REFERENCE CONDITIONS FOR STREAMS IN THE GRAND PRAIRIE NATURAL DIVISION OF ILLINOIS BY BRANDI SANGUNETT B.S., Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 2000 B.A., Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, 2000 THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science in Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2005 Urbana, Illinois © 2005 by Brandi Sangunett. All rights reserved. Abstract As part of the Critical Trends Assessment Program (CTAP) of the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, 18 potential reference quality stream reaches in the Grand Prairie Natural Division were evaluated in May 2004 and 2005. This agriculturally dominated region, located in east central Illinois, is among the most highly modified in the state. Illinois Environmental Protection Agency high quality fish stations, Illinois Natural History Survey insect collection data, and best professional knowledge were used to choose which streams to evaluate. The quality of these sites was assessed using the species richness of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera insect orders (EPT), a modified Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI), and a 12 parameter Habitat Quality Index (HQI). Reference quality streams were compared to 21 randomly selected meandering and 30 randomly selected channelized streams which were assessed by the Critical Trends Assessment Program between 1997 and 2001. The results from this research indicate that reference streams were consistently of higher quality than random streams, and are representative of the biotic potential of the Grand Prairie. A GLM ANOVA showed that both channel alteration and stream size were significant factors governing stream quality. Streams with meandering courses and a larger wetted width were generally healthier in terms of EPT, HBI, and HQI. However, HBI appeared to be a less sensitive measure of stream quality. The extent of stream channelization, especially in terms of loss of pool variability and sinuosity, appeared to be a major cause of degradation in stream quality. A regionally specific rating scale now exists for the Grand Prairie that puts 51 randomly sampled streams into context. The findings of this research are consistent with iii earlier findings for statewide random sites reported by CTAP. Overall, 31.4% of randomly chosen streams in the region were classified as having fair stream quality, 47.1% were of poor condition, 13.7% were good quality, and 7.8% were excellent quality (Fig. 27). This study has provided additional evidence that stream quality in Illinois is low and is a result of extensive channel alteration. iv To my husband Kumar, whose tireless patience and unyielding support were instrumental in the completion of this project. v Acknowledgements I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. R. Edward DeWalt, and my committee members Dr. Edwin E. Herricks, and Dr. Douglas M. Johnston for their advice and guidance. The Illinois Natural History Survey - Center for Biodiversity, University of Illinois - Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, Illinois Department of Natural Resources - Critical Trends Assessment Program, and Illinois Chapter of the Nature Conservancy - Mackinaw River Project have all provided financial support. vi Table of Contents List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... ix List of Figures......................................................................................................................x Chapter 1: Introduction........................................................................................................1 Chapter 2: Literature Review...............................................................................................3 Illinois Streams: Historical vs. Current Condition...................................................3 Biomonitoring Using Aquatic Macroinvertebrates..................................................8 Stream Reference Conditions ................................................................................11 Description of Study Area .....................................................................................15 Critical Trends Assessment Program.....................................................................17 Comparison of Historic and Contemporary EPT Specimens ................................20 Chapter 3: Methodology ....................................................................................................23 Selection of Reference Streams .............................................................................23 Sample Collection and Preservation ......................................................................26 Biological Assessment...........................................................................................26 Habitat Assessment................................................................................................26 Chemical Assessment ............................................................................................27 Functional Feeding Groups....................................................................................28 Watershed Land Cover Analysis ...........................................................................28 Comparison of Reference Streams and Random Streams .....................................29 Development of a Rating Scale..............................................................................30 Chapter 4: Results..............................................................................................................32 Stream Quality Metrics..........................................................................................32 EPT taxa richness ......................................................................................32 Hilsenhoff Biotic Index ..............................................................................35 Habitat Quality Index ................................................................................37 Individual Habitat Parameters................................................................................39 Functional Feeding Groups....................................................................................44 Watershed Land Cover Analysis ...........................................................................46 Conductivity...........................................................................................................49 Percent of Fine Sediment Particles ........................................................................51 Chapter 5: Discussion ........................................................................................................52 Site Selection .........................................................................................................52 Stream Quality Metrics..........................................................................................52 Individual Habitat Parameters................................................................................54 Functional Feeding Groups....................................................................................54 Watershed Land Cover Analysis ...........................................................................55 Conductivity...........................................................................................................56 Percent of Fine Sediment Particles ........................................................................56 vii Ratings Scale..........................................................................................................57 Comparison to Other Areas ...................................................................................60 References..........................................................................................................................62 Appendix 1: EPT taxa and abundance taken at 18 reference streams, May 2004 and 2005 in the Grand Prairie Natural Division of Illinois ................................................68 Appendix 2. Random streams sampled by the Critical Trends Assessment Program, 1997-2001, in the Grand Prairie Natural Division of Illinois ......................................74 Appendix 3: Calculation of multimetric index and overall quality rating for randomly chosen streams in the Grand Prairie Natural Division of Illinois ................................76 Curriculum Vitae ...............................................................................................................78 viii List of Tables Table 1. Comparison land cover between presettlement and contemporary times in the Grand Prairie Natural Division of Illinois. ....................................................................6 Table 2. Land cover of the 10 major river basins in the Grand Prairie Section of the Grand Prairie Natural Division of Illinois ...................................................................17 Table 3. Selected chemical parameters and approximate width of potential reference streams in the Grand Prairie Natural Division of Illinois ............................................25 Table 4. Description of individual habitat parameters used to assess reference and random streams in the Grand Prairie Natural Division of Illinois...............................27 Table 5. Variables in the data matrix for GLM ANOVA of reference and