BIOLOGICAL FIELD STATION Cooperstown, New York

45th ANNUAL REPORT 2012

Images of Copepods (above) and Daphnia spp. (top right), and a sample run summary (right) obtained using the FlowCAM, acquired through 2012 NSF FSML Grant #61721

STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK COLLEGE AT ONEONTA

OCCASIONAL PAPERS PUBLISHED BY THE BIOLOGICAL FIELD STATION

No. 1. The diet and feeding habits of the terrestrial stage of the common newt, Notophthalmus viridescens (Raf.). M.C. MacNamara, April 1976 No. 2. The relationship of age, growth and food habits to the relative success of the whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) and the cisco (C. artedi) in Otsego Lake, New York. A.J. Newell, April 1976. No. 3. A basic limnology of Otsego Lake (Summary of research 1968-75). W. N. Harman and L. P. Sohacki, June 1976. No. 4. An ecology of the Unionidae of Otsego Lake with special references to the immature stages. G. P. Weir, November 1977. No. 5. A history and description of the Biological Field Station (1966-1977). W. N. Harman, November 1977. No. 6. The distribution and ecology of the aquatic molluscan fauna of the Black River drainage basin in northern New York. D. E Buckley, April 1977. No. 7. The fishes of Otsego Lake. R. C. MacWatters, May 1980. No. 8. The ecology of the aquatic macrophytes of Rat Cove, Otsego Lake, N.Y. F. A Vertucci, W. N. Harman and J. H. Peverly, December 1981. No. 9. Pictorial keys to the aquatic mollusks of the upper Susquehanna. W. N. Harman, April 1982. No. 10. The dragonflies and damselflies (Odonata: Anisoptera and Zygoptera) of Otsego County, New York with illustrated keys to the genera and species. L.S. House III, September 1982. No. 11. Some aspects of predator recognition and anti-predator behavior in the Black-capped chickadee (Parus atricapillus). A. Kevin Gleason, November 1982. No. 12. Mating, aggression, and cement gland development in the crayfish, Cambarus bartoni. Richard E. Thomas, Jr., February 1983. No. 13. The systematics and ecology of Najadicola ingens (Koenike 1896) (Acarina: Hydrachnida) in Otsego Lake, New York. Thomas Simmons, April 1983. No. 14. Hibernating bat populations in eastern New York State. Donald B. Clark, June 1983. No. 15. The fishes of Otsego Lake (2nd edition). R. C MacWatters, July 1983. No. 16. The effect of the internal seiche on zooplankton distribution in Lake Otsego. J. K. Hill, October 1983. No. 17. The potential use of wood as a supplemental energy source for Otsego County, New York: A preliminary examination. Edward M. Mathieu, February 1984. No. 18. Ecological determinants of distribution for several small mammals: A central New York perspective. Daniel Osenni, November 1984. No. 19. A self-guided tour of Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary. W. N. Harman and B. Higgins, February 1986. No. 20. The Chironomidae of Otsego Lake with keys to the immature stages of the subfamilies Tanypodinae and Diamesinae (Diptera). J. P. Fagnani and W. N. Harman, August 1987. No. 21. The aquatic invertebrates of Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary, Otsego Lake, Otsego County, New York. Robert J. Montione, April 1989. No. 22. The lake book: a guide to reducing water pollution at home. Otsego Lake Watershed Planning Report #1. W. N. Harman, March 1990. No. 23. A model land use plan for the Otsego Lake Watershed. Phase II: The chemical limnology and water quality of Otsego Lake, New York. Otsego Lake Watershed Planning Report Nos. 2a, 2b. T. J. Iannuzzi, January 1991. No. 24. The biology, invasion and control of the Zebra Mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) in North America. Otsego Lake Watershed Planning Report No. 3. Leann Maxwell, February 1992. No. 25. Biological Field Station safety and health manuel. W. N. Harman, May 1997. No. 26. Quantitative analysis of periphyton biomass and identification of periphyton in the tributaries of Otsego Lake, NY in relation to selected environmental parameters. S. H. Komorosky, July 1994. No. 27. A limnological and biological survey of Weaver Lake, Herkimer County, New York. C.A. McArthur, August 1995. No. 28. Nested subsets of songbirds in Upstate New York woodlots. D. Dempsey, March 1996. No. 29. Hydrological and nutrient budgets for Otsego lake, N. Y. and relationships between land form/use and export rates of its sub -basins. M. F. Albright, L. P. Sohacki, W. N. Harman, June 1996. No. 30. The State of Otsego Lake 1936-1996. W. N. Harman, L. P. Sohacki, M. F. Albright, January 1997. No. 31. A Self-guided tour of Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary. W. N. Harman and B. Higgins (Revised by J. Lopez),1998. No. 32. Alewives in Otsego Lake N. Y.: A Comparison of their direct and indirect mechanisms of impact on transparency and Chlorophyll a. D. M. Warner, December 1999. No.33. Moe Pond limnology and fish population biology: An ecosystem approach. C. Mead McCoy, C. P. Madenjian, V. J. Adams, W. N. Harman, D. M. Warner, M. F. Albright and L. P. Sohacki, January 2000. No. 34. Trout movements on Delaware River System tail-waters in New York State. Scott D. Stanton, September 2000. No. 35. Geochemistry of surface and subsurface water flow in the Otsego lake basin, Otsego County New York. Andrew R. Fetterman, June 2001. No. 36 A fisheries survey of Peck Lake, Fulton County, New York. Laurie A. Trotta. June 2002. No. 37 Plans for the programmatic use and management of the State University of New York College at Oneonta Biological Field Station upland natural resources, Willard N. Harman. May 2003. No. 38. Biocontrol of Eurasian water-milfoil in central New York State: Myriophyllum spicatum L., its insect herbivores and associated fish. Paul H. Lord. August 2004. No. 39. The benthic macroinvertebrates of Butternut Creek, Otsego County, New York. Michael F. Stensland. June 2005. No. 40. Re-introduction of walleye to Otsego Lake: re-establishing a fishery and subsequent influences of a top Predator. Mark D. Cornwell. September 2005. No. 41. 1. The role of small lake-outlet streams in the dispersal of zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) veligers in the upper Susquehanna River basin in New York. 2. Eaton Brook Reservoir boaters: Habits, zebra mussel awareness, and adult zebra mussel dispersal via boater. Michael S. Gray. No. 42. The behavior of lake trout, Salvelinus namaycush (Walbaum, 1972) in Otsego Lake: A documentation of the strains, movements and the natural reproduction of lake trout under present conditions. Wesley T. Tibbitts. No. 43. The Upper Susquehanna watershed project: A fusion of science and pedagogy. Todd Paternoster. No. 44. Water chestnut (Trapa natans L.) infestation in the Susquehanna River watershed: Population assessment, control, and effects. Willow Eyres. No. 45. The use of radium isotopes and water chemistry to determine patterns of groundwater recharge to Otsego Lake, Otsego County, New York. Elias J. Maskal.

Annual Reports and Technical Reports published by the Biological Field Station are available from Willard N. Harman, BFS, 5838 St. Hwy. 80, Cooperstown, NY 13326.

45th ANNUAL REPORT 2012

BIOLOGICAL FIELD STATION COOPERSTOWN, NEW YORK bfs.oneonta.edu

STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE AT ONEONTA

The information contained herein may not be reproduced without permission of the author(s) or the SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station

BFS 2012 ANNUAL REPORT CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION: W. N. Harman…………………………………………………………………...….1

ONGOING STUDIES:

OTSEGO LAKE WATERSHED MONITORING: 2012 Otsego Lake water levels. W.N. Harman and M.F. Albright………………………..6 Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2012. H.A. Waterfield and M.F. Albright..…..…8 A survey of Otsego Lake’s zooplankton community, summer 2012. M.F. Albright ………………………………………………………..…….…..20 Chlorophyll a concentrations in Otsego Lake, summer 2012. C. Slater and M.F. Albright………………………………….……...... 29 Water quality monitoring of five major tributaries in the Otsego Lake watershed, summer 2012. K. Mehigan ..………………………………………….38

SUSQUEHANNA RIVER MONITORING: Monitoring the water quality and fecal coliform bacteria in the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2011. R. Katz.....…………………..…….……….52 Fish of the Upper Susquehanna River, Otsego County, NY. R. Katz…………………...65

ARTHROPOD MONITORING: Mosquito Studies – Thayer Farm. W.L. Butts………………………………………….69

REPORTS:

2012 aquatic plant survey of Otsego Lake. D. McShane and K. Mehigan…………………….70 Monitoring the effectiveness of the Cooperstown wastewater treatment wetland, 2012. M.F. Albright.…………………………..……………………..……….93 Benthic macroinvertebrate survey of Oaks Creek, Otsego County, NY. B. Buckhout…………103 Qualitative spot biotic survey of Oaks Creek, White Creek, Cripple Creek, and Moe Pond in Otsego County, New York. J.S. Heilveil and B. Buckhout…………113 Freshwater pearly mussel (unionid) survey of Oaks Creek and the Susquehanna River below its confluence, summer 2012. M.F. Albright, P.H. Lord and T.N. Pokorny…....123 Monitoring of the Moe Pond ecosystem and largemouth bass (Micropterus Salmoides) population before considering biomanipulation options. A. VanDerKrake…………126 Bryophyte reproduction and dispersal in a mixed hardwood forest. S. Robinson, A. Lawrence and R. Obenauer………………… …………………….137 Afton Lake monitoring and management issues, summer 2012. W.N. Harman, M.F. Albright and W.A. Waterfield………………………..………………………..148 Surface water quality in Otsego County, NY, prior to potential natural gas exploration. S. Crosier…...………………………………………………………...153 Hydroacoustic surveys of Otsego Lake’s pelagic fish community, 2012. H.A. Waterfield and M.D. Cornwell…………………………………………………….169 Monitoring the dynamics of Galerucella spp. and purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary, summer 2012. M.F. Albright……………………….177 Pearly mussels in Unadilla River and tributaries. S. Zemken, P. Lord and T. Pokorny..……185 2012 population estimate of Walleye (Sander vitreus) in Otsego Lake. J. Willson, J.R. Foster and M.D. Cornwell………………………………………………………195 Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation, Lake Moraine, Madison County, NY 2012. W.N. Harman and M.F. Albright………..…….………201 Control and eradication of water chestnut (Trapa natans, L.) in an Oneonta wetland, 2012 progress report. H.A. Waterfield and M.F. Albright..…………………………212 Parasitic worms of fishes in tributaries of Otsego Lake. F.B. Reyda and D.D. Willsey……..213

45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

INTRODUCTION

Willard N. Harman

Internships: Brett Buckhout, a SUCO Biology major, sponsored by Otsego land Trust, conducted a benthic macroinvertebrate survey of 10 sites along Oaks Creek. Guidance was provided by Jeff Heilveil. Devin McShane, an Oneonta Biology major and Kayla Mehigan, an Oneonta Environmental Sciences major, conducted an aquatic plant survey on Otsego Lake. Devin held the SUNY Oneonta Biology Department Internship with Rufus J. Thayer Otsego Lake sponsorship while Kayla held an Otsego County Conservation Association Internship. Anna VanDerKrake, an Environmental Studies major from Cazenovia College, held a SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station Internship. She monitored Moe Pond, evaluating the impacts of the establishment of largemouth bass in the system. Chelsea Slater, a SUNY Oneonta Environmental Science major, evaluated chlorophylla concentrations throughout Otsego Lake. She held the OCCA W.N. Harman Internship. Alexander Lawrence and Rebekah Obenauer, both BFS Interns, both Environmental Science majors from SUNY Oneonta, worked under the direction of Sean Robinson on the dispersal and distribution of mosses in local hardwood forests. Their work was supported by the Peterson Family Conservation Trust. Justin Hulburt, a Fisheries and Aquaculture major from SUNY Cobleskill, held the Robert C. MacWatters Internship. Robert Katz, Cooperstown High School, was the FHV Mecklenburg Conservation Intern. Funding was provided by the Village of Cooperstown. He monitored water quality in the upper reaches of the Susquehanna River and did a fish survey there.

Faculty and Staff activities: Paul Lord trained interns and subsequently directed a survey of freshwater clams on Oaks Creek as part of an Otsego land Trust funded effort on that stream. Paul and Tim Pokorny developed a lake steward training program for lakes and rivers in the Catskills based on previous work on Otsego Lake and by Paul Smith’s college in the Adirondacks. Resources were acquired from a grant to Bill Harman from the Catskills Regional Invasive Species Partnership (CRISP). Jeff Heilveil conducted qualitative biotic surveys on Oaks Creek, White Creek, Cripple Creek, and Moe Pond in Otsego County.

Trap netting efforts on Otsego Lake over the summer yielded only two alewives. This is consistent with trapping efforts of recent years, and of recent data collection from hydroacoustic surveys by Holly Waterfield and Mark Cornwell. Their decline followed our stocking program and the establishment of walleye, providing a textbook example of top-down lake management. That work has been supported by Lou Hager, the OCCA and the National Science Foundation.

Bill Harman, John Foster (SUNY Cobleskill), and Lars Rudstam (Cornell University BFS) received funding for a $90,000 flow cytometer from the National Science Foundation for the BFS so researchers can collaborate while developing a more precise understanding of the phyto- and zooplankton population dynamics that have led to the successful reduction in the forage fish (alewives) in Otsego Lake. All BFS staff were involved in training sessions on the use of the instrument.

- 1 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

After consultation with DEC it was decided to reduce the walleye stocking to 20,000 (original plans developed in 2000 were for 80,000 pond fingerlings annually) in 2013 with future consideration of stocking other native forage fish species. All stocked fish will be fin clipped fall fingerlings so that stocked fish can be differentiated from wild fish.

Dr. David Wong joined our research efforts after accepting a position split between the Biology Department and the BFS in the fall. To date he is administering four grants with a value of $115,500 and is the PI on at least two additional current proposals. He is advising Shannon O’Neill (MS in lake management) on a thesis problem collecting data on the vulnerability of zebra mussel adults and veligers (planktonic larvae) to chemicals that can prohibit their attachment and growth in the Village of Cooperstown’s (and other communities) potable water system. Florian Reyda has recently submitted three proposals. Bill Harman has a diversity of contracts. The largest is in collaboration with Jeff Heilveil for over $100,000 with NYCDEP. Bill has had a positive response from the Scriven Foundation (Clark Estates) after being invited to request $60,000 for annual support of graduate students in the MS in Lake Mgt. program.

Several years of water chestnut control efforts in a wetland near Oneonta using herbicides followed by hand picking has reduced the population to the point where, partnering with the OCCA, we will continue management by hand picking with volunteers. Bill Harman received the original funding for the project from the NYS Power authority, the Millennium Pipeline Company and a legislative grant from the NYS Senate in 2006. Willow Eyres, a SUNY Oneonta Biology Department graduate student, took responsibility for documenting efforts from 2007-08 while correlating same with water quality and impacts on the non-target plant community. Matt Albright, Holly Waterfield and Bill Harman have been involved from the beginning. In recent years Jeff Heilveil and the SUNY Oneonta Biology Club, citizen volunteers and volunteers organized by the OCCA have contributed to the hand picking efforts.

Last fall Bill Harman taught Biol 690, Lake Management, to 8 graduate students on site at the BFS. David Wong and Bill worked together offering Biol 691, Management of the Aquatic Biota to 6 students; Carter Bailey, Derek Johnson, Jason Luce, Shannon O’Neill, Caitlin Stroosnyder and Owen Zaengle. Shannon is working with David Wong on Otsego Lake zebra mussels as indicated above. The others are engaged in developing comprehensive management plans for Canadarago and Goodyear Lakes in Otsego County, Hatch Lake and Bradley Brook Reservoir in Madison County, Panther Lake in Oswego County and Grass Lake, one of the Indian River Lakes, in Jefferson and St. Lawrence Counties.

Matt Albright and Bill Harman, along with Lake Management graduate students Carter Bailey, Owen Zaengle, Derek Johnson and Jason Luce, attended the North American Lake Management Society conference in Madison, WI. Holly Waterfield attended the NALMS biannual Board meetings as Regional Director. She also is chair of the Nominations Committee and sits on the Marketing Committee. Matt is chair of the Affiliate Committee. BFS faculty and staff attended and presented at the New York State Federation of Lake Associations (NYS FOLA) meetings in Hamilton, NY. Matt Albright and Bill Harman are NYSFOLA Directors.

Holly Waterfield worked on the Lakes Festival Planning committee. A BFS booth at the festival was attended by Matt Albright and interns Chelsea Slater, Robert Katz and Justin Hulburt. Jeff Heilveil and Sean Robinson, advising the SUNY Oneonta Biology Club, conducted several overnights on the Thayer Farm.

- 2 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

About 200 students enrolled in several SUNY Oneonta and SUNY Cobleskill on-campus courses and attended field exercises on site. More than 1,000 K-12 students visited the BFS and received hands-on experiences on Otsego Lake and BFS woodlands over the year enrolled in the pre-college “Learning Adventures” and “Agricultural Environmental Quality” programs. Brett Buckhout and Justin Hulburt served as interpreters under the direction of Holly Waterfield. Jeane Bennett-O’Dea continues to work coordinating the logistics of these exercises along with her other administrative tasks.

A primary accomplishment in 2011-12 was the acquisition of National Science Foundation funding for renovation and construction of a year around laboratory on the Upper Research Site. We are ready to occupy that structure. The lab provides access to areas on 365 acres around Moe Pond. That lab, specialized for ornithology research, adds over 70 feet of modern laboratory bench space, added associated research infrastructure and a comparatively open area between the building and Moe Pond for song bird habitat improvement and the space for setting mist nets used in research involving bird banding activities.

Florian Reyda has essentially completed his survey of Otsego Lake fish parasites. Current activities will focus on sampling fish of Otsego Lake tributaries. SUNY Oneonta undergraduate student Danielle Willsey has obtained most of the measurements she needs to describe a new species of cestode (tapeworm) from the pale-edged stingray from Borneo. SUNY Oneonta undergraduate Andrew Daigler has collected morphological data for the description of a new species of cestode from the dwarf whip ray. Several additional undergraduates work concurrently in Florian’s lab.

The BFS volunteer divers, tenders and boat drivers; Jim Vogler, Dale Webster, Lee Ferrara, Ed Lentz, Bjorn Eilertsen, Joseph W. Zarzynski, Krista Ransier, Robert Eklund, Jr., Simon Thorpe, Antonio Carrasquillo, Wayne Bunn and Jeremiah Wood under Paul Lord’s leadership, continue to support the BFS and Otsego Lake. From April through June the team deploys no-wake zone buoys (NWZBs) around Otsego Lake and retrieves spar buoys placed for winter maintenances of site locations. From May through October the team regularly opens the water intake gate for the Village of Cooperstown’s water supply to allow scrubbing of the interior of that line for zebra mussel control. From September through December the team retrieves NWZBs around Otsego Lake deploying spar buoys. The team maintains buoy systems all year and performs underwater sampling as required. Additionally, the team retrieves BFS equipment lost in the lake as required and trains continuously for diving in all local conditions.

The table below summarizes boat censes data collected on Otsego Lake annually since 1975. Trends are interesting; low numbers in the late 1970s into the early 1980s reflect the first gasoline crisis of that period as well as terrible weather during the summer of 1980. Rowboat and canoe numbers have been reduced compared to those present in 1975. In general, outboards and inboard/outboards have increased, and inboards have decreased. Personal watercraft (jet skis) were not counted, since they were practically non-existent, before 1991. They increased somewhat after their first appearance, but seem to have been somewhat less abundant before surging in numbers in 2011 and 2012. It must be kept in mind that all data have been collected by different people each year so although trends are valid, sampling errors are expected to occur, distorting some annual entries.

- 3 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Year 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1991 Date 28-Jul 22-Jul 22-Jul 13-Aug 31-Jul Sailboats 224 186 129 101 92 95 230 243 Rowboats 145 236 160 94 86 42 87 285 Canoes 59 52 28 75 Outboards 636 515 436 456 378 197 445 470 Inboards 73 38 22 36 60 Inboard-Outboards 213 Personal Watercraft 61 Misc. cruisers/houseboats 65 41 40 33 24 23 Total 1070 978 765 783 679 408 896 1332

Year 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Date 5-Aug 5-Aug 27-Jul 14-Jul 23-Jul 18-Jul 7-Aug 29-Jul Sailboats 220 181 208 208 207 183 236 238 Rowboats 243 266 311 313 325 312 372 309 Canoes Outboards 407 405 461 430 378 371 377 412 Inboards 22 27 16 13 36 13 20 15 Inboard-Outboards 219 215 227 267 260 275 261 265 Personal Watercraft 32 28 29 47 51 62 84 66 Misc. 40 57 49 cruisers/houseboats Total 1158 1145 1285 1315 1272 1226 1351 1317

Year 2000 2001 2002 2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 Date 10-Aug 9-Aug 22-Jul 23-Aug 27-Aug 26-Aug 31-Aug Sailboats 187 190 171 198 192 153 178 162 Rowboats 349 389 384 450 383 422 407 458 Canoes Outboards 381 375 319 380 344 340 349 363 Inboards 23 9 36 21 24 25 30 14 Inboard-Outboards 287 285 216 297 277 280 251 272 Personal Watercraft 19 23 18 15 22 16 17 9 Misc. 53 66 43 51 43 38 48 44 cruisers/houseboats Total 1299 1337 1187 1412 1285 1274 1280 1322

Year 2011 2012 Date 9-Sep 15-Aug Sailboats 118 140 Rowboats 450 545 Canoes Outboards 227 334 Inboards 15 16 Inboard-Outboards 190 274 Personal Watercraft 14 22 Misc. 40 40 cruisers/houseboats Total 1054 1371

- 4 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Public support makes our work possible. Funding for BFS research and educational programs was procured in 2012 from many citizens and organizations. Special thanks go to the Clark and Scriven Foundations who generously provide annual support for the implementation of our responsibilities to the Otsego Lake Watershed Management Plan and to our pre-college programs in environmental education as well as supporting graduate students in the Biology Department’s Lake Management degree program. The OCCA, the Peterson Family Charitable Trust, the Village of Cooperstown, the Otsego land Trust, the Otsego Lake Association, SUNY Oneonta, and the SUNY Graduate Research Initiative have also supported our endeavors. Consulting services on a diversity of small lakes contributes to our annual income.

Willard N. Harman, CLM

- 5 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

ONGOING STUDIES:

OTSEGO LAKE WATERSHED MONITORING:

2012 Otsego Lake water levels W.N. Harman and M.F. Albright

Graphs represent Otsego Lake elevation readings at Rat Cove, in centimeters, above or below “0”, which equals the level considered optimal (364.1 m, or 1194.5 ft, above mean sea level). Data from January and February were not available. There was no ice coverage over 2012.

March '12 April '12 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0

-10 -10 Lake levelLake (cm) Lake levelLake (cm)

-20 -20

-30 -30

May' 12 June '12 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0

-10 -10 Lake levelLake (cm) Lake levelLake (cm)

-20 -20

-30 -30

- 6 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

July '12 August '12 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0

-10 -10 Lake levelLake (cm) levelLake (cm)

-20 -20

-30 -30

September '12 October '12 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0

-10 -10 Lake levelLake (cm) Lake levelLake (cm)

-20 -20

-30 -30

November '12 December '12 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0

-10 -10 Lake levelLake (cm) Lake levelLake (cm)

-20 -20

-30 -30

- 7 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2012

Holly A. Waterfield1, Matthew F. Albright2

INTRODUCTION

Otsego Lake is a glacially formed, dimictic lake (max depth 51m) supporting a cold water fishery. The Lake is generally classified as being chemically mesotrophic, although flora and fauna characteristically associated with oligotrophic lakes are present (Iannuzzi, 1991).

This study is the continuation of a year-round monitoring protocol that began in 1991. The data collected in this report run for the calendar year and are comparable with contributions by Homburger and Buttigieg (1992), Groff et al. (1993), Harman (1994; 1995), Austin et al. (1996), Albright (1997; 1998; 1999; 2000; 2001; 2002; 2003; 2004; 2005; 2006; 2007; 2008), Albright and Waterfield (2009), and Waterfield and Albright (2010; 2011; 2012). Concurrent additional work related to Otsego Lake included estimates of fluvial nutrient inputs (Mehigan 2013), and descriptions of the zooplankton community (Albright 2013), chlorophyll a (Slater 2013), macrophyte community (McShane and Mehigan 2013) and nekton communities (Waterfield and Cornwell 2013).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Physiochemical data and water samples were collected near the deepest part of the lake (TR4-C) (Figure 1), which is considered representative of whole-lake conditions, as past studies have shown the Lake to be spatially homogenous with respect to the factors under study (Iannuzzi 1991). Data and sample collection occurred approximately bi-weekly during open water conditions, 22 March through 11 December. The lake did not completely freeze over in 2012; samples were not collected in January or February due to marginal ice conditions and open water. Physical measurements were recorded at 2-m intervals between 0 and 20 m and 40 m to the bottom; 5-meter intervals were used between 20 and 40 m. Measurements of pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen and specific conductance were recorded with the use of a YSI® 650 MDS with a 6-Series multiparameter sonde which had been calibrated according to the manufacturer’s instructions prior to use (YSI Inc. 2009). Samples were collected for chemical analyses at 4-m intervals between 0 and 20 m and 40m and 48m; 10-m intervals were used between 20 and 40 m. Methodologies employed for sample preservation and chemical analyses are given in Table 1.

1 Research Support Specialist: SUNY College at Oneonta Biological Field Station, Cooperstown, NY. 2 Assistant to the Director: SUNY College at Oneonta Biological Field Station, Cooperstown, NY.

- 8 - TR4-C

45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

[Type a quote from the document or the summary of an interesting point. You can position the text box anywhere in the document. Use the Text Box Tools tab to change the formatting of the pull quote text box.]

TR4-C

Figure 1. Bathymetric map of Otsego Lake showing sampling site (TR4-C).

- 9 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 1. Summary of laboratory methodologies.

Parameter Preservation Method Reference Persulfate digestion followed by Total Phosphorus H SO to pH < 2 Liao and Marten 2001 2 4 single reagent ascorbic acid Cadmium reduction method following Pritzlaff 2003; Total Nitrogen H SO to pH < 2 2 4 peroxodisulfate digestion Ebina et al. 1983

Nitrate+nitrite-N H2SO4 to pH < 2 Cadmium reduction method Pritzlaff 2003

Ammonia-N H2SO4 to pH < 2 Phenolate method Liao 2001 Calcium Store at 4oC EDTA trimetric method EPA 1983 Chloride Store at 4oC Mercuric nitrate titration APHA 1989 Alkalinity Store at 4oC Titration to pH= 4.6 APHA 1989 Filter Buffered acetone extraction followed Chlorophylla immediately; Welschmyer, 1994 o by flourometric detection store at 0 C

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Temperature Figures 2a and 2b depict temperatures measured in profile (0 to 48m) at site TR4-C from 22 March through 19 July and 2 August through 11 December 2012, respectively. Observed surface temperature ranged from 3.4oC 22 March to 24.9oC on 19 July, at which point the epilimnion extended through 6m depth (Figure 2a). Temperatures at 48m reached the annual minimum of 3.6oC on 22 March, maximum of 6.1oC on 11 December. Complete ice-cover did not develop during the winter 2011-2012; spring mixing was underway during the 22 March sampling event. Thermal stratification was evident by 24 May. Surface temperatures began to decrease after the profile collected 19 July and the thermocline occurred at greater depth until fall turnover, sometime after 11 December (Figure 2b).

Dissolved Oxygen Isopleths of oxygen concentration based on the profiles for the calendar year are presented in Figure 3. On 12 April, prior to the onset of thermal stratification (May), dissolved oxygen ranged from 12.20 mg/l (at bottom) to 12.90 mg/l (at the surface). The minimum observed DO concentration in 2012 was 3.80 mg/l recorded on 30 November at 46m. In most years between 1995 and 2009, the bottom minimum concentration was near or below 1.0 mg/l. The areal hypolimnetic oxygen depletion rate (AHOD), calculated at 0.056 mg/cm2/day, remains well below the historical average for the third consecutive year (Table 2).

Alkalinity Alkalinity concentrations followed a typical pattern of seasonal variation, with concentrations decreasing in the epilimnion during the growing season. Mean annual concentration at TR4-C was 129 mg/l, ranging from 108 mg/l at the surface on 5 October to 141 mg/l at 48m on 19 July.

- 10 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Calcium Calcium concentrations followed a typical seasonal pattern of fluctuation similar to that of alkalinity. Mean annual concentration at TR4-C was 50.0 mg/l, ranging from 44.1 mg/l at 4m on 9 September to 52.9 mg/l at the bottom on 22 November.

Temperature (oC) 2a. 0 5 10 15 20 25 0

5 3/22/2012

10 4/12/2012

15 4/26/2012

20 5/9/2012 25 5/24/2012

30 6/7/2012 Depth (meters) Depth 35 6/21/2012

40 7/4/2012

45 7/19/2012

50

o 2b. Temperature ( C) 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 8/2/2012 5 8/16/2012 10 9/5/2012 15 9/19/2012 20 10/5/2012 25 10/19/2012 30 Depth (meters) Depth 11/1/2012 35 11/15/2012 40 11/30/2012 45 12/11/2012 50

Figure 2. Otsego Lake temperature profiles (oC) observed at TR4-C between 22 March and 19 July (2a) and 2 August and 11 December (2b) 2012.

- 11 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 3. Distribution of dissolved oxygen (isopleths in mg/L) as recorded in 2012 at site TR4-C on Otsego Lake. Points along the x-axis indicate profile observation dates.

Chlorides Mean chloride concentrations in Otsego Lake from 1925 to 2012 are shown in Figure 4. Between 1994 and 2005 mean concentration increased steadily at of rate of 0.5 to 1.0 mg/l per year (Figure 4). Since then, mean annual concentrations have been variable and have actually trended slightly downwards, likely reflecting flushing of the system that occurred during major flooding events (2006, 2011). The mean lake-wide concentration in 2012 was 14.6 mg/l; mean concentration was 14.4 and 15.5 mg/l in 2010 and 2011, respectively. Chlorides in Otsego Lake have generally been attributed to road salting practices, with the greatest influx of the ion during spring snowmelt events or early-winter snow storms.

Nutrients Total phosphorus averaged 7 µg/l in 2012, ranging from below detection (< 4 µg/l) on multiple dates to 46 µg/l at 40m on 12 April. Concentrations tended to be fairly homogeneous from surface to bottom during the growing season. Higher, more variable concentrations were observed in spring and fall. No phosphorus release from the sediments was observed prior to fall turnover, as dissolved oxygen was present at concentrations sufficient to maintain iron- phosphorus bonds in sediment materials. Nitrite+nitrate-N averaged 0.44 mg/l; ammonia-N was not measured, as it is generally below detectable levels (<0.02 mg/L) when dissolved oxygen exists in the bottom of the hypolimnion. Total nitrogen analyses, yielding a mean of 0.59 mg/l, indicate an average organic nitrogen concentration of about 0.16 mg/l over the year. This

- 12 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station situation was nearly identical to that observed in both 2010 and 2011 (Waterfield and Albright 2011; Waterfield and Albright 2012).

Table 2. Areal hypolimnetic oxygen deficits (AHOD) for Otsego Lake, computed over summer stratification in 1969, 1972 (Sohacki, unpubl.), 1988 (Iannuzzi, 1991), and 1992-2011.

Time Interval AHOD (mg/cm2/day) 05/16/69 - 09/27/69 0.080 05/30/72 - 10/14/72 0.076 05/12/88 - 10/06/88 0.042 05/18/92 - 09/29/92 0.091 05/10/93 - 09/27/93 0.096 05/17/94 - 09/20/94 0.096 05/19/95 - 10/10/95 0.102 05/14/96 - 09/17/96 0.090 05/08/97 - 09/25/97 0.101 05/15/98 - 09/17/98 0.095 05/20/99 - 09/27/99 0.095 05/11/00 - 09/14/00 0.109 05/17/01 - 09/13/01 0.092 05/15/02 - 09/26/02 0.087 05/16/03 - 09/18/03 0.087 05/20/04 - 09/24/04 0.102 05/27/05 - 10/05/05 0.085 05/4/06 - 09/26/06 0.084 05/18/07 - 9/27/07 0.083 05/8/08 - 10/7/08 0.088 05/27/09 - 10/19/09 0.082 05/26/10 - 10/7/10 0.053 05/19/11 – 10/12/11 0.060 05/24/12 – 10/05/12 0.056

- 13 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

20 18 16

14

12 10 8

(mg/l) Chloride 6

4 2 0 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Year Figure 4. Mean chloride concentrations at TR4-C, 1925-2012. Points later than 1990 represent yearly averages (modified from Peters 1987).

Secchi disk transparency and chlorophyll a Chlorophyll a concentrations were determined for samples collected on 10 dates from May through September 2012. Average 0-20m composite chlorophyll a concentration was 1.2µg/l (range= 0.4 to 2.7 µg/l); it is the lowest average recorded value since at least 1988. A more detailed description of the temporal and spatial distribution of chlorophyll a is provided by Slater and Albright (2013).

Secchi disk transparency ranged from 4.2m on 16 August to a growing season-maximum of 11.4m on 24 May (Figure 5). The temporal variation of transparency differed from that observed in 2010 and 2011 (Figure 6). Mean summer Secchi transparencies for all years available (1935-2012) are given in Figure 7. The marked increase in transparency noted in 2009 continues to date, and is likely related to the filtration capacity of the growing zebra mussel population, as similar changes in water clarity and chlorophyll a have been documented concurrent with the establishment and growth of zebra mussel populations elsewhere (e.g. Leach 1993). Also, over summers of 2010, 2011 and 2012, Otsego Lake’s zooplankton community comprised a higher abundance of Daphnia spp., which had a mean length substantially greater than any year since 1990 (Albright and Leonardo 2011, Zaengle 2012, Albright 2013). It is not known if this is resultant of the establishment of zebra mussels or more a function of declining alewife (Waterfield and Cornwell 2013).

- 14 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0 Secchi Transparency (m) (m) Transparency Secchi 12.0

14.0

16.0

Figure 5. May through September Secchi transparencies at TR4C, Otsego Lake, 2012.

2010 2011

0 0

2 2 4 4 6 6 8 8 10 10 Depth (meters) Depth 12 (meters) Depth 12 14 14 16 16

Figure 6. May through September Secchi transparency at TR4C, Otsego Lake, 2010 and 2011.

- 15 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Year

'35 '68 '69 '70 '71 '72 '73 '75 '76 '77 '78 '79 '80 '81 '82 '84 '85 '86 '87 '88 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0 Secchi Transparency (m) (m) Transparency Secchi

6.0

7.0

8.0

Figure 7. Mean summer (May through September) Secchi disk transparency collected at TR4-C, 1935-2012.

REFERENCES

Albright, M.F. 1997. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 1996. In 29th Ann. Rept. (1996). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 1998. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 1997. In 30th Ann. Rept. (1997). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 1999. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 1998. In 31st Ann. Rept. (1998). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2000. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 1999. In 32nd Ann. Rept. (1999). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2001. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2000. In 33rd Ann. Rept. (2000). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2002. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2001. In 34th Ann. Rept. (2001). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 16 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Albright, M.F. 2003. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2002. In 35th Ann. Rept. (2002). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2004. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2003. In 36th Ann. Rept. (2003). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2005. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2004. In 37th Ann. Rept. (2004). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2006. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2005. In 38th Ann. Rept. (2005). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2007. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2006. In 39th Ann. Rept. (2006). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2008. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2007. In 40th Ann. Rept. (2007). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2013. A survey of Otsego Lake’s zooplankton community, summer 2012. In 45th Ann. Rept. (2012). SUNY Oneonta. Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. and M. Leonardo. 2011. A survey of Otsego Lake’s zooplankton community, summer 2010. In 43rd Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. and H.A. Waterfield. 2009. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2008. In 41st Ann. Rept. (2008). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. and O. Zaengle. 2012. A survey of Otsego Lake’s zooplankton community, summer 2011. In 44th Ann. Rept. (2011). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

APHA, AWWA, WPCF. 1989. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 17th ed. American Public Health Association. Washington, DC.

Austin, T., M.F. Albright, and W.N. Harman. 1996. Otsego Lake monitoring, 1995. In 28th Ann. Rept. (1995). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Ebina, J., T. Tsutsi, and T. Shirai. 1983. Simultaneous determination of total nitrogen and total phosphorus in water using peroxodisulfate oxidation. Water Res. 17(12):1721-1726.

EPA. 1983. Methods for the analysis of water and wastes. Environmental Monitoring and Support Lab. Office of Research and Development. Cincinnati, OH.

Eureka Environmental Engineering. 2004. Manta water quality probe, startup guide. Austin, TX.

Groff, A., J.J. Homburger and W.N. Harman. 1993. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 1992. In 24th Ann. Rept. (1991). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 17 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Harman, W.N. 1994. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 1993. In 26th Ann. Rept. (1993). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Harman, W.N. 1995. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 1994. In 27th Ann. Rept. (1994). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Homburger, J.J. and G. Buttigieg. 1992. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring. In 24th Ann. Rept. (1991). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Iannuzzi, T.J. 1991. A model plan for the Otsego Lake watershed. Phase II: The chemical limnology and water quality of Otsego Lake, Occasional Paper #23. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Leach, J. H. 1993. Impacts of the zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) on water quality and fish spawning reefs in western Lake Erie. In: Zebra Mussels: Biology, Impacts, and Control. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL p 381-397.

Liao, N. 2001. Determination of ammonia by flow injection analysis. QuikChem ® Method 10- 107-06-1-J. Lachat Instruments, Loveland, CO.

Liao, N. and S. Marten. 2001. Determination of total phosphorus by flow injection analysis colorimetry (acid persulfate digestion method). QuikChem ® Method 10-115-01-1-F. Lachat Instruments, Loveland, CO.

McShane, D. and K. Mehigan. 2013. 2012 aquatic macrophyte survey of Otsego Lake. In 45th Ann. Rept. (2012) SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Mehigan, K. 2013. Water quality monitoring of five major tributaries in the Otsego Lake watershed, summer 2012. In 45th Ann. Rept. (2012). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Peters, T. 1987. Update on chemical characteristics of Otsego lake water. In 19th Ann. Rept. (1986). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Pritzlaff, D. 2003. Determination of nitrate/nitrite in surface and wastewaters by flow injection analysis. QuikChem ® Method 10-107-04-1-C. Lachat Instruments, Loveland, CO.

Slater, C. and M.F. Albright. 2013. Chlorophyll a concentrations in Otsego Lake, summer 2012. In 45th Ann. Rept. (2012). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Waterfield, H.A., and M.F. Albright. 2010. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2009. In 42nd Ann. Rept. (2009). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Waterfield, H.A., and M.F. Albright. 2011. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2010. In 43rd Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 18 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Waterfield, H.A., and M.F. Albright. 2012. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2011. In 43rd Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Waterfield H.A. and M.D. Cornwell. 2013. Hydroacoustic surveys of Otsego Lake’s pelagic fish community, 2012. In 45th Ann. Rept. (2012). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Welschmyer, N.A. 1994. Fluorometric analysis of chlorophyll a in the presence of chlorophyll b and pheopigments. Limnol. Oceanogr. 39:1985-1992.

YSI Incorporated. 2009. 6-Series multiparameter water quality sonde user manual. Yellow Springs, OH.

- 19 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

A survey of Otsego Lake’s zooplankton community, summer 2012

M.F. Albright

INTRODUCTION

This study was a continuation of long-term monitoring of Otsego Lake’s zooplankton community in order to document any changes that might be attributable to top down management efforts to control alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) through the re-establishment of walleye (Sander vitreus) and to the establishment of other species such as the zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha).

Historically, Otsego Lake has been considered oligo-mesotrophic based on various trophic state indicators. Some of the earlier, comprehensive limnological data collected on Otsego Lake revealed transparencies and algal standing crops indicative of oligotrophic conditions (Godfrey 1977), despite phosphorus loading rates at levels typically associated with a more mesotrophic state (Godfrey 1979). This was attributed to Otsego’s large-bodied crustacean zooplankton, which were more abundant than in other New York lakes studied at that time (Godfrey 1977).

Alewife, a visually-oriented, efficient planktivore, was first documented in Otsego Lake in 1986 (Foster 1990) and by 1990 it was the dominant forage fish in the lake (Warner 1999). The zooplankton community had shifted from dominance by crustaceans, especially Daphnia spp., to rotifers (Foster and Wigens 1990). Rotifers are poor quality food items for fish, and they sequester fewer nutrients and have substantially lower algal grazing rates than do crustaceans (Warner 1999). Depressed abundances and lower mean sizes of crustacean zooplankton have been documented from the onset of alewife dominance through at least 2002; concurrent with this shift, mean summer transparencies declined while algal standing crops and rates of hypolimnetic oxygen depletion have increased (Harman et al. 2002). This was despite various mitigative efforts designed to reduce nutrient inputs to the lake (i.e., Murray and Leonard 2005; Albright 2005). Thus, the apparent shift toward more eutrophic conditions through the 1990s seemed attributable to cascading trophic changes resulting from the establishment of alewives and the subsequent declines in large crustacean zooplankton.

Otsego Lake has been stocked with walleye since 2000 at a targeted rate of 80,000 pond fingerlings each year. The primary intent was to take advantage of the forage base provided by alewives to re-establish this popular sports fish. Concurrent monitoring has attempted to document any changes that might be related to this trophic modification.

Zebra mussels were first documented in Otsego lake in 2007 (Waterfield 2009) and by 2010 adults were widespread on suitable substrate throughout the lake. The influence of this introduction on recent shifts in the zooplankton community is not known, but warrants consideration.

- 20 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

METHODS

Samples were generally collected bi-weekly, from 9 May to 19 September 2012, at TR4C, the deepest part of Otsego Lake (Figure 1). At this site a 0.2m diameter conical plankton net with 63um mesh was hauled from 12 m (approximately the top of the hypolimnion) to the surface. A G.O. TM mechanical flow meter mounted across the net opening allowed for the determination of the volume of lake water filtered. Concentrated samples were preserved in ethanol to about 50%. The volume of the preserved samples was recorded, allowing for the later back-calculation of zooplankton abundances in lake water. Samples were viewed on a 1 ml gridded Sedgwick rafter cell. Zooplankton were identified, enumerated and measured using a research grade compound microscope with digital imaging capabilities.

The acquisition of cross polarizing filters for the microscope allowed for the quantification of zebra mussel veligers following methods described by Johnson (1995). After the samples were evaluated for zooplankton, the polarizing filters were engaged and veligers were counted. It should be noted that mid-lake composite samples are not necessarily indicative of lake wide conditions, though veliger densities there may provide insight into reproductive timing. Veliger sampling started about 4 weeks prior to the conventional plankton survey.

Figure 1. Otsego Lake, New York, showing location of sample site (TR4-C).

- 21 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Mean densities and lengths for cladocerans, copepods and rotifers were used to calculate dry weight (Peters and Downing 1984), daily filtering rate (Knoechel and Holtby 1986) and phosphorus regeneration (Esjmon-Karabin 1983) on each date sampled according to the equations given in Table 1.

Table 1. Equations used to determine zooplankton dry weight (Peters and Downing 1984), filtering rates Knoechel and Holtby 1986), and phosphorus regeneration rates (Esjmon-Karabin 1983) (see Table 2).

Dry Weight: D.W.=9.86*(length in mm)2.1 Filtering Rate: F.R.=11.695*(length in mm)2.48 Phosphorous regeneration: Cladocerans: P.R.=.519*(dry weight in ug)-.023*e 0.039*(temp.in C) Copepods: P.R.=.229*(dry weight in ug)-.645*e 0.039*(temp.in C) Rotifers: P.R.=.0514*(dry weight in ug)-1.27*e 0.096*(temp.in C)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 2 provides a summary of the data, including mean epilimnetic temperature (which affects phosphorus regeneration rates), numbers of each taxon per liter, average length, mean dry weight per individual and per liter, phosphorus regeneration rates per individual and per liter, filtering rates, and the percentage of the epilimnion filtered per day. Figure 2 summarizes dry weight contributed by rotifers, copepods, and cladocerans over the summer of 2012. Figures 3 and 4 provide similar data collected over the summers of 2011 and 2010, respectively. Table 3 provides mean crustacean density, mean cladoceran size and mean dry weight, percent of the epilimnion filtered per day, and phosphorus regeneration by crustaceans in 2000 and 2002 -2012.

Otsego Lake’s zooplankton community has changed substantially over the past several years. In the early 2000s, the cladoceran community was dominated by Bosmina longirostris, a small bodied organism, typically ~0.3 mm. Daphnia, when present, were typically 0.6 to 0.7 mm. In the latter 2000s, Daphnia have increased in abundance relative to Bosmina (which have declined markedly), leading to an increase in mean cladoceran length (mean daphnid length, then still at 0.6 to 0.7 mm, was approximately twice that of the typical bosminid length). Over the summer of 2010, the mean daphnid abundance, at 7.7/l, comprised 61% of the cladoceran community. Interestingly, the mean daphnid length had increased to 1.2 mm. Given the length to weight ratios, this indicates that mean Daphnia dry weight has increased from about 4 to 14.5 µg. Over the summer of 2011, daphnid abundance averaged 5.1/l (60% of the cladoceran community) with a mean length of 1.03 mm. The mean cladoceran size was 0.76 mm. Over the 2012 season, the cladoceran community was 98% Daphnia sp., averaging 21.5/l and having a mean length of 1.19 mm. Densities of crustacean plankton, particularly Daphnia sp., were highest in May and early June. By late June, they had declined, and no organisms at all were observed in the sample collected on 4 July. While not quantified, Microcystis sp. was noted then. Following that date, dominance was by copepods.

Zebra mussel veliger densities for the composite samples on each sampling date are provided in Figure 5. This open water sample is not expected to be reflective of lake wide densities.

