ML20079N325

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Plant Ei Hatch Units 1 & 2,Biological Survey on Altamaha River,Appling County,Ga,Jan-Oct 1980
ML20079N325
Person / Time
Site: Hatch  Southern Nuclear icon.png
Issue date: 10/31/1980
From: Guill G
GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:
References
RTR-NUREG-1437 AR, NUDOCS 9111110161
Download: ML20079N325 (36)
v • d • e


Text

. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . - _ _ . _ _ - . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _

O PLANT EDWIN I. HATCH UNITS 1 AND 2 BIOLOGICAL SURVEY ON THE ALTAMAHA RIVER, APPLING COUNTY, GEORGIA. JANUARY - OCTOBER,1980 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL ATFAIRS CENTER .

GEORGEN.GUILL,PRINdIPALINVESTIGATOR O March, 1981 O

l l

9111110161 001031 1

PDR NUREG 1437 C PDR L s, , , , - , . - . . . . . . - .. . . , . _ . , . - . .

ACDiOW1.EDGDfEh7S I would like to acknowledge the following people for their i

participation in this study. Mrs. C. C. Bell was invaluable for her assistance in sorting and taxonomic identification of samples.

Messrs. D. R. liix, A. A. Staats, M. C. liichols, J. R. Allen, and Ms. T. D. Collins assisted in field work and/or laboratory proces-sing. Mr. M. C. flichols also carried out the statistical analysis of the data. Ms. D. A. Smith typed the manuscript.

t' 0

t O

i l

l l

I l

O i

TABLE OF CONTCiTS im Conclusions y introduction 1 Matericis and Methods 2 Results and Discussion Part 1 Physicochemic-1 Monitoring 3 Part 2 Biological Monitoring 3 Sut:ma ry 6 Literature Cited 7 G

. O 9

0 9

3 O

11

__ - - - . _ . --__a_=- -__.a-u-,_ _ . _ _ _ . , _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ .._ _ . , _ _ _ _

LIST OF TABLES Pane I

1. Minimum and Maximum Values for Physicochemical Data Obtained at the Time of Macroinvertebrate Sampling. 8
2. Average Stream Velocity Hessurements (cm/sec) 'rC n at the Time of Macroinvertebrate Sampling. 9
3. Numbers of Individuals Collected on Dendy Samplers During 1980, 10
4. Taxa, Total Numbers, and Percent Composition of Organisms Collected on Dendy Samplers at Station 115.5 During 1980. 12
5. Taxa, Total Numbers, and Percent Cc:?osition of Organisms Collected on Dendy Samplet., at Station 115.9 During 1980. 15
6. Taxa, Total Numbers, and Percent Composition of -

Organisms Collected on Dendy Samplers at Station 116.6 During 1980. 17 O 7- ^v r se v 1# a ^= 1v 1 er v ri c from Dendy Samples Collected Daring 1980.

<=r t>="

19

8. Average Values and Analysis of Variance for H3AR from Dendy Samples Collected During 1980. 20
9. Average Values and Analysis of Variance for Number of Taxa from Dendy Samples Collected During 1980. 21
10. Numbers of Individuals Collected in Petersen Samples During 1980, 22
11. Species, Total Numbers, and Percent Composition of Organio.ns Collected in Petersen Samples at Station 115.5 During 1980. 24
12. Species, Total Numbers, and Percent Composition of Organisms Collected in Petersen Samples at Station 115.9 During 1980. 25
13. Species. Total Numbers, and Percent Composition of Organisms Collected in Petersen Samples at Station 116.6 During 1980. 26
14. Average values and Analysis of Variance for 1RL'M from Petersen Samples Collected During 1980. 27 iii

-. .-. - --- ~. - . - - - . .. . .

1 1

LIST OF TAPLES (Con't)

Page

15. Average Values and Analysis of Variance for IIBAR from Petersen Sample.s Collected During 1980. 20
16. Average Values and Analysis of Variance for Number of Taxa from Petersen Samples Collected During 1980. 29 i

. j O

i

O iv l-

Conclusions O

1. Physicochemical parameters measured at HNP are similar among stutions and within normal ranges for the study area.
2. The data demonstrate a healthy and diverse macroinvertebrate population in the vicinity of HNP.
3. Normal .30pulation cycles are in evidence in the macroinvertebrate popu'stian.
4. An analysis of the data with regard to relative abundance, numbers of individuals, numbers of taxa, and species diversity showed that generally similar organisms in similar numbers occurred above the HNP discharge, within the mixing zone, end at the downstream edge of the mixing zone.

The operation of Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 do not create an objectionable or damaging pollution condition with regard to the macroinvertebrate co=munity in the Altamaha River dowr.atream from the discharge.

6. The result- af this biological survey fulfill the requirements set forth in RPDES Permit No. GA-0004120, Part 1B-2.

O 1

l O

V

Introduction The NPDES Permit (GA-0004120) for Plant Hatch, issued by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division (EPD), required Georgia Power Company (CPC) to conduct a biological survey on the Altamaha River which is the receiving stream for Plant Edwin I. Hatch Units 1 and 2. The purpose of the survey was to monitor effects of the thermal discharge from discharge serial 0001 to document that the combined discharges from Units 1 and 2 do not create an " objectionable or damaging pollution condition."

Plant Hatch is a two unit, nuclear powered, steam-electric generating station. Unit 1 became operational on December 31, 1975; and Unit 2 began commercial operation on September 5, 1979. The combined capacity of both units is 1,630 W.

