DOCSLIB.ORG

1600011937.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1600011937.Pdf INSTREAM FLOWS RESEARCH AND VALIDATION METHODOLOGY FRAMEWORK 2016–2017 Guadalupe, San Antonio, Mission, and Aransas Rivers and Mission, Copano, Aransas, and San Antonio Bays Basin FINAL REPORT Prepared for Texas Water Development Board Prepared by San Antonio River Authority Dr. Timothy Bonner (Texas State University) Dr. Jacquelyn Duke (Baylor University) BIO-WEST, Inc. August 15, 2017 PURSUANT TO HOUSE BILL 1 AS APPROVED BY THE 84TH TEXAS LEGISLATURE, THIS STUDY REPORT WAS FUNDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF STUDYING ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW NEEDS FOR TEXAS RIVERS AND ESTUARIES AS PART OF THE ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PHASE OF THE SENATE BILL 3 PROCESS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL FLOWS ESTABLISHED BY THE 80TH TEXAS LEGISLATURE. THE VIEWS AND CONCLUSIONS EXPRESSED HEREIN ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHOR(S) AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD. Table of Contents Table of Contents 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Aquatic ........................................................................................................................... 3 1.1.1 Study Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Riparian .......................................................................................................................... 4 1.2.1 Study Questions and Hypotheses ............................................................................................. 7 1.3 Floodplains ..................................................................................................................... 8 1.3.1 Study Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 9 2 Methods and Materials ............................................................................................................ 9 2.1 Aquatics ......................................................................................................................... 9 2.1.1 Aquatic Field Studies ............................................................................................................. 10 2.1.2 Aquatic Historical Analysis .................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Riparian ........................................................................................................................ 14 2.2.1 Field Sampling ....................................................................................................................... 15 2.2.2 Estimate of Inundation ........................................................................................................... 17 2.2.3 Statistical Analyses ................................................................................................................. 18 2.3 Floodplains ................................................................................................................... 19 3 Results, Discussion, and Interdisciplinary Assessment ......................................................... 22 3.1 Aquatics ....................................................................................................................... 22 3.1.1 Aquatic Field Studies ............................................................................................................. 22 3.1.2 Aquatic Historical Analysis .................................................................................................... 50 3.2 Riparian ........................................................................................................................ 54 3.2.1 Goliad Site .............................................................................................................................. 54 3.2.2 Gonzales Site .......................................................................................................................... 58 3.2.3 Community and Basin Assessments ....................................................................................... 66 3.2.4 Comparison of Methodologies ............................................................................................... 66 3.2.5 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 68 3.3 Floodplain .................................................................................................................... 69 3.3.1 Fish Communities ................................................................................................................... 69 3.3.2 Connection Discharges ........................................................................................................... 71 3.3.3 Standards Evaluation .............................................................................................................. 72 4 Multidisciplinary Evaluation ................................................................................................. 73 4.1 Summary of Key Ecological Components ................................................................... 73 4.1.1 Aquatics .................................................................................................................................. 73 4.1.2 Riparian .................................................................................................................................. 73 4.1.3 Floodplains ............................................................................................................................. 74 Instream Flows Research and Validation Methodology Framework August 2017 TWDB 2016–2017 i TWDB Contract # 1600011937 Table of Contents 4.1.4 Ecological Response Summary .............................................................................................. 74 4.1.5 Validation Methodology Assessment Tool ............................................................................ 75 5 Recommendations for Future Applied Research and Long-Term Monitoring ..................... 75 5.1 Focused Applied Research ........................................................................................... 