- 22 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Avg Avg Mean Dry Phos. Regen. Rate Phos. Regen. Filtering % Temp. #/L length Dry Wt (ugP*mgdrywt-1 Rate Rates Epilimnion (°C) (mm) Wt (µg) (µg/L) *ind*h-1) (ug/l/day) (ml/ind/day) filtered/day 5/9 9.9 Cladocera 15.39 1.05 12.63 194.30 0.426 1.987 13.063 20.10 Copepoda 22.87 0.560 3.69 84.34 0.145 0.294 2.776 6.35 Rotifers 0.0 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 Total 278.64 2.281 26.45 5/24 13.16 Cladocera 9.01 1.22 16.22 146.10 0.457 1.602 19.098 17.21 Copepoda 11.61 0.650 4.86 56.43 0.138 0.187 4.023 4.67 Rotifers 0.20 0.090 0.06 0.01 0.855 0.000 0.030 0.00 Total 202.54 1.789 21.88 6/7 14.86 Cladocera 10.71 1.45 23.92 256.22 0.446 2.745 29.291 31.38 Copepoda 15.17 0.584 4.07 61.83 0.671 0.995 3.075 4.67 Rotifers 0.89 0.094 0.07 0.06 1.717 0.003 0.033 0.00 Total 318.11 3.743 36.04 6/21 17.21 Cladocera 2.30 1.20 15.04 34.60 0.544 0.452 18.315 4.21 Copepoda 11.50 0.347 1.63 18.71 0.327 0.147 0.847 0.97 Rotifers 0.46 0.084 0.05 0.02 1.221 0.001 0.025 0.00 Total 53.34 0.600 5.19 7/4 18.56 Cladocera 0.0 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 Copepoda 0.0 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 Rotifers 0.0 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 Total 0.00 0.000 0.00 7/19 20.12 Cladocera 0.0 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.00 Copepoda 10.77 0.463 2.38 25.70 0.287 0.177 1.732 1.87 Rotifers 122.56 0.092 0.07 8.27 1.036 0.206 0.032 0.39 Total 33.97 0.382 2.25

Table 2. Summary of 2012 mean epilimnetic temperature, zooplankton densities and mean length per taxa, as well as derived values for mean weight per individual and per liter, phosphorus regeneration per individual and per liter, filtering rates per individual and the percent of the epilimnion filtered per day.

- 23 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Avg Avg Mean Dry Phos. Regen. Rate Phos. Regen. Filtering % Temp. #/L length Dry Wt ugP*mgdrywt-1 Rate Rates Epilimnion (°C) (mm) Wt (µg) (µg/L) *ind*h-1 (ug/l/day) ml/ind/day filtered/day 8/2 20.62 Cladocera 1.46 0.93 8.69 12.71 0.705 0.215 9.772 1.43 Copepoda 30.00 0.355 1.72 51.53 0.361 0.446 0.896 2.69 Rotifers 29.26 0.092 0.07 2.05 1.009 0.050 0.031 0.09 Total 66.28 0.711 4.21 8/16 20.91 Cladocera 1.60 1.26 26.68 42.59 0.551 0.563 20.731 3.31 Copepoda 19.16 0.362 1.85 35.37 0.349 0.296 0.941 1.80 Rotifers 5.99 0.108 0.10 0.57 0.684 0.009 0.047 0.03 Total 78.53 0.869 5.14 9/5 19.96 Cladocera 1.56 0.88 7.67 11.96 0.708 0.203 8.480 1.32 Copepoda 19.03 0.56 3.57 67.97 0.219 0.358 2.719 5.17 Rotifers 9.98 0.11 0.09 0.90 0.712 0.015 0.044 0.04 Total 80.83 0.576 6.54 9/19 18.62 Cladocera 2.34 0.58 4.14 9.71 0.774 0.180 3.063 0.72 Copepoda 31.26 0.492 3.39 105.93 0.215 0.548 2.010 6.28 Rotifers 26.18 0.095 0.07 1.88 0.904 0.041 0.034 0.09 Total 117.52 0.769 7.09

Season mean Cladocera 4.437 1.070 14.373 70.819 0.461 0.795 12.181 7.967 Copepoda 17.137 0.485 3.018 50.780 0.271 0.345 1.902 3.447 Rotifers 19.553 0.095 0.073 1.377 0.814 0.032 0.028 0.065 Total 122.98 1.172 11.48

Table 2 (cont.). Summary of 2012 mean epilimnetic temperature, zooplankton densities and mean length per taxa, as well as derived values for mean weight per individual and per liter, phosphorus regeneration per individual and per liter, filtering rates per individual and the percent of the epilimnion filtered per day.

- 24 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

400 Rotifera 350 Copepoda 300 Cladocera 250 200 150 100 Dry weight (ug/l) weight Dry 50 0 5/9 5/24 6/7 6/21 7/4 7/19 8/2 8/16 9/5 9/19

Figure 2. Dry weight contributed by rotifers, copepods and cladocerans in Otsego Lake over the summer of 2012.

400 Rotifera 350 Copepoda 300 Cladocera 250 200 150 100 Dry weight (ug/l) weight Dry 50 0 5/19 6/1 6/15 6/28 7/13 7/26 8/8 8/24 9/9 9/27

Figure 3. Dry weight contributed by rotifers, copepods and cladocerans in Otsego Lake over the summer of 2011.

400 Rotifera 350 Copepoda 300 Cladocera 250 200 150 100 Dry weight (ug/l) weight Dry 50 0 5/18 6/4 6/15 7/1 7/15 8/2 8/12 8/26

Figure 4. Dry weight contributed by rotifers, copepods and cladocerans in Otsego Lake over the summer of 2010.

- 25 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 3. Mean crustacean density, mean cladoceran size and mean dry weight, percent of the epilimnion filtered per day and phosphorus regeneration by crustaceans in 2000 and 2002 -2012.

2000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Mean cladoceran size (mm) 0.29 0.30 0.36 0.53 0.55 0.55 0.34 0.54 0.69 0.81 0.76 1.19 Mean crustacean density (#/l) 208 146 132 163 159 159 154 178 97 56.7 59.4 21.5 Mean crustacean dry weight (ug/l) 175 145 177 261 206 206 128 321 142 143 155 122 Mean % of epilimnion filtered/day 11.9 9.9 12.7 25.1 19.2 19.2 12.2 31.9 9.5 10.8 12.1 11.5 Mean phosphorus regeneration 4.49 2.60 3.10 4.40 2.70 2.40 3.00 5.80 1.49 1.90 1.80 1.17 (ug/l/day)

30

25

20

15

10

Veliger density density Veliger (#/liter) 5

0 4/12 4/26 5/9 5/24 6/7 6/21 7/4 7/19 8/2 8/16 9/5 9/19

Figure 5. Abundance of zebra mussel veligers in the 0-12 m composite samples collected at TR4-C over the summer of 2012.

CONCLUSION

Table 4 summarizes several trophic characteristics of Otsego Lake before the introduction of alewife (when the primary forage fish was cisco), following the introduction of, and dominance by, alewife, and over the summers of 2010-12, when alewife had declined and zebra mussels were established. Over the 1990s, it is believed that alewife virtually eliminated the larger bodied crustaceans, leading to lower plankton filtering rates, higher algal standing crops, lower transparencies and greater hypolimnetic oxygen demand (Harman et al. 2002). Walleye stocking commenced in 2000, and the gradual rebound in numbers of larger crustaceans, particularly Daphnia, over the following several years, was attributed to a reduction in alewife (Waterfield and Cornwell 2011) due to predation by walleye. However, zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha), first documented in Otsego Lake in 2007, had become abundant by the spring of 2010. Filtering by them likely overshadowed that by zooplankton, leading to transparencies that were among the highest ever recorded and rates of hypolimnetic oxygen demand among the lowest ever recorded (Waterfield and Albright 2013). The reasons for the marked increase in mean Daphnia size is unknown. It is also not known whether the complete

- 26 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

absence of any zooplankton on 4 July was related to the observed presence of Microcystis sp. on that date.

Table 4. Changes in Otsego Lake’s trophic characteristics between periods of cisco dominance, alewife dominance, and current conditions (SE) (1from Harman et al. 2002).

Cisco1 Alewife1 Walleye/Zebra Dominance Dominance Mussels (1970-1988) (1990-1999) (2010-2012) Common Cladocera Daphnidae Bosminidae Daphnidae Bosminidae Bosminidae Leptodoridae Cladoceran size (mm) 0.8 0.33 0.92 Crustacean plankton biomass (ug·l-1) 500 100 140 Epilimnion filtered (%·day-1) 27.8% 9.7% 11.4% Chlorophyll a (ug·l-1) 2.4 (1.3) 6.4 (2.4) 1.8 Secchi depth (m) 5.1 (1.03) 3.3 (.46) 7.1 AHOD (mg·cm-2·day-1) 0.066 (0.021) 0.096 (1.3) 0.054

REFERENCES

Albright, M.F. 2005. A report on the evaluation of changes in water quality in a stream following the implementation of agricultural best management practices. In 37th Ann. Rept. (2004). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Cornwell, M.D. 2005.Re-introduction of walleye to Otsego Lake; Re-establishing a fishery and subsequent influences of a top predator. Occas. Pap. No. 40. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Esjmont-Karabin, J. 1984. Phosphorus and nitrogen excretion by lake zooplankton (rotifers and crustaceans) in relation to the individual body weights of the animals, ambient temperature, and presence of food. Ekologia Polska 32:3-42.

Foster, J.R. 1990. Introduction of the alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) in Otsego Lake. In 22nd Ann. Rept. (1989) SUNY Oneonta Bio Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Foster, J.R. and J. Wigen.1990. Zooplankton community as an ecological indicator in cold water fish community of Otsego Lake. In 22nd Ann. Rept. (1989). SUNY Oneonta Bio Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Godfrey, P.J. 1977. An alalysis of phytoplankton standing crop and growth: Their historical development and trophic impacts. In 9th Ann. Rept. (1976). SUNY Oneonta Bio Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 27 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Godfrey, P.J. 1979. Otsego Lake limnology: Phosphorus loading, chemistry, algal standing crop and historical changes. In 10th Ann. Rept. (1978). SUNY Oneonta Bio Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Harman, W.N., M.F. Albright and D.M. Warner. 2002. Trophic changes in Otsego Lake, NY following the introduction of the alewife (Alosa pseudohargenous). Lake and Reserv. Manage. 18(3)215-226.

Johnson, L.E. 1995. Enhanced early detection and enumeration of zebra mussels (Dreissena spp.) veligers using cross-polarized light microscopy. Hydrobiologia 32:139-146.

Knoechel, R. and B. Holtbly.1986 Construction of body length model for the prediction of cladoceran community filtering rates. Limnol. Oceanogr. 31(1):1-16.

Murray, K. and P. Leonard. 2005. Continued water quality monitoring of five major tributaries to Otsego Lake, summer 2004. In 37th Ann. Rept. (2004). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Peters, R.H. and Downing, J.A. 1984 Empirical analysis of zooplankton filtering and feeding rates. Limnology and Oceanography, 29 (4). pp. 763-784

Warner, D.M. 1999. Alewives in Otsego Lake, NY: a comparison of their direct and indirect mechanisms of impact on transparency and chlorophyll a. Occas. Pap. No.32. SUNY Oneonta Bio Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Waterfield, H.A. 2009. Update on zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) invasion and establishment in Otsego Lake, 2008. In 41st Ann. Rept. (2008). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Waterfield, H.A. and M.F. Albright. 2013. Otsego Lake limnological monitoring, 2012. In 45th Ann. Rept. (2012). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Waterfield, H.A. and M.D. Cornwell. 2011. Hydroacoustic surveys of Otsego lake’s pelagic fish community, 2010. In 43rd Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 28 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Chlorophyll a concentrations in Otsego Lake, summer 2012

Chelsea Slater1 and M.F. Albright

INTRODUCTION

As part of ongoing monitoring efforts to evaluate trophic parameters in Otsego Lake, chlorophyll a concentrations in Otsego Lake are monitored annually in profiles of the water column. Chlorophyll a is a photosynthetic pigment present in the dominant algae and thus can be used to estimate algal biomass (Harman et. al 2002). Higher chlorophyll a concentrations often reflect higher nutrient levels, and are influenced by trophic interactions throughout the food web. Historically, Otsego Lake has been considered meso-oligotrophic based upon its morphology, algal standing crop, transparency and hypolimnetic dissolved oxygen concentrations (Godfrey1977). This was largely attributed to relatively high densities of larger bodied crustacean zooplankton, which were believed to effectively filter smaller-celled algae from the water. Godfrey (1977) prosthelytized that Otsego Lake would show signs of increased eutrophy should crustacean plankton be reduced by, for instance, the introduction of additional planktivorous fish species. Alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) were first documented in the lake in 1986 (Foster 1990) and were abundant by the early 1990s (Harman et al. 2002). Alewife are efficient planktivores which caused substantial reductions in crustacean zooplankton throughout the 1990s. The reduction in algal grazing lead to higher algal standing crops, reduced transparency and increased rates of hypolimnetic oxygen reduction (Harman et. al. 2002). Walleye (Sander vitreus) has been stocked into the lake since 2000 in an attempt to re-establish this gamefish (Cornwell 2007). Monitoring various trophic indicators has continued to evaluate the effects of alewife reduction, including rebounds in zooplankton and evidence of filtering by them. An additional variable in the lake’s ecology relates to the establishment of zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha); they were first documented in the lake in 2007 (Waterfield 2009) and were widespread by 2010 (Albright and Zaengle 2012). Zebra mussels are filter feeders and can decrease the algal biomass in the lake. This work evaluated chlorophyll a concentrations in profile at three sites in Otsego Lake over the summer of 2012. Concurrent with this work, Otsego Lake’s physical and chemical limnology were monitored (Waterfield and Albright 2013), alewife abundance was monitored hydroacoustically (Waterfield and Cornwell 2013) and the lake’s zooplankton community was evaluated (Albright 2013).

1 W.N. Harman Internship, 2012. Funding provided by the Otsego County Conservation Association. Current affiliation: SUNY College at Oneonta.

- 29 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

METHODS

Water samples were collected from three sites on Otsego Lake bi-weekly from 6 June to 19 July at three sites historically monitored for water quality testing (Figure 1). Samples were collected at 1-meter intervals from the surface down to 20 meters using a Kemmerer sampler. A composite sample of the water column (0-20m) was also collected at each location. Samples were stored in Nalgene bottles and kept on ice in a dark cooler.

Figure 1. Summer 2012 Otsego lake sample sites for water collection used in chlorophyll a analysis.

Following collection, samples were immediately processed under low light to prevent chlorophyll degradation. Analysis followed the methods of Welschmeyer (1994). An aliquot of each sample (125 ml) was vacuum-filtered through a Whatman® GF/A Glass Micro Fiber filter. The filters were then folded in half, patted dry, and placed in individual labeled petri dishes which were stacked into beakers, wrapped in foil and stored in the freezer until processing resumed. Each filter was cut into pieces using forceps and scissors and put in a test tube with buffered acetone (90% acetone and 10% saturated MgCO3). Using a teflon pestle attached to a drill, the filters were ground up to a slurry. The contents of the grinding tube were then transferred into a centrifuge tube and more acetone buffer was added to bring the volume of each to 10mL. After all filters were ground, the tubes were centrifuged for ten minutes at 10,000xG.

- 30 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

The supernatant was then transferred to a cuvette and the Turner Designs™ TD-700 fluorometer was used to measure chlorophyll a concentration in ppb. Sample chlorophyll a concentrations were calculated by multiplying the fluorometer reading by 10 (volume in the tube) and dividing by 125 (volume of sample filtered).

Additionally, data collected as outlined above were compared with field data collected with a YSI Inc.™ fluorometric field probe as part of routine monitoring (Waterfield and Albright 2013) to evaluate the probes accuracy at low algal densities. Data were taken from the YSI probe on the dates of 6 June, 4 July and 19 July 2012. Statistical paired t-tests were performed on the data for these three sample days. P-values for 2-tailed t-tests were calculated to determine if there was a significant difference between the field and lab data acquired on each day. If the P-value was found to be less than 0.05, there was a significant difference in the data (UCLA Academic Technology Services 2012).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Figure 2 summarizes chlorophyll a concentrations vs. depth at TR4C (the site with the most complete history of data) over the summers of 2002 to 2012. Concentrations have been low this summer compared to the past. Over 2012, the concentrations of chlorophyll a are fairly consistent from surface to 20m, whereas in the past, concentrations often declined with depth. Figure 3 depicts the mean chlorophyll a concentrations throughout the summer, 2012 survey period for each of the three sample sites. The reason for the spike in concentration at 9m for TR5-C and at 19m for TR3-C is unknown. On the four days samples were collected, composite samples were also taken at each site. Figure 4 depicts the composite samples at each site on the date of 6 June 2012. On this day the composite concentrations were significantly higher than on future testing days and were similar between sites (range= 2.28-2.56 ppb). Figure 5 shows the composite samples at each site on 21 June 2012. TR4-C and TR3-C were similar at 1.40 and 1.32 ppb, respectively, while the concentration at TR5-C was much lower with 0.72 ppb. Figure 6 depicts the composite samples at each site on the date of 4 July 2012. The concentrations of chlorophyll a at TR3-C, TR4-C and TR5-C were 0.63, .42 and 1.0 ppb, respectively. Figure 7 shows the composite concentrations at each sample site on the date of 19 July 2012. Chlorophyll a concentrations at TR3-C, TR4-C and TR5-C were 0.96, 1.64 and 0.76 ppb, respectively.

- 31 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Concentration (ppb) 0 2 4 6 8 10 0

2

4 2002 2003 6 2004

8 2005 2006 10 2007 Depth (m)

12 2010 2011 14 2012 16

18

20

Figure 2. Average chlorophyll a concentrations per depth at sample site TR4-C each summer for the past 10 years, excluding 2008-2009. Data retrieved from 2002 (Wayman 2003), 2003 (Schmitt 2004), 2004 (Murray 2005), 2005 (Zurmuhlen 2006), 2006 (Stevens 2007), 2007 (Ottley 2008), 2010 (Bauer 2011), 2011 (Levenstein 2012).

Concentration (ppb) 0 1 2 3 4 5 0

2

4

6

8 TR3-C 10 TR4-C Depth (m) 12 TR5-C

14

16

18

20 Figure 3. Average chlorophyll a concentrations for each site (see Figure 1) throughout the water column over the summer of 2012.

- 32 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

3

2.5

2

1.5

1

Concentration Concentration 0.5

0 TR3-C Comp. TR4-C Comp. TR5-C Comp.

Figure 4. Chlorophyll a concentrations in composite samples at sample sites on June 6, 2012.

3

2.5

2

1.5

1 Concentration Concentration 0.5

0 TR3-C Comp. TR4-C Comp. TR5-C Comp. Figure 5. Chlorophyll a concentrations in composite samples at sample sites on June 21, 2012.

3

2.5

2

1.5

1

Concentration 0.5

0 TR3-C Comp. TR4-C Comp. TR5-C Comp. Figure 6. Chlorophyll a concentrations in composite samples at sample sites on July 4, 2012.

- 33 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

3

2.5

2

1.5

1

Concentration 0.5

0 TR3-C Comp. TR4-C Comp. TR5-C Comp. Figure 7. Chlorophyll a concentrations in composite samples at sample sites on 19 July, 2012.

Figure 8 compares the field data, using a YSI Inc.TM, to the lab data from June 6 2012. There was a mean -21.52% difference in the two sets of data on this day. The negative value indicates that the lab data provided concentrations lower than that of the field data. These data had a P-value of 0.132, indicating that there is an insignificant statistical difference between the data sets. Figure 9 compares field data and lab data from July 4 2012. For this day, there was a mean difference of -81.56% between the two sets of data. There was a P-value of 0.009, indicating a significant difference between the data for the two methods. Figure 10 compares the field data and the lab data from19 July 2012. Here, there was a mean difference of -74.31%. The P-value for this data set was also 0.009, indicating that the difference between these two data sets was also significant. On two out of three of the sets of data, there was a significant statistical difference between the field and lab values.

Concentrations found in the lab using a fluorometer are expected to be more accurate than those determined in the field; this is because water can be filtered, resulting in elevated concentrations in the extraction, and the extraction process itself, which is proven to be an accurate method of analysis (APHA 1992). However, the process is time consuming and laborious; the advantage of a field probe include near-instantaneous data collection, with an admitted loss of accuracy (YSI Inc. 2009). When used in waters having higher chlorophyll a concentrations, probe readings were in better agreement with lab extracted readings (Albright 2013). Therefore, lab methods should be continued, particularly when in low-algae waters, and at least to record the relative accuracy of the field probe on a regular basis.

- 34 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

4 3.5

3 2.5 2 Lab Value 1.5 Field Value

Concentration (ppb) Concentration 1 0.5 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Depth (m) Figure 8. Concentration of chlorophyll a determined in the lab compared to data retrieved in the field using a YSITM probe on the date of 6 June, 2012.

4 3.5 3

2.5 2 Lab Value 1.5 1 Field Value 0.5 Concentration (ppb) Concentration 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Depth (m)

Figure 9. Concentration of chlorophyll a determined in the lab compared to data retrieved in the field using a YSI TM probe on the date of 4 July, 2012.

4

3.5 3 2.5 2 Lab Value 1.5 1

Concentration (ppb) Concentration Field Value 0.5 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Depth (m)

Figure 10. Concentration of chlorophyll a determined in the lab compared to data retrieved in the field using a YSI TM probe on the date of 19 July, 2012.

- 35 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

CONCLUSION

Compared to data from previous years, this year’s concentrations of chlorophyll a in Otsego Lake are among the lowest ever recorded. This is likely resultant of increased density of daphnid zooplankton and the mean size of those animals (Albright 2013), which, in turn, is due to reduced alewife densities (Waterfield and Cornwell 2013). Grazing by the recently- established zebra mussel is undoubtedly reducing algal densities as well as, perhaps, the community make up.

REFERENCES

Albright, M.F. 2013. A survey of Otsego lake’s zooplankton community, summer 2012. In 45th Annual Report (2012). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2013. Personal communication. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. and O. Zaengle. 2012. A survey of Otsego Lake’s zooplankton community, summer 2011. In 44th Annual Report (2011). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

APHA, AWWA, WPCF. 1989. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 17th ed. American Public Health Association. Washington, DC.

Bauer, H. 2011. Chlorophyll a analysis of Otsego Lake, summer 2010. In 43rd Annual Report (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Cornwell, M. 2007. Walleye re-introduction update and characterization of walleye spawners: 2000-2006. In 39th Annual Report (2006). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Foster, J.R. 1990. Introduction of the alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) in Otsego Lake. In 22nd Annual Report (1989). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Godfrey, P.J. 1977. An analysis of phytoplankton standing crop and growth: Their historical development and trophic impacts. In 9th Annual Report (1976). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Harman, W.N., M.F. Albright, and D.M. Warner. 2002. Trophic changes in Otsego Lake, NY following the introduction of the alewife (Alosa Pseudoharengus). Lake and Reservoir Management. 18(3):215-226. th Levenstein, A. 2012. Chlorophyll a concentrations in Otsego Lake, summer 2011. In 44 Annual Report (2011). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Murray, K. 2005. Chlorophyll a concentrations in Otsego Lake, summer 2004. In 37th Annual Report (2004). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 36 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Ottley, S.G. 2008. Chlorophyll a concentrations in Otsego Lake, summer 2007. In 39th Annual Report (2007). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Schmitt, R. 2004. Chlorophyll a concentrations in Otsego Lake, summer 2003. In 36th Annual Report (2003). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Stevens, K. 2007. Chlorophyll a analysis of Otsego Lake, summer 2006. In 39th Annual Report (2006). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

UCLA: Academic. 2012. "FAQ: What Are the Differences between One-tailed and Two-tailed Tests?" Technology Services, Statistical Consulting Group, n.d. Web. 03 Aug. 2012. .

Waterfield, H.A. and M.D. Cornwell. 2013. Hydroacoustic surveys of Otsego Lake’s pelagic fish community, summer 2012. In 45th Annual Report (2012). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Waterfield, H.A. 2009. Update on zebra mussel (Dreissena Polymorpha) invasion and establishment in Otsego Lake, 2008. In 41st Annual Report. (2008). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Waterfield, H.A. and M.F. Albright. 2013.Otsego lake limnological monitoring, summer 2012. In 45th Annual Report (2012). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Wayman, K. 2003. Chlorophyll a concentrations in Otsego Lake, summer 2002. In 35th Annual Report (2002). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Welschmyer, N.A. 1994. Fluorometric analysis of chlorophyll a in the presence of chlorophyll b and pheopigments. Limnol. Oceanogr. 39:1985-1992.

YSI Incorporated. 2005. “The Basics of Chlorophyll Measurement." Tech Note. Web. 10 July 2012. .

YIS Incorporated. 2009. 6-Series user’s manual. Yellow Springs. OH.

Zurmuhlen, S. 2006. Chlorophyll a analysis of Otsego Lake, summer 2005. In 38th Annual Report (2005). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 37 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Water quality monitoring of five major tributaries in the Otsego Lake watershed, summer 2012 Kayla Mehigan1

INTRODUCTION Otsego Lake’s northern watershed has been monitored since 1995 to determine water quality and nutrient concentrations. Historically, Otsego Lake was classified as mesotrophic with characteristics of an oligotrophic lake (Iannuzzi 1991). However, in recent years there has been a trend towards eutrophication (Harman et. al 1997; Albright 1998; 1999; 2000; 2001; 2002). Increases in nutrients, which contribute to eutrophication, can partly be attributed to agricultural runoff; 44 percent of the northern Otsego watershed is classified as agricultural land (Harman et. al 1997). The municipalities within the Otsego Lake watershed adopted a watershed management plan which focuses on this addition of nutrients from five tributaries that feed the Lake in the northern portion of the watershed (Anonymous 2007). USDA’s Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) developed programs designed to reduce nutrient loading into lakes from agriculture. These programs are called best management practices (BMPs). In 1996 the Farm Bill included funding for the USDA’s Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP), which provided farms with funds to implement BMPs (Denby 2009). As of 2012, 22 farms utilize NRCS-funded BMPs. Monitoring the tributaries for changes in nutrients more accurately assess the nutrient loading into the Lake. The illegal introduction of alewife, Alosa pseudoharengus, into Otsego Lake in 1986 made assessments of BMP benefits on water quality more difficult because the effects of alewife mimic those of nutrient loading (Harman et. al 1997). The introduction of zebra mussels, Dreissena polymorpha, in 2007 also affects observed lake water quality. Increased water clarity and decreased phytoplankton abundance have been attributed to zebra mussel colonization in studies of other lakes (Fahnenstiel et. al 1995). Stream monitoring provides information on nutrient concentrations and sources upstream of the lake, allowing for the assessment of BMP effectiveness without the additional confounding factors present within the lake proper.

METHODS The study was continued using methods employed in previous years (Zaengle 2011). The five major tributaries monitored included White Creek, Cripple Creek, Hayden Creek, Shadow Brook, and a stream that flows from Mount Wellington. There are 23 sites in total; three along White Creek, five on Cripple Creek, eight on Hayden Creek, five on Shadow Brook, and three on Mount Wellington. Table 1 provides site names, coordinates, and a brief description of each site. Figure 1 illustrates the locations of each site and BMP farms. These sites were chosen based on road access and their proximity to farms that utilize BMPs. The seventh site along Hayden

1 Rufus J. Thayer Otsego Lake Research Assistant, summer 2012. Current Affiliation: SUNY College at Oneonta.

- 38 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Creek was incorrectly located and recorded for the first six weeks; as a result only the last three weeks of data are included. Water samples were collected weekly at each site from 23 May to 26 July in 125 mL acid washed bottles. Samples were preserved with sulfuric acid to a pH <1. Samples were analyzed for concentrations of total nitrogen (TN), nitrate+nitrite, and total phosphorus (TP) using a Lachat® QuikChem FIA+ Water Analyzer. The cadmium reduction method (Pritzlaff 2003) was used to assess total nitrogen and nitrate+nitrite and ascorbic acid followed by persulfate digestion (Liao and Martin 2001) to assess total phosphorus. For graphing purposes, nitrate+nitrite samples below detection level (bd) were included as 0 mg/L. Physiochemical parameters were measured at each site using a YSI (6820 V2) Multiparameter probe that was calibrated according to manufacturer’s specifications. Measurements included temperature, specific conductance, pH, oxidation reduction potential (ORP), percent dissolved oxygen (DO), DO concentration (mg/L), and turbidity. Specific conductance data were discarded due to data collection errors.

Figure 1. Map of five tributaries in northern watershed of Otsego Lake. Sampling sites are numbered; agricultural BMPs are marked with an asterisk.

- 39 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 1. Physical descriptions and GPS coordinates of sampling sites (modified from Zaengle 2011). Sites are displayed in Figure 1. White Creek 1: N 42º 49.646’ W 74º 56.986’ South side of Allen Lake on County Route 26 near outlet to White Creek.

White Creek 2: N 42º 48.93’ W 74º 55.303’ North side of culvert on County Route 27 (Allen Lake Road) where there is a large dip in the road.

White Creek 3: N 42º 48.355’ W 74º 54.210’ West side of large stone culvert on Route 80.

Cripple Creek 1: N 42º 48.919’ W 74º 55.666’ Weaver Lake accessed from the north side of Route 20 just past outflow of beaver dam. water here is slow moving and there is an abundance of organic matter

Cripple Creek 2: N 42º 50.597’ W 74º 54.933’ Young Lake accessed from the west side of Hoke Road. The water at this side is shallow; some distance from shore is required for sampling.

Cripple Creek 3: N 42º 49.437’ W 74º 53.991’ North side of culvert on Bartlett Road. The water at this location is cold and swift.

Cripple Creek 4: N 42º 48.836’ W 74º 54.037’ Large culvert on west side of Route 80. The stream widens and slows at this point; this is the inlet to Clarke Pond.

Cripple Creek 5: N 42º 48.822’ W 74º 53.779’ Dam just south of Clarke Pond accessed from the Otsego Golf Club road.

Hayden Creek 1: N 42º 51.658’ W 74º 51.010’ Summit Lake accessed from the east side of Route 80, north of the Route 20 and Route 80 intersection.

Hayden Creek 2: N 42º 51.324’ W 74º 51.294’ North side of culvert on Dominion Road.

Hayden Creek 3: N 42º 50.890’ W 74º 51.796’ Culvert on the east side of Route 80 north of the intersection of Route 20 and Route 80.

Hayden Creek 4: N 42º 50.258’ W 74º 52.144’ North side of large culvert at the intersection of Route 20 and Route 80.

Hayden Creek 5: N 42º 49.997’ W 74º 52.533’ Immediately below the Shipman Pond spillway on Route 80.

Hayden Creek 6: N 42º 49.669’ W 74º 52.760’ East side of the culvert on Route 80 in the village of Springfield Center.

Hayden Creek 7: N 42º 49.258’ W 74º 53.010’ Large culvert on the south side of County Route 53.

Hayden Creek 8: N 42º 48.874’ W 74º 53.255’ Otsego Golf Club, above the white bridge adjacent to the clubhouse. The water here is slow moving and murky.

- 40 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 1 (cont.). Physical descriptions and GPS coordinates of sampling sites (modified from Zaengle 2011). Sites are displayed in Figure 1.

Shadow Brook 1: N 42º 51.831’ W 74º 47.731’ Small culvert on County Route 30 south of Swamp Road.

Shadow Brook 2: N 42º 49.882’ W 74º 49.058’ Large culvert on the north side of Route 20, west of County Route 31.

Shadow Brook 3: N 42º 48.788’ W 74º 49.852’ Private driveway on County Rte 31 (Box 2075) leading to a small wooden bridge on a dairy farm.

Shadow Brook 4: N 42º 48.333’ W 74º 50.605’ One lane bridge on Rathburn Road. This site is located on an active dairy farm. The stream bed consists of exposed limestone bedrock.

Shadow Brook 5: N 42º 47.436’ W 74º 51.506’ North side of large culvert on Mill Road behind Glimmerglass State Park.

Mount Wellington 1: N 42º 48.864’ W 74º 52.594’ Stone bridge on Public Landing Road adjacent to an active dairy farm.

Mount Wellington 2: N 42º 48.875’ W 74º 52.987’ Small stone bridge is accessible from a private road off Public Landing Road; at the end of the private road near a white house there is a mowed path which leads to the bridge. Water here is generally stagnant and murky.

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

Temperature Summer 2012 mean site temperatures, displayed in Figure 2, ranged from 15.44°C at MW1 to 22.56°C at HC1. In 2011, the lowest and highest mean temperatures were 16.41°C at CC3 and 24.42°C at HC1, respectively (Zaengle 2011). The mean temperatures have decreased in 2012 compared to previous years. Changes in water temperature can be an indicator of stream health, especially related to the condition of the riparian zone. Many aquatic organisms are sensitive to temperature fluctuations because temperature affects oxygen availability; colder water holds more DO (Senese 1997). Best management practices that protect riparian zones with woody vegetation can increase shading of the stream and result in lower, more stable summer temperatures. pH Mean site pH values are displayed in Figure 3. The mean pH ranged from 7.82 at CC1 to 8.28 at HC4 in 2012. In 2011, the pH range was larger with a low pH of 7.69 at HC1 and a high pH of 8.45 at HC7 (Zaengle 2011). pH is a measure of hydrogen ions and can be an indicator for water quality because it affects the availability of DO, nutrients, and heavy metals. The values in 2012 are near neutral or slightly basic, which decreases the ability of heavy metals to leach into the streams.

- 41 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Mean Temperature

24.0

22.0 Hayden Creek

White Creek 20.0 Cripple Creek

Temperature (C) Temperature 18.0 Shadow Brook 16.0 Mount Wellington

14.0 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 Distance from Otsego Lake (km)

White Creek Cripple Creek Hayden Creek Shadow Brook Mount Wellington

Figure 2. Mean temperatures (°C) for sampling sites along five tributaries of the northern Otsego Lake watershed, summer 2012. Points on the left side of the graph represent stream mouths while the points on the right are head waters. Vertical bars indicate standard error.

Mean pH 9.0

8.5 Mount Wellington Hayden Creek Shadow Brook 8.0 White Creek 7.5 Cripple Creek

7.0 pH 6.5

6.0

5.5

5.0 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 Distance from Otsego Lake (km)

White Creek Cripple Creek Hayden Creek Shadow Brook Mount Wellington

Figure 3. Mean pH for sampling sites along five tributaries of the northern Otsego Lake watershed, summer 2012. Points on the left side of the graph represent stream mouths while the points on the right are head waters.

- 42 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Dissolved Oxygen Mean site DO concentrations ranged from 5.04 mg/L at CC1 to 11.16 mg/L at SB4; all mean site concentrations are displayed in Figure 4. In 2011, the range was from 5.80 mg/L at HC1 to 10.16 mg/L at SB4 which is similar to 2012 values (Zaengle 2011). Dissolved oxygen concentration is fundamental to indicating water quality because it reflects the availability of oxygen for aquatic organisms and decomposition. Sensitive species may be impacted by DO levels less than 6 mg/L. Site CC1 fell below that level at 5.04 mg/L.

Mean Dissolved Oxygen 12.0

11.0 Shadow Brook

10.0 Mount Wellington

9.0 Hayden Creek

8.0 White Creek 7.0

6.0

Disolved Oxygen (mg/l) 5.0 Cripple Creek 4.0 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 Distance from Otsego Lake (km) White Creek Cripple Creek Hayden Creek Shadow Brook Mount Wellington Figure 4. Mean dissolved oxygen (mg/L) for sampling sites along five tributaries of the northern Otsego Lake watershed, summer 2012. Points on the left side of the graph represent stream mouths while the points on the right are head waters. Vertical bars indicate standard error.

Turbidity Turbidity causes water to look cloudy and results from suspended particles in water that interfere with the passage of light. Higher values indicate a greater number of suspended particles (APHA 1992). In 2012, turbidity ranged from 3.68 NTU at CC3 to 26.03 NTU at MW2 (Figure 5). These values reflect the difference in site characteristics; site CC3 is a fast moving portion of Cripple Creek and MW2 is an area where the water is muddy and calm. This is the first year turbidity data has been collected.

- 43 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Mean Turbidity 35

30

Mount Wellington

25 Hayden Creek

20

15 Cripple Creek Turbidity (NTU) 10

White Creek 5 Shadow Brook

0 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 Distance from Otsego Lake (km)

White Creek Cripple Creek Hayden Creek Shadow Brook Mount Wellington Figure 5. Mean turbidity (NTU) for sampling sites along five tributaries of the northern Otsego Lake watershed, summer 2012. Points on the left side of the graph represent stream mouths while the points on the right are head waters. Vertical bars indicate standard error.

Nitrogen Total nitrogen comprises all forms of nitrogen found in the streams including nitrates, nitrites, ammonia, and nitrogenous organic compounds. In 2012, mean total nitrogen values ranged from 0.37 mg/L at WC1 to 2.3 mg/L at HC8. All total nitrogen values are displayed in Figure 6. The mean site concentrations of nitrate+nitrite in 2012 ranged from 0.16 mg/L at CC2 to 1.14 mg/L at HC8. In 2011, the values ranged from below detection (0.02 mg/L) to 1.57 mg/L at CC2 and SB2, respectively (Zaengle 2011). Nitrite+nitrate values from stream outlet sites are displayed in Figure 7. Nitrogen is an essential nutrient for all organisms and can be a limiting factor in lakes and streams. A spike in nitrogen levels can increase the productivity of a water system. The main focus of the best management practices is to limit the amount of nutrients entering Lake Otsego via the tributaries. Mean nitrate concentrations have increased from previous years at sites near the source of each tributary; Hayden Creek and Cripple Creek concentrations increase as the stream sites reach the outlets. The other tributaries display a trend that decreases in nitrate concentrations near the stream outlets. Figure 8 and Table 2 compare mean nitrate concentrations of the five tributaries since 1991.

- 44 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Mean Total Nitrogen 2.5

2.0

1.5 Shadow Brook

Mount Wellington 1.0 Cripple Creek Hayden Creek 0.5

Total Nitrogen (mg/L) White Creek 0.0 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 Distance from Otsego Lake (km)

White Creek Cripple Creek Hayden Creek Series4 Mount Wellington Figure 6. Mean total nitrogen (mg/L) for sampling sites along five tributaries of the northern Otsego Lake watershed, summer 2012. Points on the left side of the graph represent stream mouths while the points on the right are head waters. Vertical bars indicate standard error.

Mean Nitrate + Nitrite 2.0

1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 Mount Wellington Shadow Brook 1.0 0.8

0.6 Hayden Creek 0.4

0.2 White Creek Cripple Creek Nitrate+ Nitrite Concentrations (mg/L) 0.0 0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 Distance from Otsego Lake (km)

White Creek Cripple Creek Hayden Creek Shadow Brook Mount Wellington Figure 7. Mean nitrate (mg/L) for sampling sites along five tributaries of the northern Otsego Lake watershed, summer 2012. Points on the left side of the graph represent stream mouths while the points on the right are head waters. Vertical bars indicate standard error.

- 45 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Mean Nitrate at Stream Outlet 3

2.5

2

1.5

1 (mg/L) Nitrate 0.5

0 White Creek Cripple Creek Hayden Creek Shadow Brook Mount Wellington Stream Outlets 1991 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Figure 8. A comparison of mean nitrate (mg/L) concentrations at each stream mouth 1991, 1998-2012.

Phosphorus Phosphorus is an essential nutrient to aquatic organisms and is a limiting factor of productivity in Otsego Lake. Total phosphorus comprises all forms of phosphorus found in the streams. In 2012, mean total phosphorus values ranged from 20 µg/L at HC4 to 71µg/L at MW2. The concentration of phosphorus has remained similar to previous years. In 2011, the lowest value was 20 µg/L at HC2 and the highest value was 53 µg/L at HC1 (Zaengle 2011). All total phosphorus values are displayed in Figure 9. Mean stream outlet phosphorus concentrations are displayed in Figure 10. A comparison of mean phosphorus concentrations from 2000 to 2012 is displayed in Table 3.

- 46 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 2. Comparison of mean nitrate (mg/L) concentrations at each sampling location 1991, 1998-2012.

Comparison of Mean Nitrate Concentrations (mg/L) 1991, 1998-2012 1991 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 WC1 0.10 0.05 0.11 0.25 0.31 0.29 0.15 0.27 0.01 0.22 0.21 0.06 0.25 0.09 0.25 WC2 0.31 0.30 0.12 0.16 0.25 0.24 0.15 0.09 0.04 0.11 0.09 0.12 0.10 0.06 0.19 WC3 1.09 0.37 0.41 0.19 0.22 0.33 0.24 0.35 0.31 0.12 0.35 0.24 0.16 0.24 0.13 0.34 CC1 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.08 0.12 0.18 0.13 0.04 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.04 CC2 0.04 0.02 0.24 0.04 0.16 0.34 0.22 0.20 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.97 0.01 0.02 CC3 1.54 1.19 0.89 1.63 1.20 1.12 1.06 0.60 0.86 0.88 0.97 1.16 1.17 0.97 0.96 CC4 1.42 0.97 0.92 1.77 1.07 1.37 1.05 0.56 0.88 0.97 0.77 1.15 1.19 1.01 0.81 CC5 0.69 0.99 0.37 0.68 1.41 0.77 0.80 0.77 0.27 0.83 0.39 0.38 0.99 0.81 0.69 0.57 HC1 0.82 0.29 0.82 0.68 0.64 0.52 0.26 0.02 0.72 0.07 0.01 0.47 0.33 0.30 0.52 HC2 0.72 0.24 0.71 0.66 0.76 0.52 0.24 0.03 0.84 0.06 0.01 0.59 0.34 0.36 0.34 HC3 1.35 0.64 0.96 1.62 1.44 1.43 1.11 0.60 1.11 0.51 0.44 0.62 0.86 0.70 0.65 HC4 1.34 0.95 1.17 1.73 1.41 1.27 1.11 0.66 1.10 0.55 0.46 0.68 0.88 0.73 0.82 HC5 1.36 0.85 1.19 1.87 1.18 1.34 1.39 0.98 1.64 0.59 0.36 0.94 0.89 0.72 0.64 HC6 1.45 0.90 1.29 1.87 1.51 1.27 1.51 1.38 1.58 0.69 0.45 1.02 0.95 0.77 0.79 HC7 1.45 0.95 1.33 2.00 1.50 1.46 1.31 1.05 2.52 1.22 0.57 1.93 1.00 0.94 0.84 HC8 1.11 1.63 1.21 1.48 1.56 2.09 1.62 1.62 1.31 1.69 0.89 0.70 1.62 1.22 1.17 1.09 SB1 0.21 0.31 0.66 0.53 0.33 0.34 0.32 0.21 0.25 0.09 0.14 0.16 0.21 0.17 - - SB2 1.86 1.21 1.45 1.40 1.80 1.33 1.39 1.55 0.61 0.98 0.95 1.43 1.34 1.57 1.05 SB3 1.56 0.77 1.57 1.37 1.38 1.36 1.19 0.73 0.94 0.57 0.44 1.34 0.65 0.89 0.64 SB4 1.39 0.87 1.56 1.55 1.43 1.47 1.02 0.73 0.88 0.63 0.57 1.31 0.77 0.94 0.59 SB5 0.90 1.20 0.58 1.27 1.27 1.11 1.05 1.04 0.47 0.87 0.35 0.39 1.22 0.51 0.78 0.52 MW1 0.91 1.11 0.78 1.14 2.31 2.46 1.17 0.67 0.70 0.55 0.23 0.79 0.32 0.50 0.90 MW2 1.47 0.68 1.10 1.06 1.66 2.70 1.58 1.60 1.18 0.83 0.35 0.89 1.07 1.15 0.63 * - - stream flow was too low for sample collection; no nutrient data exists for Site SB1 in 2012

- 47 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Mean Total Phosphorus 90.0 80.0 70.0 Mount Wellington Cripple Creek 60.0 50.0 40.0

30.0 Shadow Brook Total Phosphorus (ug/L 20.0 Hayden Creek White Creek 10.0

0.0 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 Distance from Otsego Lake (km) White Creek Cripple Creek Hayden Creek Shadow Brook Mount Wellington

Figure 9. Mean total phosphorus (µg/L) for sampling sites along five tributaries of the northern Otsego Lake watershed, summer 2012. Points on the left side of the graph represent stream mouths while the points on the right are head waters.

Mean Total Phosphorus at Stream Outlets 250

200

150

100

Total Phosphorus (ug/L) 50

0 White Creek Cripple Creek Hayden Creek Shadow Brook Mount Wellington Stream Outlets 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Figure 10. A comparison of mean phosphorus (μg/L) concentrations at each stream mouth from 1996-2012.

