DOCSLIB.ORG

Baseline Macroinvertebrate Monitoring 2015-2017 for the Upper Missouri River: Building a Long-Term Data Set – Flushing Flow Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Baseline Macroinvertebrate Monitoring 2015-2017 for the Upper Missouri River: Building a Long-Term Data Set – Flushing Flow Study UMOWA Missouri River Project Baseline Aquatic Surveys Montana Biological Survey March 2018 Baseline Macroinvertebrate Monitoring 2015-2017 for the Upper Missouri River: Building a Long-term Data Set – Flushing Flow Study Prepared for: Pete Petersen, Alan Shaw and Sherry Meador Project Managers/Co-Chairs Missouri River Monitoring Station at Cascade, MT Summer 2017 Prepared by: David Stagliano, Aquatic Ecologist Montana Biological Survey Helena, Montana March 2018 UMOWA Missouri River Project Baseline Aquatic Surveys Montana Biological Survey March 2018 Table of Contents Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................... 3 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 4 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 6 2.0 Methods ................................................................................................................................................ 6 2.1 Habitat and Physical Water Sampling .......................................................................................... 6 2.2 Macroinvertebrate Sampling .......................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Flushing Flow Study ........................................................................................................................ 8 2.4 Taxonomic Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 9 2.5 Sample Sites .................................................................................................................................... 9 3.0 Results ................................................................................................................................................ 13 3.1 Wolf Creek Bridge to Craig Missouri River section .................................................................. 23 3.1.1 Flushing Flow Results ............................................................................................................... 25 3.2 Missouri River U/S and D/S of the Dearborn River (MO_DEAR) ........................................... 27 3.3 Missouri River D/S Hardy Creek Bridge (MO_HARDYBR) ..................................................... 28 3.4 Missouri River near Cascade (MO_Cascade) .......................................................................... 29 3.5 Missouri River Focal Invasive Species ....................................................................................... 29 4.0 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................ 32 5.0 Literature Cited................................................................................................................................... 34 Tables Table 1. UMOWA / MDEQ Sampling Study Reach locations .................................................... 10 Table 2. Cumulative mayfly, stonefly and caddisfly (EPT) species occurrences ....................... 16 Figures Map 1. Missouri River sampling location overview .................................................................. 10 Photo 1. Hess sampling procedure in a shallow riffle area ......................................................... 7 Photo 2. Extensive weed beds growing at Hardy Bridge by the summer period … ................... 22 Figure 1. Flushing Flow Study Design ...................................................................................... 10 Figure 1a. USGS Missouri River streamflow graph for the 2017 sampling period ..................... 11 Figure 1b. USGS Missouri River streamflow graph for 2011-2017 sampling period ................. 12 2 UMOWA Missouri River Project Baseline Aquatic Surveys Montana Biological Survey March 2018 Figure 2a. Macroinvertebrate metrics densities and total taxa for all sample sites.. ................... 17 Figure 2b. Macroinvertebrate EPT metrics for all sample sites by season. ................................ 18 Figure 2c. Macroinvertebrate metrics for all sample sites by season. ....................................... 19 Figure 2d. Macroinvertebrate metrics HBI for all sample sites by season. ................................ 20 Figure 3a. Macroinvertebrate annual metric comparisons 2015-2017. ..................................... 21 Figure 3b. Macroinvertebrate annual metric comparisons 2015-2017. ..................................... 22 Figure 4. FFS Macroinvertebrate densities at MO_LPPC_US 2015-2017. ............................... 25 Figure 5. FFS MO_LPPC_US and Craig % EPT 2015-2017. ................................................... 26 Figure 6. FFS Benthic Organic Matter through the 2017 seasons ............................................ 27 Figure 7. New Zealand mudsnail seasonal densities from 2015, 2016 & 2017. ........................ 