Plant Hatch is located in Appling County, Georg.ia,17.7 kilometers (11) miles north of Baxley, Georgia. It is sited on the south bank of the Altam=.ha River east of U.S. Highway 1. The Altamaha River-at this location has a drainage area of approximately 30,000 square ki-lometers (11,600 square miles) and an average annual discharge of 351 cubic meters per second (12,400 cubic feet per second), (USGS,1980). .

lhe river is about 153 m vide and up to 10 m deep at the study site.

The river is bordered by forests an'd floodplains composed of Baldcy-press and mixed hardwoods.

4 Three sampling stations were located at approximate river miles 116.6, upstream from the ENP discharge; 115.9, in the mixing zone; and 115.5, near the downstream edge of the mixing zone..

The substrate at all stations was predominately loose sand which is characteristic of coastal plain rivers. All stations were placed l near mid-channel or so as to be exposed to the ESP discharge. Current i velocity varied from 148.2 cm/see to 45.5 cm/sec.

l l

O 1

Materials and Methods At each station, three aluminum rods each with three Dendy multiplate sa=plers attached were suspended 0.2 meters below the surface of the water from two cylindrical aluminum floats. The floats were connected together with chain and anchored to the sub-strate using scrap metal weights. To obtain prepar replication of samples, six of the nine Dendy multiplate samplers we-e collected for each sampling period af ter an exposure period of 6.ix weeks.

The Dendy samplers were 'each constructed of four tempered masonite plates spaced 0.3 cm apart and with a combined surface area for all six sa=plers of 0.5 square meters. Each sampler was enclosed in a nylon bag with a drawstring top prior to removal froin the water.

The Dendy samplers were then removed from the rod, a collecting label was placed in the bags, and the bags secured by tying the drawstring. The samplers were then placed in a 10% formalin solu-tion for transport to the laboratory.

Five modified Petersen dredge samples were also taken on a transect at each station for each sampling period. The combined area sampled for the five grabs was 0.13 square meters. The dredge samples were concentrated in the field through a U.S. No. 30 sieve.

  • placed in liter jars, and preserved,in a 10% formalin solution.

In the Georgia Power Company Environmental Center Laboratory, macroinvertebrates and detritus were gently brushed from the Dendy samplers and washed through a No. 30 sieve. Petersen dredge samples were stained with Eosin-B-Biebirch Scarlet (Williams, 1974). Macro-invertebrates were sorted from detritus and sand under an illuminated magnifyer. Identifications of organisms were made using a stereo-

oom microscope.

Macroinvertebrates were identified to the lowest practical taxon using the following keys for identification'. Merritt and Cummins, 1978; Edmunds et. al., 1976; Hilsenhoff, 1975; Needham and Westfall, 1954; Parrish, 1968; Ross, 1944; Sinclair, 1964; Edmondson, 1959; and Wiggins, 1977.

Current velocity was measured at each station at the time of sample collection using a Pigmy Pattern flow meter placed at the depth of the Dendy sa=plers. Three separate measurements of three-minute durations were made and averaged to obtain the ambient stream velocity for each station.

An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed on the Dendy and Petersen data for species diversity (RBAR), number of taxa, and number of individuals (LNUM), (transformed as Log 0 (number of individuals +

1 1)).

Factors analyzed were station, month, and station sonth

, interactions. Samples were collected once each quarter during 1980 on January 31, April 28, July 21, and October 6.

2

R_esults and Discussion Part 1 Physicochemical Monitoring Minimum and maximum values of the physicochemical parameters taken at the time of sample collections are presented in Table 1.

The data are generally similar among stations within date periods.

The data appear to be within nomal ranges for the study area and exhibit no unusually high or low values that would be character-istic of a polluted stream. Current velocity (Table 2) varied at each station depending on river stage. Station 115.9 had the high-est velocities during the vinter and spring high flow, and Station 115.5 showed the highest velocities during the sumer and fall low flow situations.

Part 2 Biological Monitoring Part 2.1 Dendy Data A list of the taxa collected by Dendy samplers at ENP during 1980 is presented in Table 3. Ephemeroptera (Mayflies) were repre-sented by nine taxa. Stenonema sp. was most abundant, reaching its peak population in July at Station 115.9. Baetis sp. was also a-bundant with generally constant numbers being present throughout the year at all stations. Heptagenia sp. vas also abundant at all O ' cie= - ta===a et- 1. (1976) ee cridea ste e = P =v=Pw-as being strongly thismotactic and often occurring in crevices; there-fore, the closely spaced plates of the Dendy samplers provided a very suitable substrate for the occurrance of large numbers of Sten-onema sp. ny=phs. Stenonent sp., Heptagenia sp., and Baetis sp. are common in flowing streams with moderate to rapid current (Edmunds et. al., 1976; Hubbard and Peters, 1978), and the current velocity never fell below 45.5 cm/see at any station during the sempling peri-od. The larger numbers of Tricorythodes sp. that occurred at Station 115.5 in July may have been influenced by several factors. The cur-rent velocity at Station 115.5 was greater in July than at either of

! the other stations. Hubbard and Peters (1978) list Tricorythodes sp.

I as being theobiontic, that is, occurring 1n water with a faster cur-rent. Edmunds et. al. (1976) stated that Tricorythodes sp. was often found associated with fine sand on the stream beds and also among exposed, washed roots of terrestrial plants. There is en extensive sand bar just upstream from Station 115.5, and this station is also

loca';ed on the outside of a curve in the river adjacent to a steep, I eroded section of the river bank which is heavily vegetated. This sand bar and exposed vegetation could also have influenced the in-creased abundance of Tricorythodes sp. at Station 115.5. The remain-ing taxa of Ephemeroptera were generally distributed evenly between i

the sites.