75 5.2 Long-term Monitoring ................................................................................................. 76 6 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................ 76 7 References .............................................................................................................................. 76 List of Figures Figure 1. Reference map of locations within the GSA (taken from GSA BBEST 2011). Specific sites used in this study are reported in the text. ......................................... 10 Figure 2. An example site showing 75 random points selected within each level. (Image source: Google Earth.) ............................................................................................. 16 Figure 3. Example GIS screenshot showing water’s edge, quadrats, mature trees, and elevation contours. ................................................................................................... 18 Figure 4. Lower Guadalupe River floodplain lakes evaluated as part of this study. ............... 20 Figure 5. Hydrograph from USGS gage # 08173900 on the Guadalupe River—Gonzales from 2011 to 2017 showing Round One (dashed line) and Round Two (dotted line) sampling periods. ..................................................................................................... 23 Figure 6. Relative abundances among tier and flow magnitudes for slack-water fishes (top), moderately swift-water fishes (middle), and swift-water fishes (bottom) in riffle habitats. .................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 7. Relative abundances among flow tiers at Guadalupe River—Comfort and Medina River—Bandera in riffle habitats. Black circles represent pre-flood estimates; open circles represent post-flood estimates. ..................................................................... 27 Figure 8. Densities (number of individuals per m2) among flow tiers at Guadalupe River— Comfort and Medina River—Bandera in riffle habitats. Black circles represent pre- flood estimates; open circles represent post-flood estimates. .................................. 28 Figure 9. Relative abundances among flow tiers at Guadalupe River—Gonzales, Guadalupe River—Cuero, and San Antonio—Goliad in riffle habitats. Black circles represent pre-flood estimates; open circles represent post-flood estimates. ........................... 30 Figure 10. Densities among flow tiers at Guadalupe River—Gonzales, Guadalupe River— Cuero, and San Antonio—Goliad in riffle habitats. Black circles represent pre-flood estimates; open circles represent post-flood estimates. ........................................... 31 Instream Flows Research and Validation Methodology Framework August 2017 TWDB 2016–2017 ii TWDB Contract # 1600011937 Table of Contents Figure 11. Relative abundances among flow tiers at Cibolo Creek—Falls City in riffle habitats. Black circles represent pre-flood estimates; open circles represent post-flood estimates. .................................................................................................................. 32 Figure 12. Density among
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Winter Feeding As an Overwintering Survival Strategy in Young-Of-The-Year Winter Flounder Richard J
    This article was downloaded by: [Department Of Fisheries] On: 25 September 2012, At: 20:24 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Transactions of the American Fisheries Society Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utaf20 Winter Feeding as an Overwintering Survival Strategy in Young-of-the-Year Winter Flounder Richard J. Bell a a Graduate School of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island, South Ferry Road, Narragansett, Rhode Island, 02882, USA Version of record first published: 13 Jun 2012. To cite this article: Richard J. Bell (2012): Winter Feeding as an Overwintering Survival Strategy in Young-of-the-Year Winter Flounder, Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 141:4, 855-871 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00028487.2012.675896 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
    [Show full text]
  • GCP LCC Regional Hypotheses of Ecological Responses to Flow
    Gulf Coast Prairie Landscape Conservation Cooperative Regional Hypotheses of Ecological Responses to Flow Alteration Photo credit: Brandon Brown A report by the GCP LCC Flow-Ecology Hypotheses Committee Edited by: Mary Davis, Coordinator, Southern Aquatic Resources Partnership 3563 Hamstead Ct, Durham, North Carolina 27707, email: [email protected] and Shannon K. Brewer, U.S. Geological Survey Oklahoma Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, 007 Agriculture Hall, Stillwater, Oklahoma 74078 email: [email protected] Wildlife Management Institute Grant Number GCP LCC 2012-003 May 2014 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank the GCP LCC Flow-Ecology Hypotheses Committee members for their time and thoughtful input into the development and testing of the regional flow-ecology hypotheses. Shannon Brewer, Jacquelyn Duke, Kimberly Elkin, Nicole Farless, Timothy Grabowski, Kevin Mayes, Robert Mollenhauer, Trevor Starks, Kevin Stubbs, Andrew Taylor, and Caryn Vaughn authored the flow-ecology hypotheses presented in this report. Daniel Fenner, Thom Hardy, David Martinez, Robby Maxwell, Bryan Piazza, and Ryan Smith provided helpful reviews and improved the quality of the report. Funding for this work was provided by the Gulf Coastal Prairie Landscape Conservation Cooperative of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and administered by the Wildlife Management Institute (Grant Number GCP LCC 2012-003). Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Suggested Citation: Davis, M. M. and S. Brewer (eds.). 2014. Gulf Coast Prairie Landscape Conservation Cooperative Regional Hypotheses of Ecological Responses to Flow Alteration. A report by the GCP LCC Flow-Ecology Hypotheses Committee to the Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership (SARP) for the GCP LCC Instream Flow Project.