30 Figure 8. New Zealand mudsnail annual average densities 2015-2017. ................................... 31 APPENDICES Appendix A Site Photographs Appendix B Macroinvertebrate seasonal summary metric tables Appendix C Macroinvertebate taxa list and abundance Appendix D Habitat and Physical Site Conditions Acknowledgements We would like to thank Pat Hunter, Pete Petersen, Alan Shaw and rest of the UMOWA Board for funding this project again through Montana Biological Survey (MBS). Report review and editing was provided by Braden Lewis. Field work coordination and logistics were greatly expedited by Pete Cardinal. Field survey assistance during the 2017 sampling from Becca Troianos and Jaime Larese was invaluable. I want to sincerely thank Braden Lewis for assistance with additional sample processing during the winter. All photos in the report were taken by MBS, unless otherwise noted 3 UMOWA Missouri River Project Baseline Aquatic Surveys Montana Biological Survey March 2018 Executive Summary UMOWA began the Missouri River Baseline Monitoring program in 2015, and has continued this effort into 2017. In 2015 we established seven long-term, baseline monitoring stations for sampling benthic macroinvertebrates and water chemistry within the Blue Ribbon section of the Missouri River between Wolf Creek and Cascade and two sites upstream of Canyon Ferry Lake. Aside from a long-term PPL monitoring site below Holter Dam, until the 2015 study, very few macroinvertebrate samples have been collected below the Wolf Creek Bridge (see MDEQ 2007). Therefore, the project goals of UMOWA’s program are: 1) to conduct standardized and quantitative macroinvertebrate surveys to serve as the baseline standards for future monitoring efforts within this Missouri River section 2) to establish seasonal macroinvertebrate population estimates and community characteristics to assess aquatic biointegrity and 3) to understand the insect dynamics in relation to increasing aquatic macrophyte beds, algae and minimal sediment-flushing lows. In June, July and October of 2017, we collected 70 quantitative, replicated macroinvertebrate samples, habitat data and water chemistry measurements at seven Missouri River sites. UMOWA also collected water chemistry (WQ) samples seasonally in summer and fall in 2017. Total nitrogen and phosphorus levels for the fall samples were above MDEQ’s numeric nutrient standard across the sites (see UMOWA WQ Report). Other than indirect effects of increased weed bed extents, we can find no direct correlation with the Missouri River’s (WQ) and macroinvertebrate population characteristics. Spring run-off events from Little Prickly Pear Creek and the Dearborn River continue to have significant effects on the densities and diversity of insect communities in the Missouri River below those tributaries, especially by adding mayfly (E), stonefly (P) and caddisfly (T) taxa (EPT taxa). At the Missouri River upstream of Little Prickly Pear Creek, we observed the highest densities of macroinvertebrates (>20,000 per m2) and New Zealand mudsnails (>300 per m2) since the study began; these densities were significantly “knocked-back” by high flows in June 2017, compared to summer of 2016. High densities and standing crops of Baetis (BWOs), Tricorythodes (Tricos), Chironomidae (midges), and Ephemerella (PMDs) in the spring samples within the Wolf Creek to Craig section “hatch-out” by the summer period leading to lowered summer densities of these taxa, and a dominance of non-insect taxa (scuds, sowbugs, worms and snails). EPT taxa (mostly mayflies) gradually build up their lower summer populations though the fall sampling period, but are likely hampered by aquatic vegetation growth; therefore, non-insect taxa still dominate the fall benthos at most sites upstream from the Dearborn River and in the weed beds. Percentages of sowbugs (Caecidotea), scuds (Gammarus, Hyalella and Crangonyx) and other non- insect taxa in the samples were highest during this fall period when EPT taxa contributions were lowest. Of the 20 species of caddisflies that were collected across all sites, the net spinning caddis, Cheumatopsyche and the long-horned caddis, Oecetis were usually the most prevalent. Caddisflies were more common during the spring and summer sampling periods at some sites, but as a percentage of total EPT were usually much lower than mayflies. While stonefly taxa are not
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ARTHROPOD COMMUNITIES and PASSERINE DIET: EFFECTS of SHRUB EXPANSION in WESTERN ALASKA by Molly Tankersley Mcdermott, B.A./B.S
