REGIONAL COPPER-NICKEL STUDY..

STREAM PERIPHYTON

t1innesota Envit'onmental Quality Board

Nark D. Johnson

August 7, 1978

PR LI lNAfiY DF< FT SU J CT T J fi FiEVI N 0 T U

This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp

Page i

INTRODUCTION TO 11IE REGIONAL COPPER-NICKEL ST1,

The Regional Copper-Nickel Environmental Impact Study is a comprehensiveexamination of the potential cumulative environmental, social, and economicimpacts of copper-nickel mineral development in northeastern Mlnnesota.This study is being conducted for the Minnesota Legislature and stateExecutive Branch agencies, under the direction of the Minnesota Environ­mental Quality Board (N:EQB) and with the funding, review, and concurrenceof the Legislative Commission. on Minnesota Resources.

A region along the surface contact of the Duluth Complex in St. Louis andLake counties in northeastern Minnesota contains a major domestic resourceof copper-nickel sulfide mineralization. This region has been explored byseveral mineral resource development companies for more than twenty years,and recently two firms, Al~X and International Nickel Company, haveconsidered. commercial operations. 1bese exploration and mine planningactivities indicate the potential establishment of a new mining and pro­cessing industry in Minnesota. In addition, these activities indicate theneed for a ~omprehensive environmental, social, and economic analysis bythe state in order to consider the cumulative regional implications of thisnew industry and to provide adequate information for future state policyreview and development. In January, 1976, the }ffiQB organized and initiatedthe Regional Copper-Nickel Study.

The major objectives of the Regional Copper-Nickel Study are: 1) tocharacterize the region in its pre-copper-nickel development state; 2) toidentify and describe the probable technologies which may be used to exploitthe mineral resource and to convert it into salable commodities; 3) toidentify and assess the impacts of primary copper-nickel development andsecondary regional growth; 4) to conceptualize alternative degrees ofregional copper-nickel development; and 5) to assess the cumulativeenvironmental, social, and economic impacts of such hypothetical develop­ments. The Regional Study is a scientific information gathering andanalysis effort and will not present subjective social judgements onwhether, where, when, or how copper-nickel development should or shouldnot proceed. In addition, the Study will not make or propose state policypertaining to copper-nickel development.

The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board is a state agency responsible forthe implementation of the }linnesota Environmental Policy Act and promotescooperation between state agencies on environmental 'matters. The RegionalCopper-Nickel Study is an ad hoc effort of the MEQB and future regulatoryand site specific environmental impact studies "Jill most likely be theresponsibility of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and theMinnesota Pollution Control Agency.

PR Llf'JlINARY DRp\FT SU JEeT T M J R REVISION D N T U T

Page ii

c'.' !

ABSTRACT

Periphyton communities were sampled in the Regional Copper-Nickel Study

Area (Study Area) during 1976 and 1977. Diatoms were the most abundant

algal component and Achnanthes minutissima was the most abundant diatom

taxa. Periphyton prod~ction was highest in spring and fall.

Periphyton communities in the Study Area are related to stream order. As

stream order increases, production increases and the relative abundance of

acidophilous diatoms decreases.

Current taconite mining operations have caused some shifts in the dominant

species but not in periphyton diversity or production. In genera~ streams

affected by mining have higher relative abundances of A. minutissima and

lower relative abundances· of acidophilous species.

PREL!MINARY DRAFT SUBJECT T MAJOR REVISIC)N DO I'\l T au T

P~ge iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ii

iii

i

v

iv

45

52-77

78-94

1.

4.4

4

5

6

8

10

111112

13

14

17

Periphyton Communities1820

21

22

23

24

25

27

31

General Introduction to Regional Copper-Nickel Study

ABSTRACTTABLE OF CONTENTSLIST OF TABLESLIST OF FIGURESINTRODUCTIONMETHODS

Study Area.Sampling Area and StationsField and Laboratory ProceduresData AnalysisCluster Analysis

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONDistribution of Diatoms in the Study AreaDominant Diatom TaxaSeasonal Patterns of Dominant DiatomsDiatom DiversitySimilarity of Periphyton CommunitiesPatterns of ProductionRelationship Between Stream Order andCurrently' Illlpact~d Streams

Mine DewateringUnnamed CreekFilson CreekINCO Seeps

SUMMARYLITERATURE CITEDAPPENDIX 1

APPENDIX 2TABLESFIGURES

JEeT TO rv1AJOR REVISION DO N T U T

Page iv.

