DOCSLIB.ORG

Flow Preferences of Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Three Scottish

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Flow Preferences of Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Three Scottish Flow preferences of benthic macroinvertebrates in three Scottish Rivers by Matthew Thomas OHare This thesis is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Division of Environmental & Evolutionary Biology, Insitute of Biomedical & Life Sciences and the Department of Civil Engineering, University of Glasgow, September 1999. © Matthew T. OHare, September 1999. ProQuest Number: 13818646 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a com plete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 13818646 Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C ode Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 GIASGOW UNIVERSITY LIBRARY This thesis is dedicated to my parents. Abstract Scottish freshwaters have been described as a national resource of international significance. The high quality of Scotland’s lotic systems is integral to the formation of this view. The research presented here aims to provide an insight into the interaction between benthic invertebrates and their hydraulic habitat within some of Scotland’s lotic systems. A further aim of this project is that this information presented here will aid the design of river rehabilitation and management schemes thereby helping maintain the integrity of the opening statement. There is a large amount of literature existing which addresses the interactions between benthic invertebrates and flow parameters; substrate type, vegetation, velocity, depth and near bed stresses. However significant gaps remain in our understanding, particularly at the level of individual taxa preferences. Furthermore, little work has been done in Scotland. To address these gap in the data the distribution of macro- invertebrates in relation to flow parameters were assessed for three rivers representative of highland (River Etive), central belt (Blane Water) and borders rivers (Duneaton Water). The importance of deep and shallow reaches as habitat units for benthic invertebrates was analysed and the methods for categorising reaches into riffles, runs and pools assessed. The analysis showed that at the sites examined differences between invertebrate community in deep and shallow reaches were minimal and limited to the preferences of a number of key species. Categorising reaches into riffles, runs and pools on purely visual grounds was insufficient and some measures of velocity and depth are required if the work is to be used for between site comparisons. Benthic invertebrates did show preferences for flow parameters. At the physical scale examined (Surber sample) community structure was influenced in a limited manner by flow parameters; velocity and depth wre the most important. A gradient from erosional to depositional conditions was observed at two of the sites. Limitations of Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM) as applied to benthic invertebrate habitat identification were identified. Estimates of near bed flow parameters based on point measurements of velocity profiles to samples collected at the scale of Surber samples do not explain any additional variation in the distribution of benthic invertebrates. Analysis of individual flow preferences of macroinvertebrates suggest that to identify flow preference curves, an aim of IFIM, finer scale habitat measurements are needed. Laboratory experiments were carried out to identify the upper velocity tolerances of some benthic invertebrates; Tipulidae and Gammarus pulex. The results show that individuals were flexible in their responses to high velocities. What constituted ‘high’ velocity was taxa specific. Benthic invertebrate community structure was investigated in areas of the Blane Water vegetated with Callitriche instagnalis. Submerged vegetated patches supported a greater abundance of invertebrates than bare substrate. The hydraulic habitat of the macrophyte stands was more diverse than that of bare substrate with higher velocities occurring on the outside of the macrophyte stands than on the bare substrate. Simuliidae dominated the outside of the stands, the area exposed to the highest velocities. The invertebrate community on the outside of the plant stands was less equitable than that found at the root-substrate interface. It is suggested that macrophytes can be used as a tool in the rehabilitation of hydraulic habitat for benthic invertebrates in Scottish rivers. The importance of these results are discussed in the context of river rehabilitation and our ecological understanding of benthic invertebrate community structure. CONTENTS ABSTRACT..................................................................................................................................................................... i CONTENTS...................................................................................................................................................................iii