Eight taxa of Plecoptera (Stoneflies) were collected. Perlesta Q sp. appeared in large nu=bers at all stations in April and were_re-placed by Paracnetina sp. in July and October. Both Perlesta sp. and i

3

pararnetina sp. are classified by Merritt and Cummins (1978) as being Oi predators occurring in lotic erosional areas. This temporal separ-ation of the two species is most likely an adaption to reduce com-petition between them and allow for coexistance in the same habitat (Cu== ins and Klug, 1979).

Coleoptera (Beetles) wers represented by five taxa with Stenelmis sp. adults bein; most numerous. July was the peak month for this taxa.

Members of the family Hydropsychidae were the dominant group of the eleven taxa of Trichoptera (Caddisflies) which were collected.

This group also reached its greatest numbers in July. The Hydropsy-chids spin nets which are used to capture their food, and they are thus dependent on the current for their food supply (Wallace and Merritt, 1980; Wallace et. al., 1977). The greatest current velocity in July occurred at Station 115.5, and this station also had the greatest numbers of Hydropsychids.

Five taxa of Diptera (Flies) occurred. Chironomidae and Simulidae appeared in large numbers in April at all stations. Chironomidae were still present in moderate numbers in July, but the numbers of Simulidae were negligable. Large numbers of Chironomidae also occurred in Octo-ber. The large reduction in the populations of Simulidae after April .

was most probably related to emergence and a reduction in river stage with a corresponding reduction in entrent velocities.

The data for percent composition (Table 4 through 6) reflect "O dominance at each station by similar taxa within and among date periods.

For the January sampling period, Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, and Chiron-omidae were the dominant taxa present and comprised 86%, 99%, and 98%

of the total organisms present at Stations 115.5, 115.9, and 116.6, respectively. In April, a seasonal increase in Simu11dae occurred.

The Simulidae. Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, and Chironomidae, accounted for 94% (115.5), 96% (115.9), and 95% (116.6) of the total organisms t

collected. Simulidae were replaced in July by Stenelmis sp. adults,

, Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, and Chironomidae and comprised 93% (115.5),

l 95% (115.9), and 91% (116.6) of the 1.otal organisms collected. The October samples were dominated by Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Chiron-omidae, and Stenelmis sp. adults (93% (115.5), 86% (115.9), and 93%

l (116.6) of the total organisms present).

An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed on the Dendy data for HBAR, number of taxa, and 1NUM. Factors analyzed were station, month, and station-month interaction. Results are presented in Tables 7 through 9. This analysis showed significant station-month interac-tions for number of taxa and number of species which precluded detec-ting significant differences among main effects (month, station).

Significant differences among months were detected for HBAR. The HBAR values were similar within date periods between stations. Lower HEAR values in April were caused by a seasonal increase in Sinulidae.

Part 2.2 Petersen Data Table 10 presents a list of the taxa collected in Petersen samples at HNP during 1980. The Coleoptera (Beetles) were represented almost 4

/~'

entirely by Stenelmis sp. larvae. The predominant Deptera (Flies) were Chironocidae and Ceratopogonidae. Corbicula sp. (Pelecypoda) and 011gochaetes also occurred in large numbers. The cercarial stage of Trematode flukes were also abundant. The other taxa present were represented by relatively low numbers of individuals, some of which (i.e. Hydropsychid Caddisflies) were not usually associated with the predominately loose sand substrate which occurs at all stations.

Percentage composition data for the Petersen samples are presented in Tables 11 through 13. Petersen data exhibited more variation than the Dendy data, but similar taxa occurred among stations within date periods, and there were taxa common to all stations for all sampling periods. Caironomids were present in all samples for all date periods ranging from 3.6% to 65.0% of the organisms collected during any par-ticular survey. Oligochaetes composed 0.0% to 44.6% and Corbicula sp.

6.4% to 71.4% of the total organisms collected for any particular sur-vey. Stenelmis sp. larvae were also abundant and ranged from 0.0% to 39.8% of the total organisms collected on any particular survey.

An analysis of variance was performed on the Petersen data for HBAR, number of taxa, and number of individuals (transformed as Log10 (number of individuals + 1)). Results are presented in Tables 14 through 16. Factors analyzed were the same as those for the Dendy data. Significant interaction precluded detecting significant differ-ences among main effects (month, station).

Low HBAR values in April,1980, were due to a seasonal increase

() in the number of Chironomidae present in the samples. The low HBAR for Station 115.9 in January, 1980, was due to the presence of few individuals which were co= prised primarily of Corbicula sp.

O

, 5 I

l

- - - . . - - - - . _ .. - . . . . . . - - . - . . . ~ _ - . . . _ - . . - - -- - -- - ~ . - . ~ . - . - - - . . . - .

Summary O

, When the data obtained from Dendy and"Petersen samples for 1979 and 1980 at BNP are compared with respect to relative abundance, num-ber of taxa, HBAR, and number of individuals, they indicate a healthy benthic macroinvertebrate community both upstream and downstream from HNP. Seasonal and yearly population cycles are also in evidence.

Based on the results of these studies, HNP Units 1 and 2 have had no detectable effects on the benthic macroinvertebrate populations, nor have they created 'an cbjectionable or damaging pollution condition in the Altamaha River in the vicinity of RNP.

i 0

0 I

4 l

E O

6

i Literature Cited Cummins, K. W. and M. J. Klug. 1979. Feeding ecology of stream invertebrates. Am. Rev. Ecol. Syst., 10, pp. 147-172.

Edmunds, G. F, Jr. , S. L. Jeneen, and L. Berner. 1976. The Mayflies of North and Central America. University of Minnesota Press, Minne-apolis, 330 pp.

Hilsenhoff, W. L. 1975. Aquatic insects of Wisconsin. Department of Natural Resources Bulletin, Vol. 89, Pbdison, 52 pp.