    [Show full text]
  • DESCRIPTIONS, CLASSIFICATIONS, and EXPLANATIONS of PROCESSES and PATTERNS STRUCTURING and MAINTAINING INLAND FISH COMMUNITIES By
    DESCRIPTIONS, CLASSIFICATIONS, AND EXPLANATIONS OF PROCESSES AND PATTERNS STRUCTURING AND MAINTAINING INLAND FISH COMMUNITIES by Cody A. Craig, M.S. A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Council of Texas State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy with a Major in Aquatic Resources and Integrative Biology May 2020 Committee Members: Timothy H. Bonner, Chair Noland H. Martin Chris Nice Emmanuel Frimpong Keith Gido COPYRIGHT by Cody A. Craig 2020 FAIR USE AND AUTHOR’S PERMISSION STATEMENT Fair Use This work is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94-553, section 107). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgement. Use of this material for financial gain without the author’s express written permission is not allowed. Duplication Permission As the copyright holder of this work I, Cody A. Craig, authorize duplication of this work, in whole or in part, for educational or scholarly purposes only. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I thank my major advisor, Timothy H. Bonner, who has been my mentor throughout my time at Texas State University. I also thank my committee members who provided comments on my dissertation. Thank you to all of my past and present lab mates as well as undergraduates who have helped on all of my projects during my time as a masters and PhD student. This work is truly collaborative in nature and does not represent one person’s accomplishments. Lastly, to my family and friends, without you this would all be pointless.
    [Show full text]
  • PEASE-DISSERTATION-2018.Pdf (2.692Mb)
    Variation and plasticity and their interaction with urbanization in Guadalupe Bass populations on and off the Edwards Plateau by Jessica E. Pease A Dissertation In Wildlife, Aquatic, and Wildlands Science and Management Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTORAL OF PHILOSOPHY Approved Dr. Timothy Grabowski Co-Chair of Committee Dr. Allison Pease Co-Chair of Committee Dr. Preston Bean Dr. Adam Kaeser Mark Sheridan Dean of the Graduate School August 2018 Copyright 2018, Jessica E. Pease Texas Tech University, Jessica E. Pease, August 2018 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I want to express my extreme gratitude to my advisors Dr. Tim Grabowski and Dr. Allison Pease for their continued efforts, mentorship, and support throughout this project. This research and the completion of my dissertation would not have been possible without their guidance and contributions. I would also like to thank my committee members Dr. Preston Bean and Dr. Adam Kaeser for their continued support and guidance throughout this project. Additionally, I want to thank all the individuals that have helped with both field and lab work over the past five years. A. Adams, C. Alejandrez, K. Aziz, P. Bean, M. Berlin, T. Birdsong, S. Boles, J. Botros, D. Bradsby, C. Carter, M. Casarez, D. Chilleri, A. Cohen, B. Cook, G. Cummings, M. DeJesus, J. East, S. Fritts, K. Garmany, D. Geeslin, M. Gilbert, D. Gossett, A. Grubh, R. Hawkenson, D. Hendrickson, S. Hill, A. Horn, F. Howell, L. Howell, M. Kelly, G. Kilcrease, K. Kolodziejcyk, T. Lane, D. Leavitt, K. Linner, C.
    [Show full text]
  • Drainage Basin Checklists and Dichotomous Keys for Inland Fishes of Texas
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 874: 31–45Drainage (2019) basin checklists and dichotomous keys for inland fishes of Texas 31 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.874.35618 CHECKLIST http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Drainage basin checklists and dichotomous keys for inland fishes of Texas Cody Andrew Craig1, Timothy Hallman Bonner1 1 Department of Biology/Aquatic Station, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas 78666, USA Corresponding author: Cody A. Craig ([email protected]) Academic editor: Kyle Piller | Received 22 April 2019 | Accepted 23 July 2019 | Published 2 September 2019 http://zoobank.org/B4110086-4AF6-4E76-BDAC-EA710AF766E6 Citation: Craig CA, Bonner TH (2019) Drainage basin checklists and dichotomous keys for inland fishes of Texas. ZooKeys 874: 31–45. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.874.35618 Abstract Species checklists and dichotomous keys are valuable tools that provide many services for ecological stud- ies and management through tracking native and non-native species through time. We developed nine drainage basin checklists and dichotomous keys for 196 inland fishes of Texas, consisting of 171 native fishes and 25 non-native fishes. Our checklists were updated from previous checklists and revised using reports of new established native and non-native fishes in Texas, reports of new fish occurrences among drainages, and changes in species taxonomic nomenclature. We provided the first dichotomous keys for major drainage basins in Texas. Among the 171 native inland fishes, 6 species are considered extinct or extirpated, 13 species are listed as threatened or endangered by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and 59 spe- cies are listed as Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) by the state of Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • The Interaction Between Water Turbidity and Visual
    THE INTERACTION BETWEEN WATER TURBIDITY AND VISUAL SENSORY SYSTEMS AND ITS IMPACT ON FRESHWATER FISHES By © Sylvia Fitzgibbon A thesis submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Ocean Sciences Memorial University of Newfoundland January 2020 St John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador Abstract An aquatic ecosystem’s sensory environment has a profound influence on multiple aspects of the life cycles of its resident species, including mating cues, predation, and sensory systems. This thesis consists of laboratory studies and a meta-analysis that examines how changing aquatic sensory information, by reducing visual information through turbidity manipulation, can impact fish species. The laboratory studies focused on the consequences of changes in turbidity on the predator-prey interactions of two native Newfoundland fish species (three-spined stickleback prey, Gasterosteus aculeatus, and predatory brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis). The results illustrated that reducing visibility may give a prey species a sensory advantage over a predator, potentially influencing their dynamics. In order to understand the impacts of turbidity on a larger scale, I undertook a meta-analysis on fluctuations in fish communities in relation to shifts in turbidity due to reservoir creation. The analyses indicated that differential changes in turbidity influence the biodiversity and evenness of the visual subset of the fish community. Understanding how changes to the sensory environment can influence aquatic ecosystems is crucial when providing predictions for the potential outcomes of proposed anthropogenic activities altering water turbidity. ii Acknowledgements I thank my supervisor, Dr. Mark Abrahams, for his support, guidance, and patience in shaping the course of my research.
    [Show full text]
  • Étude De L'évolution Et De La Diversité Des Poissons D'eau Douce De L
    Étude de l’évolution et de la diversité des poissons d’eau douce de l’Amérique du Nord par une approche génétique comparative Thèse Julien April Doctorat en biologie Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) Québec, Canada © Julien April, 2013 Résumé La variation génétique des poissons d‟eau douce de l‟Amérique du Nord a été analysée aux niveaux intraspécifique et interspécifique afin d‟approfondir les connaissances actuelles sur l‟évolution de la biodiversité et de faciliter la conservation de cette richesse. Premièrement, une banque de données de séquence d‟ADN mitochondrial (codes-barres génétiques) a été générée pour 5674 individus représentant 752 espèces dans le but d‟établir un outil d‟identification moléculaire et de fournir une calibration de l‟incertitude taxonomique. Cette analyse démontre que 90 % des espèces peuvent être délimitées à l‟aide de codes-barres génétiques. De plus, il apparait que la taxonomie actuelle pourrait largement sous-estimer la diversité des poissons d‟eau douce dans son ensemble tout en surestimant la diversité spécifique de certains groupes particuliers. Deuxièmement, les niveaux de divergences génétiques intraspécifique et interspécifique ont été étudiés afin d‟identifier les mécanismes évolutifs responsables des patrons généraux de répartition de la biodiversité. L‟hypothèse suggérant un rôle combiné des cycles glaciaires du Pléistocène et de l‟activité métabolique influençant les taux de mutation est appuyée par les données représentant la presque totalité des poissons d‟eau douce de l‟Amérique du Nord. Troisièmement, les patrons de variation aux niveaux de l‟ADN mitochondrial et de l‟ADN nucléaire (AFLP) ont été analysés parmi plusieurs paires de lignées évolutives codistribuées dans le nord-est de l‟Amérique afin de vérifier l‟importance du processus de spéciation allopatrique.