DECLARATION...........................................................................................................................................................vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.......................................................................................................................................vii CHAPTER 1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 1 1.1 T h e b io l o g y o f fl o w in g -w a t e r b e n t h ic m a c r o -invertebrates ................................................................1 1.2 L o t ic s y s t e m s : P h y sic a l s t r u c t u r e ........................................................................................................................ 7 1.2.1 Life, light, temperature & water chemistry ............................................................................................ 8 1.2.2 Drainage networks and Channel Structure .......................................................................................... 10 1.2.3 Scale o f physical processes, implications for ecology ........................................................................12 1.3 L o t ic s y s t e m s : e c o l o g ic a l interpretation .......................................................................................................13 1.4 Spec ific s o f St u d y ........................................................................................................................................................... 17 1.5 T h e sis o u t l in e ....................................................................................................................................................................23 CHAPTER 2: HYDRAULIC AND INVERTEBRATE SURVEYS OF REACHES IN THE BLANE WATER, RIVER ETIVE AND DUNEATON WATER................................................................................................. 25 2.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................... 25 2.2 M e t h o d s ................................................................................................................................................................................30 2.2.1 Site choice..................................................................................................................................................30 2.2.2 Description of sites ...................................................................................................................................31 2.2.3 Field measurements..................................................................................................................................33 2.2.4 Estimation of hydraulic parameters from velocity profiles ............................................................... 34 2.2.5 Statistical analysis .................................................................................................................................... 36 2.3 R e s u l t s ...................................................................................................................................................................................38 2.3.1 General Conditions...................................................................................................................................38 2.3.2 Comparison of flow conditions at different sites................................................................................ 40 2.3.3 Substrate available in the reaches ......................................................................................................... 44 2.3.4 Distribution of Turbulent and Laminar flow within reaches .............................................................48 2.3.5 Species lists.................................................................................................................................................50 2.3.6 Reach preferences of taxa ....................................................................................................................... 53 2.4 D is c u s s io n ...........................................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • South Lanarkshire Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Energy