    Arthropod communities and passerine diet: effects of shrub expansion in Western Alaska Item Type Thesis Authors McDermott, Molly Tankersley Download date 26/09/2021 06:13:39 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/11122/7893 ARTHROPOD COMMUNITIES AND PASSERINE DIET: EFFECTS OF SHRUB EXPANSION IN WESTERN ALASKA By Molly Tankersley McDermott, B.A./B.S. A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Biological Sciences University of Alaska Fairbanks August 2017 APPROVED: Pat Doak, Committee Chair Greg Breed, Committee Member Colleen Handel, Committee Member Christa Mulder, Committee Member Kris Hundertmark, Chair Department o f Biology and Wildlife Paul Layer, Dean College o f Natural Science and Mathematics Michael Castellini, Dean of the Graduate School ABSTRACT Across the Arctic, taller woody shrubs, particularly willow (Salix spp.), birch (Betula spp.), and alder (Alnus spp.), have been expanding rapidly onto tundra. Changes in vegetation structure can alter the physical habitat structure, thermal environment, and food available to arthropods, which play an important role in the structure and functioning of Arctic ecosystems. Not only do they provide key ecosystem services such as pollination and nutrient cycling, they are an essential food source for migratory birds. In this study I examined the relationships between the abundance, diversity, and community composition of arthropods and the height and cover of several shrub species across a tundra-shrub gradient in northwestern Alaska. To characterize nestling diet of common passerines that occupy this gradient, I used next-generation sequencing of fecal matter. Willow cover was strongly and consistently associated with abundance and biomass of arthropods and significant shifts in arthropod community composition and diversity.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks Bioblitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks BioBlitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event Natural Resource Report NPS/GOGA/NRR—2016/1147 ON THIS PAGE Photograph of BioBlitz participants conducting data entry into iNaturalist. Photograph courtesy of the National Park Service. ON THE COVER Photograph of BioBlitz participants collecting aquatic species data in the Presidio of San Francisco. Photograph courtesy of National Park Service. The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks BioBlitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event Natural Resource Report NPS/GOGA/NRR—2016/1147 Elizabeth Edson1, Michelle O’Herron1, Alison Forrestel2, Daniel George3 1Golden Gate Parks Conservancy Building 201 Fort Mason San Francisco, CA 94129 2National Park Service. Golden Gate National Recreation Area Fort Cronkhite, Bldg. 1061 Sausalito, CA 94965 3National Park Service. San Francisco Bay Area Network Inventory & Monitoring Program Manager Fort Cronkhite, Bldg. 1063 Sausalito, CA 94965 March 2016 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Article Genetic Diversity of Freshwater Leeches in Lake Gusinoe (Eastern Siberia, Russia)
    Hindawi Publishing Corporation e Scientific World Journal Volume 2014, Article ID 619127, 11 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/619127 Research Article Genetic Diversity of Freshwater Leeches in Lake Gusinoe (Eastern Siberia, Russia) Irina A. Kaygorodova,1 Nadezhda Mandzyak,1 Ekaterina Petryaeva,1,2 and Nikolay M. Pronin3 1 Limnological Institute, 3 Ulan-Batorskaja Street, Irkutsk 664033, Russia 2 Irkutsk State University, 5 Sukhe-Bator Street, Irkutsk 664003, Russia 3 Institute of General and Experimental Biology, 6 Sakhyanova Street, Ulan-Ude 670047, Russia Correspondence should be addressed to Irina A. Kaygorodova; [email protected] Received 30 July 2014; Revised 7 November 2014; Accepted 7 November 2014; Published 27 November 2014 Academic Editor: Rafael Toledo Copyright © 2014 Irina A. Kaygorodova et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The study of leeches from Lake Gusinoe and its adjacent area offered us the possibility to determine species diversity. Asa result, an updated species list of the Gusinoe Hirudinea fauna (Annelida, Clitellata) has been compiled. There are two orders and three families of leeches in the Gusinoe area: order Rhynchobdellida (families Glossiphoniidae and Piscicolidae) and order Arhynchobdellida (family Erpobdellidae). In total, 6 leech species belonging to 6 genera have been identified. Of these, 3 taxa belonging to the family Glossiphoniidae (Alboglossiphonia heteroclita f. papillosa, Hemiclepsis marginata,andHelobdella stagnalis) and representatives of 3 unidentified species (Glossiphonia sp., Piscicola sp., and Erpobdella sp.) have been recorded. The checklist gives a contemporary overview of the species composition of leeches and information on their hosts or substrates.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017