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting Book for the National Fish Habitat Board
    Blanco River, Texas Rapid Creek, SD Meeting of the National Fish Habitat Board Hosted by: Meeting Book for The October 17-18, 2018 National Fish Habitat Board National Fish Habitat Board Meeting October 17-18. 2018 Tab 0 National Fish Habitat Board Meeting Kerr Wildlife Management Area in Hunt, Texas October 17 - 18, 2018 Agenda and Board Book Tabs Conference line: 800.768.2983, Passcode: 8383466 Wednesday WebEx link: https://cc.callinfo.com/r/1d87t9g40p95x&eom Wednesday, October 17, 2018 9:00 – 9:30 Welcome Craig Bonds (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Director of Inland Fisheries) 9:30 – 10:30 Welcome, Attendance, Introductions, and Housekeeping Tab 1 Chris Moore (Acting Board Desired outcomes: Chair, Mid-Atlantic Fishery • Welcome and introduce new Board members. Management Council) • Board action to: o Approve the October meeting agenda and June meeting summary. • Chair Nomination Committee nominates a new NFHP Board Chair, Board votes on nominee. • Board awareness of 2019 meeting schedule. o Discuss and decide on a 2019 fall meeting location. 10:30 – 11:00 FHP Workshop Summary TBD Desired outcome: • Board awareness of FHP workshop discussions, accomplishments, and next steps. 11:00 – 11:15 BREAK 11:15 – 11:45 Update from the Fish & Wildlife Service David Hoskins (Board Desired outcome: Member, US Fish and • Board awareness of status of FY19 funding and NFHP Wildlife Service) staff support from FWS. 11:45 – 12:15 Legislative Update Tab 2 Christy Plumer (Board Desired outcome: Member, Theodore • Board awareness of status of NFHP legislation and Roosevelt Conservation committee actions to contribute resources for FHP Partnership) educational toolkit.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquatics, Ichthyology & Wetland Ecology
    Aquatics, Ichthyology & Wetland Ecology Texas Master Naturalist Program El Camino Real Chapter Dec 6, 2013 Aquatic Ecology Module • Water • Watersheds • Streams & stream habitats • Ponds & pond management 540 ¤£77 §¨¦ ¤£62 Oklahoma City Fort Smith Amarillo §¨¦40 Norman ¤£287 §¨¦44 §¨¦35 LittleLittle RockRock LawtonLawton §¨¦27 ¤£69 §¨¦30 £70 ¤ Brazos River Witchita Falls ¤£75 ¤£82 LubbockLubbock ¤£75 ¤£81 87 ¤£ Plano Dallas Metro Area Fort Worth Bossier City Abilene Tyler 35W§¨¦ §¨¦35E Midland §¨¦49 Odessa Brazos River 20 Waco §¨¦ San Angelo §¨¦10 45 Bryan §¨¦ 210 Austin §¨¦ Beaumont ¤£59 Port Arthur Houston Metro Area ¤£281 San Antonio §¨¦37 Copperas Creek Bosque River Childress Creek Aquilla Creek Spring Creek Leon River Brazos River Navasota River South Leon River Meridian Creek Christmas Creek Neils Creek Big Creek Middle Bosque River Hog Creek Coryell Creek Tehuacana Creek Big Creek Big Bennett Creek Cowhouse Creek Cow Bayou Steele Creek Simms Creek Lampasas River Owl Creek Pond Creek Sulphur Creek Little Brazos RiverBig Elm Creek Walnut Creek Cedar Creek Mesquite Creek Salado Creek Little River Wickson Creek Berry Creek Cedar Creek San Gabriel River Davidson Creek Gibbons Creek Brushy Creek Old River Yegua Creek West Yegua Creek Types of aquatic systems • Lotic – streams, rivers • Lentic – ponds, lakes, reservoirs Lotic systems – springs, streams, rivers • Energy source is from the • Flow is important outside (exogenous) • Gradient • Allochthonous production • Meanders and Bends (from elsewhere) • Flood plains • Organisms near/on/in
    [Show full text]
  • JOHNSON N.Pdf
    GENETIC INVESTIGATIONS REVEAL NEW INSIGHTS INTO THE DIVERSITY, DISTRIBUTION, AND LIFE HISTORY OF FRESHWATER MUSSELS (BIVALVIA: UNIONIDAE) INHABITING THE NORTH AMERICAN COASTAL PLAIN By NATHAN ALLEN JOHNSON A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2017 © 2017 Nathan Allen Johnson To all my collaborators, colleagues, family, and friends who helped make this endeavor a success ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work would not have been completed without the guidance, friendship, support and assistance of my advisors, committee members, colleagues, and loved ones. My advisor, Dr. Jim Austin, provided continuous guidance and stimulus throughout my graduate career and above all, gave me total freedom to pursue a research project that piqued my interests. I also express my gratitude to Dr. Jim Williams for sharing his wealth of knowledge on aquatic fauna and for all his time and effort traveling around the “southeast corner” of the US making collections for this project and connecting me to a network of aquatic biologists around the world. Many thanks to the rest of my graduate committee, Dr. Mark Brenner, Dr. Tom Frazer, and Dr. Gustav Paulay who were always available for important discussions regarding my research and extremely helpful through all the steps of my graduate career. I give special thanks to Dr. Ken Rice, Howard Jelks, and Gary Mahon who provided continued support for my dissertation research, publications, and development of my freshwater mussel research program at the U.S. Geological Survey Wetland and Aquatic Research Center in Gainesville, Florida.