    South Lanarkshire Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Energy Report by IronsideFarrar 7948 / February 2016 South Lanarkshire Council Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Energy __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ CONTENTS 3.3 Landscape Designations 11 3.3.1 National Designations 11 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page No 3.3.2 Local and Regional Designations 11 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 3.4 Other Designations 12 1.1 Background 1 3.4.1 Natural Heritage designations 12 1.2 National and Local Policy 2 3.4.2 Historic and cultural designations 12 1.3 The Capacity Study 2 3.4.3 Tourism and recreational interests 12 1.4 Landscape Capacity and Cumulative Impacts 2 4.0 VISUAL BASELINE 13 2.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACT AND CAPACITY METHODOLOGY 3 4.1 Visual Receptors 13 2.1 Purpose of Methodology 3 4.2 Visibility Analysis 15 2.2 Study Stages 3 4.2.1 Settlements 15 2.3 Scope of Assessment 4 4.2.2 Routes 15 2.3.1 Area Covered 4 4.2.3 Viewpoints 15 2.3.2 Wind Energy Development Types 4 4.2.4 Analysis of Visibility 15 2.3.3 Use of Geographical Information Systems 4 5.0 WIND TURBINES IN THE STUDY AREA 17 2.4 Landscape and Visual Baseline 4 5.1 Turbine Numbers and Distribution 17 2.5 Method for Determining Landscape Sensitivity and Capacity 4 5.1.1 Operating and Consented Wind Turbines 17 2.6 Defining Landscape Change and Cumulative Capacity 5 5.1.2 Proposed Windfarms and Turbines (at March 2015) 18 2.6.1 Cumulative Change
    [Show full text]
  • Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 1 Table 1. Current Taxonomic Keys and the Level of Taxonomy Routinely U
    Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Table 1. Current taxonomic keys and the level of taxonomy routinely used by the Ohio EPA in streams and rivers for various macroinvertebrate taxonomic classifications. Genera that are reasonably considered to be monotypic in Ohio are also listed. Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Species Pennak 1989, Thorp & Rogers 2016 Porifera If no gemmules are present identify to family (Spongillidae). Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Cnidaria monotypic genera: Cordylophora caspia and Craspedacusta sowerbii Platyhelminthes Class (Turbellaria) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nemertea Phylum (Nemertea) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Phylum (Nematomorpha) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Nematomorpha Paragordius varius monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Ectoprocta monotypic genera: Cristatella mucedo, Hyalinella punctata, Lophopodella carteri, Paludicella articulata, Pectinatella magnifica, Pottsiella erecta Entoprocta Urnatella gracilis monotypic genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Polychaeta Class (Polychaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Annelida Oligochaeta Subclass (Oligochaeta) Thorp & Rogers 2016 Hirudinida Species Klemm 1982, Klemm et al. 2015 Anostraca Species Thorp & Rogers 2016 Species (Lynceus Laevicaudata Thorp & Rogers 2016 brachyurus) Spinicaudata Genus Thorp & Rogers 2016 Williams 1972, Thorp & Rogers Isopoda Genus 2016 Holsinger 1972, Thorp & Rogers Amphipoda Genus 2016 Gammaridae: Gammarus Species Holsinger 1972 Crustacea monotypic genera: Apocorophium lacustre, Echinogammarus ischnus, Synurella dentata Species (Taphromysis Mysida Thorp & Rogers 2016 louisianae) Crocker & Barr 1968; Jezerinac 1993, 1995; Jezerinac & Thoma 1984; Taylor 2000; Thoma et al. Cambaridae Species 2005; Thoma & Stocker 2009; Crandall & De Grave 2017; Glon et al. 2018 Species (Palaemon Pennak 1989, Palaemonidae kadiakensis) Thorp & Rogers 2016 1 Ohio EPA Macroinvertebrate Taxonomic Level December 2019 Taxon Subtaxon Taxonomic Level Taxonomic Key(ies) Informal grouping of the Arachnida Hydrachnidia Smith 2001 water mites Genus Morse et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of the Family Chironomidae (Diptera) of Finland
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 441: 63–90 (2014)Checklist of the family Chironomidae (Diptera) of Finland 63 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.441.7461 CHECKLIST www.zookeys.org Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Checklist of the family Chironomidae (Diptera) of Finland Lauri Paasivirta1 1 Ruuhikoskenkatu 17 B 5, FI-24240 Salo, Finland Corresponding author: Lauri Paasivirta ([email protected]) Academic editor: J. Kahanpää | Received 10 March 2014 | Accepted 26 August 2014 | Published 19 September 2014 http://zoobank.org/F3343ED1-AE2C-43B4-9BA1-029B5EC32763 Citation: Paasivirta L (2014) Checklist of the family Chironomidae (Diptera) of Finland. In: Kahanpää J, Salmela J (Eds) Checklist of the Diptera of Finland. ZooKeys 441: 63–90. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.441.7461 Abstract A checklist of the family Chironomidae (Diptera) recorded from Finland is presented. Keywords Finland, Chironomidae, species list, biodiversity, faunistics Introduction There are supposedly at least 15 000 species of chironomid midges in the world (Armitage et al. 1995, but see Pape et al. 2011) making it the largest family among the aquatic insects. The European chironomid fauna consists of 1262 species (Sæther and Spies 2013). In Finland, 780 species can be found, of which 37 are still undescribed (Paasivirta 2012). The species checklist written by B. Lindeberg on 23.10.1979 (Hackman 1980) included 409 chironomid species. Twenty of those species have been removed from the checklist due to various reasons. The total number of species increased in the 1980s to 570, mainly due to the identification work by me and J. Tuiskunen (Bergman and Jansson 1983, Tuiskunen and Lindeberg 1986).
