosphorus concentration. Freshwater Biology. 24: 215-232.
Iannuzzi, T.J. 1991. A model land use plan for the Otsego Lake watershed. Phase II: the chemical limnology and water quality of Otsego Lake, New York. Occas. Pap. No. 23. S,U.N.Y. Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., S.U.N.Y Oneonta, Oneonta, NY
Jasper, S. and M.L. Bothwell. 1986. Photosynthetic characteristics of lotic periphyton. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 43: 1960-1969.
Keeton, W.T. and J.L. Gould. 1986. Biological Science 4th ed. W.W. Norton & Company, NY.
67 Lamberti, G.A. and V.H. Resh. 1983. Stream periphyton and insect herbivores: an experimental study of grazing by a caddisfly population. Eco!. 64: 1124-1135.
McDiffett, W.F" AW. Beidler, T.F. Dominick, and K.D. McCrea. 1989. Nutrient concentration-stream discharge relationships during storm events in a first-order stream. Hydrobiol. 179: 97-102.
Meyer, J.L., W.H. McDowell, T.L. Bott, J.W. Elwood, C. Ishizaki, J.M. Melack, B.L. Peckarsky, B.J. Peterson, and P.A Rublee. 1988. Elemental dynamics in streams. J.N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 7: 410-432.
Monitek. 1990. Operating and Maintenance Instructions. Hayward, CA.
Morris, D. 1993. Personal Conversation. USDA Soil Conservation Service, A.D. #4, Box 430, Cooperstown, NY 13326.
Ibid., 1990. Otsego Lake Watershed Soils Survey, Soil Interpretations Records. Otsego Soil and Water Conservation District, Cooperstown, NY
Munn, M.D., L.L. Osborne, and M.J. Wiley. 1989. Factors influencing periphyton growth in agricultural streams of Central Illinois. Hydrobiol. 174:89-97.
Nielson, T.S., W.H. Funk, H.L. Gibbons, and R.M. Duffner. 1984. A comparison of periphyton growth on arti'ficial and natural substrates in the upper Spokane River. Northwest Science. 58: 243-248.
Peterson, e.G. and R.J. Stevenson. 1990. Post-spate development of epilithic algal communities in different current environments. Can. J. Bot. 68: 2092 2102.
Pitcairn, C.E.R. and H.A Hawkes. 1973. The role of phosphorus in the growth of Cladophora. Water Research. 7: 159-171.
Power, M.E., R.J. Stout, C.E. Cushing, P.P. Harper, F.R. Hauer, W.J. Mathews, P.B. Moyle, B. Statzner, and I.R. W. DeBadgen. 1988. Biotic and abiotic controls in river and stream communities. J.N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 7: 456 479.
Reisen, W.K. and D.J. Spencer. 1970. Succession and current demand relationships of diatoms on artificial substrates in Prater's Creek, South Carolina. J. Phyco!. 6: 117-121.
68 Rickard, L. V. and D. H. Zenger. 1964. Stratigraphy and paleontology of the Richfield Springs and Cooperstown Quadrangles, N.Y. New York State Museum of Science Service, Bulletin No. 396.
Robinson, C.T. and G.W. Minshall. 1986. Effects of disturbance frequency on stream benthic community structure in relation to canopy cover and season. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 5: 237-248.
Singer, M.J. and R.H. Rust. 1975. Phosphorus in surface runoff from a deciduous forest. J. Environ. Qual. 4: 307-311.
Sohacki, L.P. 1974. Limnologica! studies on Otsego Lake. In]1h Ann. Rep., S.U.N.V: Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., S.U.N.V: Oneonta, Oneonta, NV:
Ibid., 1990-1992. Personal Communication. Biological Field Station,R.D. #2, Box 1066, Cooperstown, NY 13326
Steinman, AD., P.J. Mulholland, D.B. Kirschtel. 1991. Interactive effects of nutrient reduction and herbivory on biomass, taxonomic structure, and phosphorus uptake in lotic periphyton communities. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 48: 1951-1959.