Hubbard, M. D. and W. L. Peters. 1978. Environmental requirements and pollution tolerance of Ephemeroptera, U.S.E.P. A., Cincinnati, 461 pp.

Merritt, R. W. and K. W. Cummins. 1978. An introduction to the aquatic insects of North America. Kendall/ Hunt Publishing Co.,

Dubuque, 441 pp.

Needham, J. G. and M. J. Westfall. 1954. A manual of the dragonflies of North Amerien. University of California Press Berkley, 603 pp.

Parrish, F. K. (ed.). 1968. Keys to water quality indicative organ-

$sns. FWPCA. Atlanta, 192 pp.

O. Rocs, H. H. 1944. The Caddisflies, or Trichoptera, of Illinois. Ill.

Nt ?. . Hist. Sur. Bull. 23 (1), 326 pp.

I Sinclair, R. M. 1964. Water quality requirements of the family Elmidae (Coleoptera). Tennessee Stream Pollution Control Board, Nashville, 13 pp.

U.S. Geological Survey. 1980. Water resource data for Georgia:

Water year 1979. U.S.G.S., Washington,-D.C., 501 pp.

Wallace, J. B., J. R. Webster, and W. R. Woodall.- 1977. The role of filter feeders in flowing waters. Arch. Hydrobiol. 79 (4),

pp. 506-532.

and-R. W. Merritt. 1980. Filter feeding ecology of aquatic insects. Am. Rev. Entomol. 25, pp. 103-132.

Ward, H. B. and G. C. Whipple. 1959. Freshwater biology. John -

Wiley and Sons, New York, 1248 pp.

Wiggins, G. B. 1977. Larvae of the North American Caddisfly Genera (Trichoptera). University of Toronto Press, Toronto,'401 pp.

n Williams, G. E., III. .'.9 7 4 . New technique to facilitate hand-picking

.\ s,/ macrobenthos. Trans. Amer. Micros. Soc. 93 (2), pp. 220-226.

TABLE-1 MINIMUM AhT MAXIMUM VALUES FOR PHYSICOCHEMICAL DATA OBTAINED AT THE TIME OF MACROINVERTEBRATE SAMPLING WATER LICHT STATION _ TEMP. ( C) D.O. pH PEhgTION .[cQ 115.5 10.0 - 31.0 6. 9 - 9.li 5.5 - 7.2 44 ~ 63 1' 115.9 10.0 - 30.0 7.1 - 9.2 5.4 - 7.1 36 - 60 116.6 10.0 - 31.0 7.3 - 10.4 5.5 - 7.5 37 - 60

(

o 2

o O

8

i O AVERAGE STREAM VELOCITY MEASUREMENTS (ctn/sec) '

TAKEN AT THE TDiE OF MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE SAMPLING STATION DATE 115.5 115.9 116.6 01/31/80 113.4 137.3 111.0 04/28/80 120.8 148.2 115.4 07/21/80 85.8 52.1 55.3 10/06/80 80.4 45.5 57.2 O

I l

~

1 l

l l

l l

9

l i

TABLE 3 NUMBERS OF INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED ON DENDY SAMPLERS DURING 1980 Station Taxa 115.5 115.9 116.6 l

l *Ephemeroptera Isonychia sp. 8 35 15 Tricorythodes sp. 214 38 50 Ephemerella sp. 54 47 41 l

Caenis sp. 1 stenoneta sp. 258 417 403

  • Heptageniidae 80 86 52 Heptagenia sp. 139 76 83
  • Baetidae 39 51 34 Baetis sp. 180 182 179 Odonata
  • Argia sp. 1
  • Plecoptera 12 8 5 Pteronarcys sp. 3 1

' 12 5 7 s *Perlidae Neoperla sp. 4 8 2 Perlesta sp. 55' 27 20 Acroneuria sp. 1 7 1 Paragnetina sp. 55 43 49 Isoperla sp. 1 Isogenus sp. 1 1 Megaloptera Corydalus sp. 22 21 19 Coleoptera .

l Stenelmis sp. Adult 145 342 61 Macronychus glabratus Adult 12 6 6

  • Elmidae Larvae 1 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 40 10 2 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 19 8 14 Trichoptera Chimarra sp. 1 Neureclipsis sp. 2 1 1
  • Hydropsychidae 130 38 40 Macronema sp. ,

1 1 Hydropsyche sp. 19 5 8 Hydropsyche incommoda 321 129 115 g/

y Hydropsyche orris 321 61 62 Cheumatopsyche sp. 101 61 55 I

10 c--- -- --. e,

TABLE 3 (Con't)

O Station Taxa 115.5 115.9 116.6

  • Hydroptilidae 81 18 42 Ceraclea sp. 14 5 5 Nectopsyche sp. 3
  • Diptera 1
  • Ceratopogonidae 1 1
  • Chirono=idae 1114 870 624
  • Simulida e 612 596 463
  • Empididae 7 2 3 Atherix sp. 2 2 4
  • Annelida 6
  • 011gochaeta 2 1 3
  • Isopoda 1
  • Hydracarina 1

'O

  • Were not identified beyond the indicated taxonomic level.