    [Show full text]
  • DNA Barcoding
    Full-time PhD studies of Ecology and Environmental Protection Piotr Gadawski Species diversity and origin of non-biting midges (Chironomidae) from a geologically young lake PhD Thesis and its old spring system Performed in Department of Invertebrate Zoology and Hydrobiology in Institute of Ecology and Environmental Protection Różnorodność gatunkowa i pochodzenie fauny Supervisor: ochotkowatych (Chironomidae) z geologicznie Prof. dr hab. Michał Grabowski młodego jeziora i starego systemu źródlisk Auxiliary supervisor: Dr. Matteo Montagna, Assoc. Prof. Łódź, 2020 Łódź, 2020 Table of contents Acknowledgements ..........................................................................................................3 Summary ...........................................................................................................................4 General introduction .........................................................................................................6 Skadar Lake ...................................................................................................................7 Chironomidae ..............................................................................................................10 Species concept and integrative taxonomy .................................................................12 DNA barcoding ...........................................................................................................14 Chapter I. First insight into the diversity and ecology of non-biting midges (Diptera: Chironomidae)
    [Show full text]
  • Diptera: Chironomidae) from the Czech Republic
    ISSN 2336 - 3193 Acta Mus. Siles. Sci. Natur., 65: 143 - 147 , 2016 DOI: 10.1515/cszma - 2016 - 001 8 P ublished : online August 201 6, in print 1 st September 2016 Some new records of chironomids (Diptera: Chironomidae) from the Czech Republic Peter Bitušík & Katarína Trnková Some new records of chironomids (Diptera: Chironomidae) from the Czech Republic. – Acta Mus. Siles. Sci. Natur. 65: 143 - 1 47 , 2016. Abstract : Six chironomid species: Paraboreochlus minutissimus (Strobl, 1894), Trissopelopia longimanus (Staeger 1839), Boreoheptagyia monticola (Serra - Tosio, 1964), Cricotopus (s.str.) similis Goetghebuer 1921, Heleniella serratosioi Ringe, 1976, Krenosmittia camptophleps (Edwards, 1929), were recorded in Czech Republic for the first time . The pupal exuviae were collected in July 2009 from Otava River in the vicinity of Rejštejn village in the central part of the Bohemian Forest. The notes on known distribution and ecology of the species are presented. Key words : Chironomidae, Podonominae, Tanypodinae, Diamesinae, Orthocl adiinae, ecological notes, distribution Introduction Pupal exuviae sampling has proved to be an excellent tool to identify the occurrence, distribution and ecology of chironomids in various water biotopes. This method greatly contributed, among other things, to the knowledge of the regional fauna (see e.g. B itušík 1993). Last time, Syrovátka & Langton (2015) demonstrated again that even one sample taken from a locality can bring surprising results and this paper also proves it. During the limnological investigations of the lakes in the Bohemian Forest, one sa mple of pupal exuviae was taken from Otava River in the vicinity of Rejštejn village in July 28, 2009. Here we present the results of our survey.
    [Show full text]
  • The Clyde Valley Wader Initiative
    The Glasgow Naturalist (2014) Volume 26, Part 1, 41-50 Table 1. Trend of breeding waders in the UK (Risely et al. 2012). The Clyde Valley Wader Initiative: How applied ecology is informing Breeding waders Population trend (1995 – 2011) the conservation of waders in Curlew -45% South Lanarkshire LaPwing -41% Oystercatcher -16% Toby Wilson1 and Dan Brown2 Redshank -42% Snipe +8* 1Conservation Officer, RSPB Scotland, 10 Park *This masKs a significant Post-war decline (Smart et al. Quadrant, Glasgow G3 6BS [email protected] 2008). 2Globally Threatened SPecies Officer, RSPB Scotland, 2 Lochside View, Edinburgh ParK, These PoPulation declines triggered a significant Edinburgh EH12 9DH amount of research into breeding waders and this applied ecology has given us an understanding of E-mail: [email protected] both the needs of this grouP of birds and the liKely drivers of their decline (Sheldon et al. 2004). The grassland breeding waders that the Project ABSTRACT focuses on, namely curlews, laPwings, Most sPecies of grassland breeding wading birds oystercatchers, redshanKs and sniPe all favour (‘breeding waders’) have suffered dramatic declines slightly different habitats for foraging and nesting. in Scotland over the Past 30 years and are now a LaPwings and redshanks generally favour shorter priority for the worK of the RSPB. The UPPer Clyde swards, with few or scattered tussocks, whilst Valley (including the Duneaton, Elvan, Daer and curlews and sniPe prefer longer swards, with denser Medwin Waters and the River Clyde) continues to tussocks (Youngs, 2005). Collectively, however they hold regionally, and for some sPecies nationally, tend to be associated with less intensively managed imPortant PoPulations of breeding laPwing, farmland, with high water levels; a degree of cover – oystercatcher, curlew, sniPe and redshanK.