    Washington Natural Heritage Program List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017 The following list of animals known from Washington is complete for resident and transient vertebrates and several groups of invertebrates, including odonates, branchipods, tiger beetles, butterflies, gastropods, freshwater bivalves and bumble bees. Some species from other groups are included, especially where there are conservation concerns. Among these are the Palouse giant earthworm, a few moths and some of our mayflies and grasshoppers. Currently 857 vertebrate and 1,100 invertebrate taxa are included. Conservation status, in the form of range-wide, national and state ranks are assigned to each taxon. Information on species range and distribution, number of individuals, population trends and threats is collected into a ranking form, analyzed, and used to assign ranks. Ranks are updated periodically, as new information is collected. We welcome new information for any species on our list. Common Name Scientific Name Class Global Rank State Rank State Status Federal Status Northwestern Salamander Ambystoma gracile Amphibia G5 S5 Long-toed Salamander Ambystoma macrodactylum Amphibia G5 S5 Tiger Salamander Ambystoma tigrinum Amphibia G5 S3 Ensatina Ensatina eschscholtzii Amphibia G5 S5 Dunn's Salamander Plethodon dunni Amphibia G4 S3 C Larch Mountain Salamander Plethodon larselli Amphibia G3 S3 S Van Dyke's Salamander Plethodon vandykei Amphibia G3 S3 C Western Red-backed Salamander Plethodon vehiculum Amphibia G5 S5 Rough-skinned Newt Taricha granulosa
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution of the Ribbon Leech in North Dakota
    109 Distribution of the Ribbon Leech in North Dakota CHRISTOPHER M. PENNUTOI and MALCOLM G. BUTLER Department of Zoology, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105 ABSTRACT-The distribution of the ribbon leech, NepMlopsis obscwra, was examined in the Central Lowland and Missouri Coteau regions of North Dakota. The leech was found in 12 of3S ponds sampled during a two-year period. Leeches were trapped with throated metal cans and burlap sacks baited with frozen fish parts. Leech ocamence was positively correlated with maximum depth, mean conductivity, and percent littoral rock cover. Leech occurrence was not correlated with surface area or latiwde. Ponds containing N. obscwra were characterized by maximum depths greater than or equal to 1.0 m, mean conductivity values between 500 and 2300 uS/em', and some measurable littoral rock cover. Investiga­ tions concerning all life cycle anributes ofleech populations should be pursued in North Dakota to assist resource managers in establishing harvest policy for this important bait source. Key words: NepMlopsis obscwra, conductivity, maximum depth, prairie wetlands, ribbon leech The ribbon leech (Nephelopsis obscura Verrill; Hirudinea: Erpobdellidae) is an importantfish baitin the upper Midwestprizedby walleye and bass anglers. This leech occurs in ponds throughout the North Central and northern Rocky Mountain states in the U.S. and Canada (Herrmann 1970a, Klemm 1985). Collinsetal. (1981) suggested that Type III and IV wetlands with a silty bottom and no sport fish are ideal leech habitats in Minnesota. This leech has a semelparous, but potentially iteroparous, life cycle and attains a maximum fresh weight of 150-1200 mg, depending on geographic region (Davies and Everett 1977, Davies 1978, Linton et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Publications of Glenn B
    Publications: Glenn B. Wiggins, Curator Emeritus, Entomology 2010 Wiggins, G.B. “No small matters. Introducing Biological Notes on an Old Farm: Exploring Common Things in the Kingdoms of Life.” ROM Magazine, 42(2): 29- 31. * 2009 Wiggins, G.B. Biological Notes on an Old Farm: Exploring Common Things in the Kingdoms of Life. Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. 2008 Wiggins, G.B. and D.C. Currie. “Trichoptera Families.” In An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America, edited by R.W. Merritt, K.W. Cummins, and M.B. Berg. Kendall/Hunt, Dubuque, Iowa (4th edition, revised). 2007 Wiggins, G.B. “Architects under water.” American Entomologist, 53(2): 78-85. 2005b Wiggins, G.B. “Review: Vernal pools, natural history and conservation by Elizabeth A. Colburn.” Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 24(4): 1009-1013. 2005a Vineyard, R.N., G.B. Wiggins, H.E. Frania, and P.W. Schefter. “The caddisfly genus Neophylax (Trichoptera: Uenoidae).” Royal Ontario Museum Contributions in Science, 2: 1-141. * 2004b Wiggins, G.B. Caddisflies: The Underwater Architects. University of Toronto Press. 2004a Wiggins, G.B. “Caddisflies: glimpses into evolutionary history.” Rotunda, 38(2): 32-39. 2002 Wiggins, G.B. “Biogeography of amphipolar caddisflies in the subfamily Dicosmoecinae (Trichoptera, Limnephilidae).” Mitteilungen aus dem Museum für Naturkunde in Berlin, Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift, 49(2002) 2: 227- 259. 2001 Wiggins, G.B. “Construction behavior for new pupal cases by case-making caddis larvae: Further comment. (Trichoptera: Integripalpia).” Braueria, 28: 7-9. 1999b Gall, W.K. and G.B. Wiggins. “Evidence bearing on a sister-group relationship between the families Phryganeidae and Plectrotarsidae (Trichoptera).” Proceedings of the Ninth International Symposium on Trichoptera, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 1998, edited by H.
