stream ecology ii
DESCRIPTION
Stream Ecology II. Nutrients Bioassessment “Big Picture”. 1. Nutrients. Heterotrophs —obtain nutrients from food and ingesting/absorbing water; usually limited by C Autotrophs —often limited by macronutrients (N & P, plus K, Ca, S, Mg) - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Stream Ecology II
1. Nutrients2. Bioassessment3. “Big Picture”
![Page 2: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
1. Nutrients• Heterotrophs—obtain nutrients from food and
ingesting/absorbing water; usually limited by C
• Autotrophs—often limited by macronutrients (N & P, plus K, Ca, S, Mg)
• Often, N & P demand > availability, so nutrient supply limits biological activity
![Page 3: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Nutrients (2)
![Page 4: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Nutrients (3)
![Page 5: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Nutrients (4)
• Nitrogen– ~1 mg/L, as influenced by humans– ~0.1 mg/L, natural– 40 to 90% is DON
• Phosphorus– ~0.01 mg/L for PO4
-3 (SRP)– ~0.025 mg/L for TDP
![Page 6: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Nutrients (5)N-cycle
![Page 7: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Nutrients (6) N-cycle
![Page 8: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Nitrogen budget for agricultural fields and riparian zones associated with the Rhode River, Maryland (Peterjohn and Correll 1984). Units are kg/ha/yr.
Nutrients (6): N Budget
![Page 9: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Nutrients (7) P-cycle
![Page 10: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Phosphorus budget for agricultural fields and riparian zones associated with the Rhode River, Maryland (Peterjohn and Correll 1984). Units are kg/ha/yr.
Nutrients (8): P Budget
![Page 11: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Nutrients (9)• Transport and solute dynamics closely coupled with physical
movement of water • For non-reactive solutes (ignoring subsurface exchange):
ΔC ΔC mixing in storagewith t DS water mass
C=concentration, t=time, x=distance, u=downstream velocity, D=dispersion coefficient, Cs=storage zone, =storage coefficient
CCxCD
xCu
tC
s
2
2
![Page 12: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Nutrients (10)• For reactive solutes (uptake and mineralization):
ΔC ΔC mixing in uptake mineral. with t DS water mass
C=concentration, t=time, x=distance, u=downstream velocity, D=dispersion coefficient, c=dynamic uptake rate, z=depth, b=mineralization rate, Cb=mass per unit area of immobilized nutrient in streambed
bbc Cz
CxCD
xCu
tC 1
2
2
![Page 13: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Nutrients (11): NPristine:
~1 kg/ha-yrHuman-affected:
~9.4 kg/ha-yr, with 67% as nitrate
80% of world’s variation due to fertilizers
![Page 14: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Pristine:~1 kg/ha-yr
Agricultural:~2 kg/ha-yr (row crops)~2 kg/ha-yr for MS-Atchafalaya River Basin
Inputs: fertilizers, manure, and sewage sludge
Nutrients (12): P
![Page 15: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Importance of Nutrients in Stream Restoration
• Essential to ecologic function and integrity• Typically nutrient-limited• Pathways, budgets, and loadings are affected
by human activity and corridor condition
![Page 16: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
2. Bioassessment• To assess the biological integrity and composition of stream
points in relation to reference site (as defined here for use in Ohio*)
• To measure river condition relative to a “reference stream”• “River health” in the very broad sense that a healthy river is
one in good conditionSelect examples1. Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI)—fish 2. Invertebrate Community Index (ICI)3. Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index (QHEI)—physical
characteristics
*Dufour, K., M. Meehan, A. Van Kley, B. Weber, R. Will, I.Y. Yeo, with S.I. Gordon and M.M. Conroy, 2001, Development and Change in the Big Darby Watershed, City and Regional Planning Regional Planning Studio.