    [Show full text]
  • NRSA 2013/14 Field Operations Manual Appendices (Pdf)
    National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013/14 Field Operations Manual Version 1.1, April 2013 Appendix A: Equipment & Supplies Appendix Equipment A: & Supplies A-1 National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013/14 Field Operations Manual Version 1.1, April 2013 pendix Equipment A: & Supplies Ap A-2 National Rivers and Streams Assessment 2013/14 Field Operations Manual Version 1.1, April 2013 Base Kit: A Base Kit will be provided to the field crews for all sampling sites that they will go to. Some items are sent in the base kit as extra supplies to be used as needed. Item Quantity Protocol Antibiotic Salve 1 Fish plug Centrifuge tube stand 1 Chlorophyll A Centrifuge tubes (screw-top, 50-mL) (extras) 5 Chlorophyll A Periphyton Clinometer 1 Physical Habitat CST Berger SAL 20 Automatic Level 1 Physical Habitat Delimiter – 12 cm2 area 1 Periphyton Densiometer - Convex spherical (modified with taped V) 1 Physical Habitat D-frame Kick Net (500 µm mesh, 52” handle) 1 Benthics Filteration flask (with silicone stopped and adapter) 1 Enterococci, Chlorophyll A, Periphyton Fish weigh scale(s) 1 Fish plug Fish Voucher supplies 1 pack Fish Voucher Foil squares (aluminum, 3x6”) 1 pack Chlorophyll A Periphyton Gloves (nitrile) 1 box General Graduated cylinder (25 mL) 1 Periphyton Graduated cylinder (250 mL) 1 Chlorophyll A, Periphyton HDPE bottle (1 L, white, wide-mouth) (extras) 12 Benthics, Fish Vouchers HDPE bottle (500 mL, white, wide-mouth) with graduations 1 Periphyton Laboratory pipette bulb 1 Fish Plug Microcentrifuge tubes containing glass beads
    [Show full text]
  • Conserving Texas Biodiversity: Status, Trends, and Conservation Planning for Fishes of Greatest Conservation Need
    Final Report for: Conserving Texas Biodiversity: Status, Trends, and Conservation Planning for Fishes of Greatest Conservation Need Authors: Adam E. Cohen1, Gary P. Garrett1, Melissa J. Casarez1, Dean A. Hendrickson1, Benjamin J. Labay1, Tomislav Urban2, John Gentle2, Dennis Wylie3, and David Walling2 Affiliations: 1) University of Texas at Austin, Department of Integrative Biology, Biodiversity Center, Texas Natural History Collections (TNHC), Ichthyology; 2) University of Texas at Austin, Texas Advanced Computing Center (TACC); 3) University of Texas at Austin, Department of Integrative Biology, Center for Computational Biology & Bioinformatics (CCBB) Final Report for: Conserving Texas Biodiversity: Status, Trends, and Conservation Planning for Fishes of Greatest Conservation Need Authors Adam E. Cohen, Gary P. Garrett, Melissa J. Casarez, Dean A. Hendrickson, Benjamin J. Labay, Tomislav Urban, John Gentle, Dennis Wylie, and David Walling Principal Investigator: Dean A. Hendrickson, Curator of Ichthyology, University of Texas Austin, Department of Integrative Biology, Biodiversity Collections (Texas Natural History Collections - TNHC), 10100 Burnet Rd., PRC176EAST/R4000, Austin, Texas 78758-4445; phone: 512-471-9774; email: [email protected] Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Project Leader: Sarah Robertson, River Studies, P.O. Box 1685 or 951 Aquarena Springs Dr., The Rivers Center, San Marcos, TX 78666. Phone 512-754-6844 Funded by: Texas Parks and Wildlife Department through U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service State Wildlife Grant Program, grant TX T-106-1 (CFDA# 15.634) Contract/Project Number: Contract No. 459125 UTA14-001402 Reporting Period: September 1, 2014 through December 31, 2017 Submitted: 3-23-2018 Suggested citation: Cohen, Adam E., Gary P. Garrett, Melissa J. Casarez, Dean A.
    [Show full text]