O O

11

l TABLE 4 TAXA, TOTAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF ORGANISMS COLLECTED ON DENDY SAMPLERS AT STATION 115.5 DURING 1980 Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition 01/31/80 Ephemerella sp. 54 16.4 Stenonema sp. 21 6 . 4*

Heptageniidae 28 8.5 Heptagenia sp. 23 7.0 Baetidae 39 11.9 Baetis sp. A7 14.3 Plecoptera 5 1.5 Per11dae 3 0.9 Neoperla sp. 1 0.3 Isoperla sp. 1

  • 0.3 Stenelmis sp. Adult 1 0.3 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 2 0.6 Bydropsychidae 1 0.3 Mydropsyche sp. 7 2.1 -

Hydropsycne ince=moda ,

21 6.4 Hydropsyche orris 23 7.0 Cheu=atopsyche sp. 19 5.S l ,(

) Chironocidae 33 10.0 04/28/80 Isonychia sp. 1 0.1 Stenone=a sp. 11 0.9 Heptageniidae 1 0.1 Heptagenia sp. 58 4.8 Baetis sp. 23 1.9 l Plecoptera 2 0.2 l Pteronarcys sp. 1 0.1 Neoperla sp. 1 0.1 Perlesta sp. 55 4.5 Stenelmis sp. Adult 12 1.0 i Macronychus glabratus Adult 2 0.2 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 1 0.1 Hydropsychidae 40 3.3 Bydropsyche inco==oda 23 1.9 Hydropsyche orris 42 3.5 Cheumatopsyche sp. 2.5 31 Chironocidae 304 25.0 Simulidae 608 50.0 Empididae 1 0.1 07/21/80 Isonychia sp. 6 0.4 Tricorythodes sp. 204 13.5 Caenis sp. 1 0.1

() Stenancea sp.

Heptageniidae 148 20 9.8 1.3 12

TABLE 4 (Con't)

Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition 07/21/80 Heptagenia sp. 21 1.4 Baetis sp. 55 3.6 Pleceptera 4 0.3 Pteronarcys sp. 2 0.1 Perlidae 3 0.2 Aeroneuria sp. 1 0.1 Paragnetina sp. 21 1.4 Corydalus sp. 10 0.7 Stenelmis sp. Adult 11s 8.5 Macronychus glabratus Adult 10 0.7 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 35 2.3 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 13 0.9 Chimarra sp. 1 0.1 Pacronema sp. 1 0.1 Hydropsychidae 70 4.6 Hydropsyche sp. 12 0.8 Hydropsyche incommoda 147 9,7 Hydropsyche orris . 209 13.8 Cheucatopsyche sp. 39 2.6 I

- Hydroptilidae 2 0.1 Ceraclea sp. 9 0.6 Chironomidae 329 21.8 Simulidae 2 0.1 Empididae 6 0.4 Hydracarina 1 0.1 10/06/80 Isonychia sp. 1 0.1 Tricorythodes sp. 10 0.9 Stenenema sp. 78 7.5 Heptageniidae 31 3.0 Heptamenia sp. 37 3.6 Baetis sp. 55 5.3 Plecoptera 1 0.1 Perlidae 6 0.6 Neoperla sp. 2 0.2 Paracnetina sp. 34 3.3 Corydalus sp. 12 1.2 Stenelmis sp. Adult 4 0.4 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 3 0.3 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 5 0.5 Neureclipsis sp. 2 0.2 Hydrops;chidae 19 1.8 Hydropsyche inco=moda 130 12.5 Ilydropsyche orris 47 4.5 Cheumatopsyche sp. 12 1.2 Hydroptilidae 79 7.6 Ceraclea sp. 5 0.5 13

. _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ l

TABLE 4 (Con't)

O Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition 10/06/80 Neetopsyche sp. 3 0.3 Ceratopogonidae 1 0.1 Chironomidae 448 43.1 Simulidae 2 0.2 Atherix sp. 2 0.2 A:melida 8 0.8 011gochaeta 2 0.2 e

e

<O I

0 14

TABLE 3 TAXA, TOIAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF ORGANISMS COLLECTED ON DENDY SAMPLEF.S AT STATION 115.9 DURING 1980 Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organims Composition 01/31/80 Ephemerella sp. 47 15.5 Stenonet.e sp. 29 9.6 Heptagen11dae 26 8.6 Heptagenia sp. 22 7.3 Baetidae 27 8.9 Baetis sp. 62 20.5 Perlidae 1 0.3 Neoperla sp. 2 0.7 Isogenus sp. 1 0.3 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 1 0.3 Hydropsyche sp. 3 1.0 Hydropsyche ,inco=moda 22 7.3 Hydropsyche orris 17 5.6 Cheumatopsyche sp. 17 5.6 Bydroptilidae . 1 0.3 Chironocidae 25 8.3

( 04/28/80 Isonychia sp. 1 0.1 Stenonem sp. ".6 1.1 Heptagen11dae 10 0.7 Heptagenia sp. 34 2.2 Baetidae 24 1.6 Baetis sp. 38 2.5 Plecoptera 5 0.3 Perlesta sp. 27 1.8 Acroneuria sp. 1 0.1 Paragnetina sp. 3 0.2 Stenelmis sp. Adult 17 1.1 Macronychus glabratus Adult 2 0.1 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 2 0.1 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 1 0.1 Hydropsychidae 37 2.4 Hydropsyche sp. 2 0.1 Hydropsyche ince=moda 20 1.3 Hydropsyche orris 17 1.1 Cheumatopsyche sp. 24 1.6 Hydroptilidae 5 0.3 Chironocidae 632 41.7 Simulidae 596 39.3 Oligochaeta 1 0.1 j Isonychia sp. 31 2.9 Tricorythodes sp. 31 2.9

\ Stenoneca sp. 287 26.6 Heptageniidae 48 4.5 15

TABLE 5 (Con't)

Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition 07/21/80 Heptagenia a;p. 7 0.6 Baetis sp. 54 5.0 Argin sp. -1 0.1 Plecoptera sp. 2 0.2 Pteronarcys sp. 1 0.1 Perlidae 2 0.2 Aeroneuria sp. 6 0.6 Paragnetina sp. 18 -1.7 Corydalus sp. 15 1.4 Stenelmis sp. Adult 304 28.2 Macronychus glabratus Adult 4 0.4 ,

Stencimis sp. Larvae 4 0.4 5 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 3 0.3 Hydropsychidae 1 0.1 Hydropsyche ,incommoda- 79 7.3 Hydropsyche orris 26 2.4 Cheucatopsyche sp. 19 1.8 Ceraclea sp.