Stevenson. R.J. 1982. How currents on different sides of substrates in streams affect mechanisms of benthic algal accumulation. Int. Rev. Ges. Hydrobiol. 69: 241-262.
Welch, E.B., J.M. Jacoby, R.R. Horner, and M.R. Seeley. 1988. Nuisance biomass levels of periphytic algae in streams. Hydrobiol. 157: 161-168.
Wetzel, R.G. 1983. Limnology 2nd ed. Saunders Publishing Co., Philadelphia, PA.
Whitford, L. A and G.J. Schumacher. 1963. Communities of algae in North Carolina streams and their seasonal relations. Hydrobiol. 22: 133-186.
Whitton, B.A 1970. Biology of Cladophora in freshwaters. Water Research. 4: 457-476.
69 COMPUTER SOFTWARE PACKAGES
Borland International, Inc. 1992. Quattro Pro software. Version 4.0.
Claris Corporation, Inc. September,1989. MacWrite II Release 1.1.
Jandel Scientific. 1990. Sigma Plot software used for integration. Version 4.1.
WordPerfect Corporation. 1990. Version 5.1, Orem UT.
PERIPHYTON IDENTIFICATION SOURCES
Anonymous. 1966. A Guide to the Common Diatoms at Water Pollution Surveillance System Stations. U.S. Department of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Cincinnati, OH.
Hohn, M. 1951. A study of the Distribution of Diatoms (Bacillariceae) in Western New York State, Cornell University Agricultural Experimental Station, Ithaca, NY:
Prescott, G.W. 1962. Algae of the Western Great Lakes.Wm.C. Brown Company Publishers, DuBuque, IA.
Smith, G.M. 1950. The Fresh-water Algae of the United States 2nd ed. McGraw-Hili Book Company Inc., NY:
70 APPENDICES
Appendix A Explanation of Bedrock Types
Appendix B Explanation of Soil Type pH Val ues
Appendix C Collection Dates
Appendix D Sample Graph of Velocity Estimation
Appendix E Chlorophyll a and Ash~free Dry Weight Monthly Averages
Appendix F Total Phosphorus, Nitrate, and Chloride Monthly Averages
Appendix G Turbidity, Velocity, and Temperature Monthly Averages
Appendix H Baseline Monthly Averages of pH
71 APPENDIX A Explanation of Bedrock Types
Dpm • Panther Mountain Formation Dark, bluish-gray shale, arenaceous shale, and flaggy fine-grained argillaceous sandstone.
Dso • Solsville Sandstone Upper part: fine-grained sandstone and arenaceous shale. Middle part: dark gray, thin and unevenly bedded arenaceous shale. Lower part: very dark gray to black fissile shale.
Dot - Otsego Shale Gray, irregularly bedded, lumpy siltstone overlying brownish-gray, fissile, soft shale.
Dch • Chittenango Shale Black, fissile shale with limestone septaria and calcareous concretions.
Sby - Brayman Shale Crumbly green shale overlying dark gray thin-bedded shale, argillaceous and dolomitic limestone.
Due· Cherry Valley Limeatone and Union springs Shale undifferentiated Cherry Valley: black, argillaceous limestone, weathers rusty-orange. Union Springs: fissile, black shale with calcareous concretions and thin limestone beds.
Don • Onondaga limestone Fine-grained, medium gray limestone with shaly partings and black chert. Basal member of massive, gray, coarse-grained crinoidallimestone with white-weathering chert and coral reefs.
Dee - Rickard Hill (Schoharie), Limestone, Carlisle Center Shale, Esopus Shale, and Oriskany Sandstone undifferentiated Mainly buff-weathering, calcareous siltstone and shale assigned to the Carlisle Center Shale. Sporadic occurrence of arenaceous limestone, gray siliceous shale, and brown orthoquartzite assigned to remaining units.