    [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]
  • Table of Contents 2
    Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists (SAFIT) List of Freshwater Macroinvertebrate Taxa from California and Adjacent States including Standard Taxonomic Effort Levels 1 March 2011 Austin Brady Richards and D. Christopher Rogers Table of Contents 2 1.0 Introduction 4 1.1 Acknowledgments 5 2.0 Standard Taxonomic Effort 5 2.1 Rules for Developing a Standard Taxonomic Effort Document 5 2.2 Changes from the Previous Version 6 2.3 The SAFIT Standard Taxonomic List 6 3.0 Methods and Materials 7 3.1 Habitat information 7 3.2 Geographic Scope 7 3.3 Abbreviations used in the STE List 8 3.4 Life Stage Terminology 8 4.0 Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species 8 5.0 Literature Cited 9 Appendix I. The SAFIT Standard Taxonomic Effort List 10 Phylum Silicea 11 Phylum Cnidaria 12 Phylum Platyhelminthes 14 Phylum Nemertea 15 Phylum Nemata 16 Phylum Nematomorpha 17 Phylum Entoprocta 18 Phylum Ectoprocta 19 Phylum Mollusca 20 Phylum Annelida 32 Class Hirudinea Class Branchiobdella Class Polychaeta Class Oligochaeta Phylum Arthropoda Subphylum Chelicerata, Subclass Acari 35 Subphylum Crustacea 47 Subphylum Hexapoda Class Collembola 69 Class Insecta Order Ephemeroptera 71 Order Odonata 95 Order Plecoptera 112 Order Hemiptera 126 Order Megaloptera 139 Order Neuroptera 141 Order Trichoptera 143 Order Lepidoptera 165 2 Order Coleoptera 167 Order Diptera 219 3 1.0 Introduction The Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists (SAFIT) is charged through its charter to develop standardized levels for the taxonomic identification of aquatic macroinvertebrates in support of bioassessment. This document defines the standard levels of taxonomic effort (STE) for bioassessment data compatible with the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioassessment protocols (Ode, 2007) or similar procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • (Trichoptera: Limnephilidae) in Western North America By
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Robert W. Wisseman for the degree of Master ofScience in Entomology presented on August 6, 1987 Title: Biology and Distribution of the Dicosmoecinae (Trichoptera: Limnsphilidae) in Western North America Redacted for privacy Abstract approved: N. H. Anderson Literature and museum records have been reviewed to provide a summary on the distribution, habitat associations and biology of six western North American Dicosmoecinae genera and the single eastern North American genus, Ironoquia. Results of this survey are presented and discussed for Allocosmoecus,Amphicosmoecus and Ecclisomvia. Field studies were conducted in western Oregon on the life-histories of four species, Dicosmoecusatripes, D. failvipes, Onocosmoecus unicolor andEcclisocosmoecus scvlla. Although there are similarities between generain the general habitat requirements, the differences or variability is such that we cannot generalize to a "typical" dicosmoecine life-history strategy. A common thread for the subfamily is the association with cool, montane streams. However, within this stream category habitat associations range from semi-aquatic, through first-order specialists, to river inhabitants. In feeding habits most species are omnivorous, but they range from being primarilydetritivorous to algal grazers. The seasonal occurrence of the various life stages and voltinism patterns are also variable. Larvae show inter- and intraspecificsegregation in the utilization of food resources and microhabitatsin streams. Larval life-history patterns appear to be closely linked to seasonal regimes in stream discharge. A functional role for the various types of case architecture seen between and within species is examined. Manipulation of case architecture appears to enable efficient utilization of a changing seasonal pattern of microhabitats and food resources.