LIST OF TABLES

1. Periphyton sampling intensity.

2. Mean number of blue-green, green and diatom cells per m2 of glassslide artificial substrate and percent diatom cells observed in1976.

3. Number of taxa identified ahd the number of samples collected withineach vJatershed.

4. Dominance values (D) and frequency of occurrence (F) for diatom speciescollected qua1itat1ve1y. 2 pp.

5. Dominance values arid frequency of occurrence for diatoms species collectedquantitatively.

6. Mean relative abundance of dominant diatom taxa. Means are calculated forMay, August, and Late September, 1976, and May, late-July and August, 1977.

7. Annual mean percent relative abundance of dominant taxa collectedquantitatively.

8. Number of stations where dominant taxa reach their peak abundance duringeach sampling period.

, -."

9. Species diVersitlEP\'-!Of diatom communitles colonizing glass slides atprimary and J~ i j secondary stations.

10. Species diversit~l~ of qualitative d-iatom samples collected in 1977.IP. 2

1

11. Mean annual ~h1orophyl1 a and cells/mm2 determined from samples collectedon glass slide artificiaT substrates.

12. Median water quality data averaged by stream order.

13. Acidophilous diatom taxa found in the Study Area.

14. Correlation coefficients for comparisons between stream order and meanpercent relative abundance of acidophilous diatoms.

15. Mean annual percent relative abundance of dominant diatom taxa averagedby stream order. Samples collected from glass slide artificial substratesin 1976.

16. Percent frequency of occurrence of diatoms by stream order in April, 1977.Taxa included have a 50% frequency of occurrence in any stream order.

17. Frequency of occurrence of diatoms by stream order in August, 1977.Taxa included have 50% frequency of occurrence in any stream order.

PRELlflv11N RY DRAFT SUBJECT T fv1AJ R REVI'SI I\l D N T au T

Page iv. cont1d

18. Mean number of.acid-tolerant taxa, mean number of species and species.diversity found in qualitative samples.

19. Diatom taxa which have a frequency of occurrence greater than 50%within groups from qualitative cluster.

20. Comparison of productivity and diversity at impacted and unimpacted sitesi~ the Study Area. Data from 1976 sampling season

21. Comparison of productivity and diversity at F-1, KC-l, and 88-1. Datafrom 1976 sampling season.

22. Comparison of diatoms collected from a small creek above Station C andbelow Stations AR and BR, a seep from the INCO exploration site. Samplescollected July 5, 1.977 from glass slides. 3 pp.

PH LIMINARY DRAFT SUBJECT T t\~AJ R REVISI N DO NO U T

Page v

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Aquatic biology stream stations.

2. Relative abundance by sampling period of Achnanthesminutissima and~. linearis (including ~ linearis var pusilla) at Station SL-l.

3. Relative seasonal abundance of Cocconeis placentula var. lineata atP-l and SL-l.

4. Relative seasonal abundance of Synedra spp. at P-l 'and SL-l.

5. Spee i es di ve rsity /'; 1 \ at f i ve pr i rna ry sitesin 1976 and 1977 .

~6. Species diversity 0/ 1 \ and relative abundance of Achnanthes minutissima

at stations D-l ~ and SL-l. ," /

7. Percent of 'time stations occurred in clusters at the .5 level ofsimilarity.

8. Mean relative abundance of the Achnanthes minutissima, A. linearis (in­cluding ~ linearis var pusilla), Cocconeis placentula Tlncluding C.placentula var. lineata), Tabellaria flocculosa, and Synedra spp. ctprimary and secondary stations in 1976. Stations are ordered accordingto abundance of A. minutissima.