- 48 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 3. Comparison of mean phosphorus (μg/L) concentrations at each sampling location from 2000-2012. Comparison of phosphorus concentrations (µg/L), 2000-2012 Site 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 WC1 31 34 72 25 33 51 17 66 46 33 33 25 22 WC2 28 33 23 26 39 61 33 37 34 24 25 25 33 WC3 19 24 12 23 26 36 40 38 19 22 17 21 21 CC1 45 36 112 30 49 49 33 86 89 38 63 49 62 CC2 48 23 46 124 144 172 37 36 25 24 25 28 22 CC3 25 24 10 25 39 37 62 40 22 26 41 30 21 CC4 28 35 19 22 46 55 40 39 34 27 45 30 37 CC5 42 45 51 28 46 70 37 58 59 34 41 40 51 HC1 26 25 60 21 43 33 33 48 43 35 28 53 22 HC2 20 17 14 13 23 34 57 30 27 18 24 20 52 HC3 25 28 47 26 34 39 50 35 54 24 31 24 21 HC4 20 23 17 26 29 41 22 38 27 24 31 24 20 HC5 28 27 27 22 33 43 46 41 37 22 31 27 41 HC6 24 24 21 33 28 40 40 49 32 26 26 27 25 HC7 34 26 19 30 44 54 73 40 42 27 32 28 30 HC8 32 37 54 31 51 120 89 43 71 30 37 32 62 SB1 52 39 57 21 27 103 54 28 19 36 30 33 - SB2 56 43 24 31 45 63 50 17 32 34 29 21 27 SB3 28 36 46 24 37 40 30 35 30 25 35 24 32 SB4 48 37 27 27 62 62 22 26 39 38 26 22 42 SB5 39 54 40 34 63 85 38 45 44 37 38 31 45 MW1 38 45 36 50 83 51 23 54 33 29 45 25 26 MW2 142 192 99 136 88 214 69 65 38 57 68 46 71 * - stream flow was too low for sample collection; no nutrient data exists for Site SB1 in 2012

CONCLUSION Water quality of the five tributaries has remained similar to previous years with some slight variation. The overall effectiveness of the best management practices that were implemented in 1995 has remained the same since 2000. The nutrient concentrations fluctuate yearly related to changes in weather, human activities, etc. In 2012, there was a drought that decreased water flow of each tributary; Shadow Brook site 1 was dry the entire summer and White Creek site 1 decreased in flow in mid-July to the point where measurements could not be taken. Determining changes in water quality resulting from land management practices requires long term sampling; natural variation in climate and other factors that influence physical parameters in streams can create fluctuations in the data values, making it difficult to relate the results to best management practice success.

- 49 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

REFERENCES

Albright, M.F. 1998. Otsego Lake Monitoring, 1997. In 30th Ann. Rept. (1997). SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 1999. Otsego Lake Monitoring, 1998. In 31st Ann. Rept. (1998). SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2000. Otsego Lake Limnological Monitoring, 2000. In 33rd Ann. Rept. (2000). SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2001. Otsego Lake Limnological Monitoring, 2001. In 34th Ann. Rept. (2001). SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2002. Otsego Lake Limnological Monitoring, 2001. In 34th Ann. Rept. (2001). SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Anonymous. 2007. A Plan for the Management of the Otsego Lake Watershed. Otsego County Water Quality Coordinating Committee. Otsego County. New York.

APHA. 1992. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater.18th ed. Ed Greenberg, A.E., Clesceri, L.S., Eaton, A.D. p2-8.

Denby, J. 2009. Water quality monitoring of five major tributaries in the Otsego lake watershed, summer 2008. In 41st Ann. Rept. (2008). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Fahnenstiel, G., G.A. Lang, T.F. Nalepa, and T.H. Johengen. 1995. Effects of Zebra Mussel (Driessena polymorpha) Colonization on Water Quality Parameters in Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron. J. Great Lakes Res. 21(4):435-448.

Harman, W.N., L.P. Sohacki, M.R. Albright, and D.L. Rosen. 1997. The State of Otsego Lake, 1936-1996. Occasional Paper #30. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Iannuzzi, T.J. 1991. A model plan for the Otsego Lake watershed. Phase II: The Chemical limnology and water quality of Otsego Lake. Occasional Paper #23. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Laio, N. and S. Marten. 2001. Determination of total phosphorus by flow injection analysis colorimetry (acid persulfate digestion method). QuikChem®Method 10-115-01-1-F. Lachat Instruments. Loveland, Colorado.

Pritzlaff, D. 2003. Determination of nitrate-nitrite in surface and wastewaters by flow injection analysis. QuikChem®Method 10-115-01-1-F. Lachat Instruments. Loveland, Colorado.

- 50 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Senese, F. 1997. http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/solutions/faq/predicting- DO.shtml. Date Accessed July 17, 2007.

Zaengle, O. 2011. Water quality monitoring of five major tributaries in the Otsego Lake watershed, summer 2011. In 44th Ann. Rept. (2011). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 51 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Upper Susquehanna River Water Quality Monitoring:

Monitoring water quality and fecal coliform bacteria in the Upper Susquehanna River, summer 20121

R. Katz2

INTRODUCTION

Flowing 444 miles from Otsego Lake to the Chesapeake Bay, the Susquehanna River is a major source of drinking water, energy, and recreation for those living in the Northeast. Its importance to the residents of New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland has led to an increased effort to reduce the amounts of nutrients flowing into the river (SRBC 2009), and extensive monitoring throughout its course to determine whether the Susquehanna displays the signs of a healthy river.

Each summer, water samples are taken from nine sites along the course of the Upper Susquehanna and are analyzed for temperature, dissolved oxygen, specific conductivity, nitrates and nitrates, total nitrogen, total phosphorous, and fecal coliform levels. Monitoring the water for fecal coliform bacteria is an important step in determining the health of the Susquehanna. These bacteria are found in the digestive tracts of homothermic animals including aquatic mammals and birds. The results obtained from these yearly surveys are used to determine whether local efforts to reduce nutrient flow into the river, including the newly implanted Cooperstown Wastewater Treatment Plant’s wetland (Albright and Waterfield 2011), are truly reducing the amount of nutrients near the source of the Susquehanna.

METHODS

Nine sites along the Susquehanna River were monitored weekly, from 25 June to 30 July, between the hours of 0800 and 1200. Sites were from Otsego Lake downstream to the confluence of the river with Oaks Creek (Table 1, Figure 1). A YSI® 6820 V2-2 multiprobe was used to measure temperature, pH, conductivity, and dissolved oxygen at each site. Water samples for nutrient analyses were collected in 125ml Nalgene® bottles from each site and processed by a Lachat® QuickChem FIA + Water Analyzer to determine nitrate+nitrite, total nitrogen, and total phosphorous. Nitrate+nitrite were determined by the cadmium reduction method (Pritzlaff 2003), total nitrogen by the cadmium reduction method after peroxodisulfate digestion (Ebina et al. 1983), and total phosphorous by the ascorbic acid method following persulfate digestion (Liao and Martin 2001).

1 Funding provided by the Village of Cooperstown. 2 FHV Mecklenburg Conservation Intern, summer 2012. Funding provided by the Village of Cooperstown, Present affiliation: Cooperstown High School.

- 52 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 1. Locations and descriptions of the nine Upper Susquehanna sites.

Site Distance from Description source 3 144m Under the Main Street Bridge; accessed via slope beside the bridge. 6a 1012m Below the dam at Bassett Hospital; accessed from the northern corner of the lower parking lot of Bassett Hospital. 7 1533m Below the dam at Bassett Hospital; accessed from the southern corner of the lower parking lot of Bassett Hospital. 8 1724m Under the Susquehanna Ave. bridge west of the Clark Sports Center; accessed via the slope beside the bridge. 12 4119m Just above the sewage discharge of the Cooperstown Wastewater Treatment Plant, near Cooperstown High School. Accessed by an opening in the fence. 16 5460m Small bridge perpendicular to the road on Clark Property. Accessed by crossing a gated bovine grazing area (cow field). 16a 5939m Distinct bend in river alongside road on Clark Property, in field directly across from large house with hay rolls in front. Accessed by long path found on the right side of the field. Be cautious of barbed wire. 17 8143m Abandoned bridge on Phoenix Mill Road. 18 9867m Railroad trestle about 200m north of the railroad crossing on Rt. 11 going out of Hyde Park, accessed by walking on the railroad tracks.

Water samples for fecal coliform bacteria analysis were also collected at each site. The samples were kept chilled in a cooler until processing, in order to slow the rate of bacterial growth. The membrane filter technique was used assess each sample for coliform bacteria (APHA 1992). Six subsamples ranging from 10ml to 50ml were filtered using a low-pressure vacuum. The Milipore® filter pads were then placed in culture dishes of the same brand, saturated with nutrient- laden broth, and placed in a 44.5 degrees Celsius water bath for a period of 24 hours. After the incubation period, the number of colonies on each culture dish were counted and recorded as colonies per 100ml. All lab equipment was sterilized in 70% ethanol and washed in hot water and dilution water between sample sites.

- 53 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 1. Upper Susquehanna sites, summer 2012.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Temperature

Temperature readings from June to August 2012 can be seen in Figure 2. Figure 3 displays the temperature readings from the summers of 2004-2012. The mean temperature from the summer of 2012 was 22.1oC. The highest temperature was 24.43oC at SR17 on July 23. The lowest was 21.04oC at SR17 on August 14.

- 54 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

26

25

24

23

22

21

Temperature (Celsius) Temperature 20

19

18 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Distance from source (m)

Figure 2. Average temperature profile for the upper Susquehanna, summer 2012.

26.00

25.00 2004

24.00 2005 23.00 2006 22.00 2007 2008 21.00 2009 Temperature (Celsius) Temperature 20.00 2010

19.00 2011 2012 18.00 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Distance from site (m)

Figure 3. Average temperature profile for the upper Susquehanna, summers 2004 (Hill 2005), 2005 (Bauer 2006), 2006 (Zurmuhlen 2007), 2007 (Coyle 2008), 2008 (Matus 2009), 2009 (Heiland 2010), 2010 (Bauer 2011), 2011 (Scott 2012), and 2012.

- 55 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

pH

pH measures the acidity of a liquid sample. It is important to determine the pH level when water quality is measured, as a drastic change in pH levels could indicate the introduction of new substances in the water. Figure 4 shows the pH readings for 2012. Readings for the previous summers can be found in Figure 5. The average pH this season was 7.96.

Conductivity

Conductivity is the measure of the water’s ability to carry an electric current based on the amount of dissolved ions it contains (Wetzel and Lichens 1991). It is influenced by local geology (i.e., carbonates) and salts. Changes in conductivity can be caused by a change in ionic content, which could indicate the presence of pollution in the water. Conductivity levels for 2012 can be seen in Figure 6. Readings for 2004-2012 can be found in Figure 7. The highest conductivity recorded was 0.397 umho/cm at SR17. The lowest was 0.181 at SR7.

8.5

8.4

8.3

8.2

8.1

8 pH 7.9

7.8

7.7

7.6

7.5 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 Distance from source (m)

Figure 4. Average pH profile for the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2012.

- 56 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

8.50

8.40

8.30 2004 8.20 2005 8.10 2006

8.00 2007 pH 7.90 2008

7.80 2009 2010 7.70 2011 7.60 2012 7.50 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Distance from site (m)

Figure 5. Average pH profile for the upper Susquehanna, summers 2004 (Hill 2005), 2005 (Bauer 2006), 2006 (Zurmuhlen 2007), 2007 (Coyle 2008), 2008 (Matus 2009), 2009 (Heiland 2010), 2010 (Bauer 2011), 2011 (Scott 2012), and 2012.

0.4

0.35

0.3 2012

Conductivity (umho/cm) Conductivity 0.25

0.2 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Distance from source (m)

Figure 6. Mean conductivity levels of the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2012.

- 57 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

0.400

2004 0.350 2005 2006 0.300 2007 2008 2009

Conductivity (umho/cm) Conductivity 0.250 2010 2011 2012 0.200 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Distance from source (m)

Figure 7. Average conductivity levels of the upper Susquehanna, summers 2004 (Hill 2005), 2005 (Bauer 2006), 2006 (Zurmuhlen 2007), 2007 (Coyle 2008), 2008 (Matus 2009), 2009 (Heiland 2010), 2010 (Bauer 2011), 2011 (Scott 2012), and 2012.

Dissolved Oxygen

Aquatic life depends on different levels of oxygen that has been dissolved in the water. Therefore, it is important to determine the amount of dissolved oxygen in the various sites along the Susquehanna. Colder waters are able to hold more oxygen in solution, making temperature an important factor in dissolved oxygen content. Dissolved oxygen levels in the water can be seen in Figure 8. The readings for the previous summers can be found in Figure 9. The highest dissolved oxygen level was 7.77mg/l at SR16a. The lowest was 5.00mg/l at SR17.

- 58 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

10

9

8

7 2012

Dissolved oxygem (mg/l) 6

5 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Distance from source (m)

Figure 8. Average dissolved oxygen content of the upper Susquehanna, summer 2012.

10.00

9.00 2004 2005 8.00 2006 2007 7.00 2008 2009

Dissolved oxygem (mg/l) 6.00 2010 2011 5.00 2012 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Distance from source (m)

Figure 9. Dissolved oxygen levels of the upper Susquehanna, summers 2004 (Hill 2005), 2005 (Bauer 2006), 2006 (Zurmuhlen 2007), 2007 (Coyle 2008), 2008 (Matus 2009), 2009 (Heiland 2010), 2010 (Bauer 2011), 2011 (Scott 2012), and 2012.

- 59 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Total Phosphorus

Phosphorus is elevated in agricultural and urban runoff and wastewater effluent. Increased phosphorus levels can lead to algal blooms, eventually decreasing dissolved oxygen levels. In recent years, the Cooperstown Wastewater Treatment Plant’s wetland has been effective in decreasing phosphorus from the effluent (Albright 2012). Figure 10 shows the average phosphorus levels from summer 2012. The averages of the previous years can be seen in Figure 11.

250

200

150

100

Total Phosphorus (ug/l) 50

0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

Distance from source (M)

Figure 10. Average phosphorus concentrations along the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2012.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 250

200

150

100

50 Total Phosphorus (ug/l)

0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

Distance from source (M)

Figure 11. Average phosphorus concentrations along the upper Susquehanna River, summers 2004 (Hill 2005), 2005 (Bauer 2006), 2006 (Zurmuhlen 2007), 2007 (Coyle 2008), 2008 (Matus 2009), 2009 (Heiland 2010), 2010 (Bauer 2011), 2011 (Scott 2012), and 2012.

- 60 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Nitrogen

Algae depend on nitrogen as an essential nutrient. Both organic and inorganic sources lead to the presence of nitrogen in water. Like phosphorus levels, the levels of nitrogen in past years have been decreasing due to the wetland at the Wastewater Treatment Plant (Albright 2012). Nitrate + nitrite levels for summer 2012 can be seen in Figure 12. Readings from previous summers can be seen in Figure 13. Total nitrogen levels from summer 2012 can be seen in Figure 14. Averages from previous summers are found in Figure 15.

1.00

0.80

0.60

0.40 Nitrite+Nitrate (mg/l) 0.20

0.00 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

Distance from source (M)

Figure 12. Nitrate and nitrite concentrations of the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2012.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 1.00

0.80

0.60

0.40

Nitrite+Nitrate (mg/l) 0.20

0.00 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

Distance from source (M)

Figure 13. Average nitrite and nitrate concentrations of the upper Susquehanna River, summers 2004 (Hill 2005), 2005 (Bauer 2006), 2006 (Zurmuhlen 2007), 2007 (Coyle 2008), 2008 (Matus 2009), 2009 (Heiland 2010), 2010 (Bauer 2011), 2011 (Scott 2012), and 2012.

- 61 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

2.00 2012

1.50

1.00

Total Nitrogen (mg/l) 0.50

0.00 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

Distance from source (M)

Figure 14. Total nitrogen levels of the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2012.

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2.00

1.50

1.00

Total Nitrogen (mg/l) 0.50

0.00 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000

Distance from source (M)

Figure 15. Average total nitrogen levels of the upper Susquehanna River, summers 2004 (Hill 2005), 2005 (Bauer 2006), 2006 (Zurmuhlen 2007), 2007 (Coyle 2008), 2008 (Matus 2009), 2009 (Heiland 2010), 2010 (Bauer 2011), 2011 (Scott 2012), and 2012.

Fecal Coliform

Fecal coliform bacteria are found in the intestines of warm-blooded animals, and its presence in a body of water can indicate pollution from sewage. High amounts of these bacteria represent a high health risk for those who depend on the water both for drinking and for recreation. Fecal coliform bacteria can enter the water in a variety of ways, including runoff after storms, the

- 62 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

presence of mammals or birds in the water, and human sewage. Fecal coliform levels from summer 2012 can be seen in Figure 16. Levels from previous summers can be seen in Figure 17.

2000

1500

1000 2012

500 Fecal coliform (colonies/100ml)

0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Distance from source (m)

Figure 16. Fecal coliform levels of the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2012.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012

2000

1500

1000

500 Fecal Coliform Fecal Coliform (col./100 ml)

0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

Distance from source (M)

Figure 17. Average fecal coliform levels of the upper Susquehanna River, summers 2004 (Hill 2005), 2005 (Bauer 2006), 2006 (Zurmuhlen 2007), 2007 (Coyle 2008), 2008 (Matus 2009), 2009 (Heiland 2010), 2010 (Bauer 2011), 2011 (Scott 2012), and 2012.

- 63 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

REFERENCES

Albright, M.F. 2012 Monitoring the effectiveness of the Cooperstown wastewater treatment wetland. In 44th Ann. Rept. (2011). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Bauer, E. 2006. Monitoring the water quality and fecal coliform in the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2005. In 38th Ann. Rept. (2005). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Bauer, H. 2011 Monitoring the water quality and fecal coliform in the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2010. In 43th Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Coyle, O.L. 2008. Monitoring water quality and fecal coliform bacteria in the Upper Susquehanna River, summer 2007. In 40th Annual Report (2007), SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Ebina, J.T. Tsutsui, and T. Shirai. 1983. Simultaneous determination of total nitrogen and total phosphorus in water using peroxodisulfate oxidation. Water Res. 17(12):1712-1726.

Eureka Environmental Engineering. 2004. Manta water quality probe startup guide. Austin, TX.

Hill, J.2005. Monitoring the water quality in the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2004. In 37th Ann. Rept. (2004). SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Heiland, L. 2010. Monitoring water quality in the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2009. In 42st Ann. Rept. (2009). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta

Liao, N. 2001. Determination of ammonia by flow injection analysis. QwikChem® Method 10- 115-01-0-F. Lachat Instruments. Loveland, Colorado.

Liao, N. and S. Marten. 2001. Determination of total phosphorus by flow injection analysis chloriometry (acid persulfate digestion method). QwikChem® Method 10-115-01-1-F. Lachat Instruments. Loveland, Colorado.

Matus, J.E. 2009. Monitoring water quality and fecal coliform bacteria in the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2008. In 41st Ann. Rept. (2008). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta

Pritzlaff, D. 2003. Determination of nitrate+nitrite in surface and wastewaters by flow injection analysis. QwikChem® Method 10-115-01-1-F. Lachat Instruments. Loveland, Colorado.

Susquehanna River Basin Commision. 2009. http://www.srbc.net/about/index.htm.

Wetzel, R.G. and G.E. Lichens. 1991. Limnological Analysis, 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag New York.

Zurmuhlen, S. J. 2007. Monitoring water quality in the upper Susquehanna River, summer 2006. In 39th Annual Report (2006), SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 64 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Fish of the Upper Susquehanna River, Otsego County, NY

R. Katz1

INTRODUCTION

While yearly water quality monitoring occurs on the upper stretches of the Susquehanna River, an analysis of the fish assemblages at various sampling sites has never been conducted by the Biological Field Station. The habitats surveyed by water quality monitoring range from shallow, rocky, fast-moving reaches to slow, muddy waters. There is a wide range of environments represented by a comparatively short stretch of river, providing shelter for a diversity of fish species.

METHODS & MATERIALS

Between the hours of 9AM and 12PM on 7 and 8 August, 2012, three sites along the Susquehanna River were surveyed (Figure 1). The sites chosen were pulled from the water quality monitoring site map (Katz 2013), with sites SR6a, SR8, and SR17 being surveyed. A HalTech® electro-fishing probe was used to stun and capture fish, which were identified and measured on the riverbank and were either returned to the river or collected in a cooler and brought back to the laboratories for parasite analysis or preservation, depending on the species and availability.

Figure 1. The three sites surveyed for fish in the upper Susquehanna River.

1 F.H.V. Mecklenburg Conservation Fellow, summer 2012. Present affiliation: SUNY Oswego.

- 65 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

A total of 285 fish were collected during the survey. The majority of fish captured came from SR17 (n=142), just below the closed bridge on Phoenix Mills Road. Site SR6a, below the dam at the hospital, yielded the second-highest number of fish, with 98 individuals captured. Forty five fish were collected at SR8, under the bridge on Susquehanna Avenue. The most numerous species captured was the longnose dace (Rhinichthys cataractae), although this species was only recorded at SR17. One unexpected specimen was collected from SR6a: a burbot (Lota lota), a species which has historically been collected in Otsego Lake and occasionally is seen locally in some streams (Smith 1985, Pokorny 2013). A list summarizing species collected is given in Table 1; Table 2 provides quantitative information from fish collected at each site.

Table 1. Species observed during the 7-8 August survey of the Upper Susquehanna River, summer 2012.

Family and Scientific name Common name Cyprinidae Cyprinella spiloptera spotfin shiner Exoglossum maxillingua cutlips minnow Hybognathus hankinsoni brassy minnow Luxilus cornutus common shiner Nocomis micropogon river chub Notropis hudsonius spottail shiner Notropis rubellus rosyface shiner Rhinichthys atratulus blacknose dace Rhinichthys cataractae longnose dace Semotilus atromaculatus creek chub Catostomidae Catostomus commersoni white sucker Hypentelium nigricans northern hog sucker Ictaluridae Ameiurus nebulosus brown bullhead Noturus insignis margined madtom Lotidae Lota lota burbot Centrarchidae Ambloplites rupestris rock bass Lepomis gibbosus pumpkinseed Lepomis macrochirus bluegill Micropterus dolomieu smallmouth bass Micropterus salmoides largemouth bass Percidae Etheostoma olmstedi tessellated darter Perca flavescens yellow perch

- 66 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 2. Number of individual fish, with corresponding sites, collected on the Susquehanna River, summer 2012.

Common name SR6a SR8 SR17 Spotfin shiner Ø Ø 1 Cutlips minnow 10 14 9 Brassy minnow Ø Ø 13 Common shiner Ø Ø 19 River chub Ø 1 Ø Spottail shiner 1 Ø 27 Rosyface shiner Ø 8 Ø Blacknose dace Ø Ø 2 Longnose dace Ø Ø 53 Creek chub 8 8 2 White sucker Ø 2 Ø Northern hog sucker 1 Ø Ø Brown bullhead 6 Ø Ø Margined madtom Ø Ø 15 Burbot 1 Ø Ø Rock bass 25 2 Ø Pumpkinseed 17 Ø Ø Bluegill 1 Ø Ø Smallmouth bass 2 Ø Ø Largemouth bass 19 6 Ø Tessellated darter 7 3 10 Yellow perch Ø 1 Ø Total 98 45 142

CONCLUSION

The goal of this study was to create a baseline survey of fish species found in the upper Susquehanna River. Although only a few sites were analyzed, future surveys of the water quality monitoring sites should reveal more species. Species encountered in the river, for the most part, are also represented in Lake Otsego, which does not come as a surprise. Among the species identified, all but two are also known to inhabit the lake (Macwatters 1983). In accordance with previous studies done on the Otsego Lake watershed’s fish fauna, dace and chub were among the most common fish collected (Foster 1995). Other species in the watershed, including various species of trout and pickerel, were absent from the sites surveyed. However, some species thought to be less common in the rest of the watershed proved to be more common in the river; various shiners and minnows not commonly found in the lake were abundant in the Susquehanna. If future surveys are conducted on the upper Susquehanna, it may be necessary to alter some of the sample sites – difficult access, poor visibility, and depth in some sites may ultimately prohibit electro-fishing attempts.

- 67 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

REFERENCES

Katz, R. 2013. Monitoring water quality and fecal coliform bacteria in the Upper Susquehanna River, summer 2012. In 45th Ann. Rept. (2012). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Foster, J. R. 1995. The Fish Fauna of the Otsego Lake Watershed, 1995. In 28th Ann. Rept. (1995). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Macwatters, R. C. 1983. The Fishes of Otsego Lake, 1983. Occ. Paper No. 15 (1983). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Pokorny, T. 2013. Personal communication. Cooperstown, NY.

Smith, L.C. 1985. The inland fishes of New York State. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

- 68 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

ARTHROPOD MONITORING

Mosquito Studies – Thayer Farm

W. L. Butts1 Early season weather patterns exerted a profound effect upon local mosquito populations. An early period of warming with brief rainfall and rapid melting of minimal snow cover triggered hatching of temporary pool species. The subsequent warm period with no additional precipitation led to evaporation of standing water prior to completion of immature development resulting in a minimal population of feeding adults. The only species that appeared in numbers was Coquillettidia perturbans (Walker), the larvae of which occur in permanent or persistent semi-permanent bodies of water. The larva of this species obtains oxygen by inserting its respiratory siphon into air cells of emergent aquatic vegetation, making it less susceptible to drought. However, if water levels fall below the level of attachment, the population of this species may be negatively affected. It appears that this may have been a factor in abundance of this species, since one early collection was the only numerically impressive catch. Relative isolation of the Thayer Farm from known sources of larval development may be a factor in recovery of mosquito populations in subsequent summers.

Table 1. Summary of collection, Thayer Farm, 2012.

Date Trap Method Site Species Number

VI-13 Light Trap/CO2 Drain outflow;pond below UIC Coquillettidia perturbans (Walker) 15(+9) VI-19 Light Trap/CO2 Drain outflow;pond below UIC None 0 VI-25 Light Trap/CO2 Between Step Ponds None 0 VII-5 Light Trap/CO2 Edge Lower Step Pond None 0 VII-10 Light Trap/CO2 Edge Lower Step Pond Coquillettidia perturbans (Walker) 3 VII-10 Light Trap/CO2 Edge Lower Step Pond Anopheles punctipennis (Say) 1 VII-11 Light Trap/CO2 Edge Lower Step Pond Coquillettidia perturbans (Walker) 3 VII-17 Light Trap/CO2 Drainage below Step Ponds Coquillettidia perturbans (Walker) 5 VII-25 Light Trap/CO2 at one of settings listed above None 0 VII-30 Light Trap/CO2 at one of settings listed above None 0 VIII-6 Light Trap/CO2 at one of settings listed above None 0 VIII-9 Light Trap/CO2 at one of settings listed above None 0 VIII-15 Light Trap/CO2 at one of settings listed above None 0 VIII-23 Light Trap/CO2 at one of settings listed above None 0

1 Professor emeritus. SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station.

- 69 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

2012 aquatic macrophyte survey of Otsego Lake D. McShane1 and K. Mehigan2

INTRODUCTION Otsego Lake was formed by the over deepening of the headwaters of the Susquehanna River by glaciation (Harman et al. 1997). Otsego Lake contains appreciable nutrient quantities from both cultural and natural sources, yet remains fairly oligotrophic in nature. Narrow shorelines combine with considerable depth to create a limited phototrophic zone (Harman et al. 1997). Despite the restricted area plants can grow, Lake Otsego is able to possess a fairly diverse range of aquatic macrophytes. Aquatic macrophyte community studies in Lake Otsego began when Muenscher (1936) completed an extensive survey on the plants in 1935. Studies conducted by Harman and Doane (1970) in 1969 followed Muenscher’s work. Fluctuations in plant species abundance and distribution have been recorded over time (Harman et al. 1997, Harman and Doane 1970), with the 2005 survey showing significant variation from its 1935 counterpart (Harman 2005). When Muenscher originally conducted the study, 23 different macrophyte species were noted in Lake Otsego (Harman et al. 1997). As of 2005, there were 24 species of plant present (Harman 2005). Since 1935, 6 species of plant have been lost from Otsego Lake while 5 other species have been introduced. The abundance of each species continues to vary from study to study. Plant distributions were again mapped in 2012. This effort was primarily to evaluate the influences to the plant community by the recent discovery of two additional exotic invasive species in Lake Otsego. Zebra mussels (Dressina polymorpha) were first documented in 2007 and considered abundant by spring 2010 (Albright and Zaengle 2012). The resultant increases in water clarity (i.e., Waterfield and Albright 2012) were expected to have had substantial influences on plant communities and their distributions. Second, the macroalga starry stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa) was first noted in Otsego lake in 2010 (Harman 2010) and its expansion has been anecdotally noted. It has been regarded as an aggressive invader elsewhere (Pullman and Crawford 2010, Albright and waterfield 2012). The focus of this project is to perform a study similar to those of 1935 (Muenscher 1936), 1969 (Harman and Doane 1970), 1976 (Brady and Lamb 1977), 1986 (Dayton and Swift 1987). 1993 (Harman 1994) and 2005 (Harman 2006) focusing on relative abundance and percent cover of plant species at specific locations around Lake Otsego. The techniques employed included PIRTRAM (Point Induced Rake Toss Relative Abundance Method; Lord and Johnson 2006) and in-water observations via snorkeling gear. These techniques allow for a rapid, yet thorough assessment of the lake.

1 SUNY Oneonta Biology Department Intern, summer 2012. Present affiliation: SUNY Oneonta. 2 Otsego County Conservation Association Intern, summer 2012. Present affiliation: SUNY Oneonta.

- 70 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

METHODS We visited 54 sample sites on Otsego Lake, along the shore and around Sunken Island over the summer of 2012 (Figure 1). Sites were marked on a GPS (Table 1) and returned to within 10m of the original site over the course of the summer. Sites were selected based upon lake geography and the previous survey locations (Harman & Doane, 1970). At each site we determined the relative abundance and percent cover of each plant species using two methods; PIRTRAM (Lord and Johnson 2006; see below) and snorkeling. We sampled using the PIRTRAM three times during the summer, 7 June, 9 July and 28 July. Snorkeling observations were made twice during the summer, on 21 June and 9 July. Table 1. GPS coordinates of all 54 sample sites located on Lake Otsego in the summer of 2012. See Figure 1 for site locations.

Site Approximate GPS location Site Approximate GPS location 1 42°43'2.00"N 74°55'29.97"W 28 42°44'23.00"N 74°54'35.39"W 2 42°42'57.61"N 74°55'27.97"W 29 42°44'9.51"N 74°54'47.70"W 3 42°42'49.94"N 74°55'24.61"W 30 42°44'3.94"N 74°54'50.51"W 4 42°42'45.50"N 74°55'24.48"W 31 42°43'44.42"N 74°55'1.96"W 5 42°42'34.47"N 74°55'25.94"W 32 42°43'29.77"N 74°55'15.06"W 6 42°42'19.31"N 74°55'28.60"W 33 42°43'25.96"N 74°55'16.92"W 7 42°42'14.69"N 74°55'26.57"W 34 42°47'29.16"N 74°53'49.41"W 8 42°42'6.70"N 74°55'14.07"W 35 42°47'42.84"N 74°53'27.92"W 9 42°42'10.76"N 74°54'59.48"W 36 42°47'48.20"N 74°53'28.99"W 10 42°42'19.77"N 74°54'53.61"W 37 42°47'47.38"N 74°53'33.38"W 11 42°42'39.12"N 74°54'47.56"W 38 42°48'5.67"N 74°53'59.12"W 12 42°43'1.52"N 74°54'36.86"W 39 42°48'15.14"N 74°53'53.53"W 13 42°43'20.94"N 74°54'28.93"W 40 42°48'27.42"N 74°53'44.58"W 14 42°43'35.61"N 74°54'23.56"W 41 42°48'38.01"N 74°53'49.98"W 15 42°43'44.84"N 74°54'17.14"W 42 42°48'41.63"N 74°53'27.23"W 16 42°43'57.34"N 74°54'1.30"W 43 42°48'34.92"N 74°53'0.24"W 17 42°44'34.57"N 74°53'38.19"W 44 42°48'17.68"N 74°52'59.45"W 18 42°45'11.23"N 74°53'19.01"W 45 42°48'5.71"N 74°52'59.03"W 19 42°46'10.28"N 74°52'57.65"W 46 42°47'27.03"N 74°52'45.39"W 20 42°46'17.22"N 74°52'55.65"W 47 42°47'29.01"N 74°52'26.38"W 21 42°45'50.81"N 74°53'58.70"W 48 42°47'14.43"N 74°52'8.38"W 22 42°45'19.76"N 74°54'9.75"W 49 42°46'52.94"N 74°52'26.92"W 23 42°45'11.80"N 74°54'15.20"W 50 42°46'37.60"N 74°52'44.89"W 24 42°44'58.79"N 74°54'18.29"W 51 42°46'2.88"N 74°53'59.65"W 25 42°44'49.11"N 74°54'20.91"W 52 42°46'35.38"N 74°53'58.50"W 26 42°44'39.91"N 74°54'24.94"W 53 42°46'39.61"N 74°53'56.64"W 27 42°44'35.22"N 74°54'25.41"W 54 42°47'11.92"N 74°53'50.40"W

- 71 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

PIRTRAM PIRTRAM is an efficient method used to analyze relative abundance amongst submerged aquatic plant communities. PIRTRAM is able to determine presence/absence, frequency and relative abundance (Lord, 2006). While evaluating the plant community of macrophytes of Lake Moraine, the PIRTRAM was compared to the biomass method (Harman et al. 2009). PIRTRAM was found to underestimate biomass 80% of the time compared to the actual plant dry weight determinations, but it tended to describe the communities with relative consistence. For the PIRTRAM, two garden rake heads were welded back to back to form a double sided rake; this was connected to a 10 m long nylon cord. The rake was tossed, and when settled, retrieved slowly. Sampling was done in triplicate at each site with each throw tossed in a different direction. Retrieved plants were then separated, identified by species and assigned an abundance category, as outlined in Table 2. Biomass range estimates (g/m2) were assigned for each of the above abundance categories. The midpoint of each category was used for data analysis. The total plant biomass at each site was calculated as the mean biomass for each species (based on three tosses) at each site. The method was taken from the “The State of Canadarago Lake” (Albright and Waterfield 2012). We used PIRTRAM data to standardize how visual surveys were interpreted.

Table 2. Biomass range estimate of plants in g/m2, by species, utilized in the rake toss (PIRTRAM) method. Mid values were used as estimates in the following tables and figures.

Abundance Category Field Measure Total Dry weight Range (g/m2) Midpoint (g/m2) "Z"= no plants Nothing 0 0 "T"= trace plants Fingerful 0-2.0 1 "S"= sparse plants Handful 2.0-140 71 "M"= medium plants Rakeful 140-230 185 "D"= dense plants Can't bring in boat 230-450 340

SNORKLEING We utilized snorkeling equipment at each sample site to visually describe the macrophyte species at all canopy levels. Snorkeling allowed us to estimate percent coverage of a species over larger areas and allowed for data comparison between the relative abundance data provided by the PIRTRAM. At each site we entered the water and began observing the area in a zigzag pattern that lead from the boat to the shoreline. Plant species were identified in the water and percent cover was estimated for each species at that location. If a sample could not be identified in the water, the specimen’s percent cover was noted and a sample was retrieved for a more comprehensive analysis referencing Borman et al (1997). We returned to the boat when our pattern was complete and recorded our estimates in a log book. Percent cover was reviewed in conjunction with PIRTRAM data to help estimate relative abundance of macrophyte species.

- 72 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 1. Otsego Lake, New York, showing sites sampled for aquatic macrophytes, summer 2012. See Table 1 for site coordinates.

- 73 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

RESULTS Table 3 represents the relative abundance ranking for all plant species found in 2012. Rankings are based on PIRTRAM data in conjunction with visual surveys. Tables 4 through 6 show the complete PIRTRAM data set for all 54 sites over the 11 June, 21 June and 9 July sampling periods. An “O” denotes a species that was observed but not collected. Figures 2 and 3 provide distribution maps of nuisance invasive macrophytes on 21 June and 9 July sampling dates, respectively. Plants included Potamogeton crispus, Najas guadalupensis, Myriophyllum Spicatum and Nitellopsis obtusa. (Note that distribution maps were not created for the 11 June survey as snorkeling efforts were not employed then. PITRAM only data were not expected to provide comparable distributions). Figures 4-9 show distribution maps of native plant species on the two sampling dates. Multiple maps for each date were generated so that the legends were more readable and so the map symbols were more easily distinguished. Figures 4 and 5 show the distribution of Vallisneria americana, P. pusillus, P. illinoensis, Megalodonta becki and P. amplifolius on 21 June and 9 July, respectively. Figures 6 and 7 show the distribution of elodea Canadensis, Zosterella dubia, Ceratophyllum demersum, P. pectinatus and Chara vulgaris on 21 June and 9 July, respectively. Figures 8 and 9 show the distribution of Nitella flexilis, P. praelongus, P. richardsonii, Najas flexilis, P. gramineus. P. zosteriformis and Ranunculus aquatilis on 21 June and 9 July, respectively. Aside from the species summarized in the included Tables and Figures, a single specimen of water chestnut (Trapa natans) was collected, though not as part of this study. It was a small plant, <20 cm, growing directly from a nut within 1 m of the public landing dock in Springfield (Albright 2012a).

- 74 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 3. Presence, absence and abundance of aquatic macrophytes in Lake Otsego (modified from Harman, 2005). * Note: Myriophyllum spicatum was misidentified as M. sibiricum in the 1986 study. Bold species are non-native pests. From Muenscher (1936); Harman and Doane (1970); Brady and Lamb (1977); Dayton and Swift (1987); Harman (1994) and Harman (2006).

Abundance Species 1935 1969 1976 1986 1993 2005 2012 Ceratophyllum demersum A F C C F C C Elodea canadensis A C F F F F F Najas flexilis A A A F C R C Nymphaea odorata F C C F C C C Nuphar variegatum F C F C C C C Potamogeton pectinalus C C A C F A A Potamogeton praelongus C F C C C C C Potamogeton pusillus F F A C C C R Potamogeton zosteriformis C R F C C C C Ranunculus trichophyllus C F F F C C C Vallisneria americana C C C C C C C Zosterella dubia A A A C C F A Potamogeton epihydrus R ------Potamogeton foliosus R ------Potamogeton friesii C ------Potamogeton natans F R R - R R - Potamogeton nodosus - R R - R - - Myriophyllum sibiricum C F F C* R - - Potamogeton amplifolius F R R - C F F Potamogeton gramineus A C C - R R R Potamogeton illinoensis - F F F C C C Potamogeton richardsonii C F C - C R C Megalodonta beckii C F F - C C C Potamogeton crispus - A A F F F F Najas guadalupensis - - - - - C F Myriophyllum spicatum - - - - A A C Macroalgae

Chara vulgaris A A A C F F F Nitella flexilis A C A F F F F Nitellopsis obtusa ------C Total Number 23 23 23 17 24 23 23 A = Abundant, F= Frequent, C = Common, R = Rare

- 75 - Table 4. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) of submergent aquatic macrophytes collected in Lake45th Annual Otsego Report using of the BiologicalPIRTRAM Field Station on 11 June 2012. Values provided are g/m2 mean midpoint values (see Table 2) of each site. An “O” signifies species that were observed but not collected. See figure 1 for site locations.

Species 11-Jun-12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Potamogeton amplifolius Potamogeton crispus 185 340 1 1 71 1 1 1 1 71 185 71 Potamogeton gramineus 1 Potamogeton illinoensis 1 1 71 1 1 1 Potamogeton pectinalus 1 1 71 1 1 Potamogeton praelongus Potamogeton pusillus Potamogeton richardsonii Potamogeton zosteriformis 1 Najas guadalupensis Najas flexilis Vallisneria americana 71 1 Zosterella dubia 1 185 71 1 1 71 185 1 71 Ceratophyllum demersum 71 1 1 1 1 1 Nymphaea odorata O Nuphar variegatum O O O Elodea canadensis 185 1 1 1 1 71 Ranunculus aquatilis Myriophyllum spicatum Megalodonta beckii Chara vulgaris 71 185 71 185 71 1 71 1 71 71 1 1 1 Nitella flexilis Nitellopsis obtusa

- 76 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station Table 4. (cont.) Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) of submergent aquatic macrophytes collected in Lake Otsego using PIRTRAM on 11 June 2012. Values provided are g/m2 mean midpoint values (see Table 2) of 3 tosses. An “O” signifies species that were observed but not collected. See figure 1 for site locations.

Species 11-Jun-12 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Potamogeton amplifolius 1 1 Potamogeton crispus 185 185 71 1 185 1 71 71 71 1 185 71 Potamogeton gramineus Potamogeton illinoensis 1 Potamogeton pectinalus 1 1 1 1 71 71 1 185 Potamogeton praelongus 71 Potamogeton pusillus Potamogeton richardsonii Potamogeton zosteriformis Najas guadalupensis Najas flexilis Vallisneria americana 1 1 1 Zosterella dubia 71 340 1 1 1 185 1 185 71 71 1 185 Ceratophyllum demersum 71 1 1 71 1 1 1 1 Nymphaea odorata O O O O O O Nuphar variegatum O O O O O O O Elodea canadensis 1 71 1 1 1 1 1 185 71 1 185 Ranunculus aquatilis Myriophyllum spicatum 1 1 Megalodonta beckii Chara vulgaris 71 1 185 1 71 1 Nitella flexilis 71 185 Nitellopsis obtusa

- 77 - Table 5. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) of submergent aquatic macrophytes collected in Lake45th AnnualOtsego Report using of the PIRTRAM Biological Field onStation 28 June 2012. Values provided are g/m2 mean midpoint values (see Table 2) of 3 tosses. An “O” signifies species that were observed but not collected. See figure 1 for site locations.

Species 28-Jun-12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Potamogeton amplifolius 1 1 1 Potamogeton crispus 1 71 71 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 71 Potamogeton gramineus Potamogeton illinoensis 1 Potamogeton pectinalus 71 1 1 71 1 1 71 1 Potamogeton praelongus 1 Potamogeton pusillus Potamogeton richardsonii 1 Potamogeton zosteriformis 1 1 1 1 Najas guadalupensis 1 1 1 1 1 Najas flexilis 1 Vallisneria americana 1 1 1 1 1 1 71 1 1 1 1 1 Zosterella dubia 71 71 71 71 1 71 71 71 71 1 71 1 Ceratophyllum demersum 1 Nymphaea odorata O Nuphar variegatum O O Elodea canadensis 1 71 1 1 1 1 71 Ranunculus aquatilis 71 1 Myriophyllum spicatum 1 1 Megalodonta beckii Chara vulgaris 71 1 71 71 1 71 1 1 1 71 1 1 Nitella flexilis 71 1 1 1 Nitellopsis obtusa

- 78 - Table 5 (cont.). Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) of submergent aquatic macrophytes collected45th Annual in Lake Report ofOtsego the Biological using Field PIRTRAM Station on 28 June 2012. Values provided are g/m2 mean midpoint values (see Table 2) of 3 tosses. An “O” signifies species that were observed but not collected. See figure 1 for site locations.

Species 28-Jun-12 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Potamogeton amplifolius 1 1 1 Potamogeton crispus 1 71 1 71 71 1 1 1 1 1 185 Potamogeton gramineus Potamogeton illinoensis 1 Potamogeton pectinalus 1 1 1 1 1 1 71 1 1 1 Potamogeton praelongus 71 1 Potamogeton pusillus Potamogeton richardsonii Potamogeton zosteriformis 1 1 Najas guadalupensis 1 1 1 Najas flexilis 1 1 Vallisneria americana 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Zosterella dubia 1 1 1 71 1 1 71 1 1 Ceratophyllum demersum 71 1 1 71 Nymphaea odorata O O O O O O Nuphar variegatum O O O O O O O Elodea canadensis 1 1 71 1 1 71 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 71 185 Ranunculus aquatilis Myriophyllum spicatum 1 1 1 Megalodonta beckii 1 Chara vulgaris 1 1 1 1 1 71 1 1 1 1 Nitella flexilis 1 1 71 71 Nitellopsis obtusa

- 79 - Table 6. Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) of submergent aquatic macrophytes collected in45th Lake Annual Otsego Report ofusing the Biological PIRTRAM Field Station on 9 July 2012. Values provided are g/m2 mean midpoint values (see Table 2) of 3 tosses. An “O” signifies species that were observed but not collected. See figure 1 for site locations.

Species 9-Jul-12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Potamogeton amplifolius 1

Potamogeton crispus 1 1

Potamogeton gramineus 1 24

Potamogeton illinoensis

Potamogeton pectinalus 1 1

Potamogeton praelongus 1 48 1 1 1 1 1 1 24 1

Potamogeton pusillus 1 1

Potamogeton richardsonii 1

Potamogeton zosteriformis 1 1

Najas guadalupensis 1 1

Najas flexilis 1 1 1 1 1

Vallisneria americana 24 24 1

Zosterella dubia 1 24 24 24 1 1 147 1 1 48

Ceratophyllum demersum 71 1 1 1 24 24 1 1 123

Nymphaea odorata O 1 48 62

Nuphar variegatum O O O

Elodea canadensis 1 1

Ranunculus aquatilis 24 1 1 1 1 1 1 288 24

Myriophyllum spicatum 24 48 48

Megalodonta beckii 1

Chara vulgaris 48 1 1 62

Nitella flexilis 1 24 1 71 24 24 85 85 1 1

Nitellopsis obtusa 24 48 1 24 1 1 1 62

- 80 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station Table 6 (cont.). Summary of estimated biomass (g/m2) of submergent aquatic macrophytes collected in Lake Otsego using PIRTRAM on 9 July 2012. Values provided are g/m2 mean midpoint values (see Table 2) of 3 tosses. An “O” signifies species that were observed but not collected. See figure 1 for site locations.

Species 9-Jul-12 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 Potamogeton amplifolius 1 1 1 1 Potamogeton crispus 1 Potamogeton gramineus 1 24 Potamogeton illinoensis 24 24 1 24 1 24 Potamogeton pectinalus 62 1 1 1 1 Potamogeton praelongus Potamogeton pusillus Potamogeton richardsonii Potamogeton zosteriformis 1 24 Najas guadalupensis Najas flexilis 1 24 62 24 1 86 1 1 48 1 Vallisneria americana 1 1 1 24 24 1 1 24 340 48 1 Zosterella dubia 109 71 1 62 48 1 24 62 Ceratophyllum demersum O O O O O O Nymphaea odorata O O O O O O Nuphar variegatum 62 48 1 1 1 1 1 24 Elodea canadensis 24 24 24 1 Ranunculus aquatilis Myriophyllum spicatum Megalodonta beckii 71 1 24 1 Chara vulgaris 24 24 1 85 1 71 24 Nitella flexilis 24 48 Nitellopsis obtusa

- 81 -

45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

6/21/2012 (% cover)

Figure 2. Percent cover of the nuisance invasive macrophytes at each site location, 21 June 2012.