Ok - Kalkberg Limestone Medium grained, thin to medium bedded dark blue limestone with interbedded calcareous shale and black chert.
Ddb • Deansboro (Coeymans) Limestone Coarse-grained, crinoidallimestone with massive, irregular bedding.
Ddj • Jamesville, Clark Reservation, and Elmwood (all Manlius) and Dayville (Coeymans) Limestone Upper part: fine to medium grained, thin and evenly bedded limestone, stromatoporoid biostrome at top. Lower part: coarse-grained, crinoidallimestone, some interbedded fine-grained limestone.
Oct - Thacher (Manlius) Limestone, Chrysler (Rondout) Dolomite, and Cobleskill Limestone undifferentiated Thacher: dark blue-black, fine-grained limestone with stromatoporiod biostromes. Chrysler. argillaceous shaly to thinly bedded dolomite and dolomitic limestone. Cobleskill: argillaceous mottle calcitic and dolomitic limestone.
Dr - Ravena (Coeymans) Limestone Massive and irregularly bedded, coarse-grained crinoidallimestone.
(Rickard et aI., 1964)
72 APPENDIX B
Explanation of Soil Type pH Values
AVERAGED SOIL MAJOR DEPTH IN pH pH RANGE OF pH RANGE OF TYPE SOILS INCHES RANGE MAJOR SOilS SOIL TYPES
1 Lordstown 0-5 4.5 - 6.5 4.5 - 6.5 4.2 - 7.8 5 - 26 4.5 • 6.0 26 - 30 5.1 - 6.0
Mardin o - 8 3.6 - 6.5 3.6 - 8.4 8 - 15 3.6 - 6.5 15 - 60 4.5 . 7.3 60 • 70 5.1 - 8.4
o - 9 4.5 < 6.0 4.5 - 8.4 9 ·29 4.5 - 6.0 29 ·46 4.5 • 6.5 46 - 60 5.1 - 8.4
8 Chenango o - 8 4.5 - 5.5 4.5 - 7.8 4.4 - 7.8 8 - 30 4.5 - 6.0 30 - 72 5.1 - 7.8
Valois 0-7 3.6 - 6.0 3.6 - 7.3 7 - 30 3.6 - 6.0 30 - 47 3.6 - 6.0 47 - 60 4.5 • 7.3
Howard o - 9 5.1 - 7.3 5.1 - 8.4 9 • 24 5.1 - 7.3 24 - 45 5.1 - 7.3 45 - 72 6.6 - 8.4
2 Mongaup o . 12 4.5 - 5.0 4.5 - 5.5 4.5 - 6.5 12 - 22 5.1 - 5.5
Wiildin 0-7 4.5 • 6.0 4.5 • 6.5 7 - 14 4.5 - 6.5 17-44 4.5 • 6.5 44 - 80 5.1 - 6.5
Lewbath o - 8 4.5 - 6.0 4.5 - 6.5 8 - 21 4.5 - 6.0 21 . 52 4.5 - 6.0 52 - 80 4.5 • 6.5
Formal name of each soil type and the pH at specific depths are shown. The pH range of each soil type was obtained by averaging the three lowest pH values of the major soils and averaging the highest pH values of the major soils. This overall range was calculated to be able to categorize the soil types. 73 APPENDIX B CONTINUED