9. Mean relative abundance of the taxa Achnanthes minutissima, A. linearis(including A. linearis var. pusilla), Cocconeis placentula (Tncluding C.p1acentul a var. 1i neata) and Synedra spp. at pr'i mary and seconda ry statronsin 1977. Stations have been ordered according to the abundance of A.minutissima,

10. Mean chlorophyll a in 1976 and 1977 averaged over all stations sampledin each sampling period.

11. Seasonal changes in chlorophyll~ and total cell counts averaged overprimary sites.

12. Mean chlorophyll a averaged over all sites within each streamorder in 1976 and-1977.

13. Average percent relative abundance 6y stream order of acidophilousdiatoms collected on glass slide artificial substrates in 1976 andaverage pH by stream order.

14. Average percent relative abundance by stream order of acidophilous diatomscollected qualitatively in 1976 and average pH by stream order.

PRELiMI(,\JAHY OnAFT SUBJECT T fVlAJ R REVISI N 0 NOT U TE

Page v

List of figures cont'd

15. Scatter plot and regression lines of the percent relative abundanceof acidophilous diatoms collected qualitatively and pH in May andSeptember, 1976.

16. Dendrogram for diatom species collected qualitatively during August 1977.

17. Shift in dominant species between unimpacted sites (SR-l and KC-l) and":_~Himpacted sites (SC-l and P-5) within 4th order and 2nd order streams.

PRELIMINARY DRAFT SUBJECT TO MAJOR REVISION 0 N T U T

Page 1

INTRODUCTION

Stream periphyton communities are composed of bacteria, fungi, protozoa,

and a-I gae which grow attached to substrates. The primary producers,

composed of various algal groups, are the most studied component of the

periphyton community and have been referred to as the phyco-periphyton

(Collins and Weber 1978). Under most conditions, diatoms dominate the

phyco-periphyton comprising about 90% of the algae cells (Hynes 1970,

Potter et ale 1975). Diatom species are widespread and occur under a wide

variety of conditions. A large number of species is normally present;

as environmental conditions change ,different species flourish. The

factors considered most important in determining the distribution and

dominance of diatoms include: temperature, light, current velocity,

substrate, pH, nutrients, and the concentration of various anions and

cations. Their importance to diatoms has been reviewed by Patrick (1977)

and Blum (1956).

- Seasonal changes in stream periphyton communities are not well understood.

Most diatom species are present throughout the year and attain dominance

when conditions become optimal. Whitton (1976) described a spring and

fall diatom bloom in streams while the green algae become more important

during midsumner. The spring diatom maximum occurs as water temperatures

and light intensity increase and before leaves develop on overhanging vege­

tation. The fall maximum occurs as leaves begin falling and streams begin

to cool (Hynes 1970). Species such as Cocconeis placentula and Navicula

~yptoce~ have mi dsummer max ima whi 1e other speci es occur as wi nter,

spring, or fall dominants (Peters et ale 1968). Primary. pr'oductivity

PRELIMINARY DF1AFT SUBJECT TO rv1t\JOR F{ VIS; N DO N T U

Pa.ge 2

generally increases with warmer temperatures and greater light intensity,

although Waters (1961) and Peters et al. (1968) reported spring and fall

maximums in chlorophyll a production, a measure of algal standing crops.

Douglas (1958) related seasonal changes in diatom population size to the

populations of grazing invertebrates. This aspect of seasonality has not

been extensively studied.

Patrick (1958) .reported that similar diatom communities developed under

similar eco16gical conditions and stated that most diatom species are

ubiquitous. Patrick (1967) also discussed the relation of the species pool,

invasion rate and size of habitat to diatom communities. As anyone of

these factors increase, the number of rare taxa in the population also

increases.

Studies of community succession along a stream have been made but no defini­

tive data have been presented. Longitudinal changes in stream periphyton

comnunities can be expected as chemical and physical parameters change

along the length of a stream (Regional Copper-Nickel Study 1978b). Butcher

(1946) stated that there is a decrease in planktonic diatoms and an increase

in planktonic green and blue-gt~een algae as one moves downstream from the

source of a stream. Increased primar'y production by periphyton occurs

between the headwaters (1st through 3rd order streams) a~d the midreaches

(4th to 6th order streams) followed by a decrease further downstream

(Wetzel 1975, Cummins 1976).