- 82 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

7/9/2012

(% cover)

Figure 3. Percent cover of nuisance invasive macrophytes at each site location, 9 July 2012.

- 83 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

6/21/2012 (% cover)

Figure 4. Percent cover of native macrophytes found in Otsego Lake, 21 June 2012.

- 84 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

7/9/2012 (% cover)

Figure 5. Percent cover of native macrophytes found in Otsego Lake, 9 July 2012.

- 85 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

6/21/2012

(% cover)

Figure 6. Percent cover of native macrophytes found in Otsego Lake, 21 June 2012.

- 86 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

7/9/2012 (% cover)

Figure 7. Percent cover of native macrophytes found in Otsego Lake, 9 July 2012.

- 87 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

(% cover) 6/21/2012

Figure 8. Percent cover of native macrophytes found in Otsego Lake, 21 June 2012.

- 88 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

(% cover) 7/9/2012

Figure 9. Percent cover of native macrophytes found in Otsego Lake 9 July 2012.

- 89 -

45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

DISCUSSION

The aquatic plant communities and the relative abundance of most species of plants in Otsego Lake over the summer of 2012 were similar to those described in other recent studies. Of the 23 species found in the 2005 study, 22 were also documented in 2012. Potamogeton natans (floating-leaf pondweed) and P. nosodus (long-leaf pondweed) were not observed during the 2012 survey. Perhaps most notable finding relates to increases in the density of starry stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa). It was first observed in 2010 (Harman 2010) and has become abundant and well established, forming dense beds in the understory at the northern end of the lake. Six abundance rankings have been changed since the 2005 study. Those species are P. pusillus (small pondweed), M. spicatum (Eurasian milfoil), Najas guadalupensis (southern niad), Najas flexilis (slender niad), Zosterella dubia (water stargrass), and P. richardsonii (clasping-leaf pondweed). Potamogeton pusillus has become increasingly rare around the lake, never being collected using the rake toss at any location and never being observed at over 10% cover for any location. Potamogeton richardsonii was found to be more abundant than noted in previous studies, appearing at many sites and in relatively high density for this species. A similar pattern was noted for Najas flexilis, which was found in high numbers on both the rake toss method and in percent cover observations. It became more apparent on the west shore of the lake as the season progressed. The nuisance invasive Najas guadalupensis is also becoming more abundant throughout the lake. It is now considered “frequently” found in the lake and is likely going to continue to become more abundant. Myriophyllum spicatum was the only invasive species of concern that was found at a lower abundance classification; however, this is may be somewhat misleading. Due to its late growing season, it was not abundant at the time of sampling, though it may have grown more abundant by late summer. Zosterella dubia became the plant with the highest biomass over the course of the survey, carpeting large areas of the lake later in the season. Given its growth form, it is not considered a species of concern in Otsego Lake. The growing season trends typically followed suit with that described by Harman et al. (1997), with the exception of Z. dubia. That plant grew nearly a month ahead of times reported in earlier years and is reached unprecedented heights for the time of our sampling, having recorded maximum heights up to 1.5-1.75 m in early July. This is likely a combination of a mild preceding winter, increasingly clear lake waters (Waterfield and Albright 2013) and continuously low water levels throughout the summer months. We expect the plant communities to even out as the season continues, with Z. dubia dying back in early November. These variables have potentially altered other plant characteristics, notably P. amplifolius, which was seen growing in more locations than listed in the studies since 1969. In 2012 it was throughout both the northern and southern shores. Tables 3-5 present data from our PIRTRAM study. As noted in other literature, the PIRTRAM method is excellent for rapid assessment and presence/absence of plant species but typically underestimates the amount of biomass actually present (Harman et al. 2008). We found that the PIRTRAM provided us with accurate presence/absence results and reasonably accurate biomass estimates. The PIRTRAM also served to help us standardize how visual surveys were interpreted regarding relative abundance indicated by the rake toss. Our PIRTRAM data should provide a baseline for future studies on the lake; however, no relative abundance survey has been done previously utilizing this method in Lake Otsego. The percent cover observations logged

- 90 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

from the snorkeling survey expose the relative abundance of each plant species at a particular site. We found that for each snorkeling survey (21 June and 9 July) there were three species that were fairly abundant for that time period. June’s survey resulted in high amounts of C. vulgaris and P. crispus. When the July survey was carried out, V. americana, and Z. dubia were amongst the most common. Both surveys revealed high levels of P. pectinatus for sampling periods, while it became less common as the season progressed. Of the four invasive nuisance species found in Lake Otsego, P. crispus was notably the most evident during our first sampling period. Anectodotal observations suggest it was considerably more abundant in May before the survey commenced (Albright, 2012b). It formed dense beds in shallow waters and was found growing in waters as deep as 8m. In late June, its beds nearly encircled the entire lake. The plant died down before our second snorkeling survey on 9 July. Najas guadalupensis is not currently considered a problem, but may become a nuisance as it begins to establish itself in Lake Otsego. Myriophyllum spicatum was noted in multiple locations around the lake, but never in high quantities. Nitellopsis obtusa, a macroalgae, has already formed dense beds on the northern shore of the lake and around Sunken Island. We expect this plant to continue to distribute itself more broadly around the lake in the future, eventually reaching the entirety of the lake. Potamogeton pectinatus and Zosterella dubia were the only plant species we found abundant throughout this survey. Dense beds of P. pectinatus up to 1m tall were formed in Hyde Bay which prevented the growth of most other species. This was the only observed site where such density occurred and, like P. crispus, P. pectinatus died down before our second snorkeling survey on 9 June. Species that were not specifically noted in this study have gone through no significant changes since the previous 2005 survey. Such species include E. canadensis, P. praelongus, P. illinoensis, M. beckii, R. aquatillus, C. demersum, C. vulgaris, Nitella flexilis, V. americana, and P. zosterformis.

REFERENCES

Albright, M.F. 2012a. Personal communication. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M.F. 2012b. Personal communication. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright, M. and H. Waterfield. 2012. The State of Canadarago Lake, 2011. Tech. Rept. #30. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Albright and Zaengle. 2012. A survey of Otsego Lake’s zooplankton community, summer 2011. In 44th Ann. Rept. (2011). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Borman S., R. Korth, and J. Temte. 1997. Through the Looking Glass. Merril, WI: Wisconsin Lakes Partnership.

- 91 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Brady, P. and S. Lamb. 1977. Changes in the aquatic flora of Otsego Lake between 1935 and 1976. In 9th Ann. Rept. (1976).

Harman, W.N. 2010. Updates. The Reporter (Biol. Fld. Sta. Newsletter). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Harman W., M. Albright, and L. Zach. 2008. Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation Lake Moraine, Madison County, NY 2008. Tech.; Rept. #26. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Harman W., M. Albright, and T. F. Smith. 2010. Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation Lake Moraine, Madison County, NY 2010. Tech. Rept. #29. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Harman W. 2006. Species richness of Otsego Lake submergent macrophytes: A chronology 1935-2005. In 38th Ann. Rept. (2005). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Harman, W., L. Sohacki, M. Albright, and D. Rosen. 1997. The State of Otsego Lake 1936-1996. Occas. Pap. #30. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Harman, W.N. 1994. The distribution of pestiferous aquatic macrophytes in Otsego Lake, 1993. In 26th Ann. Rept. (1993). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Harman W. and R. Doane. 1970. Macrophytes Collected in Otsego Lake, New York in 1969. In 2nd Ann. Rept. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Lord, P.H. and R.L. Johnson. 2006. Aquatic plant monitoring guidelines. Cornell University. Accessed June 14 2012. http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/water_pdf/aquatic06.pdf

Muenscher, W.C. 1936. Aquatic vegetation of the Susquehanna and Delaware areas. In A biological survey of the Delaware and Susquehanna watersheds. pp. 205-221. N.Y. State Dep. Environ. Conserv., Albany.

Pullman, G.D. and G. Crawford. 2010. A decade of starry stonewort in Michigan. Lakeline, summer 2010. North American Lake Management Society. 30(2):36-42.

Smith, T.F. 2010. 2010 Canadarago Lake aquatic macrophyte survey. In 43rd Ann. Rept. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Waterfield, H. and M.F. Albright. 2013. Otsego Lake limnological Monitoring, 2012. In 45th Ann. Rept. (2012). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 92 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Monitoring the effectiveness of the Cooperstown wastewater treatment wetland, 20121

M.F. Albright

BACKGROUND (from Albright and Waterfield 2011)

In 2002, the US Army Corp of Engineers (ACE) initiated a 1.6 million dollar Upper Susquehanna River Watershed-Cooperstown Area Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study And Integrated Environmental Assessment. Authorized by the U.S. Congress, the pilot program was to “use wetland restoration, soil and water conservation practices, and non-structural measures to…improve water quality and wildlife habitat…in the Upper Susquehanna River Basin…” (ACE 2001). Initially identified were eight Field Assessed Benefit and Design Strategy sites (FABADS) in Otsego County. During 2003, the SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station (BFS) monitored two restored sites which receive agricultural runoff as well as a local “pristine reference site”. Comparisons were made between inflows and outflows, and between the wetlands, of concentrations of different nutrient fractions, suspended sediments and fecal coliform bacteria. This short term study did indicate water quality improvements when nutrient levels at the inflow were elevated (Fickbohm 2005), though it is probable that not enough time had elapsed to allow these systems to naturalize to the point where treatment potential was realized.

A third ACE restoration wetland was sited in the outskirts of the Village of Cooperstown adjacent to the municipal sewage treatment facility (Figure 1). The primary function of this 3 acre wetland was phosphorus and nitrogen removal, potentially by converting this site into a treatment wetland for the Village’s municipal effluent. However, at that time, funds to deliver the effluent to the wetland were lacking. The wetland design, provided by Ducks Unlimited, did not necessarily follow that generally utilized for treatment wetlands.

In 2009, funding was provided by the Village of Cooperstown’s Sewer Reserve Fund to hire the services of Lamont Engineering to evaluate alternatives to address nutrient reduction from the wastewater treatment plant (Jackson 2009). A more restrictive SPDES permit by the NYSDEC regarding nutrient loading to the Susquehanna River is consistent with New York State being cosignatory with the Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Reduction Strategy. The engineering report evaluated approaches to reducing phosphorus and nitrogen introduced into the Susquehanna River, their capital and annual operational costs, and expected nutrient reductions. In conclusion, it was recommended that utilizing the existing wetland for tertiary treatment would likely meet the nutrient reduction goals while costing substantially less than other approaches (i.e., addition of chemical coagulants, modification to the treatment plant, etc.).

1 Funding for this project was provided by the Village of Cooperstown.

- 93 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 1. Bathymetric map of the wastewater treatment wetland, Cooperstown, NY (modified from Robb 2012).

Rationale for monitoring

Wetlands have been used as water treatment cells for a number of years, but, until recently, only on a very limited basis. Since the mid 1990s, however, the number of constructed wetlands, having a broad range of system configurations and treatment applications, has increased markedly (Kadlec and Wallace 2009). When associated with municipal sewage outfalls, the parameters that are most often targeted for reduction are phosphorus, various nitrogenous compounds (ammonia, nitrate, total nitrogen), suspended solids and biological oxygen demand. The demonstrated effectiveness of the removal of these constituents has been promising, though quite variable, as design and site characteristics are, in practically every case, unique. Because of this, every time a treatment wetland is utilized, the opportunity exists to collect meaningful data which can aid in the design of future systems. More directly, data collection at some level is necessary to evaluate whether or not the goals of the treatment wetland, and the regulated limits of the parameters, are met.

For the Cooperstown WWT wetland, the concentration limit requirements of total phosphorus, total nitrogen, ammonia and nitrates are not more stringent under the new SPDES/Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Reduction Strategy than they had been. It is not likely that concentrations leaving the wetland will be any higher than those entering it (excepting some short- term, meteorologically driven events). Ongoing studies of the monitoring of nutrient reduction

- 94 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

dynamics could provide insight into, among other things, modification of the wetland’s flow patterns, depth, substrate composition, plant assemblages, etc. which might enhance performance.

METHODS

In order to most accurately quantify nutrient export from the wetland, efforts were made to estimate flow moving through the outlet device. A V-notch weir was constructed of doubled ¾” treated plywood (glued and screwed together). The notch was beveled ~30o (with the bevel facing downstream), and a metal 90o edge was fastened to the upstream face, to reduce friction. A scaled gauge was attached to upstream face, off to the side, so that water level could be recorded. An adhesive-backed gasket was used to line the edges of the downstream face of the weir, and the bottom edge, to ensure that no leakage occurred around or under the device. The top four boards were removed from the flood control device and the weir was inserted into the channels. Additionally, a Solinst® Levelogger, a pressure-transducer depth recorder, was purchased and attached to the upstream face of the weir, the intention being to collect a continuous log of water heights above the V-notch for flow determination. However, the flow values logged in this manner exhibited such a discrepancy with the metered flow of the wastewater treatment plant that they were considered unreliable and were not used. Efforts in 2011 focused on direct reading of the gauge on the weir face. Robb (2012) mounted a programmable Reconyx® trail camera so that it would capture images of the gauge at 15-minute intervals. In the absence of moderate rainfall (> ~ 1 cm/24 hr), the mean daily inflow from the wastewater treatment plant equaled the outflow from the wetland. During wetter periods, a small stream entering the west side of the wetland can contribute enough flow so that the outflow exceeds the input from the treatment plant for short periods of time. Efforts to accurately estimate the flow at the outlet structure were further compounded over 2011 by activities of muskrat, which plugged the surface outflow structure, and beaver, which were believed to plug the subsurface pipe leading to the outflow structure. Eventually, efforts to gauge the flow were abandoned and the flow of effluent into the wetland was assumed to equal the flow out of it. Sampling did not coincide with runoff events in order to minimize their influence.

Sampling began in February 2010, and was done monthly through May 2010 to evaluate nutrient conditions prior to the diversion of effluent to the wetland (which commenced on 17 June 2010). Thereafter, samples were collected two to four times a month from the wastewater treatment plant (effluent), the wetland’s outlet and the stream feeding the wetland (to evaluate contributions from this source). This report summarizes results through December 2012. Samples were processed according to automated methods using a Lachat QuikChem FIA+ Water Analyzer. Samples were analyzed for total phosphorus using ascorbic acid following persulfate digestion (Liao and Martin 2001), total nitrogen using the cadmium reduction method (Pritzlaff 2003) following peroxodisulfate digestion Ebina et.al (1983), ammonia using the phenolate method (Liao 2001), and for nitrate+nitrite nitrogen using the cadmium reduction method (Pritzlaff 2003). Missing values were approximated by interpolating existing data.

- 95 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

RESULTS

Prior to the wetland receiving effluent, the outflowing concentrations of ammonia were below detection, nitrate averaged 0.28 mg/l, total nitrogen averaged 0.72 mg/l and total phosphorus averaged 0.043 mg/l. For the tributary inflow to the wetland from February 2010 through December 2012, mean nutrient concentrations were 0.02 mg/l (SE= 0.01) for ammonia, 0.26 mg/l (SE= 0.04) for nitrite+nitrate, 0.44 mg/l (SE= 0.04) for total nitrogen and 0.040 mg/l (SE= 0.004) for total phosphorus. The typical low flows and low nutrient concentrations of this tributary indicate that its influence on calculating nutrient retention rates, and investigating nutrient transformations, is minimal.

Summaries of the annual retention, as both net volumes (kg) as a percent of the inputs, of ammonia, nitrite+nitrate, total nitrogen and total phosphorus following the diversion of effluent to the wetland are provided in Table 1. Tables 2-5 provide mean monthly concentrations of the wastewater effluent and wetland’s outfall, as are total monthly nutrient volumes (kg), the volume of nutrients retained (kg) and the mean retention rate (%).

Between June 2010 and December 2012, the total amount of nutrients retained by the treatment wetland included 716kg of ammonia-N, 5,450kg of nitrate-N, 7,135kg of total nitrogen- N and 810kg of total phosphorus-P. The monthly rates of retention of ammonia varied much more so than did other nutrients, which seemed mainly due to high variability of its concentration in the treatment plant effluent (mean= 1.50 mg/l, SE= 0.24); concentrations were lower and less variable at the wetland’s outlet (mean= 1.01 mg/l, SE= 0.13). This temporal variation led to calculated negative retention rates (or release) of ammonia in some months. Overall, the mean retention declined from about 42% in 2010 to 27.4% in 2011 and 24% in 2012. However, this is not believed to reflect decreasing treatment by the wetland, but rather is due to the fact that the ammonia concentration of the effluent flowing to the wetland has been decreasing over the course of the study (2.46 mg/l in 2010, 1.67 mg/l in 2011 and 0.93 mg/l in 2012).

Retention of both nitrate and total nitrogen was higher in 2012 (46% and 42%, respectively) than in 2010 and 2011 (between 28 and 30% for both parameters during both years). The retention of total phosphorus varied from about 36% in 2010 to about 15% in 2011 and 22% in 2012. In 2011, retention was lowest in summer months whereas that was when it was highest in 2010 (at the onset of the treatment wetland’s use). Phosphorus removal would be expected to decline if the main mechanism for removal is sediment binding (as the sediments become saturated) as opposed to biological uptake (Kadlec and Wallace 2009).

Given that this wetland was designed more for waterfowl habitat than for water quality improvement, the nutrient removal capacity seems promising. As vegetation densities increase, so should nutrient reduction, both directly though vegetative uptake and enhanced microbial denitrification due to increased microsites (Kadlec and Wallace. 2009). Investigations into phosphorus uptake by rooted plants at the Cooperstown wetland provided conflicting results. Olsen (2011) found elevated phosphorus content in the leaf tissue of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) within the wetland than that of plants in nearby areas not influenced by the treatment wetland. However, similar investigations in 2011 on reed canary grass and cattail (Typha sp.) did not show meaningful differences in phosphorus uptake (Gazzetti 2012).

- 96 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station Table 1. Summary of ammonia, nitrate, total nitrogen and total phosphorus retention by the Cooperstown treatment wetland, 2010 through 2012.

Ammonia retention Nitrate retention T. Nit. retention T. Phos. retention Kg % Kg % Kg % Kg % 2010 (17 June-Dec) 234.8 41.9 796.9 28.0 1148.8 29.9 252.3 36.2 2011 365.6 27.4 2016.7 28.4 2684.8 28.1 251.0 15.3 2012 116.3 24.4 2636.8 46.4 3302.0 42.0 306.2 21.9 total 716.7 5450.4 7135.6 809.5

Table 2. Mean monthly concentrations of ammonia in the wastewater effluent and wetland’s outfall (mg/l), total monthly ammonia volumes (kg) entering and leaving the wetland, the volume of ammonia retained (kg) and the mean retention rate (%). (Projected).

Month Eff flow NH4 (kg) CM/day EFF Out EFF OUT RET. % (mg/l) (mg/l) (kg) (kg) (kg) RET. Jun-10* 1728 4.10 1.41 63.8 21.9 41.8 65.6 Jul-10 1692 0.31 1.03 16.1 54.0 -37.9 -235.5 Aug-10 1526 5.35 2.46 252.9 116.2 136.8 54.1 Sep-10 1186 2.19 1.17 77.9 41.6 36.3 46.6 Oct-10 1476 2.19 1.17 100.2 53.5 46.7 46.6 Nov-10 1447 0.60 0.45 26.0 19.7 6.3 24.3 Dec-10 1330 0.60 0.48 23.9 19.1 4.9 20.3 2010 560.9 326.1 234.8 41.9 Jan-11 1222 0.68 0.478 24.9 17.5 7.4 29.6 Feb-11 1319 2.68 2.488 98.8 91.8 6.9 7.0 Mar-11 2707 4.30 1.995 360.4 167.4 193.0 53.6 Apr-11 2824 1.96 1.883 166.2 159.5 6.7 4.0 May-11 2816 0.68 1.134 59.6 99.0 -39.4 -66.0 Jun-11 2495 2.15 1.816 161.1 135.9 25.2 15.6 Jul-11 1862 0.54 0.953 31.1 55.0 -23.9 -77.0 Aug-11 1859 3.99 2.073 230.0 119.4 110.6 48.1 Sep-11 2532 0.87 0.758 66.0 57.5 8.5 12.9 Oct-11 2120 0.71 0.341 45.2 21.7 23.5 52.0 Nov-11 1896 0.75 0.461 42.5 26.2 16.3 38.3 Dec-11 1961 0.77 0.262 46.8 15.9 30.9 66.0 2011 1332.6 967.0 365.6 27.4 Jan-12 1972 0.80 0.45 47.3 26.6 20.7 43.8 Feb-12 1722 0.69 0.44 33.3 21.2 12.1 36.2 Mar-12 1832 0.55 0.44 31.2 25.0 6.2 20.0 Apr-12 1427 0.55 0.44 23.5 18.8 4.7 20.0 May-12 1718 0.41 0.14 21.8 7.5 14.4 65.9 Jun-12 1442 0.68 0.61 29.4 26.4 3.0 10.3 Jul-12 1340 2.46 2.28 102.2 94.7 7.5 7.3 Aug-12 1344 1.39 1.50 57.9 62.5 -4.6 -7.9 Sep-12 1124 0.63 0.55 21.2 18.5 2.7 12.7 Oct-12 1196 0.52 0.43 18.7 15.4 3.2 17.3 Nov-12 1128 0.77 0.86 26.1 29.1 -3.0 -11.7 Dec-12 1245 1.68 0.40 64.9 15.4 49.4 76.2 2012 477.5 361.2 116.3 24.4 To date 2371.0 1654.3 716.7 31.2

- 97 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 3. Mean monthly concentrations of nitrite+nitrate in the wastewater effluent and wetland’s outfall (mg/l), total monthly nitrite+nitrate volumes (kg) entering and leaving the wetland, the volume of nitrite+nitrate retained (kg) and the mean retention rate (%).

Month Eff flow NO2+NO3 (kg) CM/day EFF Out EFF OUT RET. % (mg/l) (mg/l) (kg) (kg) (kg) RET. Jun-10* 1728 11.85 8.05 184.3 125.2 59.1 32.1 Jul-10 1692 9.37 7.65 491.2 401.0 90.2 18.4 Aug-10 1526 9.13 5.75 432.2 272.1 160.1 37.0 Sep-10 1186 10.85 5.80 385.8 206.2 179.6 46.6 Oct-10 1476 10.70 6.43 489.6 294.2 195.4 39.9 Nov-10 1447 11.38 8.33 493.9 361.4 132.4 26.8 Dec-10 1330 9.15 9.65 365.1 385.0 -20.0 -5.5 2010 2842.0 2045.1 796.9 28.0 Jan-11 1222 13.35 13.150 489.5 482.2 7.3 1.5 Feb-11 1319 12.70 11.280 468.9 416.5 52.4 11.2 Mar-11 2707 5.31 4.100 445.5 344.0 101.5 22.8 Apr-11 2824 6.75 3.707 571.6 314.0 257.5 45.1 May-11 2816 8.83 6.665 770.9 581.9 189.0 24.5 Jun-11 2495 10.48 5.575 783.9 417.2 366.7 46.8 Jul-11 1862 9.44 7.850 545.0 453.2 91.8 16.8 Aug-11 1859 12.83 8.095 739.3 466.4 272.9 36.9 Sep-11 2532 9.12 5.075 692.8 385.5 307.3 44.4 Oct-11 2120 7.81 6.350 496.6 403.8 92.8 18.7 Nov-11 1896 8.45 5.585 480.8 317.8 163.0 33.9 Dec-11 1961 10.30 8.420 626.1 511.8 114.3 18.3 2011 7111.0 5094.3 2016.7 28.4 Jan-12 1972 8.47 7.94 501.1 469.7 31.4 6.3 Feb-12 1722 9.55 7.81 460.5 376.6 83.9 18.2 Mar-12 1832 9.75 7.82 553.7 444.1 109.6 19.8 Apr-12 1427 12.12 9.02 518.8 386.1 132.7 25.6 May-12 1718 9.52 4.39 507.1 233.9 273.3 53.9 Jun-12 1442 12.92 3.71 559.0 160.5 398.4 71.3 Jul-12 1340 10.10 3.08 419.5 127.9 291.6 69.5 Aug-12 1344 7.80 2.75 324.9 114.5 210.4 64.7 Sep-12 1124 8.56 1.96 288.7 66.1 222.6 77.1 Oct-12 1196 10.20 2.73 366.0 98.0 268.0 73.2 Nov-12 1128 15.70 8.65 531.3 292.7 238.6 44.9 Dec-12 1245 17.00 7.25 656.3 279.9 376.4 57.4 2012 5686.8 3050.0 2636.8 46.4 To date 15639.8 10189.4 5450.4 34.3

- 98 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 4. Mean monthly concentrations of total nitrogen in the wastewater effluent and wetland’s outfall (mg/l), total monthly total nitrogen volumes (kg) entering and leaving the wetland, the volume of total nitrogen retained (kg) and the mean retention rate (%).

Month Eff flow TN (kg) CM/day EFF Out EFF (kg) OUT RET. % (mg/l) (mg/l) (kg) (kg) RET. Jun-10* 1728 17.30 9.51 269.0 147.9 121.2 45.0 Jul-10 1692 14.10 12.50 739.6 655.7 83.9 11.3 Aug-10 1526 16.03 9.38 758.3 443.6 314.7 41.5 Sep-10 1186 13.47 7.32 479.0 260.2 218.7 45.7 Oct-10 1476 12.40 7.29 567.4 333.3 234.0 41.3 Nov-10 1447 13.65 10.05 592.6 436.3 156.3 26.4 Dec-10 1330 10.90 10.40 434.9 415.0 20.0 4.6 2010 3840.8 2692.0 1148.8 29.9 Jan-11 1222 16.48 16.375 604.1 600.4 3.7 0.6 Feb-11 1319 19.28 14.875 711.7 549.2 162.5 22.8 Mar-11 2707 10.20 6.775 855.8 568.4 287.4 33.6 Apr-11 2824 9.38 5.942 794.9 503.4 291.6 36.7 May-11 2816 11.45 9.075 999.7 792.3 207.4 20.7 Jun-11 2495 17.58 8.338 1315.3 624.0 691.3 52.6 Jul-11 1862 14.46 11.038 835.0 637.2 197.7 23.7 Aug-11 1859 11.11 12.350 639.8 711.6 -71.7 -11.2 Sep-11 2532 11.65 6.275 885.1 476.7 408.4 46.1 Oct-11 2120 9.83 7.720 625.1 491.0 134.2 21.5 Nov-11 1896 9.97 6.365 567.2 362.1 205.1 36.2 Dec-11 1961 11.80 9.045 717.3 549.8 167.5 23.3 2011 9551.0 6866.2 2684.8 28.1 Jan-12 1972 10.20 9.01 603.4 533.0 70.4 11.7 Feb-12 1722 11.20 8.84 540.1 426.3 113.8 21.1 Mar-12 1832 13.23 12.28 751.3 697.4 54.0 7.2 Apr-12 1427 19.08 12.30 816.8 526.5 290.2 35.5 May-12 1718 13.98 6.35 744.7 338.3 406.5 54.6 Jun-12 1442 14.40 6.04 623.0 261.3 361.7 58.1 Jul-12 1340 17.00 8.05 706.1 334.4 371.8 52.6 Aug-12 1344 13.55 7.00 564.4 291.6 272.8 48.3 Sep-12 1124 14.88 4.27 501.8 144.0 357.8 71.3 Oct-12 1196 17.20 5.48 617.2 196.6 420.5 68.1 Nov-12 1128 18.28 9.45 618.6 319.8 298.8 48.3 Dec-12 1245 20.30 12.95 783.6 499.9 283.7 36.2 2012 7871.0 4569.1 3302.0 42.0 To date 21262.8 14127.2 7135.6 33.3

- 99 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station Table 5. Mean monthly concentrations of total phosphorus in the wastewater effluent and wetland’s outfall (mg/l), total monthly total phosphorus volumes (kg) entering and leaving the wetland, the volume of total phosphorus retained (kg) and the mean retention rate (%).

Month Eff flow TP (kg) CM/day EFF Out EFF OUT RET. % (mg/l) (mg/l) (kg) (kg) (kg) RET. Jun-10* 1728 4.36 1.49 67.7 23.2 44.5 65.7 Jul-10 1692 1.49 0.81 78.3 42.6 35.7 45.6 Aug-10 1526 3.20 2.15 151.3 101.6 49.7 32.8 Sep-10 1186 3.39 2.32 120.6 82.5 38.1 31.6 Oct-10 1476 2.41 1.56 110.2 71.4 38.8 35.2 Nov-10 1447 2.28 1.52 99.2 66.2 33.0 33.3 Dec-10 1330 1.76 1.45 70.2 57.7 12.6 17.9 2010 697.4 445.1 252.3 36.2 Jan-11 1222 2.205 2.030 80.8 74.4 6.4 7.9 Feb-11 1319 2.225 1.865 82.2 68.9 13.3 16.2 Mar-11 2707 1.168 0.701 98.0 58.8 39.1 39.9 Apr-11 2824 1.088 0.700 92.2 59.3 32.9 35.7 May-11 2816 1.645 1.160 143.6 101.3 42.3 29.5 Jun-11 2495 3.092 2.402 231.4 179.7 51.6 22.3 Jul-11 1862 2.807 2.870 162.1 165.7 -3.6 -2.2 Aug-11 1859 3.700 4.125 213.2 237.7 -24.5 -11.5 Sep-11 2532 1.419 1.308 107.8 99.3 8.5 7.8 Oct-11 2120 4.400 3.950 279.8 251.2 28.6 10.2 Nov-11 1896 1.480 0.681 84.2 38.8 45.4 54.0 Dec-11 1961 0.996 0.818 60.6 49.7 10.9 17.9 2011 1635.8 1384.8 251.0 15.3 Jan-12 1972 0.941 0.810 55.7 47.9 7.7 13.9 Feb-12 1722 1.230 1.237 59.3 59.6 -0.3 -0.6 Mar-12 1832 2.020 1.462 114.7 83.0 31.7 27.6 Apr-12 1427 3.100 2.193 132.7 93.9 38.8 29.3 May-12 1718 2.535 1.437 135.0 76.5 58.5 43.3 Jun-12 1442 3.340 2.578 144.5 111.5 33.0 22.8 Jul-12 1340 3.052 3.152 126.8 130.9 -4.2 -3.3 Aug-12 1344 3.360 2.645 140.0 110.2 29.8 21.3 Sep-12 1124 4.060 3.345 136.9 112.8 24.1 17.6 Oct-12 1196 2.930 1.985 105.1 71.2 33.9 32.3 Nov-12 1128 3.367 2.502 113.9 84.7 29.3 25.7 Dec-12 1245 3.480 2.860 134.3 110.4 23.9 17.8 2012 1399.0 1092.8 306.2 21.9 To date 3732.2 2922.7 809.5 24.5

- 100 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

CONCLUSION

The bathymetry of the wetland (see Figure 1) implies that much of the wetland is considerably deeper than that recommended for maximum nutrient removal; shallower systems allow for the colonization of suitable plants, preferably emergents (Kadlec and Wallace 2009). Also, work by Robb (2012), considering nutrient concentrations across the standing water and by using fluorescent tracers, indicate that the most suitable portion of the system regarding depth (the southeast arm) is ineffective since it is not in the flow path of the effluent. Efforts to decrease the mean depth, and to modify the flow path to better utilize the system in its entirety, could enhance the growth of desirable plants and improve the rate of nutrient retention by the system.

REFERENCES

ACE. 2001. Upper Susquehanna River Watershed-Cooperstown Area Ecosystem Restoration Feasibilty Study and Integrated Environmental Assessment. Project management Plan. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Planning Division. Baltimore, MD.

Ebina, J., T. Tsutsi, and T. Shirai. 1983. Simultaneous determination of total nitrogen and total phosphorus in water using peroxodisulfate oxidation. Water Res.7 (12):1721-1726.

Fickbohm, S.S. 2005. Upper Susquehanna River Watershed- Cooperstown Area Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study And Integrated Environmental Assessment: Post- restoration water quality and wildlife analysis of the FABADS sites (2003-2004). In 37th Ann. Rept. (2004). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Gazzetti, E. 2012. Efficacy of emergent plants as a means of phosphorus removal in a treatment wetland, Cooperstown, New York. In 44th Ann. Rept. (2011). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Jackson, M.H. 2009. Wastewater treatment facility modifications engineering report. Lamont Engineers, Cobleskill, NY.

Kadlec, R.H and S.D. Wallace. 2009. Treatment wetlands (second ed.). CRC Press, Boca Raton.

Liao, N. 2001. Determination of ammonia by flow injection analysis. QuikChem ® Method 10-107-06-1-J. Lachat Instruments, Loveland, CO.

Liao, N. and S. Marten. 2001. Determination of total phosphorus by flow injection analysis colorimetry (acid persulfate digestion method). QuikChem ® Method 10-115-01-1- F. Lachat Instruments, Loveland, CO.

Olsen, B. 2011. Phosphorus content in reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) in a treatment wetland, Cooperstown, NY. In 43rd Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 101 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Pritzlaff, D. 2003. Determination of nitrate/nitrite in surface and wastewaters by flow injection analysis. QuikChem ® Method 10-107-04-1-C. Lachat Instruments, Loveland, CO.

Robb, T. 2012. Insight into a complex system: Cooperstown wastewater treatment wetland, 2011. In 44th Ann. Rept. (2011). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 102 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Benthic marcroinvertebrate survey of Oaks Creek, Otsego County, NY

Brett C. Buckhout1

INTRODUCTION

Oaks Creek drains Canadarago Lake, which is situated in the north central region of Otsego County, NY (Figure 1). The creek flows southeast approximately 15 km before converging with the Susquehanna River south of Cooperstown, NY. Creek conditions were variable over this distance; upstream locations were found to possess greater widths, lower velocities and silt dominated substrates. Downstream sites were characterized by fast flowing water conditions with a greater diversity in micro habitats, i.e., riffles, runs and pools.

The benthic macroinvertebrate survey conducted in Oaks Creek was a follow-up to a 2004 survey ( Hingula 2005). The main focus of that work was to evaluate the community during the initial stages of colonization by zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha), which had first been documented in Canadarago lake in 2002 (Lord and Horvath 2003). In 2004, zebra mussels were found throughout Oaks Creek, though being at low densities, their impacts on the invertebrate community was believed to be minimal. This more recent evaluation of the benthic community is intended to acquire further data on Oaks Creek to determine whether the further establishment of zebra mussels seems to have impacted the communities. It also is intended to identify potential water quality impairments reflected by the biota present.

Over the course of the past century, the use of benthic macroinvertebrates to gauge water quality in freshwater streams has been an effective biomonitoring method (Rosenberg and Resh 1993). The presence or absence of particular invertebrate taxa with known pollution tolerance provides a tool for inferring water quality conditions. For example, the species within the EPT concert (the insect orders Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Plecoptera (stoneflies), and Trichoptera (caddisflies)), are less tolerant of pollution and their presence is indicative of good water quality (NYSDEC 2009). In contrast, presence of the members of the family Naididae (a family of tubificid worms), which tolerate pollution, may indicate impairment within the waterway. Low overall species diversity and/or species richness also reflects water quality impairment. Pollution-sensitive taxa respond over time to impairment. Regular monitoring provides a temporal view into benthic community health and allows one to quantify community responses to environmental change and potential stressors (Arscott 2008).

Physical water quality data were collected in addition to the macroinvertebrate specimens to provide more data for analysis. Reported parameters include temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, conductivity and turbidity.

1 BFS Intern, summer 2012. Current affiliation: SUNY College at Oneonta. Funding provided by the Otsego County Land Trust.

- 103 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Benthic macro invertebrates were collected from 10 sites between 15 June and 18 June 2012 (Figure 1, Table 1). Sample sites locations on Oaks Creek were based on the 2004 survey (Hingula 2005); two additional sites were included, one on Fly Creek and one on the Susquehanna River, both upstream of their points of confluence with Oaks Creek. Fly Creek empties into Oaks Creek between sites #5 and #6 and Oaks Creek ends at its confluence with the Susquehanna River. Original site #2 was not surveyed due to its close proximity to site #3 and the lack of suitable habitat.

Figure 1. Map of Oaks Creek, Otsego County, NY showing the 2012 sample sites.

- 104 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 1. Site locations and descriptions for samples taken on 15 and 18 June for the 2012 benthic macroinvertebrate survey. Sites 1-9 were on Oaks Creek.

GPS Site # Description Coordinates N 42 44.240' 1 Stream access near road, off west side of Keating Rd. W 75 00.768' N 42 43.838' 3 South side of bridge at intersection of Hoke and Keating Rd. W 75 00.135' N 42 43.355' 4 Downstream side of bridge on Route 28 in Oaksville W 75 00.292' N 42 42.368' 5 South of Allison Rd bridge, N of Fly Creek confluence W 74 59.156' N 42 42.127' 6 Bridge over Fork Shop Rd. W 74 58.522' N 42 41.283' 7 Under bridge at intersection of Routes 59 &26 W 74 57.453' N 42 40.967' 8 Closed bridge on Lower Toddsville Rd. W 74 57.476' N 42 39.993' 9 South of bridge on Route 28 in Index W 74 57.548' N 42 42.575' Fly Creek North of culvert under Allison Rd off Route 26 outside town of Fly Creek W 74 58.735' N 42 40.025' Susquehanna Closed bridge on Phoenix Mills Rd. Access on east side of River W 74 56.718'

Macroinvertebrates were collected using a cylindrical Wildco® Hess Stream Bottom Sampler. The sampler was placed with the mesh sock end downstream, in riffles or other suitable habitat and inserted into the substrate enough to create a seal so no organisms could wash out. Substrate within the cylinder was then rubbed and agitated long enough to sufficiently dislodge the organisms. The sampling cup at the end of the mesh sock was removed and emptied into a Whirl-Pak® with 70% ethanol added. Five samples were taken at each site, predominately in riffles with a swift current, where the depth was not exceeding the sampler height and in substrate that would allow for proper sampler insertion. Lab identification of organisms was done down to genus (with some exceptions) using Merrit and Cummins (1999) and Peckarsky et al. (1990). Dr. Jeff Heilveil, SUNY Oneonta, provided training, oversight and taxonomic review. Physical and chemical water quality data were collected at each site using a YSI® probe.

Biotic indices were calculated from the sample totals to evaluate and compare quality at each site. Two richness indices were used; EPT richness and total taxa richness. The Familial Biotic Index (FBI) and the Percent Model Affinity (PMA) were also calculated (NYSDEC 2009). These were chosen in order to remain consistent with prior macroinvertebrate surveys conducted by the Biological Field Station, (i.e., Bailey 2010, Whitcomb 2011). The FBI was calculated for each site using assigned pollution tolerance values to each taxon, obtained from the NYSDEC’s standard operating procedures manual for biological monitoring of surface waters (NYSDEC 2009). Each genus was assigned a value from 0-10 based on its ability to tolerate pollution. This value was then multiplied by the number of organisms of that genus and that product was divided by the total number of organisms collected at the site. The values for

- 105 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

all genera were then totaled to obtain the site’s FBI value. The PMA index is based on a population sample of 100 random organisms from each site. A random number generator with an end value equal to the total number of organisms at the site was used to determine the sample population. This population was then used to calculate PMA as based on the NYSDEC model community (see Table 4).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A summary of organisms collected can be found in Table 2. Numbers of each genus reflect pooled specimens of five Hess Sampler collections at each site. Sites #1-9 were on Oaks Creek, site FC= Fly Creek and site Ssq= Susquehanna River (see Figure 1).

Indices for biological assessment for each site are presented in Figures 2-5. Figure 2 includes taxa and EPT richness totals. Taxa richness includes the total number of different families within all orders of invertebrates collected. EPT richness includes the total number of families within the orders of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera (NYSDEC 2009). As previously discussed, greater diversity and higher numbers of EPT organisms are indicators of good water quality. The average number of families collected within the EPT orders on Oaks Creek averaged 9. Average total taxa richness was 20 families across all sites. The greatest EPT and total taxa richness were observed at site #6, where 29 families were documented, 12 of which being EPT families. Site #8 on had the least diversity and lowest taxa richness of those sites on Oaks Creek. It comprised a total of 15 families, 8 being EPT taxa. The Susquehanna River site had the lowest diversity, having a total of 13 families (7 belonging to EPT taxa). All other sites were similar to the average values.

- 106 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 2. Taxa list with total counts of each organism collected. Number of Individuals at Site Order Family Genus 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 FC Ssq Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis 18 9 7 16 14 10 4 3 6 Ephemeroptera Baetidae Unknown 13 6 2 37 6 2 2 Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Heptagenia 9 24 17 25 25 31 23 17 6 12 Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae MacCaffertium 4 15 4 4 7 5 6 Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Stenacron 6 18 13 8 7 8 8 17 3 4 Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Unknown 12 22 32 54 14 38 23 25 10 13 Ephemeroptera Leptophelbidae Paraleptophlebia 2 5 2 5 2 Ephemeroptera Ephemerellidae Ephemerella 1 3 1 2 2 2 Ephemeroptera Isonychiidae Isonychia 1 1 1 3 1 Plecoptera Perlidae Agnetina 6 8 22 11 41 8 7 1 Plecoptera Perlidae Paragnetina 16 6 2 Plecoptera Perlidae Acroneuria 5 4 2 Plecoptera Perlidae Neoperla 5 10 14 4 22 12 9 3 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Ceratopsyche 2 19 17 7 203 182 144 49 18 85 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Cheumatopsyche 226 67 32 10 1 5 11 40 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Hydropsyche 3 2 Trichoptera Philopatmidae Chimarra 7 59 43 4 42 68 37 24 13 4 Trichoptera Rhyacophildae Rhycophila 1 2 12 23 9 7 Trichoptera Uenoidae Neophylax 11 26 3 33 17 7 23 5 3 Trichoptera Limnephilidae Pycnopsyche 1 1 1 Trichoptera Goeridae Goera 1 Trichoptera Glossosomatidae Glossosoma 5 1 1 Trichoptera Odontoceridae Psilotreta 1 Coleoptera Elmidae Stenelmis 172 64 87 71 128 138 111 59 17 38 Coleoptera Elmidae Optioservus 63 45 59 63 511 200 252 56 21 15 Coleoptera Elmidae Dubiraphia 1 1 1 Coleoptera Elmidae Promoreseia 1 1 Coleoptera Psephenidae Psephenus 16 49 11 19 27 36 33 16 24 32 Coleoptera Psephenidae Ectopria 1 1 Megaloptera Corydalidae Nigronia 1 4 2 1 2 1 4 Megaloptera Sialidae Sialis 3 1 1 Venerioda Dressenidae Dreissena 23 6 5 5 3 2 Venerioda Sphaeriidae Sphaerium 5 2 3 Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus 181 53 58 4 19 1 3 1 Amphipoda Haustoriidae Pontoporeia 6 2 4 1 Amphipoda Unknown Unknown 327 18 8 Odonata Gomphidae Gomphus 1 1 Diptera Chironomidae Unknown 148 44 37 29 82 48 26 56 32 64 Diptera Ceratopogonidae Probezzia 2 1 2 2 5 Diptera Tipulidae Hexatoma 1 2 4 3 2 2 Diptera Tipulidae Unknown 1 2 2 1 3 2 2 Diptera Simulidae Simulium 19 2 2 1 3 Diptera Empididae Unknown 1 4 2 Diptera Athericidae Atherix 2 1 2 1 Decapoda Cambaridae Orconectes 8 3 5 4 1 2 6 Decapoda Cambaridae Unknown 1 2 4 Trombidiformes Hydrachnidiae Unknown 4 1 2 2 Isopoda Asellidae Asellus 1 Total No. Genera 24 24 19 22 31 22 20 27 18 17 Total No. Organisms 1268 571 487 347 1238 859 768 421 192 336

- 107 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Richness

Site #1 9 22

Site #3 9 20

Site #4 8 17

Site #5 10 22

Fly Creek 8 14

Site #6 12 29

Site #7 8 17 EPT Richness Site #8 8 15 Taxa Richness

Site #9 10 21

Susquehanna 7 13

Figure 2. Comparison of Taxa Richness (total number of families present) and EPT Richness (number of families belonging to the orders Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera) for sites surveyed.

The FBI estimates the level of organic pollution at each site; higher values indicate greater levels of impairment, as presented in Table 3. Figure 3 graphically displays the FBI values for all sites studied. Values for Oaks Creek never exceeded 5.5, the threshold above which water quality decreases from “good” to “fair”. Of the four sites categorized as having “good” water quality, site #1 had the highest value (i.e., the most impaired, at 5.42). The four other sites – #5,6,8,9 – all received a “very good” rating on the FBI scale with values under 4.5, indicating only a possibility of some organic pollution.

- 108 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 3. Scale of Familial Biotic Index (NYSDEC 2009).

FBI Score WQ Category Level of Organic Pollution 0.00-3.50 Excellent No apparent organic pollution 3.51-4.50 Very Good Possible slight organic pollution 4.51-5.50 Good Some organic pollution 5.51-6.50 Fair Fairly significant organic pollution 6.51-7.50 Fairly Poor Significant organic pollution 7.51-8.50 Poor Very significant organic pollution 8.51-10.0 Very Poor Severe organic pollution

Familial Biotic Index

Site #1 5.42

Site #3 4.95

Site #4 4.74

Site #5 4.38

Fly Creek 4.38

Site #6 4.48

Site #7 4.52

Site #8 4.33

Site #9 4.42

Susquehanna 4.86

Figure 3. Familial Biotic Index values for sites sampled in 2012. Higher values are associated with higher likelihood of organic pollution.

