Utilizing Aquatic Macroinvertebrates for Assessing Pre-Mining Stream Conditions

1
Utilizing Aquatic Macroinvertebrates for
Assessing Pre-Mining Stream Conditions
Monitoring Mine Drainage Impacts

• Nicholas Grant
• Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
  Enforcement

2

• Definition of Biomonitoring
• The systematic use of biological responses to
  evaluate changes in the environment with the
  intent to use this information in a quality
  control program (Rosenberg and Resh 1993)
• Definition of Bioassessment
• An evaluation of the condition of a water body
  using biological surveys and other direct
  measurements to the resident biota (Gibson et al.
  1996)

3
Advantages Over Chemical Water Quality
Monitoring(Barbor et al. 1999)

• Holistic approach
• Biological communities reflect overall ecological
  integrity (chemical, physical, biological)
• Biological communities intergrate the effects of
  different stressors, thus, providing a broad
  measure of their aggregate impact
• Biological communities also integrate stresses
  over time
• Routine biomonitoring can be relatively
  inexepensive, compared to conducting many
  different chemical analyses or toxicity tests
• Status of biological communities is of direct
  interest to the public and is easier for people
  to understand than water quality measures
• Biomonitoring is in agreement with the primary
  goal of the Clean Water Act to restore and
  maintain the chemical, physical, and biological
  integrity of the Nations waters

4
What is a Benthic Macroinvertebrate?

• Benthic lives in or on the stream substrate
  (cobble, sand, mud, debris, aquatic plants)
• Macro visible by the naked eye
• Invertebrate without a backbone insects,
  mollusks, crustaceans, annelids, etc.

5
Advantages of Benthic Macroinvertebrates(versus
algae or fish)(Voshell 1997)

• They occur in almost all types of freshwater
  habitats. All sizes, temperatures, substrates,
  chemical conditions, kinds and abundace of
  vegetation and detritus.
• Many different taxa, and among these taxa there
  is a wide range of sensitivity to all types of
  pollution and environmental stress
• Mostly sedentary habits so they are likely to be
  exposed to pollution or environmental stress, and
  they do not quickly migrate back into and
  impaired site
• Duration of their life history is long enough for
  them to be exposed to stressors and for them not
  to recover so quickly that the impairment goes
  undetected.
• Sampling is relatively simple and does not
  require complicated devices or great effort
• Taxonomic identification is almost always easy to
  the family level and usually relatively easy to
  the genus level

6
Sampling Strategies

• Site Selection
• Reference Conditions
• Site-specific Reference
• Regional Reference
• Design
• Targeted vs Probabilistic
• Single Habitat vs Multi Habitat
• Simple vs Stratified

7
Sampling Devices

• Four Categories
• Delimit a specific area without a net
• Delimit a specific area with a catch net
• Do not delimit a specific area, with a catch net
• Artificial substrates

8
Delimit a Specific Area without a Net

• Stovepipe samplers
• Grab samplers

9
Delimit a specific area with a catch net

• Surber Sampler
• Hess Sampler
• Portable Invertebrate Box Sampler (PIBS)

10
Do not delimit a specific area, with a catch net

• D-Frame Dip Net
• Kick net

11
Artificial substrates

• Simulated Artificial Substrates (SAS)
• Representative Artificial Substrate (RAS)

12
Sorting Samples

• A tedious and time consuming job
• In the field
• In the lab

13
Identifying Invertebrates
14
Genus Level vs Family Level

• Family Level
• Advantages
• Requires less training and experience to
  accomplish
• Fewer misidentifications in data
• Lab ananlyses requie less time, so results are
  available sooner
• Stopping at the higher taxonomic level produces
  data with lower variance, so statistical analysis
  are often more revealing
• Disadvantages
• Many families contain genera and species with
  greatly different ecological characteristics.
  Thus, data based on falily-level indentifications
  may not provide enough resolution to document
  impaired biological condition, or especially not
  enough resolution to document the cause of
  impairment

15
Genus Level vs Family Level

• Genus Level
• Advantages
• Provides more accurate information on ecological
  relationships and, thus, more sensitivity for
  detecting impaired biological conditions and the
  causes of impairment
• Disadvantages
• Requires and much higher degree of professional
  training and experience to accomplish
• Requires a rigorous QA/QC (Quality
  Assurance/Quality Control) program to prevent
  inaccurate data
• Lab analyses and reports take longer
• Identifying organisms to the lowest practical
  taxonomic level produces data with higher
  variance, thereby making the interpretation of
  statistical tests more confusing