Periphyton communities have been extensively studied because they provide

most of the instream primary production in first through sixth order

streams. In recent years interest has grown in petiphyton communities as

PRELlf\~INARY Df-1AFT SUBJECT T f\~AJ R REVISION 0 N T U T

Page 3

indicators of water ,quality (Cairns et al. 1972 , Patrick 1973; 1975). The

use of periphyton to monitor environmental changes has been suggested because

periphyton respond rapidly to changes in \vater qual-ity, they are sessile

organisms subjected to all water quality changes, and sampling is relatively_.

easy in comparison to other stream organisms. Lowe (1973) compiled the

available autecological data for diatoms to facilitate the assessment of

water quality through biological sampling.

Several parameters are used to analyze periphyton communities: chlorophyll

~, ash-free dry weight, cell counts and species proportional countes (Weber

1973). Measures of diversity and/or the number of species in the community

are also important parameters (Patrick 1973). With this information, an

estimate of the productivity and diversity of the diatom community can be

made and the water quality assessed.

Because of the importance of periphyton to stream ecosystems and their

usefulness in assessing water quality, a study of stream periphyton in

the Regional Copper-Nickel Study Area (Study Area) was initiated in May,

1976. This study was designed to characterize: 1) the relative produc­

tivity of periphyton communities in various Study Area streams; 2) diatom

species distributions and dominant species within the Study Area; 3) the

relation of diatom communities to stream order; 4) the effect of current

mining practices on periphyton communities; and 5) some of the factors

responsible for the observed diatom distributions and dominance. With this

characterization, prediction of the potential impact of copper-nickel

development on periphyton communities should be possible for streams which

\vere intensively sampled and to a -lesser' degree in streams which were not

fc:lRELlfVliNARY DF~AFT SUBJECT T I\~AJ R REVISI N 0 u 'T',

::Page 4

sampled during this study. This characterization is not meant to be a

baseline which could be used to quantitatively assess the impact of copper­

nickel development in future years. A statistical analysis of the peri­

phyton data will be made available in another report.

METHODS

Study Area

The Study Area encompasses 5516 km2 in Lake and St. Louis counties in northeast­

ern Minnesota"(Figure 1). The area is divided into two major watersheds by

the Laurential Divide; water south of the divide flows to Lake Superior while

water north of the divide flows to Hudson ~ay. Within the Study Area there

are 2623 km (1630 miles) of streams.

Streams in the Study Area are generally bog stained, soft water streams.

Alkalinity ranges from 1 to 190 ppm CaC03 but is generally less than 50.

Because the source of many of the streams is in bogs, low pH is found in

headwater streams; median pH ranges from 66 in headwater streams to 7.5 in

'downstream reaches. The streams consist of long flat reaches connected by

short riffles. Average gradients range from 4.7 m/km to .8 m/km. Sub­

strates in Study Area streams range from silt, sand, and/or detritus in

pools to gravel, rubble, or bedrock in riffles.

Samp~ Area and Stations

Periphyton sampling was concentrated in the area east of Biwabik and south

of Ely in the area of greatest potential for copper-nickel development.

This area is unshaded in Figure 1. In 1976 sampling stations were located

in riffle areas within those watersheds which had the greatest potential for

PFlELItv1INARY Di~AFT SUBJECT T MAJ Fi REVISION DO N T U T

Page 5

impact from copper-nickel mining. Stations were designated "primaryl',

"secondary", or "tertiary" depending on the sampling intensity scheduled

for the station (Table 1). Primary stations were located in downstream

portions of the watershed and were sampled quantitatively and qualitatively.

These stations were selected to reflect the culmination of conditions

within the watershed. Secondary stations were also sampled quantitatively

and qualitatively but less frequently than primary stations and were located

in upstream portions of watersheds or in areas already impacted by taconite

mining or copper-nickel exploration. Tertia'ry stations were sampled only

qualitatively and were located throughout the Study Area so that overall

distributions of periphyton species in the Study Area could be examined.

Additional stations were sampled in 1977 and were located over a larger

portion of the Study Area. Emphasis was placed'on sampling stations more

evenly distributed over the various stream orders found in the Study Area.

