WRC RESEARCH REPORT NO. 183 STREAMFLOW AND VELOCITY AS DETERMINANTS OF AQUATIC INSECT DISTRIBUTION AND BENTHIC COMMUNITY STRUCTURE IN ILLINOIS By Lewis L. Osborne and Edwin E. Herricks Department of Civil Engineer ing University of Illinois at. Urbana-Champaign LTrbana, Illinois 61801 Project No. B-136-ILL Matching Grant Agreement No. 14-34-0001-1219 Final Technical Completion Report Bureau of Reclamation U.S. Department of the Interior Washington, D. C. 20240 Contents of this publicati.on do not nt!cessariLy reflcct the vitlws and ~mlicirsof the United States Department of the I~lterior,nor does mention of trade nilnes or commcrclal products constitute tt1ei.r ertdorscment or recommerldation for use by the Ilnited States G'overnmcnt. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .......................... iv ABSTRACT ............................. LIST OF TABLES .......................... LIST OF FIGURES .......................... 1. INTRODUCTION ......................... 2 . AQUATIC INSECT MICROVELOCITY PROBE DEVELOPMENT. VERIFICATION. AND EXPERIMENTAL USE .............. 2.1 PURPOSE ......................... 2.2 INTRODUCTION ...................... 2.3 THERMISTOR PROBES AND METNODS .............. 2.3.1 Probe Construction (Series 1 and Series 2) .... 2.3.2 Series 1 Probe Calibration and Operation ..... 2.3.3 Series 2 Probe Calibration and Operation ..... 2.4 THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS-HYDRAULIC PARAMETERS ..... 3 . MICROVELOCITY MEASURENENTS IN VARIOUS SUBSTRATE TYPES AND FLOW CONDITIONS .................. 20 3.1 PURPOSE ......................... 20 3.2 METHODS ......................... 20 3.3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................. 21 3.3.1 Evaluation of R* as a Microhabitat Indicator ... 21 3.3.2 Comparison of R* to Depth and Velocity as Microhabitat Indicators ............ 28 3.3.3 Example of R* Use for Studying Aquatic Insect Microhabitat ............... 29 3.3.4 Discussion .................... 32 4 . A STUDY OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF AQUATIC INSECTS AS RELATED TO R* IN FIVE ILLINOIS STREAES ............ 35 4.1 PURPOSE ......................... 35 4.2 INTRODUCTION ...................... 35 4.3 STUDYSITES ....................... 36 4.4 METHODS ......................... 36 4.5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................. 37 4.6 RANGE OF F* FOR INVERTEBRATE TAXA ............ 52 5 . CALIBRATION OF ARTIFICIAL SUSSTRATES ............. 58 5.1 PURPOSE ......................... 58 5.2 INTRODUCTION ...................... 58 5.3 METHODS ......................... 59 5.3.1 Substrates .................... 59 5.3.2 Calibrations ................... 59 Page 5.4 APPLICATION TO THE FIELD ............... 72 6 . SUBSTRATE COLONIZATION AND THE EFFECTS OF PERIPHYTON AND SEDIMENT ................. 75 6.1 PURPOSE ........................ 75 6.2 INTRODUCTION ..................... 75 6.3 STUDY AREA ...................... 76 6.4 PROCEDURES ...................... 77 6.4.1 Colonization Procedures ............ 77 6.4.2 Sediment Collection and Analysis ........ 81 6.4.3 Chlorophyll a Determination .......... 81 6.4.4 Community parameters and Statistics ...... 82 6.5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................ 83 6.5.1 Colonization Results .............. 83 6.5.2 Hydropsychid Colonization ........... 91 6.5.3 Hydropsychid Colonization Results and Discuss ion ................. 92 6.5.4 Sediment Effects on the Distribution of Hydropsychid Larvae ............. 96 6.5.5 Results and Discussion of Sediment- Retreat Distribution .............. 97 6.6 SUMMARY ........................ 101 7 . INSTREAM CURRENT REQUIREMENTS OF FOUR SPECIES OF NET-SPINNING HYDROPSYCHID CADDISFLIES AND SIMULIUM SP .... 104 7.1 PURPOSE ........................ 104 7.2 INTRODUCTION ..................... 104 7.3 STUDYAREA ...................... 107 7.4 METHODS ........................ 107 7.5 MICROHYDRALTLIC STUDY ................. 108 7.5.1 Results and Discussion ............. 110 7.6 MICROHABITAT CURRENT VELOCITY STUDY .......... 112 7.6.1 Results andDiscussion ............. 114 7.7 SIMULID (SIWL1DAE:DIPTERA) CURRENT VELOCITY REQUIREMENTS ................. 122 7.7.1 Purpose .................... 123 7.7.2 Methods .................... 123 7.7.3 Results andDiscussion ............. 123 iii Page 7.8 SUBSTRATE HOLE EXPERIMENT ............... 125 7.8.1 Methods ..................... 126 7.8.2 Results and Discussion ............. 127 8 . SUBSTRATE PARTICLE SIZE AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE JORDAN CREEK EPHEMEROPTERA AND TRICHOPTERA ......... 132 8.1 PURPOSE ........................ 132 8.2 INTRODUCTION ...................... 132 8.3 METHODS ........................ 132 8.4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................. 134 9 . CONCLUSIONS ......................... 152 LITERATURE CITED ......................... 