Explanation of Soil Type pH Values
AVERAGED SOiL MAJOR DEPTH IN pH pH RANGE OF pH RANGE OF TYpe SQILS INCHES RANGE MAJOR SOILS SOIL TYpes
11 Wayland o . 7 5.1 · 7.8 5.1 - 8.4 5.3 . 8.2 7 . 38 5.1 · 8.4 38 - 60 5.6 - 8.4
Raynham 0-6 5.1 - 7.3 5.1 - 7.8 6 . 22 5.1 - 7.3 22 . 72 5.6 · 7.8
Canandaigua 0-8 5.2 - 7.8 5.6 - 8.4 8 . 30 6.1 - 7.8 30 - 60 6.6 · 8.4
5 Lansing 0-6 5.1 · 7.3 5.1 · 8.4 5.3 • 8.4 6 . 17 5.1 · 7.3 17 . 42 5.1 · 7.3 42 . 65 6.6 - 8.4
Conesus 0-9 5.1 · 7.3 5.1 · 8.4 9 • 36 5.1 · 7.3 36 - 60 6.6 · 8.4
Honeyoye 0-8 5.6 - 6.5 5.6 - 8.4 8 . 26 5.6 - 7.8 26 - 60 7.4 · 8.4
6 Honeyoye o . 8 5.6 · 6.5 5.6 . 8.4 5.4 . 8.0 8 - 26 5.6 - 7.8 26 . 60 7.4 - 8.4
Farmington 0-8 5.1 - 6.5 5.1 - 7.8 8 - 18 5.6 · 7.8
Wassaic D - 10 5.6 - 7.3 5.6 · 7.8 10 - 28 5.6 - 7.8
74 APPENDIX C
Collection Dates
Collection # CQllection Dates Abbreviation
1 9 May 1991·6 June 1991 = Jun 191 2 6 June 1991 - 3 July 1991 = Jul 192a 3 3 July 1991 - 31 July 1991 = Jul'92b 4 31 July 1991 -28August. 1991 = Aug '91 5 28 August...... 1991 - 25 September 1991 = Sept'91 6 25 September ... 1991 - 23 October 1991 = Oct '91 7 23 October. . . .. 1991 - 20 Novem ber 1991 = Nov '91 8 8 January..... 1992 - 5 February 1992 = Feb '92 9 5 February.... 1992 - 4 March 1992 = Mar '92 10 4 March 1992 - 1 April 1992 = Apr '92a 11 1 April 1992 - 29 April 1992 = Apr 192b 12 29 April 1992 - 27 May 1992 = May '92 13 27 May '" .1992 - 24 Ju'ne 1992 = Jun'92
Beginning and ending dates of each collection month.
75 APPENDIX 0 .. Sample Graph of Velocity Esimation
SrnEAU III VeIoclly .,. Dlsch 7 -j .------.. ------. - ---. ------ 6 ~ - -- - -. ------. -..------. - -~------~ --r'------ ';;' "' ~ !5.. ------. -. ----- . ------.._------~-----~-~.- ~ i:• -.....I •u (J) i 4 U =0 -.> .5 -- +_•••••• - ._ ._._. •• ~ -- _. - _ •• - ._. ---I .~ ._.._ .• .__ ~.~. . __ .._. ._.__.•_.,,__.__._.....• __. .._._" .._ ._. .._ - I _ . __-, . ~, t- __ . .__ ~ __.__, " . "__" .