These stations, designated stream classification stations (SCS) were sampled

in an attempt to determine the relationship between stream order and peri­

phyton communities.

Field and Laboratory Procedures,

Quantitative periphyton samples were collected from glass slide artificial

substrates. These slides were suspend~d between 5 and 15 cm below the

water for three week colonization periods in an area of moderate current.

Individual slides were analyzed for chlorophyll, total cell counts, and

diatom species proportional counts. In 1976, three replicate slides

were analyzed for each of these parameters. Cell counts were not made in

1977 because of time limitations. At primary stations in 1977 three sl'ides

PRELHvHNARY DRAFT SU8~J T TO ~Jit'tJ R REVISI N DO N T U

Page 6

were analyzed for chlorophyll while four replicate diatom species propor~

tiona1 counts were made. During 1977 two diatom species proportional

counts and three chlorophyll analyses were made at secondary stations and

at SCS stations. Chlorophyll sBmp1es were analyzed by the methods described

by UNESCO (1966) and Lorenzen (1967). Cell counts were made by sedimenting

an aliquot of sample for 24 hours. These samples had been preserved in

Lugol's solution. Subsamp1e size was estimated by scanning a wet mount

of the slide.· Cells 'were counted on an inverted microscope and separated

into general groups (e.g. filamentous Cyanophyta). Permanent diatom slides

were prepared by clearing the frustules by the lI po tassium persulfate oxidation ll

method in 1976 (Weber 1973) and the lIpermanganatell method (Hendley 1974)

in 1977. Diatoms were then mounted in Hyrax according to procedures

described by Weber (1973). Species proportional counts consisted of

counting and identifying 500 half cells (Weber 1973).

Qualitative samples were collected by scraping wood, aquatic vegetation

and rocks, and by pipetting samples from soft substrates at each station

sampled. Species proportional counts of diatoms were carried out on a

composite sample from the quali·tative collection. Complete field and

laboratory methods are described in Operations Manual - Aquatic Biology

(Regional Copper-Nickel Study 1977).

Data Analysis

In the following results section "samplell is defined as the mean of the

available replicates from a station on one date for the parameter discussed

(i.e. chlorophyll ~, cell counts, and species proportional counts). For

qualitative collections and quantitative collections where only one

PF{ELIMINARY Dr-~AFT SUBJECT T tV1AJ R REVIS I NON T U

Page 7r'.' ).

replicate was analyzed, a sample represents a single value rather than

a mean but is used synonymously with the sample described above. There­

fore, quantitative and qualitative data were treated similarly in the

analyses but were always analyzed separately.

Annual means discussed are the average of the samples from three selected

sampl ing dates in each, of the sampl ing years: 1976 and 1977. These

dates were selected betause they had samples available from the greatest

number of stations. These dates were the following: late May, mid-

August, and late September, 1976 and late May, late July, and mid-August,

1977. Where samples were lacking for a station on any date, the annual

mean was calculated on the available samples.

The calculation of means for groups of sites (e.g. grouped by stream

order) used samples from the six dates listed above. When statistical

comparisons were made between groups of ~tations, annual means from

individual stations were treated as individual measurements within the

groups. Frequency of occurrence data was calculated individually on

,samples of each date. lIFrequently collected taxa ll were taxa that had a

frequency of occurrence greater than or equal to 50% for all stations

sampled in any sampling date.

Domi nant taxa compri sed at 1e.as t 5ib of any sample on. any da te. Domi nance

values were c~lculated' by assigning dominant taxa the following values:

most abundant taxa = 4; second most abundant taxa = 3, third most abundant

taxa = 2; fourth most abundant taxa = 1; and other taxa greater than 5% = o.

These numbers were then sun~ed across sites for each taxon on each date.

The ratio of each sum to the maximum for that date was converted to a

pF-~ELlrV1INARY DFiAFT SUBJECT TO MAJ R REVISI N D f"'-J T U

Page 8

percentage to obtain the dominance value for a taxon on a date. The

maximum number used in each ratio was four times the number of sites

sampled on that date.

