Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Evaluating Degraded Benthos and Plankton Communities-Bell, 2012

691

Published on

Assessment tools to remove BUIs are inconsistent across the Great Lakes’ AOCs. This study assesses two BUIs, Degraded Benthos and Degraded Plankton Communities, using a design that compares AOCs to …

Assessment tools to remove BUIs are inconsistent across the Great Lakes’ AOCs. This study assesses two BUIs, Degraded Benthos and Degraded Plankton Communities, using a design that compares AOCs to non-AOCs. Using non-AOC sites to determine if BUIs are still degraded, decisions can be made based on “control” sites.

Published in: News & Politics
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
691
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Assessment of Beneficial Use Impairments for Benthos and Plankton inWisconsin’s Lake Michigan AOCs Amanda Bell US Geological Survey, Middleton, WI In cooperation with the Wisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesUS Geological Survey Menomonee River 1
  • 2. Background• All of the AOCs along Wisconsin’s Lake Michigan shoreline have degraded benthos and three (not Menominee) have degraded plankton• Consistent/comparable legacy community data for these sites doesn’t exist• Stage 2 RAPs were due and TACs needed to identify projects that would address targets• Wisconsin DNR and USGS designed a comparative study to assess plankton and benthos communities in AOCs and non-AOCSUS Geological Survey Fox River 2
  • 3. Questions• What is the current state of benthic invertebrate and plankton communities in Wisconsins Lake Michigan AOCs?• How do the benthos and plankton communities in these AOCs differ from rivers that are not considered AOCs?• What community measures (i.e. IBI, richness, abundance, diversity) can be used as guides for determining benthos and plankton impairment in the AOCs?US Geological Survey Milwaukee Harbor 3
  • 4. Sampling Design• 10 Sites/3 times in 2012 – 4 Wisconsin Lake Michigan AOCs • Menominee River • Fox River/Green Bay (two river sites) • Sheboygan River (Replicate) • Milwaukee Estuary (two river sites, one harbor site) – 6 Lake Michigan non-AOCs • Escanaba River • Oconto River • Anapee River (Algoma) • Kewaunee River • Manitowoc River (Replicate) • Root River (Racine)US Geological Survey Sheboygan River 4
  • 5. Area of Concern Non-AOCUS Geological Survey 5
  • 6. Sampling Scheme• Plankton – Water Depth Profile – 63 µm Plankton Tow• Benthos – Hester-Dendy Sampler – Ponar DredgeUS Geological Survey Oconto River 6
  • 7. Water Depth Profile Sample• Water sample (about 1 liter) from each meter of water depth down to 5 meters• 3 times during growing season – June, July/August, September• Identification/Enumeration at WSLH (soft algae) and by Paul Garrison, WDNR (diatoms)• Chlorophyll a and Biomass analyzed at WSHLUS Geological Survey Menominee River 7
  • 8. Plankton Tow Samples• Vertical tow with 63-µm plankton net• 1-5 tows to obtain total of 5 meters of depth• Identification/Enumeration by Paul Garrison, WDNRUS Geological Survey Milwaukee River 8
  • 9. Hester Dendy Samples• 3 per sampling location (15 total)• Deployed end of April – Retrieved June, redeployed – Retrieved July/August, redeployed – Retrieved September• Identification/Enumeration at UW SuperiorUS Geological Survey Menominee River 9
  • 10. Ponar Dredge Samples• 3-5 dredges composited per sampling location (depending on substrate) near Hester Dendys• 3 times during growing season – June, July/August, September• Identification/Enumeration at UW Superior• Sediment size analysis at WSLH• Volatile on Ignition analysis by USGSUS Geological Survey Kewaunee River 10
  • 11. Data Analysis• Once data come back from lab (fall/winter 2012) – Macroinvertebrate Community assemblage analysis • IBI Scores • Determine species composition differences between sites • Multivariate statisticsUS Geological Survey Anapee River 11
  • 12. Data Analysis• Site to site comparison – Benthos using WI Larger River IBI – Plankton using Shannon Diversity Index – For each season, if the AOC is less than 10% OR one stand deviation (of all non-AOC sites) of selected comparison sites, then the seasonal sampled will be deemed degraded. – If it is degraded two or more seasons, the benthos or plankton for the site is deemed degraded.US Geological Survey Milwaukee River 12
  • 13. Data Analysis• Overall comparison – Multivariate analyses designed for multiple sites with similar multiple samples (seasons) • Tests if there is difference between groups (AOC vs. non- AOC sites) • Tests if there is difference between multiple groups (sites or seasons) – Determine what species/metrics differ between AOC and non-AOC – Deemed significantly different with a 90% confidence cut-off (p-value <10%)US Geological Survey Escanaba River 13
  • 14. Future Questions• Is there a significant difference in the plankton (and benthos) communities between each AOC and the non-AOCs?• Which species, whether their present or absent, are indicative of systems that are NOT considered “degraded”?US Geological Survey Kewaunee River 14
  • 15. Questions?US Geological Survey Manitowoc River 15
  • 16. Contact Info• Amanda Bell – US Geological Survey, Middleton, WI – ahbell@usgs.gov – 608-821-3882US Geological Survey Root River 16

×