16
Taxa Classification

• Each taxa is assigned three basic descriptive
  values (Habitat, Trophic, and Tolerance)
• Various states and agencies have developed their
  own Taxa Dictionaries

17
Taxa Classification

• Habitat Value (Swimmer, Clinger, Climber,
  Crawler, Sprawler, Burrower) based on the way the
  organism moves or maintains its position within
  its habitat
• Trophic Value (Shredder, Gatherer, Filterer,
  Scraper, Predator, Macrophyte Piercer,
  Generalist) based on morphological and behavioral
  adaptations for obtaining food

18
Pollution/Stress Tolerance Value

• Numerical scores 0-10
• 0 intolerant to disturbance, pollution, and/or
  stress
• 10 tolerant to disturbance, pollution, and/or
  stress
• Subjective, determine by best available research
• Can be adjusted to target one specific stressor
  (organic pollution, sedimentation, AMD) if enough
  research is available.

19
Sensitive Benthos

• Mayflies (Ephemeroptera)
• Stoneflies (Plecoptera)
• Caddisflies (Tricoptera)
• Dobsonflies and Alderflies (Megoloptera)
• Water Penny Beetles (Psephenidae)
• Freshwater Mussels
• Snipeflies (Athericidae)

20
Moderately Tolerant Benthos

• Dragonflies and Damselflies (Odonata)
• Crayfish (Decapoda)
• Amphipods
• Isopods
• Craneflies (Tipulidae)
• Pouch Snails (Physidae)
• Blackflies (Simulidae)

21
Pollution Tolerant Benthos

• Midgeflies (Chironmidae)
• Aquatic worms (Oligocheata)
• Leaches (Hirundea)

22
(No Transcript)
23
Metrics

• Metric Measures Parameters
• Numerical characterizations
• In biomonitoring, numerical characterizations
  usually involve structure of communities
  (assemblages), sometimes function
• Underlying Concepts About Metrics
• Equilibrium exists between the community and the
  physical, chemical, and biological aspects of the
  environment
• Metrics must reflect this equilibrium
• Pollution and Environmental Stress (PES) will
  change equilibrium and metrics must change
  predictably

24
Commonly Used Metrics

• EPT index (Structural/Richness)
• Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Tricoptera the number
  of mayfly, stonefly, and caddisfly taxa, most of
  which are sensitive to PES
• Decreases in response to PES

25
Chironomids

• Structural/Balance
• Percent abundance of larvae and pupae in the true
  fly family Chironomidae
• Increases in response to PES

26
Simpson Diversity Index

• Structural/Balance
• Integrates richness and evenness into a measure
  of general diversity
• Ranges from 0-1
• Decreases in response to PES

Where S number of taxa Pk proportion of
individuals in taxa k
27
Scrapers

• Functional/Trophic
• Abundance of organisms that scrape algae and
  associated material for mineral and organic
  surfaces as a percentage of abundance of all
  organisms
• PES can cause a increase or decrease

28
Haptobenthos

• Functional/Habits
• Abundance of organisms that require clean firm
  substratum as a percentage of abundance of all
  organisms ( Clingers Crawlers)
• Decreases in response to PES
• Sedimentation and AMD crusting

29
Hilsenhoff Biotic Index

• Structural/Tolerance
• Weighted sum on the total taxa by pollution
  tolerance
• Originally developed to address organic pollution
  but can be modified to address many issues
• Score increases in response to PES

Where xi number of individuals within a
taxon ti tolerance value of a taxon n total
number of organisms in the sample
30
Water Quality Classifications for the Hilsenhoff
Biotic Index (BI) (Hilsenhoff 1987)

•  Bi Value Water Quality Degree of Organic
  Pollution
• 0.00-3.50 Excellent No apparent organic
  pollution
• 3.51-4.50 Very Good 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
• 8.51-10.00 Very Poor Severe organic pollution

31
Multimetric Indices

• A single numerical characterization of a
  community (assemblage) that is based on a
  combination of more than one metric
• Hypothetical MMI EPT Index HBI Scrapers
• Advantages
• More information about a community
• Metrics from different categories
• Better indication of biological integrity,
  different elements and processes
• Sensitive to a wider range of types of PES