•_. . • __ .._ . ...._ ,, __,_,0- _ "7_ ,--L-~ ~'--r I a 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Slroem Olscharge (cfs) ~regn~~ Shown is the graph used to estimate the stream velocity in stream 16. Graphs similar to this were used to estimate the velocity of the other streams. APPENDIX E Chlorophyll a and Ash-Free Dry Weight Monthly Averages Chlorophyll a - mg/m2/d COLL'N STREAHS DA7:: 15 16 'J "I :C ----~------Jun ' ~ 1 0.u35 O. 119 U.116 0.542 0.20U 0.058 o.818 0.890 0.462 o oj Q ~ Jul '9la 0.056 O. 181 O. 172 0.008 0.045 0.205 0.687 ow"' .. Jul '91b 0.081 O. 102 O. 105 O. 150 0, 112 0.513 0.14 5 0.160 0.223 ,91 Aug O. D29 O. 196 0,045 0.080 o, ?"Q.. J. 0.218 0.580 0.322 0.466 Sept'91 O.lH 0.006 O. 188 '. 0.015 0.061 0.226 O. 195 Oct '91 O. 135 0.114 0.029 0,041 O. 111 0.044 0.244 0.066 Noy , 91 0.0 16 0.006 O. 136 0.072 D.30 1 0.143 0,121 0.005 0.133 0.263 f'e b ' 92 0.012 0.234 1.0 16 o•954 O. 078 Hat '92 0.023 O. 159 O. 944 0.471 0.177 Apr '92a 0.028 i, 424 O.W O. 102 Apr 'nb 0.124 O. 086 1. 051 0.413 3. 225 6.940 5.520 1. 486 May '92 0.083 0.575 0.240 0.049 0.142 0.10 O. J9i Jun '92 0.021 0.054 0.705 0.077 0.356 o.b96 1.275 0.506 0.625 o•519 Ash-Free Dry Weight - mg/m2/ d CUL,L'H STREAM S Dl~~ , 1 ~ . :~ , ~u ." , .------~------iun 'H 29.16 5U9 55,4 0 51.5S 65.03 27,:6 109.37 HUO 149.21 ~ia ~ ~: 25,~4 .iu. ' 33.11 50.24 55.95 " I V I m.4e 1; 9. 70 178. L '~lD 28~.17 iUl 10 f , J 46,33 JUg 81.30 145.42 80.95 11 j I 76 135.56 Au g 1 31 il .27 119.05 31 ,59 33057 6'J , J"~ 101.4J \29.60 125.40 W.4u 'i I .• Sept! 1 105.95 7054 69.84 w.L , b ! 199.60 21U9 205. iO Oct ' 91 89 .J~ 107.94 15.11 17.30 175.98 28.51 ~ 2i.03 56.92 Nov . 91 3i .13 25,63 81.19 26.03 131.98 41.51 35.50 1U2 14 2.10 103.97 Feb '92 1U9 16.27 4,6(; 509065 153.41 11.4 e ~ar . 'J' 1 ~ " ~ 'sz 1O,52 2.38 16.07 J • " ; 2640 20 57.92 oJ • J Apr '92a lUti 4096 246.03 51.18 i:O •~ \ Apr 'nb U9 23,61 1. J4 lll.51 10.lle 261,3 00.40 48 5.3 2 265.~~ ~, May '92 lU1 42. ~ 6 17.86 8• , w 81.14 30.00 n.d Jun '92 12.50 8.33 64052 J0. i 1 lUi j 1. 36 100.4 49.84 9i.21 840 92 77 APPENDIX F Total Phosphorus, Nitrate, and Chloride Monthly Averages Total Phosphorus - fngJl COLL; ~ STREAKS Dm 15 16 17 20 ...... "''P ...... "" ...... , "' ..... "" ... =;, .. '" "' .. _ ...... , ...... 