  • 2 0.2 Chironomidae 129 12.0 Empididae 2 0.2

,O itherix s,. 2 0.2 10/06/80 Isonychia sp. 3 1.0 Tricorythodes sp. 7 2.2 Stenonema sp. 85 27.2 Heptageniidae 2 0.6 -

Hep *.agenia sp. 13- 4.2 Baetis sp. 28 8.9 Plecoptera 1 0.3-Per11dae 2 0.6 Neoperla sp.. 6 1.9 Paragnetina sp. 22 7.0 Corydalus sp. 6 1.9 Stenelmis sp. Adult - 21 6.7 Stenelnis sp. Larvae 4- 1.3 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 3- 1.0-Neureelipsis-sp.- 1 -0.3 Hydropsyche inconnoda 8 2.6 Hydropsyche orris- 1 0.3- ,

Cheumatopsyche sp.. 1 0.3 Hydroptilidae- 12- 3.8 Ceraclea sp. 3 1.0 Chironomidae 84 26.8

,O 16

TABLE 6 TAXA, TOTAL NLHBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF ORGANISMS COLLECTED ON DENDY SAMPLERS AT STATION 116.6 DURING 1980 Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition 01/31/80 Ephemerella sp. 40 12.4 Stenonema sp. 21 6.5 Heptageniidae 19 5.9 Heptagenia sp. 31 9.6 Baetidae 23 7.1 Baetis sp. 50 15.5 Plecoptera 2 0.6 Perlidae 1 0.3 Paragnetina sp. 2 0.6 Isogenus sp. 1 0.3 Hydropsychidae 2 0.6 Hydropsyche sp. 1 0.3 Hydropsyche incommoda 28 8.7 Hydropsyche orris 26 8.1 -

Cheumatopsyche sp. . 24 7.5 Chironomidae 51 15.8 f() 04/28/80 Isonychia sp.

Ephemerella sp.

2 1

0.2 0.1 Stenonema sp. 18 1.7 Heptageniidae 6 0.6 Heptagenia sp. 22 2.1 Baetidae 4 0.4 Baetis sp. 47 4.5 Plecoptera 3 0.3 Perlidae 1 0.1 Neoperla sp. 1 0.1 Perlesta sp. 20 1.9 Paragnetina sp. 4 0.4 Stenelmis sp. Adult 14 1.3 Macronychus glabratus Adult 1 0.1 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 1 0.1 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 1 0.1 Macronema sp. 1 0.1 Hydropsychidae 31 3.0 Hydropsyche sp. 7 0.7 Hydropsyche inee=moda 16 1.5 Hydropsyche orris 12 1.1 Cheumatopsyche 8 0.8 Ceratopogonidae 1 0.1 Chironomidae 357 34.2 rs Simulidae 462 44.2

(_) Oligochaeta 3 0.3 Isopoda 1 0.1 17

. . _ . - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ \

l l

l TABLE 6 (Con't)

O Total Number Percent Date gxa Of Organisms Composition 07/21/80 Isonychia sp. 12 2.2 Tricorythodes sp. 40 7.4 Stenonema sp. 238 44.2 Heptagenia sp. 5 0.9 Baetis sp. 60 11.1 Paragnetina sp. 17 3.2 Corydalus sp. 11 2.0 Stenelmis sp. Adult 25 4.6 Kacronychus glabratus Adult 3 0.6 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 1 0.2 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 10 1.9 Fydropsyche inco=:noda 22 4.1 Hydropsyche orris 15 2.8 Cheumatopsyche sp. 16 3.0 Hydroptilidae 1 0.2 Diptera 1 0.2 Chironomidae 57 10.6 -

E=pididae . 3 0.6 Atherix sp. 2 0.4 10/06/80 Isonychia sp. 1 0.2 Tricorythodes sp. 10 1.8 Stenonema sp. 126 22.2 Heptageniidae 27 4.8 Heptagenia sp. 25 4.4 Baetidae 7 1.2 Baetis sp. 22 3.9 Per11dae 5 0.9 Neoperla sp. 1 0.2 Acroneuria sp. 1 0.2 Paragnetina sp. 26 4.6 Corydalus sp. 8 1.4 Stenelmis sp. Adult 22 3.9 Macronychus glabratus Adult 2 0.4 Elmidae Larvae 1 0.2 Macronychus glabratus Larvae 3 0.5 Neureclipsis sp. 1 0.2 Hydropsychidae 7 1.2 Hydropsyche inco=noda 49 P.6 Hydropsyche orris 9 1.6 Cheumatopsyche sp. 7 1.2 Hydroptilidae 41 7.2 Ceraclea sp. 5 0.9 Chironomidae 159 30.0 Simulidae . 1 0.2 Atherix sp. 2 0.4 18

O AVERAGE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR LNUM FROM DENDY SOFLES COLLECTED DURING 1980 STATION STATION JAN. APR. JUI. OCT. AVERAGE 115.5 1,72 2.25 2.39 2.23 2.15 115.9 1.70 2.34 2.25 1,71 2.00 .

116.6 1.65 2.21 1.95 1.98 1.95 Monthly 1.69 2.27 2.20 1.97 Average Analysis of Variance:

SOURCE df ss g F, Station 2 0.53 0.26 9.62***

Month 3 3.76 1.25 45.70****

i O.