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Turbine Development in Glasgow and the Clyde Valley
    Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Turbine Development in Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Overview Report Prepared by LUC for the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Strategic Development Plan Authority September 2014 Project Title: Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Turbine Development in Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Client: Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Strategic Development Plan Authority In association with: Scottish Natural Heritage East Dunbartonshire Council East Renfrewshire Council Glasgow City Council Inverclyde Council North Lanarkshire Council Renfrewshire Council South Lanarkshire Council West Dunbartonshire Council Version Date Version Details Prepared by Checked by Approved by Principal 0.1 15 November Internal draft LUC PDM NJ 2013 0.2 22 November Interim draft for LUC PDM NJ 2013 discussion 1.0 25 March Draft LUC NJ NJ 2014 2.0 6 June 2014 Final LUC PDM NJ 3.0 11 September Revised LUC PDM NJ 2014 H:\1 Projects\58\5867 LIVE GCV wind farm study\B Project Working\REPORT\Overview report\GCV Report v3 20140911.docx Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Turbine Development in Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Overview Report Prepared by LUC for the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Strategic Development Plan Authority September 2014 Planning & EIA LUC GLASGOW Offices also in: Land Use Consultants Ltd Registered in England Design 37 Otago Street London Registered number: 2549296 Landscape Planning Glasgow G12 8JJ Bristol Registered Office: Landscape Management Tel: 0141 334 9595 Edinburgh 43 Chalton Street Ecology Fax: 0141 334 7789 London NW1
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatic Insects: Holometabola – Diptera, Suborder Nematocera
    Glime, J. M. 2017. Aquatic Insects: Holometabola – Diptera, Suborder Nematocera. Chapt. 11-13b. In: Glime, J. M. Bryophyte 11-13b-1 Ecology. Volume 2. Bryological Interaction. Ebook sponsored by Michigan Technological University and the International Association of Bryologists. Last updated 15 April 2021 and available at <http://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/bryophyte-ecology2/>. CHAPTER 11-13b AQUATIC INSECTS: HOLOMETABOLA – DIPTERA, SUBORDER NEMATOCERA TABLE OF CONTENTS Suborder Nematocera, continued ........................................................................................................... 11-13b-2 Chironomidae – Midges .................................................................................................................. 11-13b-2 Emergence ............................................................................................................................... 11-13b-4 Seasons .................................................................................................................................... 11-13b-5 Cold-water Species .................................................................................................................. 11-13b-6 Overwintering .......................................................................................................................... 11-13b-7 Current Velocity ...................................................................................................................... 11-13b-7 Diversity .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 New Ohio and Indiana Records of Aquatic Insects (Ephemeroptera
    Ohio Biological Survey Notes 9: 1–15, 2019. © Ohio Biological Survey, Inc. New Ohio and Indiana Records of Aquatic Insects (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera, Coleoptera: Elmidae, Diptera: Chironomidae) MICHAEL J. BOLTON1, SARAH K. MACY2, R. EDWARD DEWALT3, AND LUKE M. JACOBUS4 1Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Surface Water, 4675 Homer Ohio Lane, Groveport, OH 43125, Michael.Bolton@epa. ohio.gov; 2Formerly with the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency; current e-mail: [email protected]; 3University of Illinois, Illinois Natural History Survey, 1816 S Oak St., Champaign, IL 61820, [email protected]; 4Indiana University–Purdue University Columbus, 4601 Central Avenue, Columbus, IN 47203, [email protected]. Abstract: New state records and additional locations for rarely collected species are reported for Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Plecoptera (stoneflies), Trichoptera (caddisflies), Coleoptera: Elmidae (riffle beetles), and Diptera: Chironomidae (chironomids, non-biting midges, midges). These specimen records result primarily from Ohio Environmental Protection Agency biomonitoring of Ohio streams and from records found in the Purdue University Entomological Research Collection and the Illinois Natural History Survey Insect Collection; a few records were derived from material housed in two other collections. New state records for Ohio consist of the mayflies Acentrella rallatoma Burian & Myers, Acerpenna pygmaea (Hagen), Anafroptilum album (McDunnough), Anafroptilum minor group species 1, Anafroptilum
    [Show full text]