5O .. a ~~ .. ..,~= .... ~ ...... _ ...... _ ..... "'''''''''''''' ___ ...... ___ ... __ JUft '!l 0.01 i LOla 0.016 0.011 o.0Z~ O. i 01 0.037 o.m o. OJ 6 0.05l Ju I '9! a o.m 0.515 0.026 O. D! ~ 0,03 D 0,061 O. D2S D. OJ 7 D. 05 8 D.J 06 Ju1 '91 b O. OJ! 0.5 Z! O.OH O.OJJ 0,062 0.011 D.OJE 0.105 0.052 0.11 0 Au~ '91 0.050 o.m 0,0(1 0.063 D.OH 0.068 0.061 0.129 0,08 Z 0.122 5e pt '91 a,m 0,205 0,0 J7 0.027 0.035 0.051 o.0~ 2 0.099 0.087 0.111 Oct '!! 0.026 0, Oil 0.022 0,021 0,018 0.011 0.019 0, O~ 9 o,on 0.058 No. '91 O. OJ i D.Oll 0,016 O.O! 3 O,O! 2 0.011 0.019 0.010 0.033 o.on Ie b ! 92 0,008 0.059 0.019 0.009 0.019 0.021 0.015 0.028 0, OJ 7 0.078 ~ar '92 0,009 O. 130 0,00 O.OZl 0.050 0.059 0.052 0.010 0.090 0.196 Apr '92& Mli 0.086 O. Oil O.OI! 0.021 0.028 0.021 0.025 0.016 0.063 ,\pr '92b 0.011 O.W 0.010 0.026 D.015 0.056 o.OlB 0.03 ! o.m 0.121 May '92 0.016 0.095 0.035 O.OZl 0,028 o.cn o.on o.oll un 0.050 IU~ '9Z o.m L05 j 0, 0!2 0.01, 0.0,1 0,110 o.OJI 0,0lS 0.019 0.058 Nitrate - mgll COLL' • mms om 15 1& 17 20 "'''' ... ~ ...... " .. <> .. "' ... "' .. <;> '" .. ~- "" ...... "' ...... "'_ ...... co co., ,...... "" ...... ,...... _ ...... "" __ ...... __...... I ~ D "I 0.13 O.H US 0.1, o.Jl I.lZ O.J 3 l. 05 1.6& I. ,0 lui '91 & D.H 0.11 0.64 U2 0.19 0.11 0.51 0.12 I.IZ 0.55 J11 '! 1b US 0.57 1.13 0.36 o.J5 D.H D.5J 0.63 0.58 0.16 AU~ '9 j o.lO 0.15 0,93 o.J6 0.22 0.1& 0.38 0.48 o.6J 0.14 Sept'!I 0.31 O. \8 O. &3 0.18 0.21 0.10 D.n 0.52 0.68 0.30 Oct '91 US 0.09 0.0', 0,0, 0.15 0, %I 0.13 0.99 1.19 D.SI #0' '! i 0,39 O. I! 0.01 0,05 0.11 o,n 0.17 0.98 1.15 1.31 feb '92 0.81 O.l' 0.12 OJl 0.6 ! o.i8 O. II Z. 70 Ul 1.T3 hr '92 O. S2 0.38 0.43 0.31 0.61 O. i 1 0.86 1.62 , .13 ",I Apr' 92& 0.81 o.ll 0, \ 2 O,H 0.6, UI o.s5 1.0 U& 2. ~ I A,r '92b 0.86 O. 22 O. Z1 O. 16 0,19 G.O 0,50 1.1 J U! 2.02 ~al '9Z 0.81 0, ! \ 0, ZI 0,11 o.lI 0,65 0.3 j l. 0~ J. 86 1.85 Ii 0 '92 0.62 0.11 O.6J 0.28 O,q 0.11 D,ll 0.11 I.ZI 0.89 Chloride - mgtl GOWN smAMS om 15 16 17 10 ..... _ ... ~ ~- ...... _", ~~ .... _ ...... ~ ...... v .... ~ ...... "'.:,,"' ...... _ ... '""_ ...... ~ .... _ ..... _ .. _ ...... _ ...... Igft '11 6.51 16.67 5.l1 3.00 LSI 6.l & LI8 US 6,56 4,92 lu I '91 & 6.!( 52.30 U5 !.O3 5.31 IUS U~ 4.63 8.4S 8.48 Jg1 1m !.OJ lU~ 3.11 L19 1.11 lUI U! 6.89 14.42 9.08 lu! '! 