The Percent Model Affinity provides a measurement of the community’s similarity to that of an ideal model community based on the abundance of seven taxonomic groups (NYSDEC 2009; Table 4). PMA values greater than 64 indicate excellent water quality, 64-50 indicate slightly impacted water, 49-35 for moderately impacted and less than 35 indicates quality has been severely impacted (NYSDEC 2009). Site #5 was the only site with an index value greater than 64. Sites #3,4, and 9 had values reflecting slightly impacted quality. Moderately impacted conditions and PMA index values lower than 49 were found at sites #1, 6,7, and 8.

- 109 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 4. Breakdown of an ideal macroinvertebrate community used in the calculation of PMA index (NYSDEC 2009).

NYSDEC Model Order Community

Ephemeroptera (Mayfly) 40%

Plecoptera (Stonefly) 5%

Trichoptera (Caddisfly) 10% Chironomidae (Midge) 20% Coleoptera (Beetle) 10% Oligochaeta (Worms) 5% Other 10%

Percent Model Affinity

Site #1 48.5

Site #3 57.5

Site #4 58.5

Site #5 73.5

Fly Creek 63.5

Site #6 48.5

Site #7 48.5

Site #8 46.5

Site #9 62.5

Susquehanna 55.5

Figure 4. PMA index values for each study site. Values greater than 64 indicate excellent water quality. Values between 64 and 50 indicate slightly impacted water, 49-35 for moderately impacted and less than 35 indicates quality has been severely impacted (NYSDEC 2009).

- 110 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

A summary of water quality parameters is provided in Table 6. Temperature is consistent across the upper sites with a decrease from site #6 and lower, following the confluence with Fly Creek. Turbidity was much higher at the start of Oaks Creek with a gradual improvement in clarity as distance from Canadarago Lake increases. Dissolved oxygen concentrations were relatively consistent across all sites (range 8.32 to 8.86 mg/l) except for #5 where it was determined to be 9.69 mg/l.

Table 6. Physical and chemical water quality data collected from sites on Oaks Creek, Fly Creek, and the Susquehanna River on 16 and 18 June 2012.

Conductivity Turbidity Location Temp (°C) pH DO (mg/l) % DO (mS/cm) (NTU) Site #1 25.08 7.69 6.14 74.4 0.278 12.9 Site #3 26.25 8.1 8.77 108.6 0.301 9.1 Site #4 25.94 8.06 8.82 108.6 0.305 6.6 Site #5 26.57 8.32 9.69 119.7 0.298 4.9 Site #6 24.56 8.22 8.86 107.2 0.305 4.5 Site #7 24.52 8.08 8.71 104.6 0.33 4.2 Site #8 24.93 8.15 8.84 106.8 0.329 4.2 Site #9 24.91 8.06 8.59 103.7 0.334 4.4 Fly Creek 24.55 8.05 8.32 99.9 0.336 4.4 Susquehanna 23.00 7.63 5.73 67.0 0.397 3.8

CONCLUSION

This survey concludes that, based upon the benthic communities present, Oaks Creek has slightly impaired water quality but overall can be considered a healthy stream based on the diversity and abundance of its benthic macroinvertebrate community. Biotic indices reflect a range of conditions from moderate impairment to excellent water quality scores at sites sampled; physical water quality data do not indicate conditions associated with impairment.

Environmental stresses are evident on Oaks Creek, with the majority of these being close to the source at Canadarago Lake. Water quality data at the site shows the highest turbidity reading out of all the Oaks Creek sites and the lowest oxygen levels. Site #1 likely reflects conditions in the lake itself (such as planktonic algae and depressed oxygen as a result of its decomposition). It is also adjacent to agricultural fields. Site #1 shares one of the lowest Percent Model Affinity scores at 48.5. Amphipods (scuds) and the trichopteran (caddisfly) Chuematopsyches sp. were abundant at site #1. This was the only site to show such high numbers of organisms from these taxa.

Community composition at site #5 was closest to what the NYSDEC model outlines, with a PMA value of 73.5 and FBI score of 4.38. The sampled community is composed of a balanced EPT population with elevated coleopterans (beetles) present along with low numbers of

- 111 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

chironomids (non-biting midges). Taxa and EPT richness are well above average at this site with 10 EPT families and 22 families total. Each biotic index value indicates good water quality at this site due to the balanced breakdown of species within the community along with low populations of pollution tolerant species. Physical water quality data support the indices’ results showing high dissolved oxygen, low conductivity and low turbidity.

Fly Creek converges with Oaks between sites #5 and #6. The relatively clean water flowing from Fly Creek seems to improve water quality as evidenced by increased richness between these two sites. Temperature at site #6 decreased compared to the prior four as shown in Table 6. A PMA value of 48.5 indicates impairment at this site; the low value is most likely due to the very high number of coleopterans collected. Taking into consideration the low FBI index value the high species diversity and richness, as well as the physical water quality data, it would seem that the PMA for this site does not accurately represent the actual conditions.

REFERENCES

Arscott, D. B., A. K. Aufdenkampe, T. L. Bott, C. L. Dow, J. K. Jackson, and L.A. Kaplan. (2008). Water quality monitoring in the source water areas for NY City. Avondale, PA: Stroud Water Research Center. Retrieved August 14, 2012

Bailey, C. 2010. Macroinvertebrate survey and biological assessment of water quality: tributaries of Canadarago Lake; Otsego County, NY. In 43rd Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Horvath, T, and P. Lord. 2002. First report of zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) in Canadarago Lake. In 35th Ann. Rept. (2002). SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

New York State – Department of Environmental Conservation. 2009. Standard operating procedure: Biological monitoring of surface waters in New York State. Albany NY.

Merritt, R, and K. Cummins. 1996. An introduction to aquatic insects of North America. 3rd ed. Kendall Hunt Publishing. Dubuque, Iowa.

Peckarsky, B.L., P.R. Fraissinet, M.A. Penton and D.J. Conklim. 1995. Freshwater macroinvertebrates of northeastern North America. Comstock Publishing. Cornell University Press. Ithaca, NY.

Whitcomb, K. 2011. Baseline water quality assessment of aquatic benthic macroinvertebrates in streams. In 44th Annual Report (2011). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta, SUNY Oneonta.

- 112 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Qualitative spot biotic survey of Oaks Creek, White Creek, Cripple Creek, and Moe Pond in Otsego County, New York

Jeffrey S. Heilveil1 and Brett Buckhout2

INTRODUCTION

As non-native species move across the landscape and hydrofracking and other human impacts increase in scope, it is becoming more critical than ever that we can quantify changes to community structure. In order to do that, however, we must first have baseline data on which species are initially present. These baseline data also have the benefit of facilitating species- specific research by identifying populations that can be used in future studies. While the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation has a stream bioassessment program, only certain navigable waters are covered and not all taxa are targeted, reducing the utility of the data collected. To increase our knowledge of the taxa present in the environs surrounding the SUNY College at Oneonta Biological Field Station in Otsego County, NY four water bodies (three streams and one pond) were qualitatively sampled for vertebrates, invertebrates, and algae.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Site Selection:

Oaks Creek, which flows for approximately 150 Km from Canadarago Lake to its confluence with the Susquehanna River, has a watershed of approximately 188.67 Km2. The riparian corridor is mostly wooded, though the creek does pass through a few farms and underneath NYS route 80. A previous survey of Oaks Creek was performed by Hingula (2005); however, the nature of the study required limited sampling and the list of taxa collected contained several suspect identifications. Oaks Creek was sampled upstream of the junction of Otsego County roads 26 & 59 (42.68oN, 74.96oW), chosen to coincide with transect 7 of Hingula (2005). White Creek drains Allan Lake and flows for 5.65 Km to Lake Otsego. The creek passes through some shallow wetlands, prior to flowing under NYS route 80. White creek was sampled at this crossing (42.81oN, 74.90oW), approximately 501 m upstream from Lake Otsego, where it flows primarily over bedrock. Cripple Creek flows for 5.70 Km from where it drains Young Lake to where it empties into Lake Otsego. The creek flows through a mix of farms and wooded areas. The creek was surveyed where it crosses Bartlett road (42.82oN, 74.90oW), 1.77 Km upstream from Lake Otsego, a site situated favorably for use in courses and future research.

1 Assistant Professor, SUNY Oneonta Biology Department. 2 BFS Intern, summer 2012. Current affiliation: SUNY College at Oneonta. Funding provided by the Otsego County Land Trust.

- 113 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Moe Pond is has an area of approximately 1.56 Km2 and is situated northwest of Cooperstown, NY, slight less than 1.5 Km from Lake Otsego. The pond is actually an impoundment, with a mostly forested edge. The SUNY College at Oneonta has recently constructed a field research laboratory at the site and therefore the generation of baseline data will greatly facilitate future research. Moe Pond was sampled in a ~ 40 m radius from the spillway (42.71oN, 74.94oW). At each stream site, qualitative surveys were conducted for aquatic invertebrates using dip nets and kick screens (where appropriate), while fishes were captured via single-pass backpack electroshocking. Invertebrate sampling was performed for 3 – 6 hours of effort per site, and insects were preserved in 70% ethanol and returned to the laboratory for identification to lowest feasible taxonomic level. Fishes were identified in the field, if possible, and returned to their habitat. If they could not be confidently identified, the fish were returned to the Biological Field Station for identification and use in other Field Station research projects. Additionally, benthic algae (sensu lato) were removed from four small cobbles at each site and returned to the laboratory for identification. Sampling at Moe Pond was strictly for macroinvertebrates and performed for 6 hours of effort using dip and aerial nets. Identification of insect genera was performed in accordance with Merritt and Cummins (1995), while non-insect arthropods were identified using either Pennak (1978) or Hobbs (1989). Gastropods were identified using Harman (1982). Fishes were identified using Smith (1986). Chrysophytes were identified using Wehr et al. (2002). All names were verified as being valid as per the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (http://www.itis.gov).

RESULTS

All eight orders of commonly encountered insects were found at the stream sites; unsurprisingly, no plecopterans were found in Moe Pond. More specifically, 48 genera of insects, representing 31 families from eight orders, were recovered from the Oaks Creek site (Table 1). In addition to a host of non-insect invertebrates, six species of diatoms, one snapping turtle, and 16 fishes were also observed at this site (Table 2). White Creek was found to support 30 genera of insects from 25 families (Table 3), one native crayfish species, five species of diatoms, and 12 fishes (Table 4). Cripple Creek supported 31 insect genera (Table 5), a small number of non-insect invertebrates, four genera of diatoms, and eight fishes (Table 6). Perhaps most notable about Cripple Creek was the presence of vast tracts of the chlorophyte Cladophora, which drastically altered the surface habitat of the stream. Only 17 genera of insects were recovered from Moe Pond, along with a couple of non-insect arthropods (Table 7).

- 114 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Class Order Family Genus Insecta Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis Insecta Ephemeroptera Caenidae Caenis Insecta Ephemeroptera Ephemerellidae Drunella Insecta Ephemeroptera Ephemerellidae Timpanoga Insecta Ephemeroptera Ephemeridae Ephemera Insecta Ephemeroptera Ephemeridae Hexagenia Insecta Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Epeorus Insecta Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Heptagenia Insecta Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae MacCaffertium Insecta Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Stenacron Insecta Ephemeroptera Isonychiidae Isonychia Insecta Ephemeroptera Leptophlebiidae Paraleptophlebia Insecta Ephemeroptera Potamanthidae Anthopotamus Insecta Odonata Aeshnidae Boyeria Insecta Odonata Calopterygidae Calopteryx Insecta Plecoptera Perlidae Acroneuria Insecta Plecoptera Perlidae Agnetina Insecta Plecoptera Perlidae Neoperla Insecta Plecoptera Perlidae Paragnetina Insecta Plecoptera Pteronarcyidae Pteronarcys Insecta Hemiptera Corixidae Dasycorixa Insecta Hemiptera Corixidae Hesperocorixa Insecta Hemiptera Corixidae Trichocorixa Insecta Hemiptera Veliidae Rhagovelia Insecta Trichoptera Glossosomatidae Glossosoma Insecta Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Ceratopsyche Insecta Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Cheumatopsyche Insecta Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Hydropsyche Insecta Trichoptera Leptoceridae Ceraclea Insecta Trichoptera Philopotamidae Chimarra Insecta Trichoptera Rhyacophilidae Rhyacophila Insecta Trichoptera Uenoidae Neophylax Insecta Megaloptera Corydalidae Nigronia Insecta Megaloptera Sialidae Sialis Insecta Coleoptera Elmidae Ancyronyx Insecta Coleoptera Elmidae Dubraphia Insecta Coleoptera Elmidae Optioservus Insecta Coleoptera Elmidae Oulimnus Insecta Coleoptera Elmidae Promoresia Insecta Coleoptera Elmidae Stenelmis Insecta Coleoptera Hydrophilidae Paracymus Insecta Coleoptera Psephenidae Psephenus Insecta Diptera Athericidae Atherix Insecta Diptera Ceratopogonidae Probezzia Insecta Diptera Chironomidae N/A Insecta Diptera Simuliidae Prosimulium Insecta Diptera Tabanidae N/A Insecta Diptera Tipulidae Hexatoma Table 1. Insect genera recovered from Oaks Creek.

- 115 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Class Order Family Genus Specific epithet Bacillariophyceae Achnanthales CocconeidaceaCocconeis N/A Bacillariophyceae Naviculales Naviculaceae Navicula 2 Spp. Coscinodiscophyc Melosirales Melosiraceae Melosira N/A Fragilariophyceae Fragilariales Fragilariaceae Diatoma 2 Spp. Turbellaria N/A N/A N/A N/A Clitellata N/A N/A N/A N/A Bivalva Veneroida Dreissenidae Dreissena polymorpha Bivalva Veneroida Pisidiidae Pisidium N/A Gastropoda Neotaeniglossa Pleuroceridae Elimia virginica Gastropoda Neotaeniglossa Pleuroceridae Spirodon carinata Malacostraca Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus N/A Malacostraca Amphipoda Haustoriidae Pontoporeia affinis Malacostraca Decapoda Cambaridae Orconectes rusticus Malacostraca Isopoda Asellidae Caecidotea N/A Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Catostomidae Hypentelium nigricans Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Exoglossum maxillingua Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Hybognathus hankinsoni Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Hybognathus regius Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Luxilius cornutus Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Nocomis micropogon Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Notropis amoenus Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Notropis hudsonius Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Notropis rubellus Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Rhinichthys atratulus Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Rhinichthys cataractae Actinopterygii Perciformes Centrarchidae Amblopites rupestris Actinopterygii Perciformes Centrarchidae Micropterus dolomieu Actinopterygii Perciformes Percidae Etheostoma olmstedi Actinopterygii Scopaeniformes Cottidae Cottus cognatus Actinopterygii Siluriformes Ictaluridae Noturus insignis Reptilia Testudines Chelydridae Chelydra serpentina Table 2. Non-insects recovered from Oaks Creek.

- 116 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Class Order Family Genus Insecta Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis Insecta Ephemeroptera Leptophlebiidae Paraleptophlebia Insecta Ephemeroptera Ephemerellidae Drunella Insecta Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Epeorus Insecta Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Heptagenia Insecta Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae MacCaffertium Insecta Odonata Aeshnidae Boyeria Insecta Odonata Cordulegastridae Cordulegaster Insecta Plecoptera Pteronarcyidae Pteronarcys Insecta Plecoptera Perlidae Acroneuria Insecta Plecoptera Perlidae Agnetina Insecta Plecoptera Leuctridae Leuctra Insecta Hemiptera Gerridae Aquarius Insecta Hemiptera Veliidae Microvelia Insecta Trichoptera Helicopsychidae Helicopsyche Insecta Trichoptera Glossosomatidae Glossosoma Insecta Trichoptera Rhyacophilidae Rhyacophila Insecta Trichoptera Limnephilidae Pycnopsyche Insecta Trichoptera Philopotamidae Dolophilodes Insecta Trichoptera Odontoceridae Psilotreta Insecta Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Ceratopsyche Insecta Megaloptera Corydalidae Nigronia Insecta Coleoptera Psephenidae Psephenus Insecta Coleoptera Elmidae Stenelmis (2 spp.) Insecta Coleoptera Elmidae Optioservus Insecta Diptera Tipulidae Tipula Insecta Diptera Tipulidae Hexatoma Insecta Diptera Chironomidae N/A Insecta Diptera Athericidae Atherix Insecta Diptera Ceratopogonidae N/A Table 3. Insect genera recovered from White Creek.

- 117 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Class Order Family Genus Specific epithet Bacillariophyceae Achnanthales Cocconeidaceae Cocconeis N/A Bacillariophyceae Naviculales Naviculaceae Navicula N/A Coscinodiscophyceae Melosirales Melosiraceae Melosira N/A Fragilariophyceae Fragilariales Fragilariaceae Diatoma N/A Bacillariophyceae Cymbellales Gomphonemataceae Gomphonema N/A Malacostraca Decapoda Cambaridae Cambarus bartonii Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Catostomidae Catostomus commersonii Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Notemigonus crysoleucas Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Notropis hudsonius Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Rhinichthys atratulus Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Rhinichthys cataractae Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Semotilus atromaculatus Actinopterygii Perciformes Centrarchidae Lepomis gibbosus Actinopterygii Perciformes Centrarchidae Lepomis macrochirus Actinopterygii Perciformes Centrarchidae Micropterus salmoides Actinopterygii Perciformes Percidae Etheostoma olmstedi Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Salmo trutta Actinopterygii Siluriformes Ictaluridae Noturus insignis Table 4. Non-insects recovered from White Creek.

- 118 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Class Order Family Genus Insecta Ephemeroptera Tricorythidae Tricorythodes Insecta Ephemeroptera Leptophlebiidae Paraleptophlebia Insecta Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis Insecta Ephemeroptera Ephemerellidae Timpanoga Insecta Ephemeroptera Ephemerellidae Drunella Insecta Ephemeroptera Ephemerellidae Ephemerella Insecta Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae MacCaffertium Insecta Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Heptagenia Insecta Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Stenacron Insecta Odonata Calopterygidae Calopteryx Insecta Odonata Aeshnidae Boyeria Insecta Plecoptera Pteronarcyidae Pteronarcys Insecta Plecoptera Perlidae Acroneuria Insecta Plecoptera Perlidae Agnetina Insecta Hemiptera Gerridae Gerris Insecta Hemiptera Veliidae Rhagovelia Insecta Trichoptera Odontoceridae Psilotreta Insecta Trichoptera Brachycentridae Micrasema Insecta Trichoptera Glossosomatidae Glossosoma Insecta Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Ceratopsyche Insecta Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Cheumatopsyche Insecta Trichoptera Rhyacophilidae Rhyacophila Insecta Megaloptera Corydalidae Nigronia Insecta Coleoptera Psephenidae Psephenus Insecta Coleoptera Curculionidae* N/A Insecta Coleoptera Elmidae Dubiraphia Insecta Coleoptera Elmidae Optioservus Insecta Coleoptera Elmidae Oulimnius Insecta Diptera Tipulidae Hexatoma Insecta Diptera Athericidae Atherix Insecta Diptera Chironomidae N/A Table 5. Insects recovered from Cripple Creek. * = potential terrestrial species

- 119 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Class Order Family Genus Specific epithet Bacillariophyceae Thalassiophysales Catenulaceae Amphora N/A Bacillariophyceae Naviculales Naviculaceae Navicula Multiple spp. Coscinodiscophyceae Melosirales Melosiraceae Melosira N/A Bacillariophyceae Cymbellales Gomphonemataceae Gomphonema N/A Gastropoda Neotaeniglossa Physidae Physa integra Malacostraca Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus N/A Malacostraca Amphipoda Haustoriidae Pontoporeia affinis Malacostraca Decapoda Cambaridae Orconectes rusticus Malacostraca Isopoda Asellidae Caecidotea N/A Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Catostomidae Erimyzon oblongus Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Exoglossum maxillingua Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Rhinichthys atratulus Actinopterygii Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Rhinichthys cataractae Actinopterygii Perciformes Centrarchidae Micropterus salmoides Actinopterygii Perciformes Percidae Etheostoma olmstedi Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Salmo trutta Actinopterygii Siluriformes Ictaluridae Noturus insignis Table 6. Non-insects recovered from Cripple Creek.

Class Order Family Genus / species Malacostraca Amphipoda Haustoriidae Pontoporeia affinis Turbellaria N/A N/A N/A Insecta Ephemeroptera Caenidae Caenis Insecta Odonata Aeshnidae Aeshna Insecta Odonata Corduliidae Epitheca Insecta Odonata Coenegrionidae Coenegrion/Enellagma Insecta Odonata Libellulidae Libellula Insecta Odonata Libellulidae Sympetrum Insecta Hemiptera Gerridae Rheumatobates reileyi Insecta Hemiptera Pleidae Neoplea Insecta Trichoptera Leptoceridae Mystacides Insecta Trichoptera Limnephilidae N/A (empty case found) Insecta Trichoptera Molannidae Molanna Insecta Megaloptera Sialidae Sialis Insecta Coleoptera Dytiscidae Uvarus Insecta Coleoptera Haliplidae Haliplus (2 spp.) Insecta Diptera Chironomidae N/A Insecta Diptera Ceratopogonidae Probezzia Insecta Diptera Tabanidae Chrysops Table 7. Invertebrates recovered from Moe Pond.

- 120 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

DISCUSSION

Oaks Creek had the greatest diversity of taxa of all the sites sampled. Although richness was greatest for the Ephemeroptera (13 genera), the family with the greatest number of genera was the coleopteran Elmidae (6 genera). Only two of these elmids, Stenelmis and Optioservus, appear in the Otsego County Insect Collection housed at SUNY College at Oneonta, and only Ancyronyx was recovered by Hingula (2005) at this location. Overall, Hingula (2005) recovered seven genera of insects that were not seen in the present study; however, one genus does not exist (potential typographic error of a genus that was collected), one genus has since been split (and the newly created genus was recovered in large numbers), and four of the genera are unlikely to have been found at this location (potential identification errors). The present study revealed 10 genera of Ephemeroptera, 2 of Odonata, 3 of Plecoptera, 4 of Hemiptera, 4 of Trichoptera, 2 of Megaloptera, 6 of Coleoptera, and 5 of Diptera that had not been previously recorded for this site. Of the non- insect arthropods, one additional amphipod was recovered, as was one bivalve, a leech and a flatworm (that were unable to be identified further), and Dreissena polymorpha. The last of these is unsurprising, as Hingula (2005) found D. polymorpha both upstream and downstream of the sampled location. White Creek was the only location sampled that lacked Orconectes rusticus, and the only site found to support native crayfishes. This site also supported a population of Helicopsyche borealis, which has not been recovered recently from other streams in the area, despite heavy sampling (Heilveil, personal observation). This site is perhaps the most promising for future work, due to its distinctive collection of taxa. Cripple Creek had the least richness among the stream sites, but supported both genera that have strict oxygen and flow requirements (e.g. Epeorus), as well as those that do well in less oxygenated waters (i.e. Tricorythodes). It should be noted that Cripple Creek was extensively sampled in June of 2011 by a field entomology course from SUNY College at Oneonta and a far greater number of taxa were encountered. The lack of precipitation in 2012 left Cripple Creek with approximately 1/3 the stream width of the previous summer. Coupled with the Cladophora mats that were present in 2012, but absent the previous summer, these factors may explain the lower levels of taxonomic richness observed. While there were no surprises in the taxa recovered from Moe Pond, these baseline data will be invaluable for comparison with later work. For all of these sites, having current data on which taxa are present will facilitate both the research and teaching mission of the Biology Field Station.

Acknowledgements We would like to thank Matthew Albright, Florian Reyda, and Justin Hulbert for aid in collection and identification, landowners for easier access to the water bodies, and the 2012 BFS summer interns for assistance in sampling. Collections were made under the NYS DEC License to Collect or Possess #1225 assigned to WN Harman. This work was funded by a research grant from the SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station to J.S. Heilveil.

- 121 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

REFERENCES

Harman, W.N. 1982. Pictorial keys to the aquatic mollusks of the upper Susquehanna. Occas. Pap. No. 9. SUNY Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Hingula, L. 2005. Benthic macroinvertebrate survey of Oaks Creek, Otsego County, NY, during the initial stages of zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) colonization. In 37th Annual Report (2004). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Hobbs, H. 1989. An illustrated checklist of the American crayfishes (Decapoda: Astacidae, Cambaridae,and Parastacidae). Smithsonian Contributions to Biology. 480:1-236.

Merritt, R.W. and K.W. Cummins. 1995. An introduction to the aquatic insects of North America, 3rd Edition. Kendall Hunt Publishing Company. Dubuque, IA.

Pennak, R.W. 1978. Freshwater invertebrates of the United States, 2nd Edition. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Smith L.C. 1985. The inland fishes of New York State. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

Wehr, J.D., R.G. Sheath, P. Kociolek and J.H. Thorp. 2002. Freshwater algae of North America: Ecology and Classification. Academic Press.

- 122 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Freshwater pearly mussel (unionid) survey of Oaks Creek and the Susquehanna River below its confluence, summer 20121

M.F. Albright, P.H. Lord and T.N. Pokorny

INTRODUCTION

Oaks Creek drains Canadarago Lake in central Otsego County and converges with the Susquehanna River about 15 km from its source. Over the summer of 2012, the benthic communities were evaluated at nine sites along the Creek, as well as a site on Fly Creek, immidiately above its confluence with Oaks Creek, and at a site on the Susquanna River below its confluence with Oaks Creek (Buckhout 2013). Additionally, an intensive qualitative survey was conducted on all aquatic taxa at a single streetch on the middle reaches of Oaks Creek (Heilveil and Buckhout 2013. This report attempts to describe the distribution of freshwater pearly mussels (unionids) throughout Oaks Creek and in the Susquehanna, below where the two meet.

METHODS

In anticipation of the field surveys, the BFS summer intern crew was trained on the basics of clam recognition and identification. This involved ½ day utilizing a collection of shells archieved at the BFS, and ½ day at a nearby site on the Susquehanna River which is known to be inhabited by unionids. Using glass bottom buckets and snorkel gear, crew members gained experience searching for and recognizing unionids in various habitats. The formal survey was conducted on 16-18 July 2012. Figure 1 provides a map showing the sample sites. All mussel identifications were confirmed by P.H. Lord.

RESULTS

Table 1 summarizes the number of each species of freshwater mussel collcted at each site, including both living specimens and empty shells. Site 1, just below the dam at Canadarago Lake’s outlet, was the only site on Oaks Creek proper where living unionids were found. Five living species were collected, as was the shell of an additional species. Lampsilis radiata was by far the most abundant mussel, with 111 individuals identified. The shells of three species were collected from site 2 and of one species at site 3. Several species of living and dead mussels were collected at sites 6, where Oaks Creek and the Susquehanna River converage, and several were collected at site 7, downstream several km at Clintonville Road.

1 This work was supported by the Otsego County Land Trust.

- 123 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 1. Sites surveyed for freshwater mussels on Oaks Creek (sites 1-5) and the Susquehanna River, below its confluence with Oaks Creek (sites 6 and 7), summer 2012.

- 124 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 1. Summary of living and dead (shells only) freshwater clam species collected on Oaks Creek and the Susquehanna River, below the confluence, 16-18 uly 2012. See Figure 1 for site locations.

Site Species 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Lampsilis cariosa (Yellow Lamp Mussel) 1 dead Elliptio complanata 6 live 4 live (Eastern elliptio) 38 dead 7 dead 2 dead 4.5 dead 14 dead Lampsilis radiata 111 live 6 live 10 live (Eastern lampmussel) 34 dead 10 dead 1 dead 42 dead Lasmigona compressa (Creek heelsplitter) 1 dead Alasmidonta undulata 10 live 3 live (Triangle floater) 14.5 dead 4 dead 3.5 dead Strophitus undulatus 2 live 14 live 1 live (Squawfoot) 4 dead 5 dead 2.5 dead 13 dead Pyganodon cataracta 5 live (Eastern floater) 5.5 dead

REFERENCES

Buckhout, B.C. 2013. Benthic marcroinvertebrate survey of Oaks Creek, Otsego County, NY. In 45th Annual Report (2012). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Heiveil, J.S. and B.C. Buckhout. 2013. Qualitative spot biotic survey of Oaks Creek, White Creek, Cripple Creek, and Moe Pond in Otsego County, New York. In 45th Annual Report (2012). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 125 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Monitoring of the Moe Pond ecosystem and largemouth bass (Micropterus Salmoides) population before considering biomanipulation options Anna J. VanDerKrake1 ABSTRACT Moe Pond, a 15.6 ha man-made body of water owned by SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station, is located near Cooperstown, NY, at N42°43.00’W74°56.75’ (Albright et. al 2004). The pond was created in 1939 by the damming of a natural wetland and has been used for research and educational purposes, since owned by the BFS (Tibbits 2001). It is classified as a polymictic water body because it mixes and maintains approximately the same temperature from the surface to the bottom of the pond. Moe Pond is considered a eutrophic body of water because of the high level of nutrients available, as well as the presence of algae and a past history of blue- green algal blooms (Sohacki 1972). Prior to 1998, seining in Moe Pond revealed that the only fish species in the water body were brown bullhead (Ictalurus nebulosus) and golden shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas) (McCoy et al. 2001). In 1998 or 1999, largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) and smallmouth bass (M. dolomieu) were illegally introduced. The subsequent disappearance of the golden shiner population led to an increase in zooplankton mean size and abundance and increased algal grazing (Albright et al. 2004). Stomach sampling of largemouth bass showed a variety of invertebrate species in the contents, while also showing individual fish food preferences, in correlation to the number of individual species in the stomach contents. Elodea Canadensis, or American pondweed, makes up the majority of the submerged plant species throughout Moe Pond, as observed during the seining and water sampling processes.

INTRODUCTION Moe Pond, a polymictic water body located in Otsego County, New York, is 15.6 hectares in surface area, has an average depth of approximately 1.8 meters (Albright et al. 2004) and drains a largely forested watershed of approximately 360 acres (Anonymous 2007). The pond is the source of Willow Brook, a tributary to Otsego Lake and, in turn, the Susquehanna River (Albright et al. 2004). Historically, the fish populations were comprised of brown bullhead (Ictalurus nebulosus) and golden shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas) (McCoy et al. 2001). By 1999, there had been an unauthorized stocking of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) and smallmouth bass (M. dolomieu) (Albright et al. 2004). Smallmouth bass have been virtually absent since 2002. Predation by largemouth bass is assumed to be the main cause of the disappearance of the previously abundant golden shiner (Albright et al. 2004). This could have assisted in the increase in zooplankton, thus decreasing the amount of algae, reducing algal blooms and increasing the water clarity. At that time, the rooted plant Elodea Canadensis was abundant (Hamway 2003). By the late 2000’s, small stunted largemouth bass seemed to have functionally replaced golden shiners as an efficient planktivore, reverting the pond’s algal crop to what it had been prior to the largemouth bass introduction (Albright et al. 2004). The current work is a

1 SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station intern, summer 2012. Current affiliation: Cazenovia College.

- 126 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

continuation of this monitoring, prior to anticipated biomanipulation efforts by the addition of forage and/or game fish.

METHODS Limnology On a weekly basis, from 31 May to 17 July 2012, Moe Pond’s water quality was assessed. Water samples were taken from the deepest point in the pond, which was marked by an anchored buoy at a depth of ~2.6 meters, as shown in Figure 1. A 500 mL sample of water was taken in a Nalgene bottle at a depth of 1 meter to determine chlorophyll a as well as total nitrogen (Ebina et al. 1983), nitrate+nitrate-N (Pritzlaff 2003), total phosphorus (Liao ad Marten 2001), calcium (EPA 1983) and chloride (APHA 1989). A YSI (6820 V2 Multiparameter Water Quality Sonde) was used to measure depth (meters), temperature (°C), pH, Conductivity (µS/cm), chlorophyll a, dissolved oxygen levels (% and mg/L), and Redox Potential or ORP. Transparency was measured using a Secchi disk.

Figure 1. Sampling location at Moe Pond, Otsego County, NY (modified from Sohaki 1972). Fish Community Using a small rowboat and a 200 foot haul seine, largemouth bass were sampled from Moe Pond by rowing out and placing the seine into the water in a “teardrop” shape. After the seine was in place, it was slowly pulled back onto the southern shore of the pond, continuously holding down the lead line to prevent any fish from potentially escaping the net. Once ashore, the seine was searched for fish which were placed into a Ship-N-Shore tub for upcoming evaluations; all brown bullheads were instantly released back into Moe Pond.

- 127 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Using a Wildco™ measuring board and a Leatherman™ Kick® pocket knife, largemouth bass lengths and scale samples were taken. The scales were removed from above the left pectoral fin and placed on a Post-It® and labeled for aging each fish at a later time. A 2oz Monoject® gastric lavage was used for taking stomach content samples from all bass over 150 mm in length. The contents were emptied from the fish into a 7oz Nasco Whirl-Pak® and preserved with 70% ethyl alcohol. Using Peckarsky et al. (1990) and Thorp and Covich (1991) as references, the contents were then examined under a Zeiss™ dissecting microscope. Food items (primarily zooplankton and other invertebrates) that were identified to family level and were counted. Zooplankton Community Quantitative zooplankton samples were taken each week by using a Wildco™ plankton net having a 147 µm mesh. 1-mL subsamples were observed under a compound microscope on a gridded sedgewick-rafter cell. The first 100 organisms for each sample date were identified according to Thorpe and Covich (1991) and measured using a calibrated ocular micrometer. Results were then put into Microsoft Excel to organize the data by species, mean length per species, and the percent composition of each taxa out of 100 organisms examined each week. Invertebrate Community A macro-invertebrate/benthic survey was conducted on 13 July 2012 using triangle kick nets and clear bottom 5 gallon buckets. Samples were taken randomly from the east and west edges of Moe Pond, as well as from deeper areas of the eastern edge with an Eckman dredge. Samples were then transferred into 7oz Nasco Whirl-Pak® and preserved with 70% alcohol. Organisms were then classified to the genus or species level.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Limnology The information obtained by the YSI (6820 V2 Multiparameter Water Quality Sonde) from 31 May to 17 July 2012 is shown in Table 1. From the end of May to mid-July, data show a slight increase in water temperature as well as in conductivity and pH over the summer. On all dates except 6 June, every Secchi disk reading exceeded the depth of Moe Pond; this exception is presumably because of rainfall during the data collection that day. All other readings remained relatively consistent throughout the summer with the exception of ORP (Oxidation Reduction Potential) with which the probe had problems stabilizing on some occasions. Compared to previous years of studies conducted on Moe Pond, transparency has greatly increased from 2008 (Finger 2009). This could be due to an increase in plankton feeding on algae but the precise change in transparency is unknown. In Table 2, results from the analyses of nutrients, chlorides, calcium and chlorophyll a are shown. Compared to previous years of research, nitrate+nitrate levels are very low (below detectable levels), as they previously have been found to be. Total phosphorus levels are comparable to those of recent years.

- 128 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

sample depth (meters) Temp. (°C) pH Conductivity (mS/cm) Chlorophyll a DO (mg/L) DO (%) ORP Secchi depth (m) 5/31/2012 0.1 23.12 7.39 0.046 2.4 7.76 90.8 N/A 2.48+ 1.4 22.77 7.19 0.046 22.5 7.48 88.4 N/A 2.5 22.09 7.06 2.084 -1 0.17 1.9 N/A 6/6/2012 0.2 18.46 7.57 0.047 3.5 8.1 86.9 135.5 2.2 1.0 18.26 7.49 0.047 4.6 8.29 87.9 153.5 2.2 18.3 7.41 0.054 5.1 8.05 85.3 109.5 6/19/2012 0.1 21.15 7.45 0.05 6.1 8.52 95.8 N/A 2.3+ 1.0 21.13 7028 0.05 5.6 8.48 95.4 N/A 2.6 19.83 6.88 0.078 -0.9 0.39 4 N/A 7/4/2012 0.0 26.97 8.78 0.055 1.6 8.67 108.6 14.2 2.2+ 1.1 25.73 8.99 0.055 2.8 9.04 112.2 11.7 2.2 24.38 6.97 0.108 -0.8 0.2 2.4 -149.9 7/10/2012 0.2 26.87 9.04 0.056 2 8.67 8.67 18.4 2.0+ 1.0 25.34 9.17 0.055 3.4 8.87 8.87 24.6 2.0 24.86 8.7 0.053 12.7 0.22 0.22 -35 7/17/2012 0.0 27.46 8.8 0.052 N/A 8.46 106.7 46 2.2+ 1.0 26.58 8.79 0.05 N/A 8.53 105.9 45.1 2.2 25.92 7.2 0.06 N/A 0.92 13.3 -190.5 Table 1. Values of Secchi disk transparency, depth, temperature, conductivity, chlorophyll a, dissolved oxygen, and ORP from 31 May 2012 to 17 July 2012. (“+” indicates Secchi transparency exceeding water depth).

1972 1994 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2012 Secchi Depth (m) NA 0.85 1.2 1.1 >2.2 >2.33 1.26 1.26 2.2 2.62 1.35 2.24+ Total phosphorus (µm) 40-70 36.7 NA NA 26.4 29.05 42.29 56.64 26.91 20.5 28.95 26.33 Nitrate+nitrate (mg/L) NA <.05 NA NA 0.14 0.11 0.1 0.01 0.01 <.01 0.0027 bd Chlorophyll a (ppb) NA 2.2 0.2 8.1 2.4 2.49 4.4 2.41 19.4 2.75 3.94 4.99 pH 6.8-10.2 7.93 8.63 8.66 9.08 6.84 7.3 7.66 7.3 7.54 7.39 7.89 Calcium (mg/L) NA NA NA NA 10.45 NA NA NA NA NA 1.02 1.53 Chloride (mg/L) NA NA NA NA 1.06 1.47 NA Na NA NA 0.54 0.52 Table 2. Values of nitrate+nitrate, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, calcium, chloride, and chlorophyll a from 31 May 2012 to 17 July 2012. (Bd= below detectable levels) (modified from Finger 2008).

Fish Community Table 3summarizes abundance estimates for fish in Moe Pond from 1994 through 2012. These values were extrapolations of the numbers of fish collected in the seines, following the methods of Wilson et al. (2000). Because the fish are not expected to be randomly distributed, these numbers are not expected to estimate actual abundance with any level of certainty. However, the method employed has been consistent, so the values likely do serve as a proxy of relative abundance over time.

- 129 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Year Golden shiner Largemouth Bass Smallmouth Bass (Notemigonus crysoleucas) (Micropterus salmoides) (Micropterus dolomieu) 1994 (McCoy et al., 2000) 7,154: +12,701;-6,356 0 0 1999 (Wilson et al., 2000) 3,210+/-1760 1,588+/-650 958+/-454 2000 (Tibbits, 2001) 381+/-296 2,536+/-1,177 945+/-296 2001 (Wojnar, 2002) 1,708+/-1,693 3,724+/-3,447 504+/-473 2002 (Hamway, 2003)1 3 206 20 2003 (Hamway, 2004)1 2 318 1 2004 (Lopata, 2005) 0 6,924+/-2,912 0 2005 (Dresser, 2006) 0 12,019+/-3,577 223+/-257 2006 (Reinicke & Walters, 2007) 0 11,555.17+/- 0 2007 (Underwood, 2008) 0 13,373+/-249 0 2008 (Finger, 2009) 0 46,740+/-13,220 0 2012 (current) 0 6,480+/-1,533 0 Table 3. Estimates of golden shiner, largemouth bass and smallmouth bass abundances (+/- standard error) in Moe Pond, determined by extrapolating haul seine captures, 1994, 1999-2001, 2004-2008 and 2012. 1 indicates years where electrofishing was used as a measure of abundance rather than seining due to excessive plant growth.

Stomach contents of the largemouth bass collected at Moe Pond, displayed in Table 4, shows a large majority of their diet consists of Daphnia, amphipods, sphaeriids, and peltodytes. In comparison to a 2008 survey, Daphnia, Odonates, larval bullhead and amphipods comprised the majority of the largemouth bass diets (Finger 2008). Although the more common organisms consumed are slightly different now from those in 2008, the organisms ingested are very similar but in different relative abundances. For example, in both 2008 and 2012, Daphnia was the most common organism found within the stomach contents. In 2008, the mean stomach contained 18, but in 2012 the mean found per stomach was 51.

Taxa Mean Per Stomach % Occurrence in Micropterus Salmoides Total individuals Coleoptera: Peltodytes sp. (beetle larva) 5.60 5.90 202 Crustacea: Amphipoda (scud) 9.35 10.00 346 Crustacea: Daphnia 51.19 54.90 1894 Diptera (unknown) 0.95 1.00 35 Diptera: Ceratopogonidae (biting midge larva) 0.97 1.00 36 Diptera: Chironomid (non-biting midge larva) 2.73 2.90 101 Ephemeroptera (Mayfly) 3.97 4.30 147 Ictalurus nebulosus (Brown Bullhead) 5.27 5.70 195 Mollusca Sphaeriidae (fingernail clams) 6.16 6.60 228 Odonata (Dragonflies and Damselflies) 1.84 1.90 67 Trichoptera: Polycentropus (Caddisfly larva) 5.41 5.80 200 N (#prey items) 37.00 37.00 3451 N (# somachs)= 47 Table 4. Analysis of stomach contents of largemouth bass caught from 31 May 2012 to 17 July 2012; including mean per stomach sample, % occurrence, and total individual species found. Figure 3 shows the relationship between the lengths of largemouth bass seined in Moe Pond versus the number of total fish caught. The majority of the fish captures were ~90mm, ~110mm and ~190mm in length. These three lengths are directly related to the three most

- 130 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

common fish ages calculated at Moe Pond, shown in Figure 4. Most fish ranging in the 90mm length were estimated to be 1 year old, 110 mm long fish were estimated to be between 1 and 2 years of age, and fish with lengths around 190mm were estimated to be in the 3 year old age group. These clusters of fish that are similar in lengths but vary in age range could be due to stunted growth because of limited food and a lack of bigger largemouth bass predators (Finger 2009).

Length vs. Number of Fish: Moe Pond Largemouth bass

14 12

10 8 6 # of fish 4 2 0 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210 230 250 270 Length (mm)

Figure 3. Length vs. Number of largemouth bass collected in Moe Pond from 30 May 2012 to 17 July 2012.

Moe Pond Fish Age vs. Length 6

5

4

3 Fish Age 2

1

0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Fish Length

Figure 4. Age vs. Length of largemouth bass collected in Moe Pond from 30 May 2012 to 17 July 2012.

- 131 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Zooplankton Community The zooplankton community is summarized in Tables 5-10. Copepoda was the most common order of zooplankton found, with the subclasses Calanoidia and Cyclopoidia both being represented. Keratella, the only rotifer found in 2012, was common in the June samples only. Compared to past studies, the amount of rotifers has decreased since 2008, when they were the dominant plankton.

Moe Pond 6-6-12 Moe Pond 6-12-12

Species mean length (mm) % out of 100 Species mean length (mm) % out of 100 COPEPODA 0.137 8.000 COPEPODA 0.325 37.000 Calanoid 0.000 0.000 Calanoid 0.400 3.000 Cyclopoid 0.000 0.000 Cyclopoid 0.357 1.000 Naplius 0.137 8.000 Naplius 0.217 33.000 CLADOCERA 0.000 0.000 CLADOCERA 0.609 8.000 Bosmina 0.000 0.000 Bosmina 0.000 0.000 Daphnia 0.000 0.000 Daphnia 0.609 8.000 ROTIFERA 0.104 92.000 ROTIFERA 0.119 55.000 Keratella 0.104 92.000 Keratella 0.119 55.000 Tables 5 and 6. 6 June and 12 June 2012 analysis of zooplankton samples with mean length (mm) and percent composition from Moe Pond in 2012.

Moe Pond 6-26-12 Moe Pond 7-4-12

Species mean length (mm) % out of 100 Species mean length (mm) % out of 100 COPEPODA 0.295 72.000 COPEPODA 0.228 92.000 Calanoid 0.424 19.000 Calanoid 0.318 11.000 Cyclopoid 0.361 51.000 Cyclopoid 0.254 75.000 Naplius 0.099 2.000 Naplius 0.112 6.000 CLADOCERA 0.427 28.000 CLADOCERA 0.229 6.000 Bosmina 0.158 4.000 Bosmina 0.127 4.000 Daphnia 0.695 24.000 Daphnia 0.331 2.000 ROTIFERA 0.000 0.000 ROTIFERA 0.053 2.000 Keratella 0.000 0.000 Keratella 0.053 2.000 Tables 7 and 8. 26 June and 4 July 2012 analysis of zooplankton samples with mean length (mm) and percent composition from Moe Pond in 2012.

- 132 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Moe Pond 7-10-12 Moe Pond 7-17-12

Species mean length (mm) % out of 100 Species mean length (mm) % out of 100 COPEPODA 0.234 89.000 COPEPODA 0.165 79.000 Calanoid 0.290 6.000 Calanoid 0.243 67.000 Cyclopoid 0.314 79.000 Cyclopoid 0.251 12.000 Naplius 0.099 4.000 Naplius 0.000 0.000 CLADOCERA 0.349 11.000 CLADOCERA 0.288 21.000 Bosmina 0.081 6.000 Bosmina 0.101 3.000 Daphnia 0.616 7.000 Daphnia 0.475 18.000 ROTIFERA 0.000 0.000 ROTIFERA 0.000 0.000 Keratella 0.000 0.000 Keratella 0.000 0.000 Tables 9 and 10. 10 July and 17 July 2012 analysis of zooplankton samples with mean length (mm) and percent composition from Moe Pond in 2012.