    [Show full text]
  • User Manual Beta Sdam Aw.Pdf
    User Manual for a Beta Streamflow Duration Assessment Method for the Arid West of the United States Version 1.0 March 1, 2021 Prepared by Raphael Mazor1, Brian Topping2, Tracie-Lynn Nadeau2,3, Ken M. Fritz4, Julia Kelso5, Rachel Harrington6, Whitney Beck2, Kenneth McCune1, Heili Lowman1, Aaron Allen7, Robert Leidy8, James T. Robb9, and Gabrielle C. L. David10. 1 Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. Costa Mesa, CA 2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds. Washington, D.C. 3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 10. Portland, OR 4 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Office of Research and Development. Cincinnati, OH 5 Oak Ridge Institute of Science and Education (ORISE) Fellow at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds. Washington, D.C. 6 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 8. Denver, CO 7 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers–South Pacific Division. Los Angeles, CA 8 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 9. San Francisco, CA. 9 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – South Pacific Division. Sacramento, CA 10 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers—Engineer Research and Development Center Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Hanover, NH. Suggested citation: Mazor, R.D., Topping, B., Nadeau, T.-L., Fritz, K.M., Kelso, J., Harrington, R., Beck, W., McCune, K., Lowman, H., Allen, A., Leidy, R., Robb, J.T., and David, G.C.L. 2021. User Manuel for a Beta Streamflow Duration Assessment Method for the Arid West of the United States. Version 1.0. Document No. EPA- 800-5-21001 Cover images The top row shows the biological indicators included in the streamflow duration assessment method for the Arid West: number of hydrophytic plant species, such as seep monkey flowers; abundance of aquatic invertebrates, such as black fly larvae; evidence of mayfly, stonefly, and caddisfly taxa, such as a larva or pupal case of Dicosmoecus gilvipes (photo credit: California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Aquatic Bioassessment Lab); and algal cover on the streambed.
    [Show full text]
  • Arhynchobdellida (Annelida: Oligochaeta: Hirudinida): Phylogenetic Relationships and Evolution
    MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 30 (2004) 213–225 www.elsevier.com/locate/ympev Arhynchobdellida (Annelida: Oligochaeta: Hirudinida): phylogenetic relationships and evolution Elizabeth Bordaa,b,* and Mark E. Siddallb a Department of Biology, Graduate School and University Center, City University of New York, New York, NY, USA b Division of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY, USA Received 15 July 2003; revised 29 August 2003 Abstract A remarkable diversity of life history strategies, geographic distributions, and morphological characters provide a rich substrate for investigating the evolutionary relationships of arhynchobdellid leeches. The phylogenetic relationships, using parsimony anal- ysis, of the order Arhynchobdellida were investigated using nuclear 18S and 28S rDNA, mitochondrial 12S rDNA, and cytochrome c oxidase subunit I sequence data, as well as 24 morphological characters. Thirty-nine arhynchobdellid species were selected to represent the seven currently recognized families. Sixteen rhynchobdellid leeches from the families Glossiphoniidae and Piscicolidae were included as outgroup taxa. Analysis of all available data resolved a single most-parsimonious tree. The cladogram conflicted with most of the traditional classification schemes of the Arhynchobdellida. Monophyly of the Erpobdelliformes and Hirudini- formes was supported, whereas the families Haemadipsidae, Haemopidae, and Hirudinidae, as well as the genera Hirudo or Ali- olimnatis, were found not to be monophyletic. The results provide insight on the phylogenetic positions for the taxonomically problematic families Americobdellidae and Cylicobdellidae, the genera Semiscolex, Patagoniobdella, and Mesobdella, as well as genera traditionally classified under Hirudinidae. The evolution of dietary and habitat preferences is examined. Ó 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]