32
State Programs

• Several states have developed comprehensive
  biomontioring programs and multimetric indices
• Florida Stream Condition Index (FSCI)
• Stream Condition Index for Virginia Non-Coastal
  Streams (SCI)
• Stream Condition Index for West Virginia Wadeable
  Streams (SCI)
• Ohio EPAs Invertebrate Community Index (ICI)
• Marylands Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity
  (IBI)
• Arkansas, Maine, and New Jersey are currently
  developing their own indices

33
Multimetric Indices

• Creating a comprehensive index takes a lot of
  time and data
• FSCI required surveys of 188 reference site over
  3 years to get started and data collection
  continues
• However, a simple MMI can be created without
  background data as long as the parameters are set
  prior to data collection, to avoid bias

34
Sample Study

• Prairie Creek, Arkansas
• Effected by AMD from two sources
• Central Coal and Cokes Mine 6
• Woodson Mine
• 5th order, low gradient stream
• Arkansas River Valley Ecosystem
• Cattle grazing and mining, predominant land uses

35
Pre-assessment Study
36
(No Transcript)
37
Mine 6 Discharge
Woodson Mine Discharge
38
Water Quality
Site ID Temperature C pH Specific Conductance uS Dissolved Oxygen mg/l Turbidity FAU
R2 20.25 7.13 149.2 7.00 10
R1 22.00 7.21 147.6 6.92 14
AMD2 16.00 6.84 391.0 4.32 9
AMD1 20.00 4.02 389.0 6.47 22
S1 17.50 6.85 332.0 5.53 14
S2 18.80 6.87 294.0 6.09 30
Table 2. Chemical analysis results, listed in
upstream to downstream order Measurement taken
after significant rain event
39
Habitat Assessment
40
Habitat Assessment Results
Site ID Habitat Evaluation Index
R1 118
R2 108
S1 92
S2 97
Reference Site (upstream)
Sample Site (downstream)
41
Lack of Riparian High Cattle Grazing
Reference Site (upstream)
Sample Site (downstream)
42
(No Transcript)
43
Invert Sampling Results
44
Metric Mean Upstream Expected Response to Perturbation Mean Downstream of Upstream of Outside Reference Site
EPT 5.50 - 5.50 100.00 110.00
EPT 48.33 - 12.34 25.53 44.32
Taxa Richness 17.00 - 14.00 82.35 100.00
Simpson's D 0.80 - 0.50 62.15 65.21
HBI 4.14 5.69 137.56 112.30
Top Dominant 33.82 70.09 207.24 164.50
Top 5 Dominant 85.67 92.90 108.43 107.57
Chironomidae 20.52 70.09 341.58 373.82
Tolerant 7.08 5.65 79.85 165.77
Intolerant 32.79 - 6.49 19.81 32.65
Haptobenthos 67.80 - 22.69 33.46 29.58
Herpobenthos 30.57 76.43 250.05 336.26
Scrapers 13.62 - 6.30 46.25 55.46
Ephemeroptera Taxa 1.50 - 3.00 200.00 150.00
Intolerant Taxa 3.50 - 3.00 85.71 75.00
45
Quick Multi-Metric Index
AMD Ref of Ref
EPT 12.34 48.33 25.53
Simpson's D 0.50 0.80 62.15
HBI 5.69 4.14 72.70
Chironomidae 70.09 20.52 29.28
Haptobenthos 22.69 67.80 33.46
SC 6.30 13.62 46.25
Final Grade 44.89 100
46
Why?

• Why should we monitor the biotic integrity of our
  streams?
• Traditional chemical water quality sampling only
  tells part of the story
• Monitoring the biota integrates the full range of
  environmental influences chemical, physical, and
  biological
• Organisms are continuous monitors of
  environmental quality, PES spikes do not go
  unnoticed and can be detected with a
  comprehensive biomonitoring program
• A pre-mining bioassessment establishes a baseline
  for future reclamation
• Track improvements and identify successes in both
  active mining and AML reclamation

47
Acknowledgements

• Kale Horton, Lachelle Harris, Dan Trout, Wayne
  Van Buren
• Dr. Steve Voshell (Virginia Tech)

48
Questions?