Invertebrate Community A benthic survey of invertebrates was conducted on Moe Pond in order to better understand the organisms that could be a potential food source for any fish species (Table 11). Previous studies that have been conducted showed the same organisms present in 2008 (Finger 2009), though no mollusks were collected in 2012

Class Order Family Genus Malacostraca Amphipoda Haustoriidae Pontoporeia Turbellaria Insecta Odonata Aeshnidae Aeshna Insecta Odonata Cordullidae Epitheca Insecta Odonata Coenegrionidae Coenegrion/Enellagma Insecta Odonata Libellulidae Libellula Insecta Odonata Libellulidae Sympetrum Insecta Megaloptera Sialidae Sialis Insecta Ephemeroptera Caenidae Caenis Insecta Trichoptera Leptoceridae Mystacides Insecta Trichoptera Limnephilidae CASE ONLY Insecta Trichoptera Molannidae Molanna Insecta Hemiptera Gerridae Rheumatabates Insecta Hemiptera Peleidae Neoplea Insecta Diptera Chironomidae Insecta Diptera Ceratipognidae Probezzia Insecta Diptera Tabaanidae Chrysops Insecta Coleoptera Dytiscidae Uvarus Insecta Coleoptera Haliplidae Haliplus Table 11. List of invertebrates collected in Moe Pond on 13 July 2012 during a benthic sampling.

- 133 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

CONCLUSION The potential exists to modify the trophic nature of Moe Pond by managing the fish community. Currently, bass are overabundant and competition for food has resulted in slow growth and small maximum size (the largest fish collected were about 250 mm at age 4-5). Reducing their abundance would potentially reduce planktivory, as reduced competition would shift the size distribution toward larger fish. That would enhance algal grazing, which seems to have been highly variable in past years (Finger 2009). Another strategy would be to add a forage species which could more efficiently utilize the planktonic resources and which would provide a forage base for the bass. One candidate species that could be introduced is Perca flavescens (yellow perch). They do not need to swim upstream to spawn or rely heavily on fast moving inlets and outlets, and they will move into deeper water as seasons change and spawning begins in the spring (Simon and Wallus 2006). Adding low numbers of larger fish, like walleye (Sander vitreus), might reduce bass abundance and allow for better growth of the survivors throughout the year. Other fish, like bluegill, have a laterally compressed body shape which would allow them to quickly reach sizes where only large bass can consume them, allowing them to continue to recruit. Yellow perch are well suited for Moe Pond because they adjust well to shallow waters (Simon and Wallus 2006). Yellow perch also have feeding habits that Moe Pond could support. When they are young of the year (YOY), they feed primarily on zooplankton, which is abundant in Moe Pond based on the stomach samples in largemouth bass shown in Table 4 and the plankton samples taken throughout the summer (Tables 5-10). Unlike bluegill, yellow perch will outgrow feeding on zooplankton and “they eventually consume an assortment of prey including worms, crustaceans, mollusks, and fishes,” (Simon and Wallus 2006), as well as odonate nymphs and ephemeropterans. Throughout the lifespan of the yellow perch, Moe Pond could potentially provide any adequate food and aquatic plant habitat that they may need to survive and provide high fecundity rates. Yellow perch are a reasonable fish species to introduce to Moe Pond based on the nutrients available to them as well as the limnological characteristics of the pond and the plant species that are present to provide adequate habitats and spawning areas throughout their lifetimes.

REFERENCES Albright, M.F., W.N. Harman, W.T Tibbits, M.S. Gray, D.M. Warner, and R.J. Hamway. 2004. Biomanipulation: A classic example in a shallow eutrophic pond. Lake and Reserve Management. 20(04):263-269. Anonymous. [BFS] Biological Field Station at Cooperstown: A Facility of the SUNY College at Oneonta. 2007 Jan 30. Discover Moe Pond! . Accessed 25 Jun 2012. APHA, AWWA, WPCF. 1989. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 17th ed. American Public Health Association. Washington, DC.

- 134 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Borman, S., R. Korth, and J. Temte. 1997. Through the looking glass…: A field guide to aquatic plants. Wisconsin Lakes Partnership. Stevens Point, WI. Dresser, K. 2006. Continued monitoring of the Moe Pond ecosystem following the introduction of smallmouth and largemouth bass (Micropetrus dolomieu and M. salmoides, respectively). 38th Annual Report (2005). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta. EPA. 1983. Methods for the analysis of water and wastes. Environmental Monitoring and Support Lab. Office of Research and Development. Cincinnati, OH. Ebina, J., T. Tsutsui and T. chirai. 1983. Simultaneous determination of total nitrogen and total phosphorous in water using persoxodisulfate oxidation. Water Res. 17(12): 1721-1726. Finger, Kristen M. 2009. Continued monitoring of the Moe Pond ecosystem following the introduction of smallmouth and largemouth bass (Micropetrus dolomieu and M. salmoides, respectively). 41st Annual Report (2008). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta. Hamway, R. J. 2003. Continued monitoring of Moe Pond following the unauthorized stocking of smallmouth and largemouth bass. In 35th Annual Report (2002). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta. Hamway, R. J. 2004. Continued monitoring of Moe Pond following the unauthorized stocking of smallmouth and largemouth bass. In 36th Annual Report (2003). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta. Lopata, K. 2005. Fifth annual report on the status of Moe Pond following the stocking of Micropetrus dolomieu and M. salmoides. In 37th Annual Report (2004). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta. Liao, N. and S. Marten. 2001. Determination of total phosphorus by flow injection analysis colorimetry (acid persulfate digestion method). QuikChem®Method 10-115-01-1-F. Lachat Instruments. Loveland, Colorado. McCoy, M.C. III, C.P. Madenjian, J.V. Adams and W.N. Harman. 2001. The fish community of a small impoundment in upstate New York. J. of Freshwater Ecology. 16(3):389-394. Peckarsky, B.L., P.R. Fraissinet, M.A. Penton, and D.J. Conklin, Jr. 1990. Freshwater macroinvertebrates of northeastern north america.Cornell University Press. Ithaca, New York. Pritzlaff, D. 2003. Determination of nitrate/nitrite in surface and wastewaters by flow injection analysis. QuikChem®Method. 10-107-04-1-C. Lachat Instruments. Loveland, Colorado. Reinicke, E. and G. Walters. 2007. continued monitoring of fish community and abiotic factors influencing Moe Pond, summer 2006. In 39th Annual Report (2006). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 135 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Simon, T. P. and R. Wallus. 2006. Reproductive biology and early life history of fishes in the Ohio River drainage. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Volume 4: 550-69. Sohacki, L. P.1972. Limnological studies on Moe Pond. 5th Annual Report (1972). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta. Thorp, James H. and Alan P., Covich. 1991. Ecology and classification of North American freshwater invertebrates: Second Edition. Academic Press. San Diego, California. Tibbits, Wesley T. 2001. Consequences and management strategies concerning the unauthorized stocking of smallmouth and largemouth bass in Moe Pond. In 33rd Annual Report (2000). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta. Underwood , E.S. 2008. Continued monitoring of the ecosystem dynamics of Moe Pond following the introduction of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) and smallmouth bass (M. dolomieu). In 40th Annual Report (2007). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta. Wojnar, 2002. The continued evaluation of Moe Pond following the unauthorized stocking of smallmouth and largemouth bass. In 34th Annual Report (2001). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta Wilson, B.J., D.M. Warner and M.Gray. 1999. An evaluation of Moe Pond following the unauthorized stocking of smallmouth and largemouth bass. In 32nd Annual Report (1998). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 136 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Bryophyte reproduction and dispersal in a mixed hardwood forest1

Sean Robinson2, Alexander Lawrence3, Rebekah Obenauer4

INTRODUCTION Quantitative descriptions of dispersal are essential to understanding the spatial and genetic structure of plant populations (Howe and Smallwood 1982; Levin et al. 2003; Ridley 1930). In particular, dispersal plays a crucial role in the survival of populations in systems, which are fragmented, either naturally or due to anthropogenic impacts. In recent years, dispersal ecology has become an active area of research as a result of current concerns about climate change, invasive species, and habitat fragmentation (Cousens et al. 2008). In plants, dispersal precedes colonization of new habitat patches; allows an escape from competition, either with the parent plant and/or with individuals of other species; and permits gene flow between established populations (Howe and Smallwood 1982; van der Pijl 1982). Given the widely differing reproductive strategies, diaspore types, and patchy distribution of bryophytes, these organisms offer a good model to address questions about plant dispersal.

Bryophyte dispersal occurs through the dissemination of sperm, spores, specialized asexual propagules, or gametophytic fragments. Spores are considered the primary agents of long-distance dispersal in bryophytes given their small size (8–200 μm); large production numbers (14–90 million/capsule); release above the boundary layer; and ability, in at least some species, to survive cold, drought, and UV-radiation (Longton 1997; van Zanten 1976, 1978; van Zanten and Pócs 1981). In contrast, sperm, specialized asexual propagules and gametophytic fragments are dispersed over much shorter distances (1.2 cm–2 m) (Andersson 2002; Brodie 1951; Cameron and Wyatt 1990; Kimmerer 1991). The delicate nature of sperm and their need for a water film is assumed to limit their mobility. In contrast, it is mass and lack of specialized release mechanisms that limit the movement of asexual propagules and fragments (Laaka-Lindberg et al. 2003). These asexual propagule types are considered important in local population maintenance, but they have received little attention with respect to their possible role in dispersal over longer distances (> 2 m). Recent work, however, has provided evidence to suggest that fragments and specialized asexual propagules may be equally important to dispersal beyond the immediate vicinity of a bryophyte patch (Heinken et al. 2001; Parsons et al. 2007; Pohjam et al. 2006; Robinson 2012; Rudolphi 2009).

Bryophytes are an integral component of forest ecosystems, forming extensive mats on logs, stumps, and rocks. They are important for soil formation, provide much needed moisture and shelter for invertebrates and small vertebrates, and serve as a seedbed for understory vegetation (Bates and Farmer 1992; Nilsson and Wardle 2005; Turetsky 2003). The effect of different dispersal strategies, however, on the distribution, diversity, abundance, and colonization rate of different species in northern forests has not been well studied. In order to investigate the dispersal to, and colonization of logs in

1 Funding provided by the Peterson Family Trust. 2 Assistant Professor of Biology, Biology Department, SUNY-Oneonta. 3 Biological Field Station Intern, summer 2012. Environmental Science Major, SUNY-Oneonta. 4 Biological Field Station Intern, summer 2012. Environmental Science Major, SUNY-Oneonta.

- 137 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

northern hardwood/coniferous forests, a long-term study is being established at three properties maintained by the SUNY-Oneonta Biological Field Station (BFS). The objective of this study was to select appropriate sites and collect baseline data for the long-term study. Additionally, the bryophyte diversity data collected serve as the first of their kind for the properties on which sites were established.

METHODS

This study took place at the following SUNY-Oneonta properties: Greenwoods Conservancy, Thayer Farm, and Rum Hill. Three sites at each of these three locations (nine sites total) were selected based on an initial survey of bryophyte diversity and forest composition. This provided three replicates each at three sites with similar community structure. The GPS coordinates for each site were recorded using a Garmin GPSmap 76CSx GPS unit. After determining the location of all nine sites, two were chosen to be sampled for this initial study, one site at Thayer Farm and one site at Rum Hill.

At both locations, circular belt transects were established around a central point, marked with a stake, in ½-m increments to a total distance of 10 meters from the central point. To accomplish this, a 30-m length tape measure was extended from the stake, and flags or dowels were used to mark the inner and outer borders of each transect (Figure 1). Each ½-m transect was surveyed for the presence of moss and liverwort patches. When a patch was located, a sample was collected for later identification, and the following information was recorded: substrate type, transect number, compass bearing from central point, presence/absence of sporophytes, site name, date, and time. After identifying each sample collected, data associated with that specimen were organized by transect number, bearing, and site using Microsoft excel. Presence/absence of sporophytes was recorded for each specimen in order to estimate the amount of spore production for each species at each site. Nomenclature for hepatics followed Schuster (1953), and for mosses, Crum and Anderson (1981).

- 138 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 1. Diagram showing first five ½-meter belt-transects of a 10-m circular plot sampled at both sites. An “X” represents the central point of the plot.

RESULTS

Combining material collected at both sites, a total of 572 bryophyte patches, representing 50 species (8 liverworts and 42 mosses) were found, sampled, and identified. Overall bryophyte abundance was higher at the Thayer farm site with 390 collections compared to the 182 collections made at Rum Hill. Species richness, however, was greater at Rum Hill. A total of 26 and 41 species were found at the Thayer farm and Rum hill sites, respectively (Figures 2 and 3). Eleven of the 26 species found at Thayer farm and 22 of the 41 species found at Rum Hill were unique to those sites. Of the ten most abundant species encountered at each site, four were the same. These included Hypnum imponens, Hypnum pallescens, Lophocolea heterophylla, and Dicranum montanum (Figures 2 and 3).

Bryophytes were found growing on seven and eleven substrate types at Rum Hill and Thayer farm, respectively (Figures 4 and 5). Logs at varying levels of decay were the dominant substrate type at Rum Hill, while DOM (Dead Organic Matter) was the dominant type at Thayer farm. Dead organic matter consisted of highly degraded organic material that could not be identified as any specific substrate type (i.e. branch, log, stump, etc.).

Overall sporophyte production was higher at Rum Hill (44% of material collected) compared to Thayer Farm (35% of material collected). Combining data from both sites, the most abundant species encountered also had the greatest sporophyte production (Figure 6). Consequently, a Pearson’s correlation found that sporophyte production was significantly correlated with species abundances (r = 0.93, p = 0.0000). Seven of the most abundant species, however, showed low to no sporophyte production. These included Leucobryum glaucum, Dicranum montanum, Dicranella heteromalla, Leskea gracilescens, Leskeela nervosa, Dicranum viride, and Platygerium repens.

- 139 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

30 25 20 15 10 5 Number Number of Collections

0 Ulota crispa Thelia hirtella Thelia Dicranum virideDicranum Orthotrichumsp. Dicranum fulvumDicranum Leskeella nervosa Leskeella Hypnum imponens Hypnum Hypnum pallescensHypnum Platygerium repens Platygerium Radula complanata Orthotrichumaffine Leskea gracilescens Leskea Dicranum flagellareDicranum Atrichum undulatum Hypnum curvifoliumHypnum Geocalyx graveolens Geocalyx Dicranum montanum Dicranum Brotherella recurvens Brotherella Thuidium delicatulum Frullania eboracensis Brachytheciumlaetum Anomodon attentuatusAnomodon Orthotrichumpumilum Hypnum cupressiforme Hypnum Orthotrichumohioense Dicranella heteromalla Orthotrichum stellatum Orthotrichum Schistidium apocarpum Porella platyphylloidea Orthotrichumsordidum Ptilidium pulcherrimum Ptilidium Brachythecium reflexum Brachythecium Lophocolea heterophylla Brachytheciumpopuleum Pterigynandrumfiliforme Brachytheciumoxycladon Brachytheciumrutabulum Callicladium haldanianum Brachythecium salebrosum Brachythecium Plagiotheciumdenticulatum Species

Figure 2. Total number of collections made (black bars), and number of collections with sporophytes present (gray bars) for each species encountered at the Rum Hill site.

- 140 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Number Number of Collections 0

Ulota crispa Lepidozia reptans Hypnum imponens Hypnum Mnium spinulosum Nowellia curvifolia Nowellia Tetraphis pellucida Hypnum pallescensHypnum Dicranum flagellareDicranum Dicranum polysetumDicranum Geocalyx graveolens Geocalyx Dicranum montanum Dicranum Dicranum scopariumDicranum Leucobryum glaucum Anomodon attenuatusAnomodon Brotherella recurvens Brotherella Plagiotheciumlaetum Thuidium delicatulum Dicranella heteromalla Ptilidium pulcherrimum Ptilidium Lophocolea heterophylla Brachytheciumvelutinum Plagiotheciumcavifolium Brachytheciumrutabulum Callicladium haldanianum Plagiotheciumdenticulatum Species

Figure 3. Total number of collections made (black bars), and number of collections with sporophytes present (gray bars) for each species encountered at the Thayer Farm site.

- 141 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

80

70

60

50

40

30

Number of Colletions Number 20

10

0 Branch Log Rock Root Soil Tree Base Tree Trunk Substrate Type

Figure 4. Total number of collections found on each substrate type encountered at the Rum Hill Site.

- 142 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

160

140

120

100

80

60

Number Number of Collections 40

20

0 Bark Branch DOM Feces Log Rock Root Soil Stump Tree Tree Base Trunk Substrate Type Figure 5. Total number of collections found on each substrate type encountered at the Thayer Farm site.

- 143 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

40

35

30

25 y = 0.3842x - 0.0423 R² = 0.8668 20

15

10 Collections with Sporophytes) with Collections

Sporophyte Production (Number of (Number Production Sporophyte 5

0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Species Abundances (Number of Collections)

Figure 6. The relationship between species abundances and sporophyte production in a linear regression based on all samples collected from the Thayer Farm and Rum Hill sites.

- 144 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

DISCUSSION

The results presented in this paper are meant to serve as baseline data for a long-term study that will be used to investigate bryophyte dispersal to, and subsequent spread on logs in northern hardwood/coniferous forests. A total of nine sites among three locations have been chosen for this study with the plan to establish two to three a year over the next three to four years. The two sites discussed in this paper are the first two, of the expected nine, to be established.

In terms of species richness and abundance, it is difficult to make comparisons given the uniqueness of this study and the current lack of replicate plots at each location. It is interesting to note, however, that a greater number of species were encountered at Rum Hill, even though the number of samples collected was less than half of that from Thayer farm. Additionally, Thayer farm had a greater number of substrate types. This result was most likely due to the greater diversity of tree species found at the Rum Hill site (data not shown). Gustafsson and Eriksson (1995) found a strong correlation between bark chemistry and epiphytic diversity (bryophytes and lichens), as well as soil chemistry. While there was a greater number of substrate types at Thayer Farm, given the homogeneity of the site, with respect to the vascular vegetation (hemlock forest), important variables such as pH and nutrient levels were likely very similar throughout the plot. A greater diversity in soil and bark chemistry at the Rum Hill site, consequently, could explain the greater species diversity. These variables need to be measured, however, before such conclusions can be made.

At both sites sampled, species abundance was strongly correlated with sporophyte production. This is an indication of greater dispersal ability and colonization rate of spore producing species compared to those that rely more on asexual means of reproduction and dispersal. This result is consistent with past work showing evidence of the local and long- distance dispersal ability of spores (During 1990; Longton 1997; van Zanten 1976, 1978; van Zanten and Pócs 1981). Seven of the most abundance species, however, showed little to no sporophyte production. Five of these seven species produce some sort of specialized asexual propagule. Such propagules were originally not thought to be important to dispersal beyond the immediate vicinity of a bryophyte patch. Recent work, however, has provided evidence to the contrary (Parsons et al. 2007; Pohjam et al. 2006; Rudolphi 2009). The results of this study appear to support these recent findings, showing that species relying more on asexual propagules are equally capable of dispersal, at least within a 314 m2 area, as those that produce high numbers of spores.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to thank the Biological Field Station and its staff for providing all the necessary resources to complete this project. Field work conducted at Thayer Farm by Alexander Lawrence and Rebekah Obenauer was done during there time as Biological Field Station Interns during the summer of 2012. Thanks to Mathew Dami, Elli Edelstein, and Elizabeth Castle (SUNY-Oneonta graduate students) for their assistance with the identification of collected material.

- 145 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

REFERENCES Andersson, K. 2002. Dispersal of spermatozoids from splash-cups of the moss Plagiomnium affine. Lindbergia 27: 90–96.

Bates, J. W. and A. M. Farmer. 1992. Bryophytes and Lichens in a Changing Environment. Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Brodie, H. J. 1951. The splash-cup dispersal mechanism in plants. Canadian Journal of Botany 29: 224–234.

Cameron, R. G. and R. Wyatt. 1990. Spatial patterns and sex ratios in dioecious and monoecious mosses of the genus Splachnum. Bryologist 93: 161–166.

Cousens, R., C. Dytham and R. Law. 2008. Dispersal in plants: a population perspective. Oxford University Press, New York.

Crum, H. and L. E. Anderson. 1981. Mosses of Eastern North America. 2 vols. Columbia University Press, New York.

Gustafsson, L. and I. Eriksson. 1995. Factors of importance for epiphytic vegetation of aspen Populus termula with special emphasis on bark chemistry and soil chemistry. Journal of Applied Ecology 32: 412–424.

Heinken, T., R. Lees, D. Raudnitschka and S. Runge. 2001. Epizoochorous dispersal of bryophyte stem fragments by roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) and wild boar (Sus scrofa). Journal of Bryology 23: 293–300.

Howe, H. F. and J. Smallwood. 1982. Ecology of Seed Dispersal. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 13: 201–228.

Kimmerer, R. W. 1991. Reproductive ecology of Tetraphis pellucida II differential success of sexual and asexual propagules. The Bryologist, 94(3), 284-288.

Laaka-Lindberg, S., H. Korpelainen and M. Pohjamo. 2003. Dispersal of asexual propagules in bryophytes. Journal of the Hattori Botanical Laboratory 93: 319–330.

Levin, S. A., H. C. Muller-Landau, R. Nathan, and J. Chave. 2003. The ecology and evolution of seed dispersal: A theoretical perspective. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 34: 575–604.

Longton, R. E. 1997. Reproductive biology and life-history strategies. Advances in Bryology 6: 65–102.

Nilsson, M-C. and D. A. Wardle. 2005. Understory vegetation as a forest ecosystem driver: Evidence from the northern Swedish boreal forest. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 3: 421–428.

- 146 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Parsons, J. G., A. Cairns, C. N. Johnsson, S. K. A. Robson, L. A. Shilton and D. A. Westcott. 2007. Bryophyte dispersal by flying foxes: a novel discovery. Oecologia 152: 112–114.

Pohjam, M., S. Laaka-Lindberg, O. Ovaskainen and H. Korpelainen. 2006. Dispersal potential of spores and asexual propagules in the epixylic hepatic Anastrophyllum hellerianum. Evolutionary Ecology 20: 415–430.

Ridley, H. N. 1930. The Dispersal of Plants Throughout the World. L. Reeve and Co., Ltd. Ashford, Kent.

Robinson, S. C. 2012. Experimental and molecular studies of bryophyte dispersal on alpine summits. [PhD] dissertation, University at Albany, Albany: ProQuest/UMI, 2012. (sunyalb10724).

Rudolphi, J. 2009. Ant-mediated dispersal of asexual moss propagules. Bryologist 112: 73–79.

Schuster, R. M. 1953. Boreal Hepaticae: A manual of the liverworts of Minnesota and adjacent regions. American Midland Naturalist 49: 257–684.

Turetsky, M. R. 2003. The role of bryophytes in carbon and nitrogen cycling. The Bryologist 106: 395–409.

van der Pijl, L. 1982. Principles of Dispersal in Higher Plants, 3rd ed. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany. van Zanten, B. O. 1976. Preliminary report on germination experiments designed to estimate the survival chances of moss spores during aerial trans-oceanic long-range dispersal in the southern hemisphere, with particular reference to New Zealand. Journal of the Hattori Botanical Laboratory. 41: 133–140. van Zanten, B. O. 1978. Experimental studies on trans-oceanic long-range dispersal of moss spores in the southern hemisphere. Journal of the Hattori Botanical Laboratory 44: 455– 482. van Zanten, B. O. and T. Pocs. 1981. Distribution and dispersal of bryophytes. Advances in Bryology 1: 479–562.

- 147 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Afton Lake monitoring and management issues, summer 20121

W.N. Harman, M.F. Albright and H.A. Waterfield

SAMPLING ACTIVITIES Site visits were made to Afton Lake on 21 June, 18 July, and 26 September 2012. Water samples were collected over the deepest part of the lake from the surface to 16 meters in depth at 4 m intervals. These were analyzed for nutrients, major ions, algae groups and abundance. Anecdotal review indicates minimal algal concentrations in open water over the course of the summer. Measurements were recorded on-site for temperature, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, pH, chlorophylla (a proxy for algal abundance) and Secchi disk transparency (water clarity). Methods are the same as indicated in the 2011 final report.

FINDINGS While the lake’s physical and chemical characteristics were similar between the sampling dates in 2011 and 2012, the lake’s water quality seemed notably better during the summer of 2012 than it had over 2011 (Harman et al. 2012). Secchi transparency averaged about 4 m, as opposed to 0.5 m in 2011. The primary difference between the years was the predominance of blue green algae (= cyanobacteria) during the former year. No planktonic blooms were noted during our site visits, nor were any widespread blooms noted by lake association members; though there were colonies of filamentous benthic (bottom) green algae along the shoreline in selected localities that some lake users considered a nuisance. These algae, which were tentatively identified as Spirogyra on site, turned out to be Rhizoclonium sp., another green algae which is typically of little concern. In general, planktonic algal populations were very low with no single species dominating the community. There were a very few colonies of Anabaena spiroides (a cyanobacterium), a species that has been problematic elsewhere on occasion. We observed a large diversity of rotifers and small water fleas (cladocerans), which are organisms that typically graze on algal cells. Overall, the situation appeared sustainable. Water quality profiles (surface to 18m in depth) generated data similar to previously documented information. Short-term management: The marked differences in algal conditions noted between summer 2011 and 2012 indicate a year to year variability that makes it difficult to anticipate conditions that warrant aggressive targeted management actions. Continued monitoring and collection of water samples to anticipate potential cyanobacteria blooms is an option to consider. If persistence of filamentous algae continues to be a concern, physical means of removal, such as raking out of the water, should mitigate the concern. If that does not help, spot applications of a contact herbicide directly on colonies may be warranted. Having permits enabling this action

1 This report was prepared for the Afton lake Association as part of a contractual agreement.

- 148 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

ahead of time is suggested so that timely applications, should they be deemed appropriate, could be made. However, don’t consider that a recommendation unless conditions worsen.

ANALYTICAL METHODS

Minimum Detection Parameter Level Method Reference

Persulfate digestion followed Total Liao and Marten 4 µg/L by single reagent ascorbic Phosphorus 2001 acid

Cadmium reduction method Ebina et al. Total Nitrogen 0.04 mg/L following peroxodisulfate 1983 digestion

Nitrate+nitrite-N 0.02 mg/L cadmium reduction method Pritzlaff 2003

Ammonia-N 0.02 mg/L Phenolate method Liao 2001

Alkalinity Titration to pH = 4.6 APHA 1989

Calcium EDTA titrimetric method APHA 1989

Chloride Mercuric nitrate titration APHA 1989

RESULTS Nutrient profiles from Afton Lake are summarized in Table 1. Tables 2- 4 summarize profiles of water quality data collected over the course of 2012. These analyses document conditions that in 2012 were similar to those of 2011 (Harman et al. 2012). Temperature and dissolved oxygen profiles indicate that Afton Lake experiences strong thermal stratification during the summer months, meaning that there is a warm surface layer floating on top of the cold deep water. This has major implications for the amount of dissolved oxygen in the water column – and in turn, for habitat available to fish and other aquatic organisms, and very importantly to your concerns, internal nutrient cycling. The entire water column below 7m (24 feet) was anoxic (essentially devoid of free oxygen), meaning that these depths do not provide habitat for fish or invertebrates (fish food organisms). These conditions also lead to internal phosphorus loading (the release of phosphorus from the bottom sediments). Late season phosphorus concentrations were approaching 600 µg/l (Table 1). Despite the consistent water quality conditions, the algae community composition and the amount growing (“standing crop”) differed markedly between the two years. Secchi disk

- 149 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

transparency averaged over 4 m (about 13 feet) over 2012, while it was 0.5 m on the two dates measured in 2011. The conditions perceived by the lakeside community were much more favorable in 2012 (Johnson, 2012). Chlorophylla concentration, a measure of algal pigments used to estimate algal abundance, were consistently less than 10 µg/l in the warmer, surface waters. (Chlorophylla did accumulate in mid-depth levels over the course of both summers, likely following the senescence and death of algae cells, though at depths not influencing the recreational use of the lake). In July 2011, the algal community was dominated by Anabaena and Oscillatoria, both cyanobacteria. By October 2011, Aphanizomenon, another cyanobacterium, dominated. In general, cyanobacteria are not desirable components of a lake’s ecosystem. They are a poor food source for zooplankton (the microscopic animals fed upon by forage fish), they contribute to unsightly scums, produce noxious odors, and under certain conditions some produce toxins that can jeopardize human health and have killed livestock and pets. Many cyanobacteria are able to fix atmospheric nitrogen and as such they are at a competitive advantage in lakes having low concentrations of dissolved nitrate (as is the case in Afton Lake). Over 2012, cyanobacteria were observed, but never at nuisance levels. It is not fully understood why a lake like Afton experiences nuisance blooms one year (i.e., 2011) and not the next. If patchy colonies of filamentous green algae are a perceived problem, physical removal with rakes may effectively control this issue. If this is not effective, spot treatments of a contact herbicide should yield satisfactory results. If cyanophyte blooms in the open water persist in the future, Afton Lake seems an ideal candidate for treatment with aluminum sulfate (alum). Alum removes free phosphorus from the water column and locks it in the sediments, reducing internal loading of the nutrient. Because of anticipated low watershed inputs of phosphorus, an alum treatment would likely improve conditions for a number of years.

Table 1. Afton Lake nutrient concentrations, summer 2012.

ammonia nitrate+nitrite total nitrogen total phosphorus date depth (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (µg/L) 6/21/2012 0M 0.02 bd 0.42 39 6/21/2012 4M 0.03 bd 0.51 32 6/21/2012 8M 0.05 0.34 0.78 22 6/21/2012 12M 0.36 0.20 1.03 52 6/21/2012 16M 0.92 bd 1.37 170 7/18/2012 0M bd bd 0.42 12 7/18/2012 4M bd bd 0.47 18 7/18/2012 8M 0.06 bd 0.55 41 7/18/2012 12M 0.48 0.09 0.96 70 7/18/2012 16M 0.89 bd 1.60 247 9/26/2012 0M bd 0.05 0.27 17 9/26/2012 4M bd bd 0.35 21 9/26/2012 8M 0.05 bd 0.53 62 9/26/2012 12M 0.65 bd 0.68 87 9/26/2012 16M 1.61 bd 1.33 591

- 150 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station Table 2. Water quality data collected on Afton Lake, 21 June 2012. Afton 6/21/2012 Secchi Disk 4.0 Meters Depth Temp Sp. Cond. pH Dis. Oxy. Dis. Oxy. Chl.a M oC ms/cm % sat. mg/l µg/l 0 26.46 0.145 8.42 114.0 9.18 3.9 1 24.21 0.144 8.62 127.7 10.21 4.9 2 23.08 0.143 8.52 116.9 9.99 7.6 3 20.74 0.142 8.28 118.0 10.59 9.3 4 16.25 0.141 7.65 107.8 10.49 15.4 5 14.77 0.140 7.24 65.9 7.23 21.2 6 8.18 0.140 6.92 34.7 4.06 13.1 7 6.27 0.140 6.76 6.3 0.51 7.7 8 5.53 0.143 6.71 1.4 0.17 3.9 9 5.36 0.143 6.70 1.1 0.14 3.6 10 5.21 0.143 6.82 1.1 0.13 3.6 11 5.06 0.144 6.82 0.7 0.08 3.3 12 4.96 0.144 6.81 0.5 0.06 3.5 13 4.89 0.145 6.81 1.0 0.11 4.5 14 4.83 0.146 6.80 0.3 0.04 9.9

Table 3. Water quality data collected on Afton Lake, 18 July 2012. SD = Secchi Disk Transparency.

Afton 7/18/2012 Secchi Disk 4.5 Meters Depth Temp Sp. Cond. pH Dis. Oxy. Dis. Oxy. Chl.a M oC ms/cm % sat. mg/l µg/l 0 27.56 0.155 8.87 108.5 8.56 1.4 1 27.24 0.155 8.89 108.3 8.59 1.7 2 27.07 0.155 8.90 110.5 8.80 1.6 3 23.93 0.152 8.88 129.8 10.63 5.9 4 19.79 0.148 7.40 110.2 10.09 8.6 5 14.1 0.147 6.97 86.2 8.79 11.1 6 9.94 0.146 6.68 41.1 4.63 12.3 7 6.78 0.147 6.56 0.9 1.10 12.0 8 5.88 0.15 6.56 0.4 0.05 7.6 9 5.56 0.151 6.56 0.4 0.05 6.7 10 5.38 0.152 6.56 0.4 0.06 8.3 11 5.18 0.152 6.58 0.9 0.12 10.4 12 5.01 0.153 6.58 0.6 0.08 22.5 13 4.91 0.155 6.56 0.6 0.08 55.4 14 4.85 0.157 6.54 0.7 0.10 15.5 15 4.82 0.16 6.52 0.9 0.11 17.8 16 4.80 0.161 6.50 1.0 0.13 17.6 17 4.79 0.163 6.47 1.7 0.21 18.9 18 4.78 0.168 6.48 1.6 0.20 22.5

- 151 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 3. Water quality data collected on Afton Lake, 18 July 2012.

Afton 9/26/2012 Secchi Disk 3.7 Meters Depth Temp Sp. Cond. pH Dis. Oxy. Dis. Oxy. Chl.a M oC ms/cm % sat. mg/l µg/l 0 18.63 0.149 7.71 93.4 8.72 4.1 1 18.63 0.149 7.73 93.3 8.72 2.8 2 18.62 0.150 7.37 93.2 8.71 3.1 3 18.62 0.150 7.37 93.5 8.73 3.5 4 18.61 0.150 7.37 92.8 8.68 3.8 5 18.41 0.150 7.34 86.2 8.07 6.5 6 16.19 0.148 7.21 25.8 2.45 7.5 7 11.57 0.147 6.81 5.0 0.47 23.1 8 8.44 0.154 6.45 2.2 0.26 71.2 9 6.72 0.153 6.36 1.3 0.15 184.9 10 5.86 0.155 6.17 2.7 0.32 89.1 11 5.40 0.156 6.26 1.1 0.13 42.6 12 5.19 0.158 6.29 0.6 0.08 29.5 13 5.02 0.161 6.30 0.5 0.06 23.6 14 4.94 0.164 6.31 0.4 0.06 19.9 15 4.91 0.166 6.32 0.5 0.07 19.3 16 4.88 0.176 6.32 0.3 0.04 19.9 17 4.86 0.179 6.32 0.2 0.03 22.2 18 4.86 0.180 6.32 0.2 0.02 22.5 19 4.86 0.180 6.33 0.2 0.02 1.4

REFERENCES

APHA, AWWA, WPCF. 1989. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 17th ed. American Public Health Association. Washington, DC.

Ebina, J., T. Tsutsi, and T. Shirai. 1983. Simultaneous determination of total nitrogen and total phosphorus in water using peroxodisulfate oxidation. Water Res. 17(12):1721-1726.

Harman, W.N., M.F. Albright and H.A. Waterfield. 2012. Afton Lake water quality, nutrients and algae. In 44th Ann. Rept (2011). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Johnson. M. 2012. Personal communication. Afton lake Association.

Liao, N. 2001. Determination of ammonia by flow injection analysis. QuikChem ® Method 10- 107-06-1-J. Lachat Instruments, Loveland, CO.

Pritzlaff, D. 2003. Determination of nitrate/nitrite in surface and wastewaters by flow injection analysis. QuikChem ® Method 10-107-04-1-C. Lachat Instruments, Loveland, CO.

- 152 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Surface water quality in Otsego County, NY, prior to potential natural gas exploration

Sarah Crosier1

Abstract –Baseline water quality data was established for Otsego County, NY prior to potential natural gas exploration. Hydraulic fracturing may contaminate surface water with chemicals, salts and sediments. Averages for pH, total dissolved solids, and conductivity were calculated for 50 Otsego County streams from data collected using a YSI® multi-parameter probe from August 2010 – April 2012. Limestone bedrock sub-watersheds had significantly higher conductivity, TDS and pH than shale bedrock sub-watersheds. Winter and summer peaks and fall and spring lows occurred in conductivity and TDS. Road salt use, precipitation and evaporation likely caused seasonal variation. Sub-watershed size had no significant effect on parameters. These data will serve as a control for future water quality testing if hydraulic fracturing occurs in Otsego County, NY.

INTRODUCTION

This study was conducted to identify baseline water quality conditions at base flow for streams in Otsego County. Water quality varies between streams due to different physical, chemical, and microbiological characteristics (Rajeshwari and Saraswathi 2009). These factors are dependent upon topography, geology, vegetative cover (Dosskey et al. 2010), land use in a watershed (Ou and Wang 2011) and watershed size (Landers et al. 2007).

Stream chemistry varies naturally throughout the seasons due to changes in precipitation, evaporation, nutrient input, and biotic activity within the streams. Anthropogenic pollutants such as road salt (Jackson and Jobbágy 2005, Kaushal et al. 2005), urban storm water runoff and agricultural pesticides, nutrients, and sediments (Madden et al. 2007) also affect stream quality variably. Stream quality may differ between years, particularly due to changes in flow conditions due to higher or lower-than-average rainfall.

The goal was to ascertain the range of water quality parameters common in pre-drilling Otsego County so that we may detect changes in water quality should natural gas exploration occur. Hydrofracturing for natural gas may cause water degradation due to chemical, salt, or sediment contamination (Balyszak 2011). Conductivity, pH, and total dissolved solids (TDS) are basic water quality parameters used to identify contamination of water due to natural gas drilling (EPA 2011). We monitored these water quality variables monthly in 50 streams in Otsego County. If pollution occurs from potential natural gas activities, we expect conductivity and TDS to rise (due to more ions present) and for pH to decrease due to increased acidity from chemicals used for hydrofracturing. Various combinations of chemicals are used to facilitate the fracturing process. For example, pH may increase because acid, such as hydrochloric acid, is used to dissolve minerals and initiate cracks in rock from which gas may be extracted (EPA 2011).

1 Otsego County SWCD intern. Environmental Sciences, State University of New York College at Oneonta, Oneonta, New York 13820.

- 153 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

By monitoring at base flow conditions, we identified the natural variation of stream water quality in Otsego County. We were able to observe when, how often, and how much water quality parameters vary throughout the year. Knowing these ranges can allow us to detect surface water quality issues in the future. Our focus was to establish baseline conditions prior to potential natural gas exploration, but the information gained can allow us to document other pollutions that may occur within the County.

FIELD SITE DESCRIPTION

We conducted this study in Central New York in Otsego County, which is located west of Albany, southeast of Utica, and northeast of Binghamton. Otsego County is part of the Upper Susquehanna River Watershed. Following protocols established by the Susquehanna River Basin Commission used in their Remote Monitoring Network, we selected 50 sites on low-order streams (Table 1) throughout Otsego County, NY. We chose low order streams that drain 170 square kilometers or less to account for the sensitivity of our field instruments. Figure 1 is a map showing monitoring site locations. Sites are located at the terminus of each sub-watershed and are easily accessible from or next to bridges. A sub-watershed in this paper refers to the area of land draining to a monitoring site. The watersheds in which the monitoring sites are located are defined by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC) 12-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) and are listed in Table 1.

METHODS

Equipment A YSI Professional Plus® multi-parameter meter was used to collect pH, conductivity, temperature, and TDS data as well as time and date information. Monitoring SUNY Oneonta students and Otsego County Soil and Water District employees conducted water monitoring from August 13, 2010 - April 21, 2012. We visited each of the 50 sites monthly. Some sites were not monitored as frequently due to inaccessibility from ice formation, hazardous access, or time constraints.

Analysis Sub-watershed area- ArcGIS® was used to display average conductivity and pH values for data collected from August 2010-August 2011 for each of the sub-watersheds. Relationships between the means of TDS, pH, conductivity and sub-watershed area were tested using Spearman’s Rank Correlation using SYSTAT®.

Geology- Sites were divided into two categories: limestone, and shale (Figure 1), based on the geology of the area according to the Otsego County Soil Survey (Figure 2). Some sites were not included because their respective sub-watersheds were both shale and limestone based. A Mann-Whitney Test was run using Minitab® on data from 45 sub-watersheds to determine if bedrock was significantly correlated with conductivity.

- 154 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Stream monitoring location

Primarily Limestone with some shale

Shale, siltstone, and sandstone

Figure 1. Sites sampled for water quality in Otsego County, NY from 13Aug10 – 21Apr12 with bedrock geology. See Table 1 for a list of stream names and the corresponding identification numbers.

- 155 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 1. Sites monitored for water quality in Otsego County, NY from 13Aug10 – 21Apr12. Sites listed by sub-watershed name. HUC codes are used by the NYSDEC, NRCS, and USGS for delineating watershed boundaries. The 12 digit code used here is the smallest unit of watershed depicted. Site ID refers to site number in Figure 1. Bridge location is where the site was accessed from. Area (km2) is the area of the sub-watershed.

Sub-Watershed Site ID HUC Town Coordinates Bridge Area (km2) Geologya Area sq mi NW Aldrich Brook 17 020501010802 Morris 42.55701 75.22853 State Hwy 51, south Cty Hwy 49 18.1 S 7.0 Brier Creek 23 020501011102 Otego 42.37381 75.21772 State Rt 7, west of Cty Hwy 5 23.1 S 8.9 Cahoon Creek 14 020501010803 Butternuts 42.47196 75.31449 Bloom Street, east of Butternut Creek 27.4 S 10.6 Campbell Brook 24 020501010905 Plainfield 42.82387 75.23535 Cty Hwy 18, south of Cty Hwy 21, X Pritchard 12.5 L 4.8 Chase Creek 36 020501010604 Middlefield 42.6579 74.96046 State Hwy 28, across from SPCA 19.5 L 7.5 Cripple Creek 39 020501010603 Springfield 42.81396 74.9005 State Hwy 80, across from Bartlet Rd 40.6 L 15.7 Decatur Creek 42 020501010303 Worcester 42.5914 74.75387 State Hwy 7, east of Cty Hwy 39 34.9 L 13.5 Dunderberg Creek 15 020501010803 Butternuts 42.47233 75.31643 Bloom Street, west of Butternut Creek 16.2 S 6.2 Elk Creek 39 020501010302 Maryland 42.54499 74.84201 State Hwy 7, east of Valder Road 85.3 L 33.0 Flax Island Creek 10 020501011101 Otego 42.38968 75.18527 State Rt 7, west of Flax Island Road 13.1 S 5.1 Fly Creek 1 020501010103 Otsego 42.71806 74.98177 State Hwy 28/80 east of Village 36.6 L 14.1 Harrison/Cooper Creeks 6 020501010504 Laurens 42.48724 75.11815 Cty Hwy 11, North of State Hwy 23 22.6 S 8.7 Hayden Creek 8 020501010603 Springfield 42.82129 74.88303 Cty Hwy 53, East of State 80 24.1 L 9.3 Herkimer Creek 33 020501010102 Richfield 42.78866 75.0247 State Hwy 28, south of Taylor Road 22.8 L 8.8 Hinman Hollow Brook 37 020501010604 Milford 42.59509 74.0457 State Hwy 28, south of Oxbow Road 20.8 L 8.0 Hyder Creek 32 020501010102 Richfield 42.81657 75.01965 State Hwy 28, north of Wing Hill Road 24.2 L 9.4 Indian/Sand Hill Creeks 11 020501011103 Unadilla 42.37147 75.26382 State Hwy 7, east of Cty Hwy 3a 37.3 S 14.4 Lake Brook 3 020501010503 Laurens 42.53328 75.08913 Brook Street, south of Town Hall 16.8 S 6.5 Lidell Creek 26 020501010103 Exeter 42.75981 75.02778 State Hwy 28 south of Cty Hwy 16 *L * Middle Wharton Creek 35 020501010702 Edmeston 42.70475 75.24465 State Hwy 80, South of Burdick Ave 167.8 L 64.8 Mill Creek 23 020501010703 Edmeston 42.70471 75.24458 Cty Hwy 20, across from Bert White Road 24.8 L 9.6 Moorehouse Brook 21 020501010304 Maryland 42.53473 74.89551 State Rt 7, east of Cty Hwy 42 18.6 7.2 Morris Brook 16 020501010803 Morris 42.5088 75.28967 St Hwy 51, across from Dimmock Hollow Rd 20.2 S 7.8 O'Connel Brook 48 020501010203 Middlefield 42.6908 74.84377 Moore Road, South off State Hwy 166 8.5 L 3.3 Oneonta Creek 7 020501010606 Oneonta 42.45571 75.05533 Fair Street, under J. Lettis Hwy 21.5 S 8.3 Oquiniuos Creek 31 020501010102 Richfield 42.85014 74.99079 Elm Street, south of Town 52.7 L 20.3 Otsdawa Creek 9 020501011101 Otego 42.39995 75.17185 State Hwy 7, East of Cty Hwy 7 51.9 S 20.1 Palmer Creek 41 020501010303 Maryland 42.5652 74.78461 State Hwy 7, west of Gohan road 4.8 1.9 Pleasant Brook 45 020501010201 Roseboom 42.71973 74.76939 State Hwy 165, North of Pleasant Brook 56.5 L 21.8 Pool Brook 4 020501010503 Laurens 42.54105 75.08086 Cty Hwy 11, South of Pool Brook road 14.9 S 5.8 Potato Creek 38 020501010304 Maryland 42.50283 74.92709 State Rt 7, east of Peterson Road 8.5 S 3.3 Red Creek 25 020501010604 Middlefield 42.6862 74.9184 Intersection of Cty Hwy 33 and 52 33.1 L 12.8 Rogers Hollow Brook 13 020501010910 Unadilla 42.34176 75.39375 Cty Hwy 1 & 1B 33.2 S 12.8 Shadow Brook 27 020501010602 Springfield 42.79071 74.85894 Mill Road, West of Cty Hwy 31 43.0 L 16.6 Shellrock Brook 46 020501010203 Middlefield 42.70922 74.81886 Hubble Hollow Road & State Hwy 166 14.8 L 5.7 Sparrowhawk Brook 40 020501010303 Maryland 42.5473 74.8251 Race Street, south of State Hwy 7 6.6 L 2.6 Spring Brook 49 020501010605 Milford 42.53008 74.97894 State Hwy 28, east of Cty Hwy 44 29.8 S 11.5 Stony/Mill Creeks 19 020501010801 New Lisbon 42.59245 75.18867 Meyers Mill Rd, North of Cty Hwy 12 23.1 S 8.9 Trout Brook 29 020501010603 Springfield 42.80672 74.90287 State Hwy 80, North of Cty Hwy 27 13.3 L 5.1 Unamed Blue line 12 020501011105 Unadilla 42.32403 75.31158 Watson Street, west of cemetary 8.0 S 3.1 Unamed Blue line Lower CV 47 020501010204 Middlefield 42.68145 74.86813 State Hwy 166, north of Cty Hwy 52 5.2 L 2.0 Upper Butternut Creek 18 020501010801 New Lisbon 42.58939 75.19321 Cty Hwy 12, East of State Hwy 51 111.4 L 43.0 Upper Cherry Valley Creek 44 020501010202 Roseboom 42.74007 74.77361 State Hwy 165, East of Town 61.1 L 23.6 Upper Otego Creek 50 020501010502 Hartwick 42.61636 75.05741 Cty Hwy 11D, West of State Hwy 205 59.8 L 23.1 Upper Schenevus Creek 43 020501010301 Worcester 42.58863 74.7499 Cty Hwy 39, South of State Hwy 7 66.6 25.7 Upper Unadilla River 34 020501010905 Plainfield 42.84246 75.24294 Cty Hwy 18, north of Unadilla Forks 149.7 L 57.8 Upper Wharton Creek 23 020501010701 Burlington 42.68868 75.24188 Cty Hwy 19, East of State Hwy 51 83.7 L 32.3 West Branch Otego Creek 2 020501010501 Laurens 42.59083 75.06508 Cty Hwy 11, East of Cty Hwy 15 50.8 S 19.6 Wharton creek 5 020501010504 Laurens 42.51121 75.10594 Cty Hwy 11 and New Road 169.5 S 65.4 Whitney Creek 20 020501010303 Maryland 42.53648 74.88545 State Hwy 7, east of Dog Hill/Kenyon Road 6.0 2.3 * Lidell creek sub-watershed area data unavailable a L = Limestone, S = Shale Some geology data omitted because the sub-watershed contained both types of bedrock.