  • Females Do Count: Documenting Chironomidae (Diptera) Species Diversity Using DNA Barcoding
    Org Divers Evol DOI 10.1007/s13127-010-0034-y ORIGINAL ARTICLE Females do count: Documenting Chironomidae (Diptera) species diversity using DNA barcoding Torbjørn Ekrem & Elisabeth Stur & Paul D. N. Hebert Received: 19 April 2010 /Accepted: 8 October 2010 # The Author(s) 2010. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract Because the family Chironomidae, or non-biting Keywords DNA barcoding . Biodiversity. Insects . midges, is one of the most species-rich groups of macro- Freshwater . Diptera . Chironomidae invertebrates in freshwater habitats, species-level identifi- cations of chironomids are important for biodiversity assessments in these ecosystems. Morphology-based spe- Introduction cies identifications from adult female chironomids usually are considerably more difficult than from adult males, or The family Chironomidae (Diptera), or non-biting midges, is even impossible; thus, the females are often neglected in a species-rich group of flies that includes more than 1200 community assessments. We used DNA barcoding to valid species in Europe (Sæther and Spies 2004)andan investigate how inclusion of the females influenced the estimated more than 10,000 species worldwide (Armitage et species count from springs and spring brooks at Sølendet al. 1995). The group is very ecologically diverse, with larvae Nature Reserve in Central Norway. By means of the recorded from terrestrial, semi-terrestrial and aquatic envi- barcodes we were able to identify 77.6% of the females to ronments. Among the aquatic species most are restricted to species by associating them with males from the study site freshwater habitats, but several lineages have independently or from other regions, whereas the remaining, unassociated colonised marine environments.
    [Show full text]
  • Chironomidae of the Southeastern United States: a Checklist of Species and Notes on Biology, Distribution, and Habitat
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln US Fish & Wildlife Publications US Fish & Wildlife Service 1990 Chironomidae of the Southeastern United States: A Checklist of Species and Notes on Biology, Distribution, and Habitat Patrick L. Hudson U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service David R. Lenat North Carolina Department of Natural Resources Broughton A. Caldwell David Smith U.S. Evironmental Protection Agency Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usfwspubs Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons Hudson, Patrick L.; Lenat, David R.; Caldwell, Broughton A.; and Smith, David, "Chironomidae of the Southeastern United States: A Checklist of Species and Notes on Biology, Distribution, and Habitat" (1990). US Fish & Wildlife Publications. 173. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usfwspubs/173 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Fish & Wildlife Service at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in US Fish & Wildlife Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Fish and Wildlife Research 7 Chironomidae of the Southeastern United States: A Checklist of Species and Notes on Biology, Distribution, and Habitat NWRC Library I7 49.99:- -------------UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Fish and Wildlife Research This series comprises scientific and technical reports based on original scholarly research, interpretive reviews, or theoretical presentations. Publications in this series generally relate to fish or wildlife and their ecology. The Service distributes these publications to natural resource agencies, libraries and bibliographic collection facilities, scientists, and resource managers. Copies of this publication may be obtained from the Publications Unit, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Refinement of the Basin-Wide Index of Biotic Integrity for Non-Tidal Streams and Wadeable Rivers in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
    Refinement of the Basin-Wide Index of Biotic Integrity for Non-Tidal Streams and Wadeable Rivers in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed APPENDICES Appendix A: Taxonomic Classification Appendix B: Taxonomic Attributes Appendix C: Taxonomic Standardization Appendix D: Rarefaction Appendix E: Biological Metric Descriptions Appendix F: Abiotic Parameters for Evaluating Stream Environment Appendix G: Stream Classification Appendix H: HUC12 Watershed Characteristics in Bioregions Appendix I: Index Methodologies Appendix J: Scoring Methodologies Appendix K: Index Performance, Accuracy, and Precision Appendix L: Narrative Ratings and Maps of Index Scores Appendix M: Potential Biases in the Regional Index Ratings Appendix Citations Appendix A: Taxonomic Classification All taxa reported in Chessie BIBI database were assigned the appropriate Phylum, Subphylum, Class, Subclass, Order, Suborder, Family, Subfamily, Tribe, and Genus when applicable. A portion of the taxa reported were reported under an invalid name according to the ITIS database. These taxa were subsequently changed to the taxonomic name deemed valid by ITIS. Table A-1. The taxonomic hierarchy of stream macroinvertebrate taxa included in the Chesapeake Bay non-tidal database.
    [Show full text]