Station

  • Month 6 1.00 0.17 6.08****

Error 60 1.64 0.03 Total 71 6.92

  • Significant for a = 0.05
        • Significant for a = 0.0001 19

1 TABLE 8 AVERAGE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR EBAR FROM DENDY SAMPLES COLLECTED DURING 1980 STATION STATION JAN. APR. JUL. OCT. AVERAGE 115.5 3.25 2.25 3.22 2.88 2.!0 115.9 3.06 2.16 2.84 2.84 2.77 116.6 3.10 2.21 2.67 3.10 2.72 Monthly 3.14 2.21 2.91 2.94 Average Analysis of Variance: )

SOURCE df ss as F Station 2 0.39 0.20 2.02 NS r Month 3 8.94 2.98 30.67****

Station

  • Month 6 0.95 0.16 1.63 NS Error 60 5.83 0.10 Total 71 16.11
  • Significant for a = 0.05
  • ^ *
  • Si gnifican t for o = 0.0001 I

O 20

TABLE 9 O. AVERAGE VALUFS.AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR NUMBER OF TAXA FROM DENDY SAMPLES COLLECTED I%MG 1980 5TATION STATION JAN. APR. JUL. OCT. A\TRAGE 115.5 11.83 11.83 18.83 16.67 14.79 115.9 10.83 14.33- 15.17 12.50 13.21 116.6 10.67 13.67 12.83 15.50 13.17 Monthly 11.11 13.28 15.63 14.89 Average

-Analysis of Variance:

SOURCE df ss as F

~

Station 2 41.,19 20,60 6.97***

Month 3 215.00 71.67 24.25****

'O Station

  • Month 6 148.92-- 24.82 8.40****

Error 60- 177.33 2.96 Total 71 K;1.44

  • Significant for a = 0.05
        • Signiilcant for o = 0.0001 l

_ . _ _ = .

O.

21

TABLE 10 r]

(s NUMBERS OF INDIVIDUALS COLLECTED IN FETERSEN SArrLES DURING 1980 ,

Station Taxa 115.5 115.9 116.6

  • Ephemeroptera 1
  • Heptageniidae 1 Caenis sp. 10 Baetis sp. 1 2
  • Plecoptera 2 8
  • Ferlidae 3 12 Nemocapnia_ sp. 1 Coleoptera
  • Elmidae Larvae 1 Stenelmis sp. Latvae 72 56 187 Trichoptera ,
  • Hydropsychiidae 1 gs Macronema sp. 1 Cheumatopsyche sp. 2
  • Leptoceridae 3 Nectopsyche sp. 3 2 Oecetis sp. 1 Diptera
  • Ceratopogonidae 52 29 61
  • Chironocidae 114 125 325
  • Simulidae 1 Mollusca
  • Pelecypoda 32 Corbicula sp. 92 143 281 Annelida *
  • 0ligochaeta ,

22 130 281 Platyhelminthes

  • Planariidae 1
  • Trematoda 45 12 101 Arthropoda
  • Copepoda 1 2
  • Isopoda 1
  • Amphipoda 1

,s *Hydracarina 2

  • Collembola 2 1 3 22

TABLE 10 (Con't)

O station Taxa 115.5 115.6 116.6

  • Nematoda 1 1 3
  • Rhynchocoela Frostoma rubrum 12 2 1
  • Were not identified beyond ti.e indicated taxonomic level.

4 0

(

l l

l O 23

TABLE 11 SPECIES, TOIAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSIIION OF ORGANISMS COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES AT STATION 115.5 DURING 1980 i .

Total Number Percent  :

Date Taxa Of Organisms Composition 01/31/80 Necocapnia sp. 1 0.7 stenelmis, sp. Larvae 13 9.5 Ceratopogonidae 4 2.9 Chironomidae 48 35.0 Corbicula sp. 14 10.2' Tremstoda 55 40.1 Collembola 2 1.5 04/28/80 Baetis sp. 1 2.0 Ceratopogonidae 2 4.1 Chironomidae 25 51.0 Corbicula sp. 6 12.2 011gochaeta 2 4.1 Trematoda 12 24.5 Nematoda 1 2.0 .

07/21/80 Plecoptera 2- 1.2 g Elmidae Larvae 1 0.6 i Stonelmis sp. Larvac 6 3.6 Hydropsychidae 1 0.6 Ceratopogontdae 32 19.4

' Chironomidae 6 3.6 Pelecypoda 32 19.4 Corbicula sp. 55 33.3-011gochaeta 19 11.5 .

Trematoda 11 6.6 10/06/80 Per11dae '3- 1.8 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 53 32.5

-Macronema sp. -1 0.6 Cheumatopsyche sp. . 2 1.2 Ceratepogonidae -

14 8.6' Chironomidae 35 - 21.5-Corbicula sp. 17_ 10.4

-011gochaeta 1 0.6 Trematoda- 23 14.1 Prostoma rubrum - 12 7.4 Hydracarina. _2 1.2 l

1 l

l l

24

, , , . - - -. . ,,~<,.e-e wm,---w.,m,--n'. .'

,--,.,,w.,,- ,.,-w~- .,..,l-.m e---. .e,..w v e r nan o .v r ,r m , m w,pwgrry1 ep. -y r-s y m,,,w we , ~ y g

b TABLE 12 SPECIES, TOTAL NUEERS, AND Pr.ECENT COMPOSITION OF ORGANISFl.