1 US I9•I9 U8 3.l5 US 18.l% LSI 7.71 16 .O~ 8.60 Sept'!1 UB 17.16 Lli 1.16 11.01 \9.08 6.02 9.06 16.8~ II. 03 Dc t '91 1.1i lUl 5.63 Ll7 1.27 ILlI 6.ll 7.39 11.29 10.01 ~H '11 9.1 i 21, 19 1.11 6.81 9.06 10,16 8.91 8.90 lU~ IU2 feb '92 1.39 121.&8 U! U5 1.11 Ul 9.0 S. 2~ 8.01 8.26 ,\11 'i2 U3 ll.1l !.5l LSI 1.01 U~ US 6.95 7.75 7.79 Apr '921 6.81 28.10 \.15 L1~ S.P 1.l0 5.05 s.oS 6068 7.39 Apr '9tb 6. 68 12.95 LID 3.55 5.51 6.08 1.10 4.66 S.S6 4,96 hI '92 6. 58 9.01 U7 U, LS9 I.H UJ Ul 6. SO US liD' 92 6.25 11 .J3 US U6 Ul 1.10 3.70 US 7.23 5.17 78 APPENDIX G Turbidity, Velocity, and Temperature Monthly Averages Turbidity - ntu CaLL' H mms om 15 16 11 20 g -_ ... -.___.. _~ __ ..... ~_ ... _ .. ___ ... ," _::a _...... __ ...... _...... __ ... ___ ... _""'''' ____ ... ______...... _...... _____ ...... ______...... _____ ... Jun '91 4, 93 ZILlO 17, H U5 26,53 18,41 11. 83 1.01 21.52 32,13 iul ' Sia UO i987.02 LSO 2.3\ 1,50 72.50 4.53 3.23 \1,25 19.17 iul '91b 2060 1114.26 lUI 6.93 37.33 72.50 22050 3.17 11 ,50 19, 11 Aug '91 1. 9B m.lo 1D, 10 9.98 3D, 00 78.55 9.55 32.03 33,75 \8.00 Sept'91 2,n 22U6 3.79 [,23 l.9l 6,95 2.31 12.33 29,11 2UO Ocl '91 2.l8 7. 10 !.ll 1.90 l.13 U9 1.28 1U 0 9,0 12.70 Hoy , 91 5.35 U5 2.OJ 1.53 U8 1.80 1.37 2.07 UJ 1.90 Fe b '92 3.90 154, 52 LiD 1. 60 3.10 5.20 1. 60 5,50 6.50 5.00 hr '92 1.56 1l3.66 11.68 8.35 17.20 23.04 10.60 9.44 33.5i 50.55 Apr '92a 1.85 142.17 5.60 2. 7J U3 US 2.41 2.52 5.80 8.75 Apr' 92h 8.57 121.6 8 15.02 6.00 23.58 27.08 9.76 5.70 31. 50 52.22 Kay '92 5.15 l8O.06 13.81 \.40 ILIO 19.57 7.42 3,29 15.68 1\.25 i UD ' 92 U3 281.10 10.39 3.01 15.50 15.23 8.67 3.88 18.31 12,13 Velocity - m/s COWl mEAMS om 15 16 11 20 .. - ... _.. -...... _- ..... - ...... - ... - ... --_ ...... - ...... -~- ...... ------..... _-- .. - ..... --...... _.- ...... _-- ..... - ...... iUD '91 1.35 j, 15 1. 50 1.16 l. 30 1.55 U8 2.10 1. i I 0, H Ju 1 '91 a 1.13 1.10 l.!3 0.96 1.l! 1.50 1. 60 1. 50 I.5l 0.69 Ju1 '91 b 1.10 LIS l.!0 0.96 1.10 l. 50 l.T5 \. 40 1.52 0.67 Aug 'SI 1.09 1. 09 1. 20 0,96 1.10 LIS 1.74 l. 40 I.50 0.65 Sept'9l 1.10 I. Il l.!3 0.97 J, 10 1. 50 I. 80 1.40 J.5! D.69 Oct '91 1.15 1.1 J I.! 1 1.09 I. [6 1.65 U2 !. 70 t.51 0,73 Hov '91 1.19 l. 20 l.!7 L08 I. 20 LOt 2. 