1 / 23

Macroinvertebrate Bioassessment Tools

Macroinvertebrate Bioassessment Tools. Aquatic Life/Nutrient Workgroup August 11, 2008. Discussion Topics. Reference and stressed site status O/E (RIVPACS) preliminary results MMI (multimetric index) preliminary results Bioclasses. Reference Site Review. Two part process:

garran
Télécharger la présentation

Macroinvertebrate Bioassessment Tools

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Macroinvertebrate Bioassessment Tools Aquatic Life/Nutrient Workgroup August 11, 2008

  2. Discussion Topics • Reference and stressed site status • O/E (RIVPACS) preliminary results • MMI (multimetric index) preliminary results • Bioclasses

  3. Reference Site Review • Two part process: • Calculated GIS-based human disturbance values and established criteria cutoffs • Reviewed and critiqued aerial images at EPA using Global Explorer • 11 additional ref sites added to fill obvious spatial gaps and large rivers in plains and xeric bioregions

  4. Reference Sites • 168 reference sites finalized in April (90 mnts, 39 plains, 39 xeric) • 4 xeric, 4 plains and 1 mnts sites removed later • All USFS sites (n=16) retained – midges ID’ed down to genus • 12 additional sites w/ low taxa counts could be removed (USU and TT testing)

  5. Reference Sites

  6. Stressed Site Review • Flagged human disturbance values (GIS derived) that exceeded “acceptable” conditions and further reviewed with Google Earth images • Sites exhibiting clear characteristics of stressed condition retained after image review

  7. Stressed Sites • Goal: identify unquestionably stressed sites – no marginal ones • 74 stressed sites finalized in June • 31 mnts, 23 plains & 20 xeric

  8. Stressed Sites

  9. O/E Model Progress • Predictor variables calculated • OTU’s assignments redefined • Improved resolution • Replicate #’s organized & sample IDs selected • Reference sites reviewed by Utah St staff • 6 sites suggested for removal based on additional aerial image review – WQCD agreed

  10. O/E Preliminary Modeling • USU modeling based on 143 ref sites and 282 taxa (OTU's) • Rare taxa not used (106 taxa remained) • Cluster analysis/ordination • Used presence/absence of taxa among sites • Investigating 2 alternate groupings: • 3 classes – Ecoregions • 13 classes – Bioclasses

  11. O/E Preliminary Modeling • Spatial distribution of samples coded by 3 bug-defined classes

  12. Performance Plot • Sites coded by bioregion • Good agreement between what the model predicts at a site and what is observed

  13. O/E Preliminary Modeling • Spatial dist. of samples coded by 13 bug-defined classes

  14. Performance Plot • Sites are coded by the group assignments • Different types of streams vary in predicted and observed richness • r2 = 0.85

  15. MMI Preliminary Modeling • Tetra Tech keeping in sync with Utah State work • Same OTU designations, predictor variables, reference sites and samples used • Retained rare taxa – Tetra Tech investigating further

  16. Preliminary Findings • Tetra Tech’s ordination similar to Utah State’s • Geographic ecoregions not a perfect fit • Biology is sensitive to the natural gradients in temp. and water amount across the landscape • Bioclasses may work better than ecoregions

  17. Bioclasses • Not defined by geographic regions • Defined more by broad habitat characteristics • Doesn’t lend itself to drawing lines on a map

  18. Bioclass Example • Primary predictors appear to be summer water temperature and amount of water • Amt of water = ƒ (watershed area, precipitation) • Stream temp = ƒ (amount of water, elevation, latitude)

  19. Bioclasses • Two sites, close together geographically, can be in two very different bioclasses • Mainstem (large watershed) vs. tributary (small) • We do some of that already with mainstems separated from “all tribs,” but not consistently

  20. Example • How we might identify bioclass membership

  21. Upcoming Work • Tetra Tech will try further classifications by removing rare taxa • Critically reviewing how to standardize analysis & treatment of data • Move deeper into the modeling processes • O/E – predictive modeling • O/E – estimating probability of capture (pc) & E • MMI – metric calculations

  22. Questions? Drunella doddsi Mayfly Baetis tricaudatus Mayfly

  23. Information • Utah State website on Predictive Models: • http://129.123.10.240/WMCPortal/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabindex=2&tabid=27 • Bioassessment tool info and PowerPoint presentations: • http://www.cwqf.org/Workgroups/Aquatic.asp

More Related