![Page 17: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Bioassessment (2)
![Page 18: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
• At a stream location, a score is given for each metric if it closely (5), somewhat (3), or fails (1) to approximate the “reference site”
• With 12 metric scores, 60 is the maximum and 12 is the minimum
1. Total Number Species: direct diversity measure and general indicator of environmental quality
2. Number of Darter Species/Percent Round-Bodied Suckers: site specific species requiring clean water found in headwater or wading stream and represented by round-bodied suckers in boating sites
3. Number of Sunfish Species/Number of Headwater Species: favor quiet pools and in-stream cover; indicate degree of preservation of original pools and riffles and channel components
4. Number of Sucker Species/Number of Minnow Species: relatively long-lived and favor high environmental quality; serve as long-term indicators of surrounding conditions
5. Number of Intolerant Species/Number of Sensitive Species: serve as indicators of degradation; greater proportion of intolerant species indicates less degradation
6. Percent Tolerant Species: serves as indicator of degradation; greater proportion of tolerant species signifies a greater degree of degradation
Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI; 1)
![Page 19: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
7. Percent Omnivores: represents degree of disruption to the food base; greater proportion of omnivores indicates greater environmental degradation
8. Percent Insectivores: measures community integrity in the middle of the food chain; fewer insectivores suggest depletion of insect food base and therefore a greater degree of environmental degradation
9. Percent Top Carnivores/Percent Pioneering Species: measures fish species at the top of the food chain; more carnivores suggest a greater food base and therefore a relatively good community structure
10.Number of Individuals: excluding tolerant species, serves as a measure of toxic sensitivity and total degradation
11.Percent Hybrids/Number of Simple Lithophilic Species: indicate levels of stress and disturbance in stream reach; lithophilic spawners require clean gravel or cobble and are a good indicator in non-headwater streams
12.Percent DELT Abnormalities: measures Deformities, Eroded fins, lesions or tumors and usually indicate overcrowding, disease, or high levels of toxicity
Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI; 2)
![Page 20: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
• At a stream location, a score is given for each metric if it closely (6), somewhat (4), less somewhat (2), or fails (0) to approximate the “reference site”
• With 10 metric scores, 60 is the maximum and 0 is the minimum
1. Total Number of Taxa: species richness and diversity increases with warm water stream quality; inverse relationship with drainage area
2. Number of Mayfly Taxa: pollution sensitive species; greater proportion of taxa indicates higher environmental quality
3. Number of Caddisfly Taxa: main component in larger, unimpacted waterways; wide range of pollution tolerances within taxa
4. Number of Fly Taxa: have wide range of tolerances to pollution; often only organism collected under heavily polluted conditions - greater proportion suggests lower stream quality
5. Percent Mayfly Composition: easily affected by even minor disturbances; serves as measure of overall levels of stress and disturbance
Invertebrate Community Index (ICI; 1)
![Page 21: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
6. Percent Caddisfly Distribution: quickly absent under environmental stress; serves as a measure of stream stress
7. Percent Tribe Tanytarsini Midge Composition: often predominant group at minimally impacted sites; pollution tolerances are intermediate
8. Percent Other Fly and Non-insect Composition: includes non-insect invertebrates such as worms, isopods, snails, etc.; main community component in poor water quality conditions - greater abundance indicates lower environmental quality
9. Percent Tolerant Organisms: tolerant to toxic and organic pollution; greater proportion of organisms indicates lower overall environmental quality
10.Number of Qualitative EPT Taxa: qualitative measure of habitat diversity and water quality; measures richness of mayfly, stonefly, and caddisfly taxa
Invertebrate Community Index (ICI; 2)
![Page 22: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
1. Substrate: measures substrate type and quality; takes into account variables like parent material, embeddeness of cobble, gravel and boulders and silt cover. The maximum score is 20
2. Instream Cover: measures instream cover type and amount. The maximum score is 20
3. Channel Morphology: includes channel sinuosity, development, stability and channelization; indicates the quality of the stream channel in relation to creation and stability of the macrohabitat. The maximum score is 20
4. Riparian Zone and Bank Erosion: measures floodplain quality, extent of bank erosion and the width of the riparian zone; serves as indication of the quality of the riparian buffer and floodplain vegetation. The maximum score is 10
Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index (QHEI; 1)
![Page 23: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
5. Pool and Riffle Quality: component measures include overall diversity of current velocities, pool depth and morphology and riffle-run depth, substrate and substrate quality; serves as indication of the quality of the pool and riffle habitats. The maximum score is a combined 20 (12 for pool, 8 for riffle)
6. Map Gradient: calculation of elevation drop through sampling area; accounts for varying influence of gradient with respect to stream size. The maximum score is 10
Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index (QHEI; 2)
![Page 24: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Big Darby Watershed, Ohio
IBI, ICI, and QHEI Application
![Page 25: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Comparison of Indices
Stream Visual Assessment ProtocolVersion 2 (USDA-NRCS), Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index (OH EPA), Rapid Bioassessment Protocol (USEPA), and Qualitative Physical Habitat Index (USEPA); Hughes et al. (2010, JAWRA)
![Page 26: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Biological Condition and Stress
![Page 27: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Importance of Bioassessment in Stream Restoration
• Rather than focus on specific taxa, relatively rapid semi-quantitative protocols have been developed to comprehensively characterize the physical habitat structure of streams (Reference, and various levels of impairment)
• Balance information content of candidate indicators against the costs of acquiring the information
![Page 28: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
3. “Big Picture”
![Page 29: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
“Big Picture” (2):Hierarchical Organization
![Page 30: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
“Big Picture” (3):
River Continua
![Page 31: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
“Big Picture” (4):
River Continua
![Page 32: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
“Big Picture” (5): Spatial Scales
(Minshall, JNABS, 1988)
![Page 33: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
“Big Picture” (6): Temporal Scales
(Minshall, JNABS, 1988)
![Page 34: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
“Big Picture” (7): Hyporheic Zone
![Page 35: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
“Big Picture” (8): Urban Streams
![Page 36: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
“Big Picture” (9): Urban Streams
(Meyer et al., JNABS, 1988)
![Page 37: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
“Big Picture” (10): Urban Stream Syndrome
(Walsh, JNABS, 1988)
![Page 38: Stream Ecology II](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022081513/568165a0550346895dd87b53/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Importance of “Big Picture” in Stream Restoration
• Appreciate connectivity and scale• Hyporheic zone• Special needs and opportunities of urban
streams