- 156 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 2. Bedrock Geology of Otsego County, NY. Limestone is primarily present in the northern part of County, whereas shale, siltstone, and sandstone are present in southern part of County.

RESULTS

Sub-watershed size Sub-watershed size was weakly correlated with conductivity (Figure 3; r =0.35) and TDS (Figure 4; r = 0.32). No relationship was found between pH and sub-watershed area (Figure 5; r = -0.04). Sub-watersheds with shale bedrock appeared to be smaller than sub-watersheds with limestone bedrock (Figures 3 and 4) but no significant difference was found (T-test. T = 1.49, df = 42, p = 0.144).

Geology Geology had a strong influence on conductivity, TDS, and pH. Relationships exist between conductivity, pH, and geology (Figure 6). Significant differences exist in the conductivity (p=0.0001), TDS (p=0.0002), and pH (p=0.0019) measured in sub-watersheds with shale bedrock compared with sub-watersheds with limestone bedrock. Of the 45 sub-watersheds tested, 26 were limestone-based, and 19 were shale-based.

- 157 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

180 L

160 L

140

120 L

100 S L L 80

Area (km2) L L L 60 SS L L L S L S L L 40 S L S L L S S S L S L S S S L 20 S SL L L SL L S 0 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 Conductivity (mS/cm)

Figure 3. Relationship between sub-watershed area and conductivity (r = 0.35) for Otsego County, NY. Data points represent type of bedrock present in monitored sub-watershed where L = Limestone sub-watersheds and S = Shale sub-watersheds. Data collected from 13Aug10 – 21Apr12

180 L

160 L

140

120 L

100 S L L 80

Area (km2) L L L 60 S S L L L S L S L L 40 S L S L L SS S S L S L SS S L 20 SS L L L S L L S 0 0 100 200 300 400 TDS (mg/L)

Figure 4. Relationship between sub-watershed area and TDS (r = 0.32) for Otsego County, NY. Data points represent type of bedrock present in monitored sub-watershed where L = Limestone sub-watersheds and S = Shale sub-watersheds. Data collected from 13Aug10 – 21Apr12.

- 158 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

180 L

160 L

140

120 L

100 L S L 80

Area (km2) L L L 60 SS L L L S L S L L 40 S S L L S S S S S L L S S S L 20 S S L L L L L S L S 0 7.50 7.75 8.00 8.25 8.50 8.75 pH

Figure 5. Relationship between sub-watershed area and pH (r = -0.04) for Otsego County, NY. Data points represent type of bedrock present in monitored sub-watershed where L = Limestone sub-watersheds and S = Shale sub-watersheds. Data collected from 13Aug10 – 21Apr12.

- 159 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 6. Monitored sub-watersheds in Otsego County, NY, showing average conductivity and average pH. Averages represent data collected August 2010-August 2011.

Sub-watershed variability Conductivity and TDS were more variable than pH (Figures 7, 8 and 9). Pool Brook had the least variation in TDS (78.8 ± 14.6), while the Oneonta Creek experienced the most variation in TDS (200.3 ± 120.4). TDS and conductivity showed similar variation in the same streams. Five of the ten streams with the least variability for TDS were also listed in the ten least variable streams for conductivity, i.e., Lake Brook, Potato Creek, Brier Creek, Morris Brook, and Pool Brook (Table 2; Figures 7 and 8). Six of the ten streams with the most variability for TDS were also listed in the ten most variable streams for conductivity, i.e., Oquiniuos Creek, Cripple Creek, Shadow Brook, Hyder Creek, Upper Unadilla River, and Oneonta Creek. pH was relatively stable across sub-watersheds. Streams in which pH varied the most were the Unnamed Blue Line (8.74 ± 0.87) and Stony/Mill Creeks (7.63 ± 0.80). Trout Brook (8.58 ± 0.14) and Campbell Brook (8.33 ± 0.16) had the least variable pH.

- 160 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 7. Mean conductivity for streams monitored in Otsego County, NY ± 1 standard deviation. Means calculated from data collected monthly from 13Aug10 – 21Apr12.

- 161 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 8. Mean TDS for streams monitored in Otsego County, NY ± 1 standard deviation. Means calculated from data collected monthly from 13Aug10 – 21Apr12.

- 162 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 9. Mean pH for streams monitored in Otsego County, NY ± 1 standard deviation. Means calculated from data collected monthly from 13Aug10 – 21Apr12.

- 163 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 2. Mean conductivity, TDS, and pH for streams monitored in Otsego County, NY ± 1 standard deviation. Means calculated from data collected monthly from 13Aug10 – 21Apr12.

Stream Name Conductivity (mS/cm) TDS (mg/L) pH Aldrich Brook 0.076 ± 0.04 83.0 ± 28.6 7.70 ± 0.28 Brier Creek 0.065 ± 0.02 79 ± 19.8 7.61 ± 0.40 Cahoon Creek 0.103 ± 0.04 138.6 ± 71.4 7.81 ± 0.38 Campbell Brook 0.127 ± 0.06 161.2 ± 53.0 8.33 ± 0.16 Chase Creek 0.116 ± 0.06 150.3 ± 67.1 8.37 ± 0.26 Cripple Creek 0.281 ± 0.08 360.0 ± 106.7 8.36 ± 0.20 Decatur Creek 0.077 ± 0.03 106.8 ± 35.1 8.07 ± 0.29 Dunderberg Creek 0.101 ± 0.05 135.4 ± 80.4 7.90 ± 0.38 Elk Creek 0.071 ± 0.03 85.3 ± 31.2 7.83 ± 0.32 Flax Island Creek 0.070 ± 0.03 77.5 ± 22.0 8.08 ± 0.48 Fly Creek 0.153 ± 0.07 195.5 ± 67.6 8.23 ± 0.41 Harrison/Cooper Creeks 0.096 ± 0.03 128.2 ± 37.8 7.79 ± 0.53 Hayden Creek 0.326 ± 0.07 418.6 ± 89.0 8.42 ± 0.22 Herkimer Creek 0.173 ± 0.07 220.2 ± 66.3 8.34 ± 0.25 Hinman Hollow Brook 0.107 ± 0.05 137.4 ± 49.2 8.26 ± 0.31 Hyder Creek 0.272 ± 0.09 358.4 ± 90.1 8.42 ± 0.27 Indian/Sand Hill Creeks 0.077 ± 0.05 106.5 ± 65.2 7.85 ± 0.44 Lake Brook 0.065 ± 0.02 86.5 ± 23.0 7.79 ± 0.32 Lidell Creek 0.140 ± 0.06 184.5 ± 60.9 8.42 ± 0.29 Middle Wharton Creek 0.159 ± 0.07 168.6 ± 49.9 8.09 ± 0.28 Mill Creek 0.087 ± 0.03 118.2 ± 26.1 8.18 ± 0.34 Moorehouse Brook 0.066 ± 0.03 83.2 ± 38.3 7.79 ± 0.30 Morris Brook 0.065 ± 0.02 90.0 ± 20.5 7.81 ± 0.35 O'Connel Brook 0.074 ± 0.04 99.7 ± 36.0 7.74 ± 0.46 Oneonta Creek 0.159 ± 0.09 200.3 ± 120.4 8.17 ± 0.27 Oquiniuos Creek 0.278 ± 0.07 382.9 ± 110.2 8.41 ± 0.22 Otsdawa Creek 0.073 ± 0.03 102.8 ± 34.9 7.91 ± 0.32 Palmer Creek 0.042 ± 0.03 56.3 ± 46.4 7.92 ± 0.20 Pleasant Brook 0.089 ± 0.06 104.5 ± 39.3 7.89 ± 0.41 Pool Brook 0.055 ± 0.01 78.8 ± 14.6 7.56 ± 0.40 Potato Creek 0.037 ± 0.01 47.4 ± 20.6 7.95 ± 0.51 Red Creek 0.121 ± 0.06 152.7 ± 62.8 8.36 ± 0.35 Rogers Hollow Brook 0.065 ± 0.02 91.7 ± 34.0 7.94 ± 0.28 Shadow Brook 0.301 ± 0.08 374.9 ± 90.8 8.27 ± 0.24 Shellrock Brook 0.071 ± 0.04 90.9 ± 41.1 8.11 ± 0.46 Sparrowhawk Brook 0.040 ± 0.02 54.7 ± 31.5 7.70 ± 0.28 Spring Brook 0.075 ± 0.02 88.5 ± 20.3 8.32 ± 0.35 Stony/Mill Creeks 0.054 ± 0.02 75.0 ± 30.1 7.63 ± 0.80 Trout Brook 0.198 ± 0.06 257.4 ± 78.7 8.58 ± 0.14 Unamed Blue line 0.096 ± 0.05 144.8 ± 91.3 8.74 ± 0.87 Unamed Blue line Lower CV 0.074 ± 0.02 98.8 ± 27.0 8.07 ± 0.56 Upper Butternut Creek 0.106 ± 0.04 123 ± 31.2 7.58 ± 0.37 Upper Cherry Valley Creek 0.230 ± 0.08 271.6 ± 69.7 8.08 ± 0.28 Upper Otego Creek 0.119 ± 0.04 144.5 ± 42.0 7.95 ± 0.39 Upper Schenevus Creek 0.116 ± 0.04 139.4 ± 36.4 7.72 ± 0.32 Upper Unadilla River 0.312 ± 0.08 428.6 ± 86.4 8.35 ± 0.25 Upper Wharton Creek 0.171 ± 0.07 191.5 ± 52.9 8.20 ± 0.27 West Branch Otego Creek 0.071 ± 0.04 83.4 ± 29.9 7.90 ± 0.39 Wharton creek 0.056 ± 0.02 74.0 ± 20.0 7.90 ± 0.38 Whitney Creek 0.040 ± 0.03 57.3 ± 47.2 7.89 ± 0.23

- 164 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Seasonal variation Seasonal variation was observed in all of our monitored streams. For conductivity and TDS, two peaks are apparent in most of the data. A peak usually occurs in the winter months, as well as in the summer months. Spring and fall usually see a decline in TDS and conductivity. The Oneonta Creek has a noticeably large peak in the winter months and a moderate peak in the summer months (Figure 10). The fall and spring see relatively low levels of TDS and conductivity. A stream with lower variability, Pool Brook, shows a less dramatic peak of conductivity and TDS in the winter months, and a gentle swell throughout the summer and fall months (Figure 11). No significant seasonal pattern was observed for pH.

Figure 10. Seasonal variation of Oneonta Creek (Otsego County, NY), a stream with high conductivity and TDS variability. Data collected monthly from 13Aug10 – 21Apr12.

Figure 11. Seasonal variation of Pool Brook (Otsego County, NY), a stream with low TDS and conductivity variability. Data collected monthly from 13Aug10 – 21Apr12.

- 165 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

DISCUSSION

Sub-watershed size No a significant relationship between sub-watershed size and TDS, pH, or conductivity. Landers et al. (2007) listed watershed size as an important predictor of TDS, and conductivity. Larger watersheds tend to contain higher ionic concentrations. We monitored sub-watersheds ranging from 4.8 km2 to 167.8 km2. However, over 50% of our monitored sub-watersheds were under 25 km2, with only three sub-watersheds over 100 km2. Since the majority of the sub- watersheds were similar in size, differences between sub-watersheds were likely due to other factors, which was primarily geology.

Geology Geology strongly influenced stream pH, conductivity, and TDS. Watersheds with limestone bedrock often have a high conductivity due to the relative softness of limestone, which allows dissolution of carbonate minerals into the water (Allan and Castillo 2007). Carbonates in the water neutralize acids and raise stream pH. My results support these patterns. Some of our limestone-based sub-watersheds had lower conductivities and TDS concentrations similar to the shale-based sub-watersheds. This can be explained by smaller area of these sub-watersheds (Figures 5 and 6). Lower conductivities and TDS concentrations may be observed because a smaller watershed area results in less interaction time between landscape and water. Some of these values might also be explained by the bedrock types used to represent limestone and shale areas. The area designated shale (Figure 1) included only shale, siltstone, and sandstone, but part of the limestone area represented, the Hamilton Group (Figure 2), included some shale as well. This can explain why a stronger distinction was not observed between shale and limestone in Figures 5-7.

Sub-watershed variability Sub-watersheds are highly variable due to their small size, relative to watersheds. Natural spatial variation is largely due to the rocks being weathered, how wet or dry the climate is and by the composition of the rain (Allan and Castillo 2007). Small streams are subject to flashy patterns of change in stream quality variables due to changes in stream discharge. Soil features such as permeability, can also change how much nutrients flow into a stream. Watersheds with highly permeable soil will have less runoff with more nutrients being absorbed into the soil (Calhoun et al. 2002).

Land use within a watershed could cause greater variation in some streams (Landers et al. 2007). For example, a watershed with agriculture may experience more variability over time due to seasonal use of fertilizers. Urban areas may also affect stream variability. Schoonover et al. (2005) studied the effects of urban land use on stream TDS concentration and found a 36% increase in TDS concentrations at base flow conditions and a 42% increase in storm flow conditions. Rose (2002) also found a 30% increase in base flow TDS concentration in an urban watershed compared to a lesser developed watershed. Land use affects water quality, even at base flow conditions. While I did not examine land use in Otsego County, it may be useful to study the relationship between variability and land use in the future.

Seasonal variation Conductivity and TDS - Stream chemistry varies seasonally due to changes in discharge, biological activity (Allan and Castillo 2007) and land use patterns (Landers et al. 2007). Conductivity and TDS were lowest in the spring and fall in the Oneonta Creek (Figure 13).

- 166 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Increased flow in the spring and fall likely diluted the conductivity and TDS, due to the inverse relationship between ionic concentrations and discharge (Allan and Castillo 2007). High TDS and conductivity values were observed in the Oneonta Creek from December 2011 through March 2011. These values can be explained by the use of road salt throughout the winter months. The less dramatic peak in conductivity and TDS in the summer months (June-October) can be explained by a decrease in precipitation and increase in evaporation, which led to a concentrating effect. Monitoring for several years may be required to establish accurate seasonal patterns. pH - Stream pH can vary according to sunlight due to biological activity within the stream. During photosynthesis, primary producers convert carbon dioxide (CO2) and water into carbohydrate. Hydroxyl ions (OH-) are produced in the process, raising stream pH. Additionally, plants take up CO2, decreasing levels of carbonic acid (H2CO3) in the stream, raising pH (Lampert and Sommer 1997). If primary production increases more than stream respiration, then stream CO2 will decrease, causing stream pH to rise. If they are in equilibrium, no change in pH will be observed. Since no significant seasonal variations in pH for our monitored streams were observed, primary production and respiration are likely in equilibrium.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I thank Paul Lord and Scott Fickbohm for assistance revising this paper; and Thomas Horvath for statistical assistance and additional revisions. I would also like to thank the SUNY Oneonta students and Soil and Water Conservation District employees for assistance in collecting water monitoring data. Additional thanks to the Otsego County Conservation Association (OCCA), Otsego County, Otsego County Soil and Water Conservation District, the SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station and the Upper Susquehanna Coalition for supporting this project.

LITERATURE CITED

Allan, J.D., and Castillo, M.M. 2007. Stream ecology: Structure and function of running waters, 2nd Edition. Springer, New York. 436 pp.

Balyszak, M. 2009. Considerations for Marcellus Shale drilling. Hobart and William Smith Colleges. Finger Lakes Institute. Available online at http://fli.hws.edu/marcellus/MBalyszak_MarcellusShaleDrillingConsiderations.pdf. Accessed May 1, 2011.

Calhoun F.G., Baker D.B., and Slater, B.K. 2002. Soils, water quality, and watershed size: interactions in the Maumee and Sandusky river basins of northwestern Ohio. Journal of Environmental Quality 31(1):47-53.

Dosskey, M., Vidon, P., Gurwick, N., Allan, C., Duval, T., and Lowrance, R. 2010. The role of riparian vegetation in protecting and improving chemical water quality in streams. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 46(2):261-277.

EPA. 2011. Plan to study the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources. Available online at:

- 167 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

http://agriculturedefensecoalition.org/sites/default/files/file/natural_gas85/85E_2011_Natural _Gas_EPA_Final_Plan_to_Study_Hydraulic_Fracking_November_2011_Report_110211_fin al_508.pdf. Accessed April 23, 2012.

Jackson, R.B., and Jobbágy, E.G. 2005. From icy roads to salty streams. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102(41):14487–14488.

Kaushal, S.S., Groffman, P.M., Likens, G.E., Belt, K.T., Stack, W.P., and Kelly, V.R. 2005. Increased salinization of fresh water in the northeastern United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102(38):13517-13520.

Landers, M.N., Ankcorn, P.D., and McFadden, K.W. 2007. Watershed effects on streamflow quantity and quality in six watersheds of Gwinnett County, Georgia. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5132.

Lampert, W. and Sommer, U. 1997. Limnoecology: The ecology of lakes and streams. Oxford University Press, New York. 382 pp.

Madden, S. S., Robinson, G.R., and Arnason, J. G. 2007. Spatial variation in stream water quality in relation to riparian buffer dimensions in a rural watershed of eastern New York State. Northeastern Naturalist 14(4):605-618.

New York State Adirondack Park Agency. Hydrologic Units. 2003. http://apa.ny.gov/gis/shared/htmlpages/metadata/hydrologic_unit.html#huc11 attribute table. Accessed 7May12.

Ou, Y., and Wang, X. 2011. GIS and ordination techniques for studying influence of watershed characteristics on river water quality. Water and Science Technology 64(4):861-870.

Rajeshwari, C.V., and Saraswathi, B. 2009. Assessment of water quality of rivers Tungabhadra and Hundri, India. Pollution Research 28(3):499-505.

Rose, S. 2002. Comparative major ion geochemistry of Piedmont streams in the Atlanta, Georgia region: Possible effects of urbanization. Environmental Geology 42:102–113.

Schoonover, J.E., Lockaby, B.G., and Pan, S. 2005. Changes in chemical and physical properties of stream water across an urban-rural gradient in western Georgia. Urban Ecosystems 8:107– 124.

Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Otsego County Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed April 23, 2012.

- 168 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Hydroacoustic surveys of Otsego Lake’s pelagic fish community, 20121

Holly A. Waterfield2 and Mark Cornwell3

INTRODUCTION

Hydroacoustic surveys were conducted in June and November 2012 to estimate pelagic fish abundance in Otsego Lake (Otsego County, NY). Following their introduction in 1986, alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) quickly became the most abundant forage fish in Otsego Lake (Foster 1990) and had major impacts on trophic relationships, chlorophyll a, water clarity, and hypolimnetic oxygen depletion rates (Warner 1999, Harman et al. 2002). Walleye (Sander vitreus) stocking resumed in 2000 (previously stocked through 1934) to establish a recreational fishery while at the same time introducing a predator which would potentially control the alewife population. The population of spawning adult walleye has steadily increased since 2008; in 2012 the population was estimated at 10,520 fish (Willson et al. 2013). Increased predation by this growing population in combination with winter predation by lake trout have drastically reduced the alewife population and led to changes in lake conditions that suggest reversal of the alewife- induced trends previously described. However, the establishment of zebra mussels in Otsego Lake in 2007 has confounded efforts to directly attribute recovery of certain trophic measures directly to decreased alewife abundance. The acoustic surveys reported here are part of an ongoing effort to document changes in the pelagic fish community and lake trophic condition. Comparisons are made to the results of past hydroacoustic surveys (1996 to 2007) which were summarized by Brooking and Cornwell (2008) and those from 2009 to 2012 (Waterfield and Cornwell 2011, 2012). Previous reports were focused on estimating alewife abundance, as this was the dominant forage fish in the open water community; 2012 results are more general due to uncertainty associated with the composition of acoustic targets.

METHODS

Acoustic surveys were conducted on the nights of 22 June and 16 November 2012, beginning at least 1 hour after dark. Both surveys were conducted from north to south following a zig-zag pattern from shore to shore (Figure 1). Approximately east-west transects were connected with a diagonal “zig” to yield two sets of parallel transects for additional analysis of methods and statistical approaches. Down-looking data were collected using a BioSonics DtX echosounder with a 123kHz 7.5o beam transducer; data collection settings for each survey are listed in Table 1. Performance of each transducer was checked against a standard tungsten carbide sphere; no calibration offset was used.

Hydroacoustic data were analyzed using the Sonar5-Pro post processing system (Sonar5) following conversion of the raw acoustic files to Sonar5-compatible formats (Balk and Lindem

1 Made possible by 2007 NSF grant entitled Acquisition of hydroacoustic and associated instrumentation for fisheries research (DBI: 0722764). 2 Research Support Specialist, SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station, Cooperstown, NY. 3 Assistant Professor, SUNY Cobleskill Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Cobleskill, NY.

- 169 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 1. Bathymetric map of Otsego Lake, NY with acoustic transects surveyed 22 June 2012 (left) and 16 November 2012 (right).

Table 1. Data collection settings for 22 June and 16 November 2012 acoustic surveys conducted on Otsego Lake, NY.

Number of Downlooking Average Survey Pulse Duration Ping Rate Survey Date transects Frequency (kHz) Speed (m/s) (ms) (pps) 06/22/2012 11 123 1.6 0.4 3 11/16/2012 10 123 1.6 0.4 3

2007). Surface and bottom exclusion zones were established on each echogram to isolate open water areas for analysis. The surface exclusion zone was established from the surface to 2.5m to eliminate data from the transducer’s near-field and surface noise. The bottom boundary included a margin of approximately 0.5 m above the actual detected bottom to avoid inclusion of bottom echoes in abundance estimates. Echograms were visually inspected to remove echoes from targets other than fish (i.e., submerged vegetation). Passive noise, calculated from passive listening data collected prior to each survey, was subtracted from all files before analysis. Fish density (#/ha) was calculated using Sv/TS scaling method in Sonar5 (Balk and Lindem 2007) based on a minimum in situ target strength threshold of -53 dB for the spring survey and -55 dB for the fall survey. The TS threshold used in past analyses was -61dB; the higher thresholds of -

- 170 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

53 and -55dB were used to exclude an abundance of small targets from the alewife abundance estimate (Figure 2). Target strengths of -61 to -55 dB have been associated with alewife ranging in length from 1.5 to 2.0 cm (Warner 2002), a size class that would not be present at the time of the either 2012 survey. Each transect was divided into layers for analysis based on areas of relatively homogeneous fish distribution. Abundance estimates were determined for predator- sized (TS >-35 dB) and prey-sized (TS -53dB or-55dB to -34dB) targets in each layer. Total fish abundance and predator abundance were each based on the summation of the estimates for all layers; alewife abundance was based on estimates from the surface through the bottom of the metalimnion. Layers used in the analysis of the June and November surveys were 2-10m and 10m+ and 2-22m and 22m+ respectively.

Variable small mesh experimental gill nets were set concurrent with each survey. Nets were 21 meters long by 6 meters deep and composed of seven 3-meter wide panels of different mesh sizes (6.2, 8, 10, 12.5, 15, 18.7, and 25mm bar mesh). Three nets were set on the nights of 22 June and 12 November 2012 for about 12 hours each, set just before dark, pulled early morning. Fish were tallied by panel and vertical position (top, middle, or bottom) in the net. Species, length, and weight were recorded for all fish caught.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Lake-wide total acoustic fish density in June was estimated to be 934fish/ha (95% CI +/- 604 fish/ha) based on the 11 transects; this is higher than most recent estimates of alewife-only abundance (Table 2). 2012 spring survey results are not alewife-specific due to uncertainty related to the composition of targets contributing to forage fish abundance estimates. Table 3 contains 2012 estimates of epilimnetic forage fish and lake-wide predators within each transect. Estimates varied among transects ranging from 27 fish/ha to 2526 fish/ha; this range of density estimates is larger than observed for alewife-only in 2011 (Waterfield and Cornwell 2012). Figure 2 illustrates acoustic targets by target strength (dB) versus their depth (m) in the water column. Targets having a range in TS typically associated with alewife were observed below 20m (Figure 2); these targets do not contribute to the epilimnetic forage fish abundance estimate, as they are in deeper waters. Large zooplankton, fish fry, and other small organisms likely contributed to the high abundance of small targets (< -55dB), as the date of this survey was rather late in the season.

Gill netting efforts yielded a single golden shiner. If this catch is representative of lake- wide alewife distribution, it is possible that the acoustic density estimate over-estimates the abundance of alewife in the water column. Increased effort to ground-truth the acoustic data is necessary in order to identify the organisms contributing to spring abundance estimates.

- 171 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 2. Forage fish abundance estimates (fish/ha) for spring surveys conducted between 2004 and 2012. Prior to 2012, forage fish abundance estimates were specific to alewife. The 2012 forage fish estimate is not specific to alewife, as ground truthing provided little insight into the community composition. Year Fish/ha # transects stdev 95% SE 2004 907 9 175 114 2005 236 9 214 137 2006 2522 10 1463 907 2007 1330 9 611 399 2010 174 14 236 137 2011 78 8 52 43 2012 901 11 921 619

Table 3. Fish abundance estimates of forage fish and predator-sized targets for transects surveyed 22 June 2012, including lake-wide mean, standard error (SE) and 95% confidence intervals.

Fish Density (fish/ha) Transect Forage fish Predator 1 1648 0.0 2 2224 0.0 3 909 4.1 4 2526 3.3 5 626 1.5 6 102 29.2 7 73 12.5 8 51 5.6 9 1431 3.0 10 27 7.5 11 290 0.0 Mean 901 6.1 S.E. 278 2.6 95% CI 619 5.75

- 172 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 2. Target strength (TSc in decibels) versus depth (range in meters) of all acoustic targets greater than -70dB identified in the June (left) and November (right) 2012 surveys.

Total acoustic fish abundance in November was estimated to be 20 fish/ha (95% CI +/- 14 fish/ha) across 10 transects; of this total, mean alewife abundance was estimated at 11 fish/ha (Table 4), the lowest level reported since acoustic surveys began on Otsego Lake in 1996 (Table 5). The majority of acoustic targets were observed at depths greater than 20m (Figure 2). Corresponding gill nets caught no alewife in any net, though lake trout were caught in all three nets, at the surface (0-6m), 4-10m, and 8-14m. While no alewife were caught in the nets, abundance estimates are assumed to be associated with alewife, as the distribution of targets is consistent with past surveys when alewife were present in higher numbers.

Table 4. Fish abundance estimates of forage fish and predator-sized targets for transects surveyed 16 November 2012, including lake-wide mean, standard error (SE) and 95% confidence intervals. Fish Density (fish/ha) Transect Forage fish Predator 1 0 0.0 2 53 0.0 3 10 21.1 4 6 2.2 5 2 1.4 6 2 0.0 7 11 0.5 8 6 0.0 9 0 0.0 10 16 2.7 Mean 11 2.8 S.E. 5 2.1 95% CI 11 4.6

- 173 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 5. Abundance estimates (fish/ha) from fall acoustic surveys conducted between 1996 and 2012. Modified from Brooking and Cornwell (2008). Forage fish estimates are assumed to be representative of alewife abundance.

Fall Forage Fish Abundance Fall Predator Abundance Year #/ha # transects stdev 95% SE #/ha # transects stdev 95% SE 1996 5170 7 1434 1063 7.5 7 4.2 3.1 1997 2053 9 798 521 3.3 9 3.4 2.2 2000 1382 8 925 774 2001 8562 9 3811 2490 35.2 9 13.9 9.1 2002 10901 16 4886 2394 15.2 16 10.7 5.2 2003 3851 16 2901 1421 1.2 16 1.5 0.7 2004 2418 9 1571 1026 3.5 9 4.7 3.1 2005 9562 9 3555 2322 8.6 9 8.8 5.7 2006 1631 7 2713 2010 19.4 7 25.6 19 2007 3921 11 2524 1492 6.5 11 5.7 3.4 2009 369 18 334 166 6.6 18 6.4 3.17 2010 275 16 464 247 2.9 16 4.3 2.3 2011 58 11 85 57 4.1 11 6.9 3.3 2012 11 10 16 11 2.7 10 6.5 4.6

2012 results indicate fall alewife abundance continues to decline (Table 5, Figure 3), even when considering the confidence intervals and their reflection of the high degree of variability among transect density estimates. This decrease in estimated alewife abundance is corroborated by gill net catch for both surveys, as well as results documented in other ongoing and past studies, including increased mean alewife size concurrent with decreased trap net catch rate (Potter 2010, German 2012), only 2 individual alewife were recorded in 2012, and the past prevalence of alewife in stomachs of captured walleye (McBride and Cornwell 2008). Other trophic indicators measured in and calculated for Otsego Lake also point toward changes that are directly related to the decreased alewife population including mean size of cladoceran zooplankton (Albright and Zaengle 2012) and areal hypolimnetic oxygen depletion rates (Waterfield and Albright 2012). Definitive conclusions regarding the “success” of the walleye stocking program in balancing the lake’s trophic condition have been precluded by the establishment of zebra mussels in Otsego Lake and the resultant trophic changes. Additional changes observed in lake trout and walleye reflect the marked decrease in alewife abundance. Fitness and condition of lake trout decreased in 2012, as documented by Region 4 DEC Fisheries gill net survey (Wells 2013). Angler reports indicate uncharacteristic foraging by lake trout in shallow waters during the late fall and winter. Anecdotal observations of stomach contents indicate that walleye are targeting species other than alewife as abundance remains low.

- 174 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

12000

10000

8000 6000

4000

Density Fish (#/ha) 2000

0

spring fall

Figure 3. Forage fish abundance estimates based on analysis of spring and fall acoustic surveys from 1996 through 2012. Prior to 2012, all values attributed to alewife abundance.

REFERENCES

Balk, H. and T. Lindem. 2007. Sonar4 and Sonar5 post processing systems, operator manual version 5.9.7, 420p. Lindem Data Acquisition Humleveien 4b. 0870 Oslo Norway.

Bowers, B.E. and H.A. Waterfield. 2011. Investigating walleye (Sander vitreus) behavior and optimal forage theory in Otsego Lake, New York. In 43rd Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Brooking, T.E. and M.D. Cornwell. 2008. Hydroacoustic surveys of Otsego Lake, 2007. In 40th Ann Rept. (2007). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Cornwell, M.D. and N.D. McBride. 2009. Walleye (Sander vitreus) reintroduction update: Walleye stocking, gill netting 2008. In 41st Ann. Rept. (2008). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

German, B.P. 2012. Summer 2011 trap net monitoring of fish communities utilizing the weedy littoral zone at Rat Cove and rocky littoral zone Brookwood Point, Otsego Lake. In 44th Ann. Rept. (2011). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Foster, J.R. 1990. Introduction of the alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) into Otsego Lake. In 22nd Ann. Rept. (1989). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 175 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Harman, W.N., M.F. Albright, and D.M. Warner. 2002. Trophic changes in Otsego Lake, NY following the introduction of the alewife (Alosa psuedoharengus). Lake and Reservoir Management. 18(3)215-226

Potter, J. 2010. Littoral fish community survey of Rat Cove & Brookwood Point, summer 2009. In 42nd Ann. Rept. (2009). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Warner, D.M. 1999. Alewives in Otsego Lake, NY: a comparison of their direct and indirect mechanisms of impact on transparency and chlorophyll a. Occas. Pap. No. 32. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Waterfield, H.A. and M.D. Cornwell. 2012. Hydroacoustic surveys of Otsego Lake’s pelagic fish community, 2011. In 44th Ann. Rept. (2011). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Waterfield, H.A. and M.D. Cornwell. 2011. Hydroacoustic surveys of Otsego Lake’s pelagic fish community, 2010. In 43rd Ann. Rept. (2010). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Wells, S.M. 2013 Personal Communication.

Willson, J., J.R. Foster, M.D. Cornwell. 2013. 2012 population estimate of walleye (Sander vitreus) in Otsego Lake. In 45th Ann. Rept. (2012). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 176 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

An update on the dynamics of Galerucella spp. and purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary, summer 2012

M.F. Albright

INTRODUCTION

The distribution and effectiveness of Galerucella spp. populations as a biocontrol agent of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) were monitored within Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary as part of an ongoing monitoring regime that began in 1997. Annual spring monitoring of the impact of Galerucella spp. on purple loosestrife is updated in this report. Details of the history of this study can be found in Albright et al. (2004).

L. salicaria is an emergent semi-aquatic plant that was introduced into the United States from Eurasia in the early 19th century (Thomson 1987). It is an aggressive and highly adaptive invasive species which inhabits wetlands, flood plains, estuaries and irrigation systems. Once established, purple loosestrife often creates monospecific stands, displacing native species including cattails (Typha spp.), sedges (Carex spp.), bulrushes (Scirpus spp.), willows (Salix spp.) and horsetails (Equisetum spp.). Recent efforts, which include both chemical application and the use of biocontrol methods, have focused on controlling L. salicaria where stands impede well-diversified wetland communities (Thomson 1987).

In June 1997, 50 adults each of Galerucella calmariensis and G. pusilla were introduced into Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary (N42°48.6’ W74°53.9), located at the northeastern end of Otsego Lake (Austin 1998). The beetles were initially released in cages from sites 1 and 2 (Figure 1). In 1998, sites 3-5 were introduced into the study in order to monitor the distribution of Galerucella over time to other stands of purple loosestrife (Austin 1999). Sampling sites were established to monitor the qualitative and quantitative effects of the beetles on purple loosestrife and also to examine the extent of any recovery by the native flora (Austin 1998). It was expected that these beetles would lessen the competitive ability of purple loosestrife by feeding upon their meristematic regions, resulting in defoliation, impaired growth, decreased seed production, and increased mortality (Blossey et al. 1994).

METHODS

Spring monitoring was performed according to protocols established by Blossey et al. (1997). Observations of the insects and plants were made within the five 1m2 quadrats, marked by four visible stakes (Figure 1).

- 177 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 1. Map of Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary showing sampling sites. Sites 1 and 2 are 1997 Galerucella spp. stocking sites; sites 3-5 were established to evaluate the spread of Galerucella spp. within the Sanctuary over time.

Spring monitoring was completed on 14 May 2012. This first assessment is typically completed within 2-3 weeks after overwintering adults appear (Blossey 1997). Galerucella spp. abundance was estimated in each life stage (egg, larva, adult) according to the established abundance categories (Table 1). The number of stems of L. salicaria within each quadrat were counted, and the five tallest were measured. The percent cover of L. salicaria and the percent damage attributable to Galerucella spp. were both estimated according to established frequency categories. Fall monitoring, which was completed on 24 August 2012, consisted of the same metrics measured in the spring monitoring along with measurements to gauge the vigor of L. salicaria plants, including the number of inflorescences per plant and per quadrat, as well as the number of flowers per inflorescence.

Table 1. Categories prescribed by Blossey’s (1997) protocol for reporting abundance and frequency categories.

Abundance Categories Frequency Categories Number category range category mid point 0 1 0% A 0% 1-9 2 1-5% B 2.5% 10-49 3 5-25% C 15% 50-99 4 25-50% D 37.5% 100-499 5 50-75% E 62.5% 500-1000 6 75-100% F 87.5% >1000 7 100% G 100%

- 178 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

All monitoring data are represented by abundance and frequency categories defined in Table 1. Changes between these frequency categories from year-to-year or plot-to-plot can represent a substantial change in abundance due to the broad ranges covered by each category (Albright 2004). It should be noted that the actual number of L. salicaria stems are presented in the following results, while all other metrics are categorical. Variation in the number of stems between years or plots may not correspond with a shift in percent cover category, due to the above-stated lack of sensitivity that is inherent in a categorical classification scheme.

Spring Monitoring (14 May 2012)

Eggs of the Galerucella beetle were present in four of the five of the quadrats at moderate densities (Figure 2). Larvae were found in all the quadrats, most at high density (Figure 3). This was the first time larvae were documented since 2001. A warm, dry spring may have resulted in early egg laying and development. Interestingly, spring 2012 was the first time that no adults were observed in any quadrat (Figure 4). Some were observed elsewhere in the sanctuary.

6

5

4

3

2

Abundancecategory 1 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

quadrat 1 quadrat 2 quadrat 3 quadrat 4 quadrat 5

Figure 2. Comparison of Galerucella spp. egg abundance from yearly spring samplings. Abundance categories taken from Table 1.

6

5

4

3

2

Abundancecategory 1 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

quadrat 1 quadrat 2 quadrat 3 quadrat 4 quadrat 5

Figure 3. Comparison of Galerucella spp. larval abundance from yearly spring samplings. Abundance categories taken from Table 1.

- 179 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

6

5

4

3

2

1 Abundancecategory 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

quadrat 1 quadrat 2 quadrat 3 quadrat 4 quadrat 5

Figure 4. Comparison of Galerucella spp. adult abundance from yearly spring samplings. Abundance categories taken from Table 1.

Lythrum salicaria had about as low an abundance of stems at the time of the 2012 spring monitoring than has been recorded (Figure 5). Estimated percent cover was also as low as has ever been recorded (Figure 6). The loosestrife that was in the quadrats was heavily damaged by herbivory (Figure 7).

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30

Number of Number Stems 20 10 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

quadrat 1 quadrat 2 quadrat 3 quadrat 4 quadrat 5

Figure 5. Comparison of the number of purple loosestrife stems from yearly spring sampling observations.

- 180 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

70 point

- 60 50 40 30 20 10

Frequency Category Category Mid Frequency 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

quadrat 1 quadrat 2 quadrat 3 quadrat 4 quadrat 5

Figure 6. Comparison of percent cover estimates by purple loosestrife from yearly spring samplings. Frequency category mid points derived from Table 1.

70 point

- 60 50 40 30 20 10

Frequency Category Category Mid Frequency 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

quadrat 1 quadrat 2 quadrat 3 quadrat 4 quadrat 5

Figure 7. Comparison of percent damage estimates to purple loosestrife leaves from yearly spring samplings. Frequency category mid points derived from Table 1.

Fall Monitoring (24 August 2012)

The number of L. salicaria stems and estimated percent cover was as low as any year since control efforts began (Figures 8 and 9, respectively). No inflorescences (flowerheads) were recorded in the quadrats, though a patch of L. salicaria just north of site 5 (see Figure 1) was in bloom.

Galerucella are host-specific and as such feed exclusively on purple loosestrife. This characteristic results in a beetle population that is directly dependent upon loosestrife densities within the swamp. Abundance patterns observed within the swamp since 1998 illustrate the population dynamics of host-specific organisms and their dependency upon host populations (Fagan et al. 2002). It appears that once Galerucella spp. became established in the Sanctuary in about 2001, control of purple loosestrife has been effective, with abundance at a fraction of what it had been prior to the onset of biocontrol efforts.

- 181 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

100 90 point - 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 NA

Frequency Category Mid Category Frequency 0 1997 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

quadrat 1 quadrat 2 quadrat 3 quadrat 4 quadrat 5

Figure 8. Number of purple loosestrife stems per quadrat during fall monitoring, 1997, 2000- 2012. Flooding in fall 2011 precluded sampling.

100 90 point - 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 NA

Frequency Category Mid Category Frequency 0 1997 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

quadrat 1 quadrat 2 quadrat 3 quadrat 4 quadrat 5

Figure 9. Estimated percent cover (category midpoints) of purple loosestrife during fall monitoring, 1997, 2000-2012. Categories as presented in Table 1. Flooding in fall 2011 precluded sampling.

CONCLUSIONS

Spring 2012 monitoring indicated that L. salicaria was less abundant (based on percent cover and number of stems) than in any year since monitoring began in 1997. The abundance of Galerucella spp. eggs was moderately abundant and the abundance of larva was higher than ever, though adults were practically absent, likely due to the lack of L. salicaria (as a necessary food source). Observations related to the presence of Galerucella spp. at sites outside of Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary (i.e., Lydon 2008) indicate that the dispersal of Galerucella spp. is expanding from the original site and has indicated its potential effectiveness as a biological agent against the invasive.

- 182 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

REFERENCES

Albright, M.F., W.N. Harman. S.S. Fickbohm, H.A. Meehan, S. Groff and T. Austin. 2004. Recovery of native flora and behavior responses by Gallerucella spp. following biocontrol of purple loosestrife. Am. Midl. Nat. 152:248-254.

Austin, T. 1998. Biological control of purple loosestrife in Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary using Galerucella spp., summer 1997. In 30th Ann. Rept. (1997). SUNY Oneonta. Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Austin, T. 1999. Biological control of purple loosestrife in Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary using Galerucella spp., summer 1998. In 31st Ann. Rept. (1998). SUNY Oneonta. Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Blossey, B. 1997. Purple loosestrife monitoring protocol, 2nd draft. Unpublished document. Dept. of Natural Resources, Cornell University.

Blossey, B., D. Schroeder, S.D. Hight and R.A. Malecki. 1994. Host specificity and environmental impact of two leaf beetles (Galerucella calmariensis and G. pusilla) for the biological control of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria). Weed Science. 42:134-140

Fagan, W.F., M.A. Lewis, M.G. Neubert, P. van den Driessche. 2002. Invasion theory and biological control. Ecology Letters 5(1) 148.

Groff, S. 2001. Biological control of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary using leaf-eating beetles (Galerucella spp.), summer 2000. In 34th Annual Report (2000). SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Lydon, J.C. 2008. Monitoring the dynamics of Galerucella spp. and purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in the Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary and along the shorelines of Otsego, Weaver and Youngs Lakes, summer 2007). In 40th Ann. Rept. (2007). SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Meehan, H.A. 2006. Biological control of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary using leaf-eating beetles (Galerucella spp.), summer 2005. In 38th Annual Report (2005). SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Rubenstein, M. 2010. Monitoring the dynamics of Galerucella spp. And purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in the Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary, summer 2009. In 42nd Ann. Rept. (2009). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Snyder, C.M. 2007. Monitoring the dynamics of Galerucella spp. and purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in the Goodyear Swamp Sanctuary and along the Otsego Lake shoreline, summer 2006. In 39th Annual Report (2006). SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

- 183 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Thompson, Daniel Q., R.L. Stuckey, E. B. Thompson. 1987. Spread, Impact, and Control of Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) in North American Wetlands. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 55 pages. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Online. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/plants/loosstrf/loosstrf.htm (04JUN99).

- 184 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Pearly mussels in Unadilla River and tributaries

Shelby Zemken1, Paul Lord1 and Tim Pokorny1

ABSTRACT

Pearly mussels (i.e., Figure 1) are widespread freshwater bivalves important for their particle filtration and status as indicators of water quality. North American bivalves are declining at an alarming rate due to a variety of circumstances. We document the current status of pearly mussels in the Unadilla River and its tributaries in Otsego County, Madison County, and Chenango County, New York. Using tactile and visual searching methods, we report previously unknown distribution patterns, diversity, and range within the Unadilla watershed. Results indicate the presence of mussels is primarily dependent on stream size and physical geology.

Figure 1. Living Elktoe (Alasmodonta marginata) found 21 July 2012.

1 SUNY College at Oneonta.

- 185 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

INTRODUCTION Pearly mussels are widespread freshwater mollusks found in lakes, rivers, and streams. Pearly mussels are important to ecosystems in North America and Europe for their ability to process phytoplankton, bacteria, and particles organic matter (Vaughn 2001). These long-lived, slow growing suspension feeders are sentinels of water quality and are sensitive to alterations in the environment including toxic substances and dam introduction (Strayer 1999). The mystery of population decline in North America and Europe has led to increased investments in conservation, biology, and ecology (Strayer 2004). Population and diversity decline is documented in numerous places in the United States. In Clinton River, Michigan, industrial pollution and urban development in the 1950s caused massive mussel kills that have not recovered (Strayer 1980). Gangloff (2009) attributes decreased mussel distribution and population to degrading habitat and upstream urbanization. In the Hudson River of New York, pearly mussel density has decreased significantly since 1992 (Strayer 1999). Research has led to conservation efforts from government agencies. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYDEC) has listed the following Susquehanna River drainage pearly mussels as Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN): Yellow Lamp Mussel (Lampsilis cariosa), Elktoe (Alasmidonta marginata), Green Floater (Lasmigona subvirdis), and Brook Floater (Alasmidonta varicosa).