10 1.60 1.60 0.77 Fe h ' 92 1.58 1.52 U2 J. 31 1.42 I. 61 2. 70 %.SO l. 15 0.96 hr 'n 2.\5 1.10 2.S0 U4 1.92 2.J3 3.80 J. 50 US 1. II Apr '9la 2.S2 1. j I 2,12 1.66 l.87 Ul J.l5 4.DO !.lO 1.61 Apr '92b 2.22 I. 41 2. I0 1.51 l.65 US 2. 70 UO 2, 10 1.54 Kay '92 2.01 I.! 2 U2 1.38 1.!7 2.00 2.45 Z. 70 U5 l. 05 Jutl 192 1.15 l. 15 1.25 1.00 j , 15 ! ,52 1.65 !.60 1.5\ o,i ~ Temperature - °c CaLL' W STREAKS Dm 15 16 17 2D ~ ...... -~ ... " ...... _...... -_ .. - ...... -_ ..... -.., ...... , --_ .. _...... iun '91 16.89 16.88 11 , 19 lUi IUl lU8 16.24 lU5 16.81 IUS JUJ ' 91 a 19.9\ 13.10 lU3 H,60 15.39 13.97 15.52 20.87 18.1 \ 18,14 iuJ '9\ b 21 .53 IU8 IUD IU5 16.0 16.3 ! 15.26 20.83 1S. 71 20. II Aug ,91 21.56 16.35 16.n 15.51 IU5 15.18 16.13 18.82 18.31 18.75 Sept'91 18,29 19,57 j 3, 15 12.74 IU7 lU3 13,75 IU8 15.15 15, 15 Oct '9 J \o.s5 5.26 1,17 1.34 7.90 7.l1 6.n 8,69 7.88 8,04 Hov 'll 6.2\ 1.16 J.5J 2.79 3.17 2.59 2.29 4.97 J.50 LS2 Feb '92 1. 70 0,81 l.!l 0.69 1.88 0,16 0.12 0.83 0.61 I.J! Kar ' 92 1,76 I. 45 1.24 0,70 -0.11 0.36 0,11 1.19 1.15 0,13 Ap r '9 2! LSO 2.02 3.12 2.57 1.52 2.80 2.55 J. 91 3.91 1.65 Ap r ' 9lb U9 US U6 6,4 S U8 6.ll 7.19 1.32 7.11 U5 Kay '92 5.79 \U6 1U9 13.61 \1.81 13 .l i 14082 15.73 It .57 I!. 79 Jun '92 15.93 IUO IU7 15.5\ lU2 15.87 lUI ZD.09 I!.1I J6.11 79 APPENDIX H Baseline Monthly Averages of pH pH STREAM :COLLECTION # ~ I I I ~ I 1 .. ~ 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 AVE 7.35 7.58 7.46 7.40 7.46 7.34 7.37 7.40 7.51 7.19 7. 70 7.83 7.80 I 7.53 2 7.70 7.67 7.65 7.30 7. 33 7. 36 7, 55 7.73 7.77 7.72 7,76 7.68 7.60 4 7.64 7.72 7.57 7.67 7.32 7.53 6.83 7.73 6.54 7.56 7.56 7.69 7.45 5 7.70 7.67 7.69 7.53 7.50 7.30 7.33 6.99 7.07 7.00 7.34 7.69 7.72 7.43 6 7.89 7.72 7.59 7,52 7.25 7.29 7.52 7.26 7.30 7.17 7. 55 7.97 7.81 : 7.53 I I 9 7.95 7.79 7.85 7.78 7.65 7.54 7.64 7.30 7.44 7.31 7.67 7.96 7.95 : 7.68 15 8.02 7.79 7,67 7.63 7. 52 7.66 7.40 7.68 7.54 7. 79 8.02 7.95 I 7.72 16 7.58 7.09 6.93 6.96 6.91 7.41 7.45 7.25 7.42 7.39 7.47 7.64 7,47 7.31 17 7.82 7.53 7,49 7,46 7.43 7.40 7.52 7. 34 7.55 7. 53 7.76 7,85 7.73 7.57 20 1.61 7.35 7.37 7.32 7.39 7.49 7.50 7.35 7.55 7.54 7.68 7.67 7.61 7.49 80