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.

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.

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.

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

Site # GPS Coordinates Description

1 N 42 44.240' W 75 00.768' Stream access near road, off west side of Keating Rd.

3 N 42 43.838' W 75 00.135' South side of bridge at intersection of Hoke and Keating Rd.

4 N 42 43.355' W 75 00.292' Downstream side of bridge on Route 28 in Oaksville

5 N 42 42.368' W 74 59.156' South of Allison Rd bridge, N of Fly Creek confluence

6 N 42 42.127' W 74 58.522' Bridge over Fork Shop Rd.

7 N 42 41.283' W 74 57.453' Under bridge at intersection of Routes 59 &26

8 N 42 40.967' W 74 57.476' Closed bridge on Lower Toddsville Rd.

9 N 42 39.993' W 74 57.548' South of bridge on Route 28 in Index

Fly Creek N 42 42.575' W 74 58.735' North of culvert under Allison Rd off Route 26 outside town of Fly Creek

Susquehanna N 42 40.025' W 74 56.718' Closed bridge on Phoenix Mills Rd. Access on east side of River

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.

Table 2. Taxa list with total counts of each organism collected.

Order Family Genus 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 FC SsqEphemeroptera Baetidae Baetis 18 9 7 16 14 10 4 3 6Ephemeroptera Baetidae Unknown 13 6 2 37 6 2 2Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Heptagenia 9 24 17 25 25 31 23 17 6 12Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae MacCaffertium 4 15 4 4 7 5 6Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Stenacron 6 18 13 8 7 8 8 17 3 4Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Unknown 12 22 32 54 14 38 23 25 10 13Ephemeroptera Leptophelbidae Paraleptophlebia 2 5 2 5 2Ephemeroptera Ephemerellidae Ephemerella 1 3 1 2 2 2Ephemeroptera Isonychiidae Isonychia 1 1 1 3 1

Plecoptera Perlidae Agnetina 6 8 22 11 41 8 7 1Plecoptera Perlidae Paragnetina 16 6 2Plecoptera Perlidae Acroneuria 5 4 2Plecoptera Perlidae Neoperla 5 10 14 4 22 12 9 3Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Ceratopsyche 2 19 17 7 203 182 144 49 18 85Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Cheumatopsyche 226 67 32 10 1 5 11 40Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Hydropsyche 3 2Trichoptera Philopatmidae Chimarra 7 59 43 4 42 68 37 24 13 4Trichoptera Rhyacophildae Rhycophila 1 2 12 23 9 7Trichoptera Uenoidae Neophylax 11 26 3 33 17 7 23 5 3Trichoptera Limnephilidae Pycnopsyche 1 1 1Trichoptera Goeridae Goera 1Trichoptera Glossosomatidae Glossosoma 5 1 1Trichoptera Odontoceridae Psilotreta 1Coleoptera Elmidae Stenelmis 172 64 87 71 128 138 111 59 17 38Coleoptera Elmidae Optioservus 63 45 59 63 511 200 252 56 21 15Coleoptera Elmidae Dubiraphia 1 1 1Coleoptera Elmidae Promoreseia 1 1Coleoptera Psephenidae Psephenus 16 49 11 19 27 36 33 16 24 32Coleoptera Psephenidae Ectopria 1 1

Megaloptera Corydalidae Nigronia 1 4 2 1 2 1 4Megaloptera Sialidae Sialis 3 1 1Venerioda Dressenidae Dreissena 23 6 5 5 3 2Venerioda Sphaeriidae Sphaerium 5 2 3

Amphipoda Gammaridae Gammarus 181 53 58 4 19 1 3 1Amphipoda Haustoriidae Pontoporeia 6 2 4 1Amphipoda Unknown Unknown 327 18 8

Odonata Gomphidae Gomphus 1 1Diptera Chironomidae Unknown 148 44 37 29 82 48 26 56 32 64Diptera Ceratopogonidae Probezzia 2 1 2 2 5Diptera Tipulidae Hexatoma 1 2 4 3 2 2Diptera Tipulidae Unknown 1 2 2 1 3 2 2Diptera Simulidae Simulium 19 2 2 1 3Diptera Empididae Unknown 1 4 2Diptera Athericidae Atherix 2 1 2 1

Decapoda Cambaridae Orconectes 8 3 5 4 1 2 6Decapoda Cambaridae Unknown 1 2 4

Trombidiformes Hydrachnidiae Unknown 4 1 2 2Isopoda Asellidae Asellus 1

24 24 19 22 31 22 20 27 18 171268 571 487 347 1238 859 768 421 192 336

Number of Individuals at Site

Total No. GeneraTotal No. Organisms

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.

13

21

15

17

29

14

22

17

20

22

7

10

8

8

12

8

10

8

9

9

Susquehanna

Site #9

Site #8

Site #7

Site #6

Fly Creek

Site #5

Site #4

Site #3

Site #1

Richness

EPT Richness Taxa Richness

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

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.

4.86

4.42

4.33

4.52

4.48

4.38

4.38

4.74

4.95

5.42

Susquehanna

Site #9

Site #8

Site #7

Site #6

Fly Creek

Site #5

Site #4

Site #3

Site #1

Familial Biotic Index

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

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).

55.5

62.5

46.5

48.5

48.5

63.5

73.5

58.5

57.5

48.5

Susquehanna

Site #9

Site #8

Site #7

Site #6

Fly Creek

Site #5

Site #4

Site #3

Site #1

Percent Model Affinity

Order NYSDEC Model

Community Ephemeroptera (Mayfly) 40%

Plecoptera (Stonefly) 5% Trichoptera (Caddisfly) 10% Chironomidae (Midge) 20%

Coleoptera (Beetle) 10% Oligochaeta (Worms) 5%

Other 10%

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.

Location Temp (°C) pH DO (mg/l) % DO Conductivity (mS/cm)

Turbidity (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

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.