154 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors of this report would like to acknowledge the contributions and assistance provided by many people during the three years this research was conducted. Joseph K. Furnish selected many field sites, completed initial field analyses, and performed aquatic insect collection and identification. Steven F. Railsback developed R* and assisted in field data collection and analysis. Experimental studies and associated data analysis were performed by Heather Cairns-Chambers, Margaret Lang, and Maria Braga. Professor Vahid Alavian consulted on microprobe development and assisted in the design and analysis of artificial substrate calibrations. Professor Vincent J. McDonald provided important consultation on microprobe development. Dr. John D. Unzicker verified identifications of aquatic insects and Drs. Michael Wiley and James Gore provided invaluable review of this manuscript . Manuscript typing was performed by Connie Cassida. Significant technical support was provided by the staff of the Department of Civil Engineering. Owen Ray, Richard Shipley, Glenn Lafenhagen and Richard Hines all assisted in development of experimental systems for the project. Ron Winburn and his staff drafted many of the figures. We would also like to express our appreciation for the administrative support of Glenn Stout, Director of the Illinois Water Reso,urc.es Center. ABSTRACT Stream flow characteristics, in particular velocity and depth, control channel substrates and directly or indirectly determine how aquatic insects are distributed and benthic communities are structured. A three year laboratory and field research program has been completed evaluating how streamf low affects aquatic insects in Illinois. Field studies related benthic community structure and species composition with boundary layer Reynolds number (R*) and evaluated microhabitat selection of several insect species on hydraulically defined artificial substrates. Hydraulic calibra- tion of substrates was completed in laboratory flume studies using a thermistor based microprobe. A laboratory artificial stream was also used to determine habitat selection of net spinning caddisf lies. Results indi- cated selection for defined microhabitats in several aquatic insect taxa. The artificial substrates proved to be a valuable tool in defining micro- habitat characteristics occupied by aquatic insects. In studies to determine instream flow requirements, measures of mean column velocity were shown to be inadequate, determination of R* was preferred. The results of this research provide water resources managers with better tools to assess microhabitat modifications produced by changes in streamflow. Osborne, Lewis L . , and Edwin E . Herr icks STREAMFLOW AND VELOCITY AS DETERMINANTS OF AQUATIC INSECT DISTRIBUTION AND BENTHIC COMMTNITY STRUCTURE IN ILLINOIS Report of Project No. B-136-ILL, Matching Grant Agreement No. 14-34-0001- 1219, Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of Interior, Washington, D.C. 170 pp. KEYWORDS--Aquatic Insects, Benthic Communities, Stream Macrobenthos, Aquatic Habitat, Instream Flow, Stream Organisms, Microhabitat Selection, Artificial Substrates List of Tables Table 2-1. Sensitivity analysis for R* (from Railsback, 1979) for various types of streams and stream habitats .................. Table 4-1. Taxa collected during the study and the corresponding taxa codes ............. Table 4-2. Community statistics for each of the 70 Surber samples collected from Hutchins Creek (HC), Big Creek (BC), Apple River (AP), Kishwaukee River (KS), and the Salt Fork River (SF) and the corresponding R* value ..................... Table 4-3. Reynolds number statistics for each of the five rivers sampled during the project ...... Table 4-4. Species richness statistics for each of the five rivers sampled during project ...... Table 4-5. Total number of individuals and corresponding statistics for each of the five rivers sampled during study ................... Table 4-6. Species diversity (H') statistics for each of the five rivers sampled during the project .... Table 4-7. Results of oneway analysis of variance on the various community statistics (species richness, total number of individuals, H' diversity) and the calculated Reynolds number with respect to river system and the subsequent A-posteriori comparisons (N.S. = not significant at p<0.05). .. Table 4-8. Results of Spearman rank correlation analysis with the various river parameters using all seventy Surber samples. (N.S. = not significant at pH = 0.05; numbers and sign (i.e., + or -) represent significance of relationship) ...... Table 5-1. The mean column velocities (crnlsec) employed in the substrate hydraulic calibrations and the corresponding Reynold's number (R*) at a depth of 12.7 cm and a temperature of 17OC ....... Table 5-2. Equations for determining mean point velocities on the