METHODS

We surveyed the Unadilla River and several tributaries (Figures 2 and 3), Wharton Creek, Beaver Creek, Tallette Creek, and Center Brook, to document the current status of pearly mussels in the area. Survey locations were chosen by their ease of access from roadways, paths, and DEC fishing access points, using Google™ maps. Search methods were consistent with Strayer and Fetterman (1999). Using a Garmin™ GPS, we recorded survey location start and end points as well as live mussel and dead mussel locations. We assigned a waypoint at the start and end of the search of each location. We assigned a single waypoint to high population densities, single live mussel locations, and SGCN. Using Strayer and Jirka (1997), we identified spent shells on location, bagging, labeling, and saving them for further examination and, some, for voucher specimens. We removed, identified, and captured images of live animals (as in Figure 1) using a digital camera and, then, carefully replaced the mussels back into the substrate.

We categorized data by species of living and dead mussels and appended specific notes for each point describing substrate conditions. Using the data collected, we created maps using ArcMap™ 10 to represent survey locations. We calculated a one-hour catch per unit of effort (CPUE) from the total number of individual mussels collected, the number of searchers, and the timeframes of the collection.

- 186 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 2. Unadilla watershed location in New York State.

- 187 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 3. Unadilla River drainage locations surveyed in 2012 for this work.

RESULTS

Principal results of our work are displayed in Tables 1-3, and Figures 4-6.

- 188 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 1. CPUE for live pearly mussels in the Unadilla River in 2012 sorted by descending CPUE. Surveys were limited to headwater areas. SGCN indicates species is on current DEC list for species of greatest conservation need.

Common Name Species SGCN Total # CPUE Eastern elliptio Elliptio complanata 226 5.75 Squawfoot Strophitus undulatus 61 1.55 Yellow Lampmussel Lampsilis cariosa 42 1.07 Elktoe Alasmidonta marginata 28 0.71 Triangle Floater Alasmidonta undulata 16 0.41 Eastern Lampmussel Lampsilis radiata 7 0.18 Green Floater Lasmigona subvirdis 2 0.05 Brook floater Alasmidonta varicosa 0 0 Eastern Floater Pyganodon cataracta 0 0 Table 2. CPUE for live pearly mussels in Wharton Creek in 2012 sorted by descending CPUE. SGCN indicates species is on current DEC list for species of greatest conservation need.

Common Name Species SGCN Total # CPUE Squawfoot Strophitus undulatus 52 2.46 Eastern elliptio Elliptio complanata 31 1.47 Eastern Floater Pyganodon cataracta 9 0.43 Elktoe Alasmidonta marginata 3 0.14 Triangle Floater Alasmidonta undulata 3 0.14 Yellow Lampmussel Lampsilis cariosa 0 0 Eastern Lampmussel Lampsilis radiata 0 0 Green Floater Lasmigona subvirdis 0 0 Brook floater Alasmidonta varicosa 0 0 Table 3. Survey totals for all sites in 2012 sorted by descending live mussels found. SGCN indicates species is on current DEC list of greatest conservation need.

Common Name Species SGCN Live Dead Squawfoot Strophitus undulatus 428 145 Eastern elliptio Elliptio complanata 283 657 Yellow Lampmussel Lampsilis cariosa 41 140 Elktoe Alasmidonta marginata 32 13 Triangle Floater Alasmidonta undulata 19 50 Eastern Floater Pyganodon cataracta 11 60 Eastern Lampmussel Lampsilis radiata 7 75 Green Floater Lasmigona subvirdis 2 22 Brook Floater Alasmidonta varicosa 0 1

- 189 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 4. Location of Live Yellow Lampmussel (Lampsilis cariosa)

- 190 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 5. Location of Live Elktoe (Alasmidonta Marginata).

- 191 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 6. Location of Live Green Floater (Lasmigona Subvirdis)

- 192 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

DISCUSSION

Comparing Tables 1 and 2, mussel diversity is higher in the Unadilla River. Wharton Creek contains similar populations but harbors less species richness than the Unadilla River. The Unadilla River held the most diversity and richness of the five bodies surveyed in 2012. Tallette Creek and Center Brook were the smallest water bodies surveyed, and we found no live pearly mussels or spent shells in those small waters. Our results in the last two years are consistent with Strayer (1983) in that mussel species richness increases with stream size. Elktoe (A. marginata) was found only in the two largest of the five streams further supporting Strayer’s (1983) conclusion. Our sampling methods did not detect any SGCN in Beaver Creek, Tallette Creek, or Center Brook. Time constraints limited our survey to 23 sites within the watershed. We spent 102 hours of search time in the water and found nine of the 10 previously found living species in the watershed (Lord and Pokorny 2011). We found three of the four SGCN in the sites searched in 2012. Living brook floater (A. varicosa) was the only SGCN that was not found in our 2012 search. Previous searches located brook floater (A. varicosa) in downstream reaches of the Unadilla River (Lord and Pokorny 2011). We saw evidence of continued mussel kills in April; most of the recent dead mussels appeared to have died in 2011 with the exception of a sizeable kill just upstream of the Chenango County Route 25 bridge on the Unadilla River. Those dead mussels appeared to have died in 2010. Our sampling methods were not exhaustive, and pearly mussels could have been overlooked in our surveys. To further analyze mussel populations in this watershed, a reproduced sampling of the sites needs to take place followed by a linear regression analysis of population size to document the status of pearly mussels.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank the Upper Susquehanna Coalition and the Otsego County Soil and Water Conservation District for the financial support facilitating this research. We further acknowledge, with gratitude, Scott Fickbohm’s participation in our April survey.

REFERENCES

Gangloff, M. Siefferman, L. Seesock, W. Webber, E. 2009 Effects of urban tributaries on freshwater mussel abundance in a biologically diverse piedmont (USA) stream. Hydrobiologia 636:191-201.

- 193 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Lord, P. and Pokorny, T. 2011. Pearly Mussel Surveys of Portions of the Catatonk Creek, Butternut Creek and Unadilla River. SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station.

NYSDEC. 2008. Mollusk Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN). http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/9406.html#Mollusk as viewed on 21Nov12.

Strayer, D. L. 1980. The freshwater mussels (Bivalvia: Unionidae) of the Clinton River, Michigan, with comments on man's impact on the fauna, 1870–1978. The Nautilus 94:142–149.

Strayer, D. 1983. The effects of surface geology and stream size on freshwater mussel (Bivalvia, Unionidae) distribution in southeastern Michigan, U.S.A. Freshwater Biology, 13: 253– 264.

Strayer, D. L. and A. R. Fetterman. 1999. Changes in the distributions of the freshwater mussels (Unionidae) in the Upper Susquehanna River Basin, 1955-1965 to 1996-1997. Am. Mid. Nat. 142:328-339.

Strayer, D.L. and K.J. Jirka. 1997. The pearly mussels of New York State. New York State MuseumMemoir26. The Univ. of the State of New York, The State Education Department. 113pp. + illustrations.

Strayer, D. Downing, J. Haag, W. King, T. Layzer, J. Newton, T. Nichols, S. 2004. "Changing Perspectives On Pearly Mussels, North America's Most Imperiled Animals." Bioscience 54.5: 429-439.

Vaughn, Caryn C., and Christine C. Hakenkamp. 2001. "The Functional Role Of Burrowing Bivalves In Freshwater Ecosystems." Freshwater Biology 46.11: 1431-1446.

- 194 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

2012 population estimate of walleye (Sander vitreus) in Otsego Lake

Jonas Willson1, John R. Foster1 and Mark D. Cornwell1

Abstract: The goal of this study was to estimate the adult walleye population in Otsego Lake. Adult walleye were captured and marked during their spawning run in tributary streams using backpack electrofishers and in the lake using an electrofishing boat during March and April 2012. A recapture sample was collected in May 2012 by electrofishing the entire circumference of the lake using a boat electrofisher. The 2012 adult walleye population in Otsego Lake was estimated to be 10,520 fish. This estimate indicates that the walleye population has continued to increase from the 2008 and 2009 levels.

INTRODUCTION

In the mid-1900s walleye (Sander vitreus) were abundant in Otsego Lake, but by 1990 the walleye population had become extirpated (Lehman et al. 1991). Following the unauthorized stocking of the alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) into Otsego Lake (Foster 1989) and its subsequent irruption (Foster and Gallup 1990), detrimental impacts from this species were observed on the lake ecosystem (Foster 1995, Wilson and Warner 1998, Harman et al. 2002). Starting in 2000 a walleye stocking program has been carried out as a management strategy to control the abundance of alewife and to reduce the detrimental impact of this species on the ecology of Otsego Lake (Cornwell and McBride 2007).

In order to provide a critical measure of the success of past and future walleye stocking efforts in Otsego Lake an efficient and accurate measure of walleye population abundance was needed. Initially population estimates followed the Percid Sampling Manual and were based on catch per unit effort data from boat electro-fishing and gillnetting (Cornwell and McBride 2007). However, the population estimates using mark and recapture techniques (Lydon et al. 2008, Peck et al. 2010) were significantly different than the number of walleye indicated by electro-fishing and gillnet catches (Cornwell and McBride 2007). Since mark and recapture population estimates are considered to be more reliable than those based on catch per unit effort data, this study utilized mark and recapture data to directly measure the abundance of adult walleye in Otsego Lake (Peck et al. 2010, Rogers et al. 1992).

The goal of this study was to determine the size of the adult walleye population in Otsego Lake in 2012. These data were compared to estimates made of the walleye population in 2008 and 2009.

1 Fisheries & Aquaculture Program, State University of New York at Cobleskill, NY 12043

- 195 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

METHODS & MATERIALS

This study was conducted on Otsego Lake (42.40⁰ N, 74.55⁰ W), Otsego County, New York. Otsego lake has a surface area of 1,711 ha., a maximum depth of 50.5 m and an elevation of 364.2 m (Harman et al. 1997).

Marked Sample

Smith-Root and Halltech backpack shockers were utilized at night to capture and mark 269 walleye in Cripple Creek (below Clarke Pond), Shadow Brook (at Mill Road) and Hayden Creek (County Road-53) from 20 March to 11 April 2012 (Figure 1 and 2). The marking effort in the streams resulted in fewer fish than needed. On 17 and 25 April 2012 the rocky shoals and Sunken Island (Figure 2) were sampled with a Smith-Root electro-fishing boat. Night (2030- 2400 hrs) electrofishing resulted in the capture and marking of 257 additional walleye. All walleye captured were checked for previous marks (fin clips, VIEs, jaw tags, hole punches), measured, sexed and checked for ripeness before being hole-punched in the soft dorsal fin and released.

Figure1. Marked sample collected in Otsego Lake tributaries using backpack electro-fishers in March and April 2012.

Recapture Sample

The recapture sample was collected by shocking the whole circumference of Otsego Lake with a Smith-Root electro-fishing boat (Figure 2). Recapture data were collected on 1 and 2 May 2012 and 9 and 10 May 2012 between 2030 and 2400. The 139 walleye in the recapture sample were checked for marks and tags, measured, sexed and released. Six recaptured walleye were marked in 2012.

- 196 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure 2. Otsego Lake and its three main tributaries, Otsego County, NY.

- 197 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

In the spring of 2012, a total of 526 walleye were marked. However, only 6 of the 139 recaptured walleye were previously marked fish. Unfortunately, the accuracy of the population estimate is highly dependent on the number of marked fish recaptured. Too small of a recapture sample can result in a biased population estimate. A minimum of 8 marked fish was needed in the recapture sample to provide an unbiased estimate of the walleye population in Otsego Lake (Brower et al. 1998). This should be kept in mind, when evaluating the 2012 estimate of the adult walleye population in Otsego Lake that was calculated using Bailey’s modification (Bailey 1951) of the Petersen Mark and Recapture formula.

In 2012 the estimated number of adult walleye in Otsego Lake was 10,520 fish (Figure 3). This indicates that the 2012 walleye population was substantially larger than the previous population estimates for 2008 (Lydon et al. 2009) and 2009 (Peck et. al 2010). Another population estimate should be made in 2013 to determine if this trend to increasing walleye abundance is real.

Figure 3. Otsego Lake adult walleye population estimates for 2008, 2009 and 2012.

The walleye population in Otsego Lake is maintained through stocking. Future fisheries management decisions regarding walleye stocking require a good estimation of their population, as well as its major prey – the alewife. Alewife populations are monitored using hydroacoustic surveys (Brooking and Cornwell 2005, 2007; Waterfield and Cornwell 2010) and all indications are that they have dropped to very low levels in recent years (Waterfield 2013). With large enough sample sizes, mark and recapture data can be utilized to accurately monitor the size of the walleye population. These data are necessary in order to evaluate the effectiveness of walleye as a biological control agent for alewives.

- 198 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The SUNY Cobleskill Department of Fisheries and Wildlife provided the equipment used to conduct the survey as well as transportation to and from the study locations. Ben German, Anthony Bruno, Stephan Bence, Ryan Cuer, Dan Drake, Matt Bowker, Pat Keating, Alex Phillipcheck, and Eric Malone assisted in the data collection.

LITERATURE CITED

Bailey, N.T.J. 1951. On estimating the size of mobile populations from recapture data. Biometrika. 38: 293-306

Brower, J. E., J. H. Zar, and C. N. von Ende. 1998. Field and laboratory methods for general ecology. 4th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill. 273 pp.

Brooking, T.E., and M.D. Cornwell. 2007. Hydroacoustic surveys of Otsego Lake, 2007. In 40th Ann. Rept. (2007). SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station, SUNY Oneonta.

Brooking, T.E. and M.D. Cornwell. 2005. Hydroacoustic survey of Otsego Lake, 2005. In 37th Ann. Rept. (2004). SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Cornwell, M.D., and N.D. McBride. 2007. Walleye (Sander vitreum) reintroduction update:Walleye stocking, gill netting and diet analysis 2007. In 40th Annual Report. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta

Foster, J.R. 1989. The introduction of the alewife into Otsego Lake. In 22nd Ann. Rept. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta. pp 107-111.

Foster, J.R. 1995. The fish fauna of Otsego Lake. In 28th SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta. pp 202-220.

Harman, W.N., L.P. Sohacki, M.F. Albright, D.L. Rosen. 1997. The State of the Otsego Lake1936-1996. Occasional Paper No. 30. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Harman, W.N., M.F. Albright, and D.M. Warner. 2002. Trophic changes in Otsego Lake, NY following the introduction of the alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus). Lake and Reservoir Management 18(3):215-223.

Lehman, K., W. Williams and J. Foster. 1991. Extinction of walleye (Stizostidion vitreum) in Otsego Lake, NY. In 23rd Ann. Rept. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Peck, D.J., J.R. Foster, J.C. Lydon, K. Poole and M.D. Cornwell. 2010. The

- 199 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

effectiveness of spring stream electro-fishing, trap netting and lake electro-fishing as a means of determining walleye abundance in Otsego Lake, NY. In 42th Ann. Rept. SUNY Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Rodgers, J. D, Solazzi, M. F, Johnson, S. L, Buckman, M. A. 1992. Comparison of three techniques to estimate juvenile coho salmon populations in small streams. North American Journal of Fisheries Management. 12: 79-86

Waterfield, H.A., and M.D. Cornwell. 2010. Hydroacoustic surveys of Otsego Lake’s pelagic fish community, 2010. In 43rd Ann. Rept. SUNY Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Waterfield, H.A. 2013. Personal communication. SUNY Oneonta Biol. Fld. Sta., SUNY Oneonta.

Wilson, B.J. and D.M. Warner. 1998. A comparison of littoral fish diversity and size in Otsego Lake in 1986-1998. In 31st Annual Report, SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station, Cooperstown, NY 13326. pp. 145-153.

- 200 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation, Lake Moraine, Madison County, NY 2012

Willard N. Harman and Matthew F. Albright

BACKGROUND (From Harman et al. 2010)

Located in Madison County NY, Moraine Lake (42o 50’ 47” N, 75o 31’ 39” W) was formed by a deposited glacial moraine damming a valley. The lake, which has been artificially raised, is divided into two basins separated by a causeway and interconnected by a submerged culvert. The north basin is approximately 79 acres, has a mean depth of 1.1m, and a maximum depth 3.7m. The south basin occupies 182 acres, has a mean depth of 5.4m, and a maximum depth of 13.7m. Most of the recreational activities such as fishing, boating and swimming take place in the south basin (Harman et al. 1997).

Moraine Lake has been regarded as meso-eutrophic due to the high productivity of algal and macrophytic plants, low transparency, and depleting levels of dissolved oxygen in the hypolimnion during summer stratification. Developments of lakeside residences and nearby agricultural activities are believed to have contributed to the current productivity status of the upper and lower basins (Anon. 1991). Nutrient loading as a result of faulty septic systems from the residences are believed to be a significant source of the problem in nutrient introduction (Harman et al. 1998). Many of the systems are out of date, undersized, and extremely close to the lake (Brown et al. 1983). Furthermore, soils surrounding the lake have poor percolation rates, steep slopes, shallow depths to bedrock, and fractured bedrock make the lake vulnerable to nutrient loading (Harman et al. 2008).

INTRODUCTION

The aquatic macrophyte communities of Moraine Lake have been monitored by the SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station (BFS) since 1997. The purpose of monitoring these plant communities has historically been directed towards controlling Eurasian water-milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), though in recent years the expansion of the exotic starry stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa) has been a matter of increased focus. Eurasian water-milfoil is an invasive species that grows rapidly and its extensive canopies cause problems for recreation and other species growth (Borman et al. 1999). Numerous methods of control have been applied to reduce the abundance of Eurasian water-milfoil (Harman et al. 2006). Since 1998, efforts have focused primarily on applications of Sonar®, which has been demonstrated to control Eurasian water- milfoil with some specificity. The goal of managing the Eurasian water-milfoil in the past has been to achieve a balance of species (Lembi 2000, Harman et al. 2008). Most recent activities have included a Sonar® application in the north basin in 2010 and in the south basin in 2011.

These efforts to control Eurasian water-milfoil have been effective in reducing the biomass of this species in relation to the overall biomass of aquatic plants in the Lake. However, currently Moraine Lake is experiencing a state of productivity whereby macrophytes other than Eurasian water-milfoil and macroalgae, such as coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum), sago

- 201 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

pondweed (Stuckenia pectinata) and starry stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa) are producing biomass that may be a threat to the recreational goals of the users of the Lake. It would be timely to address nutrient loading in addition to controlling plant mass via Sonar® application and other methods.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sampling took place 21 June and 20 September 2012 (a more abbreviated evaluation than those of previous years). Five collection sites were sampled, two in the north basin and three from the south basin (Figure 1). The sampling method used was the Point Intercept Rake Toss Relative Abundance Method (PIRTRAM) (Lord and Johnson 2006). It was evaluated in 2008 by comparing the PIRTRAM and dry weight methods such that the rake toss method “could prove useful, if not too much value is placed on actual abundance estimates. …an adequate number of replicate samples could provide insight into species dominance and extent related to exotic nuisance species as well as efforts to control them” (Harman et al. 2008).

For this method two heads of garden rakes were welded together and connected to a 10m nylon cord. At each of the 5 sites, the rake was thrown out randomly 3 times. The rake was allowed to settle to the bottom of the lake and slowly pulled into the boat. Once in the boat, species were separated and each was assigned an abundance category. The 5 abundance categories are “no plants” (denoted by “Z”), “fingerful” (“T”= trace), “handful” (“S” = sparse), rakeful (“M” =medium), and “can’t bring into the boat” (“D” = dense). Table 1 provides biomass range estimates associated with each category. Each rake toss triplicate sample’s category was converted to its corresponding mid-point (Harman et al. 2008). The mid-points were averaged for each species at each site. These species averages were then summed together to look at overall biomass at each site.

In each basin at the deepest location, water quality parameters were measured with a YSI® multiprobe. From surface to substrate, temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, pH, and ORP were measured. A water sample was taken from each basin and returned to the lab to be analyzed using the Lachat QuickChem FIA+Water Analyzer®. The ascorbic acid method following persulfate digestion (Liao and Marten 2001) was used to determine total phosphorus. For total nitrogen, the cadmium reduction method (Pritzlaff 2003) was used following peroxodisulfate digestion as described by Ebina et al. (1983). The phenolate method (Liao 2001) was used to measure ammonia and the cadmium reduction method (Pritzlaff 2003) for nitrate+nitrate-nitrogen. (Harman et al. 2008)

- 202 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Figure1. Bathymetric map of Moraine Lake, Madison County, NY. Contours in feet. WQ1 and WQ2 represent were water quality data were collected, sites 1-5 represent where plant biomass and rake toss methods were performed (Harman et al. 2008).

Table 1. Categories, field measurements, midpoint of each category (g/m2) and dry weight ranges applied for the rake toss method and used to generate Tables 2-6 (Harman et al. 2008).

Abundance Categories Field Measure Total Dry Weight (g/m^2) mid low high "Z" = no plants Nothing 0 0 0 0 "T" = trace plants Fingerful .0001 - 2.000 1 0.0001 2 "S" = sparse plants Handful 2.001 - 140.000 71 2.001 140 "M" = medium plants Rakeful 140.001 - 230.000 185 140.001 230 "D" = dense plants Can't bring in boat 230.001 - 450.000+ 340 230.001 450

- 203 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

RESULTS

Plant Biomass

Tables 2-6 proved biomass estimates, by species, during 2011 for sites 1-5 at Moraine Lake. Eurasian water-milfoil density was generally low in the south basin sites throughout the summer (Tables 2-4). However, it was abundant in the north basin throughout the summer (Tables 5 and 6). Of particular note is the continued dominance by starry stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa) at sites 1 and 3; the biomass estimates given in Tables 2 and 4 undoubtedly underestimate actual values because masses of this plant would collapse and fall off the rake as it was being pulled into the boat. Beds of this plant were often so thick that the perception was that a false bottom existed over 1 m from the actual bottom.

Figures 2-6 graphically summarize the plant biomass contributed by starry stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa), Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and other plant species between 2008 and 2011. While not the original focus of study, starry stonewort is highlighted along with milfoil because it is also an exotic nuisance species and management efforts ought to focus upon control both species. Also, the temporal variations implied by these figures may be misleading. The highest midpoint that can be assigned by any given species is 340 g/m2 (see Table 1). In some visits prior to 2012, more than one species was assigned this highest value, though the cumulative biomass value, in actuality, likely did not exceed the monocultural beds encountered in 2012.

Table 2. Mean biomass (g/m2) category mid-points for each species found at Site 1 during 2012 sampling events.

Site 1 6/21/2012 9/20/2012 Myriophyllum spicatum Megalodonta beckii Zosterella dubia Najas spp. Ceratophyllum demersum Chara vulgaris 23.67 Vallisneria americana Elodea canadensis Ranunculus aquatilis Ranunculus trichophyllus Stuckenia pectinata 24.00 71.00 Potamogeton crispus 24.00 Potamogeton zosteriformis 0.33 Potamogeton pusillus Nitellopsis obtusa 0.33 236.67 Total 72.33 307.67

- 204 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 3. Mean biomass (g/m2) category mid-points for each species found at Site 2 during 2012 sampling events.

Site 2 6/21/2012 9/20/2012 Myriophyllum spicatum 71.00 Megalodonta beckii Zosterella dubia 85.33 Najas spp. Ceratophyllum demersum Chara vulgaris 23.67 Vallisneria americana Elodea canadensis Ranunculus aquatilis Ranunculus trichophyllus Stuckenia pectinata 24.33 Potamogeton crispus 71.00 0.33 Potamogeton zosteriformis Potamogeton pusillus Nitellopsis obtusa Total 95.33 180.33

Table 4. Mean biomass (g/m2) category mid-points for each species found at Site 3 during 2012 sampling events.

Site 3 6/21/2012 9/20/2012 Myriophyllum spicatum Megalodonta beckii Zosterella dubia Najas spp. 85.33 Ceratophyllum demersum Chara vulgaris Vallisneria americana Elodea canadensis Ranunculus aquatilis Ranunculus trichophyllus Stuckenia pectinata Potamogeton crispus 0.33 Potamogeton zosteriformis Potamogeton pusillus Nitellopsis obtusa 109.00 236.67 Total 109.33 322.00

- 205 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Table 5. Mean biomass (g/m2) category mid-points for each species found at Site 4 during 2012 sampling events.

Site 4 6/21/2012 9/20/2012 Myriophyllum spicatum 250.33 250.33 Megalodonta beckii Zosterella dubia Najas spp. Ceratophyllum demersum Chara vulgaris Vallisneria americana 0.33 Elodea canadensis Ranunculus aquatilis Ranunculus trichophyllus Stuckenia pectinata Potamogeton crispus 0.33 Potamogeton zosteriformis Potamogeton pusillus Nitellopsis obtusa Total 250.33 251.00

Table 6. Mean biomass (g/m2) category mid-points for each species found at Site 5 during 2012 sampling events.

Site 5 6/21/2012 9/20/2012 Myriophyllum spicatum 340.00 198.67 Megalodonta beckii Zosterella dubia Najas spp. Ceratophyllum demersum 47.33 Chara vulgaris Vallisneria americana Elodea canadensis Ranunculus aquatilis Ranunculus trichophyllus Stuckenia pectinata Potamogeton crispus Potamogeton zosteriformis Potamogeton pusillus Nitellopsis obtusa Total 340.00 246.00

- 206 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Site 1 Plant Community 1000

900

800

700

600

500 Nitellopsis obtusa

400 Myriophyllum spicatum

Dry Weight (g/m^2) 300 Other

200

100

0

Figure 2. Comparison of biomass (g/m2) of starry stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa), Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and other plant species present, 2008 (Harman et al. 2009), 2009 (Harman et al. 2010), 2010 (Harman et al 2011), 2011 (Harman et al. 2012) and 2012, Site 1 (see Figure 1 for site locations).

Site 2 Plant Community 1000

900

800

700

600

500 Nitellopsis obtusa

400 Myriophyllum spicatum

Dry Weight (g/m^2) Other 300

200

100

0

Figure 3. Comparison of biomass (g/m2) of starry stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa), Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and other plant species present, 2008 (Harman et al. 2009), 2009 (Harman et al. 2010), 2010 (Harman et al 2011), 2011 (Harman et al. 2012) and 2012, Site 2 (see Figure 1 for site locations).

- 207 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Site 3 Plant Community 1000

900

800

700

600

500 Nitellopsis obtusa 400 Myriophyllum spicatum

Dry Weight (g/m^2) 300 Other

200

100

0

Figure 4. Comparison of biomass (g/m2) of starry stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa), Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and other plant species present, 2008 (Harman et al. 2009), 2009 (Harman et al. 2010), 2010 (Harman et al 2011), 2011 (Harman et al. 2012) and 2012, Site 3 (see Figure 1 for site locations).

Site 4 Plant Community 1000 900 800 700 Nitellopsis obtusa 600 Myriophyllum spicatum 500 400 Other 300 Dry Weight (g/m^2) 200 100 0

Figure 5. Comparison of biomass (g/m2) of starry stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa), Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and other plant species present, 2008 (Harman et al. 2009), 2009 (Harman et al. 2010), 2010 (Harman et al 2011), 2011 (Harman et al. 2012) and 2012, Site 4 (see Figure 1 for site locations).

- 208 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Site 5 Plant Community 1000

900

800

700

600 Nitellopsis obtusa 500 Myriophyllum spicatum 400

Dry Weight (g/m^2) 300 Other

200

100

0

Figure 6. Comparison of biomass (g/m2) of starry stonewort (Nitellopsis obtusa), Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and other plant species present, 2008 (Harman et al. 2009), 2009 (Harman et al. 2010), 2010 (Harman et al 2011), 2011 (Harman et al. 2012) and 2012, Site 5 (see Figure 1 for site locations).

Water Quality Analysis

Water quality parameters over summer 2012were comparable to those of recent years. In the south basin, waters below 8m were anoxic by the first sampling date (10 June). Transparency was 6.0m on 21 June and 4.0m on 20 September. pH was typically between 7.0 and 8.5. Surface nitrite+nitrate concentrations were 0.32 mg/l on 21 June and were 0.03 mg/l on 20 September.. Surface total nitrogen ranged from 0.30 to 0.32 mg/l, and total phosphorus from 6 to 25 ug/l.

In the shallower north basin, stratification was evident in the June visit, with bottom waters being anoxic. pH ranged from 7.0 to 8.7. Surface nitrite+nitrate concentrations below detection on both dates, total nitrogen ranged from 0.41 to 0.45 mg/l and total phosphorus ranged from 13 to 29 ug/l.

DISCUSSION

On 21 June, the North basin was practically covered in milfoil, in which thick scum algae was imbedded. By September, it was still prevalent, though had largely collapsed to the bottom. Unlike previous years, coontail was not collected earlier in the season, and was at moderate levels later. Milfoil was collected in the South basin only at Site 3, and only at moderate amounts. Curly leaf pondweed was never collected at high abundances, and likely was dying back by the first visit (which occurred at a later date than previous years of monitoring).

- 209 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

For the fourth year, starry stonewort has been dominant where present (Sites 1 and 3, the south end of the south basin and the eastern embayment at the north end of the south basin (see Figures 2 and 4)). It should be noted that its abundance is likely much higher than those figures imply due to difficulties related to measurement via the rake toss method. On a number of samples collected, masses of this species collapsed off the rake as the sample was lifted into the boat. It is not quickly spreading to other sites in that basin, and it has not yet been documented in the north basin. It has become a serious recreational pest in many lakes (i.e., Pullman and Crawford 2010), and in Moraine Lake it likely will become increasingly common and problematic and may soon be considered the focus of management concerns.

REFERENCES

Anon. 1988. Madison County septic system survey. Madison County Planning Department, Wampsville, NY 13163.0

Borman, S., R. Korth, and J. Tempte. 1999. Through the looking glass. A field guide to aquatic plants. Wisconsin Lakes Partnership.

Crow, G. E. and C. B. Hellquist. 2000a. Aquatic and wetland plants of Northeastern North America. V.1. Pteridophytes, gymnosperms, and angiosperms: dicotyledons. The University of Wisconsin Press.

Crow, G. E. and C. B. Hellquist. 2000b. Aquatic and wetland plants of Northeastern North America. V.2. Angiosperms: monocotyledons. The University of Wisconsin Press.

Fuller, R. 1997. Unpublished data. Colgate University, Hamilton, NY 13346.

Harman, W.N. and M.F. Albright and O. Zaengle. 2012. Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation, Lake Moraine, Madison, N.Y. 2011. Tech. Rept. #30. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., Oneonta, NY.

Harman, W.N. and M.F. Albright and T.F. Smith. 2011. Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation, Lake Moraine, Madison, N.Y. 2010. Tech. Rept. #29. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., Oneonta, NY.

Harman, W.N., M.F. Albright, H.A. Waterfield and M. Rubenstein. 2010. Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation, Lake Moraine, Madison, N.Y. 2009. Tech. Rept. #27. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., Oneonta, NY.

Harman, W.N. and M.F. Albright and L. Zach. 2009. Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation, Lake Moraine, Madison, N.Y., 2008. Tech. Rept. #26. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., Oneonta, NY.

- 210 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Harman, W. N. and M. F. Albright, and C. M. Snyder. 2008. Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation, Lake Moraine, Madison County, NY., 2007 Tech. Rept. #25. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., Oneonta, NY.

Harman, W. N. and M. F. Albright, and A. Scorzafava. 2006. Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation, Lake Moraine, Madison County, NY. Tech. Rept. #23. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., Oneonta NY.

Harman, W. N. and M. F. Albright, P.H. Lord and M. E. Miller. 2002. Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation of Lake Moraine, Madison County. Tech. Rept. #13. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., Oneonta NY.

Harman, W. N. and M. F. Albright, P.H. Lord and M. Miller. 2000. Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation of Lake Moraine, Madison County. Tech. Rept. #9. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., Oneonta NY.

Harman, W. N. and M. F. Albright, P.H. Lord and D. King. 1998. Aquatic macrophyte management plan facilitation of Lake Moraine, Madison County. Tech. Rept. #5. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., Oneonta NY.

Harman, W. N. and M. F. Albright. 1997. Aquatic macrophyte survey of Lake Moraine, Madison County, summer 1997, as related to management efforts by Sonar ® application. SUNY Oneonta Bio. Fld. Sta., Oneonta NY.

Lembi, C.A. 2000. Aquatic Plant Management. Purdue University, Cooperative Extension Service. West Lafayette, IN 47907.

Lord, P.H. and R.L. Johnson. 2006. Aquatic plant monitoring guidelines. http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/water_pdf/aquatic06.pdf

NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, Water Division. A Primer on Aquatic Plant Management in NYS. http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/water_pdf/ch6p2.pdf. 8.12.2009.

Pulman, G.D. and G. Crawford. 2010. A decade of starry stonewort in Michigan. Lakeline, summer 2010. North American Lake Management Society.

- 211 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Control and eradication of water chestnut (Trapa natans, L.) in an Oneonta wetland, 2012 progress report

Holly A. Waterfield1 and Matthew F. Albright2

The marsh of concern is located within the city of Oneonta, Otsego County, NY. The majority of the shoreline (and site access point) is owned by Louis Blasetti with a number of other landowners along the northwestern shoreline behind Oneida Street. Water chestnut (Trapa natans L.) was first observed in the wetland in 2000, though it is likely that it was introduced in years prior but was not documented. A detailed description and history of the management efforts to control and eradicate the water chestnut within the marsh is given in a 2009 Master’s Thesis submitted by W. Eyres (2009) and subsequent report to the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (Harman et al. 2012). In short, management activities have included a combination of herbicide applications and hand-harvesting of plants since 2006. The combination of chemical and manual control of plants was hugely effective in reducing the population from 2007 to 2010. Native floating-leaved plants were rebounding. Logistical complications resulted in a “missed” herbicide application during the 2010 growing season and subsequent rebound of the population. Following the 2011 herbicide application a second growth of plants was observed in mid-August. These plants were also producing fruits; a major hand-pulling event was held in mid-September, though growth was so prolific that effective harvest of all plants was not achievable.

Herbicide was not applied in 2012 due to complications in obtaining the appropriate state permits. Despite this, the extent of growth was markedly less than it had been in 2011. Water chestnut plants were hand-harvested on 19 August and 8 September 2012 by BFS staff along with volunteers from OCCA and the SUNY Oneonta incoming freshmen and Biology Club members. In comparison to recent years, only a small amount of chestnut was harvested (1 canoe-load) due to its low abundance. In 2011, volunteers removed approximately 12 canoe- loads, and at least that amount was left in place at the end of the effort. Since recent hand- harvesting efforts without herbicide treatment proved effective, treatment will rely solely on manual efforts through at least 2013.

REFERENCES

Eyres, W. 2009. Water Chestnut (Trapa natans L.) infestation in the Susquehanna River watershed: population assessment, control and effects. Master’s Thesis: SUNY College at Oneonta. Bio. Fld. Sta. OP No. 44.

Waterfield, H.A., W.N. Harman, M.F. Albright. 2010. An update on the control and eradication of water chestnut (Trapa natans, L.) in an Oneonta wetland, 2009 summary report of activities. In.42nd Ann. Rept.(2009). SUNY Oneonta.

1 Research Support Specialist: SUNY College at Oneonta Biological Field Station, Cooperstown, NY. 2 Assistant to the Director: SUNY College at Oneonta Biological Field Station, Cooperstown, NY.

- 212 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

Parasitic worms of fishes in tributaries of Otsego Lake

F. B. Reyda1 and D. D. Willsey2

INTRODUCTION

This particular study is part of an ongoing survey of the parasites of fishes of Otsego Lake that began in September 2008. The ultimate goal of this survey is to identify as many species of parasitic worms as possible from the diversity of fishes that occur in Otsego Lake, which is home to over 35 species of fish (MacWatters 1980), and to provide a host-parasite checklist for the watershed. Understanding the parasite diversity in Otsego Lake allows for insights to the ecology of Otsego Lake, and it facilitates future research by Reyda and his students. Results of earlier phases of this survey were included in previous annual reports (Hendricks & Reyda 2010; Reyda 2009; 2010; Szmygiel & Reyda 2011). Throughout this ongoing survey the focus has been on finding and identifying parasitic worms that occur within the digestive system, in particular the intestine, of the fishes examined, though other organs of the fish have also been examined. Prior to 2012, the fish that were collected and examined for parasites were predominantly centrarchids (e.g., smallmouth bass) and the percid, Perca flavescens (yellow perch), owing to the emphasis on angling as the sampling technique.

Collection efforts in 2012 emphasized other fish groups, namely cyprinids, many of which cannot be caught via angling. In 2012 collection efforts were focused on Otsego Lake tributaries, as well as the Susquehanna River, and nearby Oaks Creek, which flows from Canadarago Lake to the Susquehanna below Cooperstown. These stream collections, emphasizing different fish groups than those previously studied, were possible because of the recent acquisition of a backpack electro-fisher. The present study summarizes the fish species that were collected as part of this fish parasite survey in 2012, and provides comments on the parasite species encountered, several of which await species-specific identification.

METHODS

A Hallteck HT-2000 battery backpack electrofisher and accessories were used to stun fish at several sites in the vicinity of Otsego Lake between June and November 2012. Fish collections were done in compliance with a NY State DEC permit to F. Reyda (License No. 1647). Fish that were stunned were preliminarily identified while in the field and subsequently kept or released, based on desirability for the fish parasite survey. Fish that were kept were transported back to the BFS in an aerated portable container and stabilized in aquaria according to collecting site. Fish were necropsied 0–14 days after collection as follows: Fish were initially anesthetized in FinQuil and/or were double-pithed with a knife incision. Fish were then identified to species with the aid of an identification key and reference website (Smith 1985; http://fish.dnr.cornell.edu/nyfish/fish.html).

1 Assistant Professor, SUNY Oneonta Biology Department. 1 BFS Intern, summer 2012. Current affiliation: SUNY College at Oneonta.

- 213 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

A subset of collected fish were preserved in 10% formalin for the BFS reference collection. All fish were assigned a field code and were photographed with digital camera, and tissue samples from nearly all fish were preserved in vials containing molecular-grade 100% ethyl alcohol and stored in a -80°C freezer to enable future molecular studies. The necropsy was initiated with a ventral incision starting at the anus, and the viscera were subsequently removed and isolated in a petri dish filled with tap water. The stomach and the intestine of all fish dissected were examined with the aid of a dissecting microscope. In addition, in most fish examined, the external surface, including the eyes and fins, as well as the gills, liver, heart and body cavity, were also examined. All parasites encountered were preserved in vials of either 4 or 10% formalin or 70% ethyl alcohol (for future morphological study) or in molecular-grade 100% ethyl alcohol (for future DNA sequence analysis). A subset of the parasitic worms encountered and preserved for morphological study were subsequently prepared as whole-mount microscope slides as follows: worms were hydrated and stained in Delafield’s hematoxylin, and subsequently dehydrated in a graded ethanol series, cleared in methyl salicylate, and mounted in Canada balsam. Once dried, whole-mount microscope slides were examined with a compound microscope and initial identifications were made with the aid of a general fish-parasite identification reference (Hoffman 1999).

In addition, a subset of the worms saved in molecular grade ethanol, mainly metacercaria of digenetic trematodes encountered in the body cavity or in other organs, were sent to colleagues at Environment Canada (Montreal, Canada) who intend to obtain DNA sequence data for the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I gene, and make that data publicly available, as part of the Barcode of Life Initiative (http://www.barcodeoflife.org/).

RESULTS

Table 1 summarizes the number of fish species encountered at each of the collecting sites, which included: Oaks Creek (site 7), Susquehanna River (near Cooperstown), Hayden Creek; Shadow Brook, and Leatherstocking Creek. In total, 138 specimens representing 26 species of fish, including 16 cyprinid species, were collected and examined for parasites. More than 10 specimens of each of the following fish species were collected: blacknose dace, brown trout, creek chub, longnose dace, margined madtom, and white sucker. Ten of the 26 species of fish that were collected were previously sampled relatively well during the Otsego Lake portion of the survey, such as the smallmouth bass and rock bass. Sixteen of the 26 species encountered had not been previously collected as part of the fish parasite survey. Among the field sites chosen, Oaks Creek was by far the most diverse; we collected 18 species from that site.

Preliminary parasitological data are also included in Table 1. The number of species of parasitic worms that were encountered in the digestive system of each fish species is indicated, as is the number of parasite species that were encountered in sites other than the digestive system. Parasites encountered outside the digestive system included parasitic worms, as well as copepods, leeches and protists. Although the longnose dace was the most abundant fish encountered (21 individuals), it did not have the highest overall parasite diversity, with a total of four parasite species. The smallmouth bass was infected with the greatest diversity of parasites, with four species of intestinal worms, all of which were previously encountered in smallmouth bass in Otsego Lake, and with three species of parasites outside of the intestine, including an

- 214 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

unidentified leech externally, the copepod Ergasilis centrarchidarum on the gills, and an identified species of larval tapeworm on the gonads. Most of the species noted in Table 1 as occurring in non-intestinal sites were metacercaria, a larval stage of digenetic trematodes. Metacercaria were not identified to species, so the total number of digenetic trematodes obtained in this stream fish survey is not currently known.

- 215 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

- 216 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

DISCUSSION

The use of the backpack electrofisher and emphasis on stream sites made possible the collection of a diversity of fishes not previously encountered in the ongoing fish parasite survey, especially species of cyprinids. The resulting inclusion of stream fishes, however, did little to increase our list of intestinal parasitic worm species known from this area. Nearly all of the parasitic worms encountered in the digestive system of streams associated with Otsego Lake were already known to occur in fishes in Otsego Lake, such as the acanthocephalans Leptorhynchoides thecatus and Neoechinorhynchus rutili, the nematodes Spinitectus carolini and Spinitectus gracilis, and the cestode Proteocephalus cf ambloplites. The only intestinal parasite not previously encountered in the survey was a species of digenetic trematode—currently being identified to species—from the northern hogsucker.

Cyprinids are generally poor hosts of intestinal worms. In other words, cyprinids do not typically serve as definitive hosts for parasitic worms that mature and complete their life cycle in the intestine. Ten of the 16 species of cyprinids examined had no parasites occurring in their digestive system, and the other 6 cyprinid species had only one or two species of parasitic worms in the intestine (Table 1). On the other hand, cyprinids serve an important role as intermediate hosts of parasites, parasites that occur in locations other than the digestive system (Hoffman 1999). Eleven of the 16 cyprinid species examined were infected with at least one species of non-intestinal parasite, typically the metacercaria stage of digenetic trematodes, in the body cavity, the liver, the eyes, or some other non-intestinal site. Digenetic trematodes, such as the well-known “yellow grub”–a worm encountered throughout our survey work in both Otsego Lake and the streams–utilize the fish as the second intermediate host in the life cycle, which can only be completed when the intermediate fish host is preyed upon by a piscivorous bird, such as a heron, where the worm will develop to the adult stage, mature, and mate (Hoffman 1999). Although five species of cyprinids were found not to host any parasites outside of the digestive system, it is assumed that these species also serve as intermediate hosts of metacercaria in these streams but that we failed to encounter infections owing to small sample sizes. For example, only one specimen of eastern silvery minnow was examined (see Table 1).

Our understanding of the diversity of digenetic trematodes awaits species-specific identifications of the plethora of metacercaria that were encountered in this survey. Because metacercaria are immature worms, there are relatively few morphological features to facilitate their identification, and morphology-based identification of metacercaria to species is virtually impossible (Hoffman 1999). It is our hope that our collaboration with colleagues at the Barcode of Life Initiative in Canada will result in available sequence data of some of these unknown species and shed light on the species diversity of fish trematodes in Otsego Lake and its tributaries.

In addition to the stream sampling summarized here, fish were collected directly from Otsego Lake in 2012 as part of the fish parasite survey. Those data, however, are not reported here. Rather, those data will be included in a more comprehensive summary of the parasitic worms of fishes of Otsego Lake and its tributaries that will be provided in the future.

- 217 - 45th Annual Report of the Biological Field Station

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to Mark Cornwell for providing training on using the electro-fisher, and thanks to him and Justin Hurlbert, both of SUNY Cobleskill, and to Matt Albright, Holly Waterfield and Jeff Heilveil of SUNY Oneonta, for assistance with electro-fishing. The following students contributed to this study: Austin Borden, Rebecca Russell, Amanda Sendkewitz and Joe Westenberger. This study was funded in part by the SUNY Oneonta Research Foundation and an NSF FSML grant to W. Harman (DBI 1034744).

REFERENCES

Hendricks, L. & F. B. Reyda. 2010. A survey of the acanthocephalan parasites of fish species of Otsego Lake, NY. In 41st Annual Report of the SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station. Pp. 272–275.

Hoffman, G.L. .1999. Parasites of North American Freshwater Fishes. Cornell University. Second Edition. 576 p.

MacWatters, R. C. 1980. The fishes of Otsego Lake, Biological Field Station, Cooperstown, New York. Occasional Paper No. 7. 52 p.

Reyda, F. B. 2009. Fish parasite survey, 2008. In 41st Annual Report of the SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station. Pp. 153–157.

Reyda, F. B. 2010. Parasitic worms of fishes of Otsego Lake and nearby water bodies , 2009. In 42nd Annual Report of the SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station. Pp. 276–281.

Smith, C. L. 1985. The Inland Fishes of New York State. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 287-309.

Szmygiel, C. & F. B. Reyda. 2011. A survey of the parasites of Smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) In 43rd Annual Report of the SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station. Pp. 235–240.

- 218 -