COLLECTED IN PLTERSEN SAMPLES AT STATION 115.9 DURING 1980 Total Number Percent Date Taxa Of Organisms Ceeposition 01/31/80 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 1 14.3 Chironomidae -

1 14.3 Corbicula sp. 3 71.4 04/28/80 Ceratopogonidae 5 2.6 Chironomidae 79 40.5 Corbicula sp. 15 7.7 Oligochaeta 87 44.6 Copepoda 1 0.5 ,

A=phipoda 1 0.5 Trematoda 6 3.1 Nematoda 1 0.5 07/21/80 Heptageniidae 1 0.7 ,

Stenelmi; sp. Larvae ,

17 12.3 Ceratopogonidae 23 16.7 Chironomidae 12 8.7 i Corbicula sp. 52 37.7 Oligochaeta 28 20.3 Trematoda 4 2.9 Collembola 1 0.7 10/06/80 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 38 22.9 Decetis sp. 1 0.6 Nectopsyche sp. 3 1.8 Ceratopogonidae 1 0.6 Chironomidae 33 19.9 Corbicula sp. 71 42.8 011gochaeta 15 9.0 Trematoda 2 1.2 Prostoma rubrum 2 1.2 e

25

_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ = _ _ .

l l

l TABLE 13 '

SPECIES, TOTAL NUMBERS, AND PERCENT COMPOSITION OF ORGANISMS COLLECTED IN PETERSEN SAMPLES AT STATION 116.6 DURING 1980 Total Number Percent Date Taxa _ Of Organirms Composition l

01/31/80 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 4 13.3 3.3 Ceratopogonidae 1 Chironomidae 2 6.7 Corbicula'sp. 17 56.7 Trematoda 4 13.3 6.7 Collembola 2 04/28/80 Baetis sp. 2 -0.4 Plecoptera 1 0.2 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 1 0.2 Ceratopogonidae 23 5.7 Chironomidae 264 65.0 Simulidae 1 0.2 Corbicula sp. 26 6.4 ,

Oligochaeta

  • 69 17.0 Copepoda 2 0.4 1sopoda 1 0.2 Trematoda 14 3.4 l i( ) Nematoda 2 0.4 07/21/80 Caenis sp. 10 2.4 c

p Plecoptera 7 1.7 Stenelmis sp. Larvae 80_ 19.2  :

Nectopsyche sp. 1 0.2 Leptoceridae 3 0.7 .

Ceratopogonidae 35 8.4 Chironomidae 27 6.4 Corbicula sp. 140 33.6 Oligochaeta 85 -20.4

-Trematoda 27- 6.5

-Nematoda 1 0.2 Collembola 1 0.2 10/06/80 Ephemeropte:a 1 0.4 Per11dae 12 4.7-Stenelmir; sp. Larvae- '102 3 9. 8 -- -l

}!ee7.opsyche sp. 1 0.4 Ceratopogonidae 2 0.8 Chironomidae 32 12.5 Corbicula sp. 98 38.3 oligochaetc 6 2.3 Planariadat_ ~ 1 0.4 Zyostoma' rubrum 1 0.4

]( )

26 i

I u _., . _

TABLE 14 AVERAGE VALVES AND ANALYSIC OF VARIANCE TOR L!Mi FRuH PETERSD4 SAMPLES COLLECTED DURING 1980 STATION STATION JAN. APR. J t'L ._ OCT. AVERACE 11$.5 1.21 0.93 1.43 1 38 1.24 115.9 0.37 1.23 1,38 1.48 1.12 116.6 0.64 1,56 1.87 1.61 1.42 ,

Monthly 0.74 1.24 1.56 1.A9 Average

/nalysis of Variance SottRCE g g g F Station 2 0.93 0.46 2.44 NS Month 3 6.20 2.07 10.80****

i Station *nonth 6 2.73 0.46 2.37*

k Error 48 9.19 0.39 Total 59 19.05

  • Significant for a = 0.05
        • Significant for a = 0.0001 O

27 I

x . _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ _

_. . . . - . . . - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - ~ . - - _ _ _ _ . _ . . . - - - . - _ - . . _ - . - . - - _ - -

TABLE 15 O AVERAGE VAlbES AND ANALYSIS OT VARIANCE FOR IIBAR FROM PETERSEN SAMPLES COLLECTED DURING 1980 FTATION STATION JAN.,

APR. JUL. OCT. AVERAGt 115.5 1.26 0.95 1.72 1.80 1.42 115.9 0.20 0.93 1.70 1.91 1.18 116.6 0.75 1.77 2.30 1.47 1.57 Honthly 0.74 1.22 1.90 1.73 Average Analysis of Variarce:

SOURCE df as es F Station 2 1.53 0.1J 2.36 NS Month 3 12.49 4.16 12.81****

O Station

  • Month 6 5.30 0.88 2.72* ,

Error 48 15.60 0.32 Total 59 34.93

  • Significant for n = 0.05
        • Significant for a = 0.0001 l

i O

28

TABLE 16 O AVERAGE VALUES AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR NUMBER OF TAXA FROM PETERSEN SAMPLES COLLECTED DURING 1980 STATION STATION JAN. APR. JUL. OCT. AVERAGE 115.5 3.80 3.00 5.20 4.60 4.15 115.9 1.20 3 80 5.00 5.20 3.80 116.6 2.20 5.80 7.20 5.00 5.05 Honthly 2.40 4.20 5.80 4.93 Average Analysis of Variance SOURCE of se as F Station 2 16.6} 8.32 3.45*

Month 3 94.00 31.33 13.01****

Station

  • Month 6 37.10 6.18 2.57*

Error 48 115.60 2.41 Total 59 263.33

  • Significant for o = 0.05
        • Significant for a = 0.0001 l

l O -

29

.- .. - , . -.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20079N325&oldid=2758148"