Species diversity (1/IPi 2) was calculated using sample values. The

index was calculated on the data from species proportional counts. Species

and varieties were treated as individual taxa in the calculation of

diversity. Genus level identifications were used in diversity calculations

for six genera: Cymberla, Melosira, Navienla, Nitzschia, Pinnularia and

Synedr'a. The species in these genera were pooled to genus level as a

result of the quality control program in 1976 (Regional Copper-Nickel Study

1977). This program indicated that taxonomic errors were present in the

identification of species within these genera.

Cluster Analysis

Analysis of patterns of similarity between periphyton communities using

quantitative data was based on calculating of the Bray-Curtis similarity

coefficient using relative abundance percentages (Boesch 1977). This

coefficient is also called "percentage similarity" when used in percentage

data, or the Czekanowski coefficient. This coefficient of similar'ity was

selected from many possible coefficients because it gives most weight to

large differences in percent relative abundance rather ,than small

differences (Boesch 1977, Clifford and Stephenson 1975). Because of the

variability present in the data it was thought that small differences

mi9ht not be significant and therefore should not determine the similarity

or dissim-jlarity of stat-ions.

JEeT T rV1j\JOH F: VISI N 0 N T I!\,) T

Page 9

The percent similarity coefficient is as follows:

x' .Sjk = L min (Pij, Pik) where Pij = L~~j is the relative abundance of the

ith taxon at site j. This coefficient ranges from 0 to 1 where 1 =

identical sites.

Calculations of similarity betv-Jeen sites in one sampling period were based

on an edited data matrix including only those taxa conprising at least 5%

of the "mean' sample 'l .for at least one of the stations sampled. Relative

abundance of a taxon was still calculated relative to the total abundance

of all diatom taxa. Exclusion of the rare species has very little effect

on the analyses and saves considerable amounts of computer time. The matrix

of sinlilarity coefficients between pairs of sites was analyzed by cluster

analysis to determine whether sites could be ~lassified into groups

according to the patterns of relative abundance of dominant species.

The method of clustering used has been called group average (Bresch, 1977)

and unweighted pair-group method using arithmetic averages (UPGMA) (Sneath

and Sokul, 1973). This is a hierarchical, agglomerative method in which

sites are grouped so as to minimize the distance between two groups of

entities, defined as the mean of all distances between members of one

group to members of the other.

This method has been widely Jsed in aquatic ecology (Boesch, 1977) and

tends to ·preserve the original expressed in the matrix of similarity

coefficients.

Cluster analysis of qualitative data employed the Jacard coefficient of

similarity, and the group average method of clustering descr-ibed above.

FT S JEC T AJ R R VI N 0 N T u TI

Page 10

::

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Distribution of Diatoms in the Study Area

Diatoms were the major component of the phycoperiphyton in the Study Area

comprising an average of 87% of the algal cells enumerated in 1976 (Table

2). This is similar to results reported by Potter et al. (1975). Within

the Study Area, 433 diatom taxa were identified. Appendix 1, Table 1

indicates the distribution between watersheds of diatom taxa collected.

Species in the genera Cymbella, Navicula, Nitzschia, Melosira, Pinnularia,

and ~'ynedra are not indicated but the species are listed in Appendix 1, Table

2.

The number of taxa collected within any watershed was correlated with

sampling effort in those watersheds (correlation coefficient = .90). The

number of taxa found and the number of qualitative and quantitative samples

collected is listed in Table 3. Because water quality is similar in all

Study Area watersheds (Regional Copper-Nickel Study 1978c), no difference in

- the species lists for individual watersheds of equal size in the Study Area

'would be expected since diatom species lists are similar under similar

ecological conditions as discussed by Patrick (1968). Small differences

in stream conditions in the Study Area should be indicated by shifts

in dominant taxa.

Dominant Diatom Taxa

Tables 4 and 5 present the dominance values for species which occurred as

a dominant in qualitative and quantitative periphyton samples. According

to the dominance index, Achnanthes minutissima was the most dominant taxon

PHELIMINAHY Dr:~AFT SU ~JECT TO IV1AJ R FiEVISI N DO N T U

Page 11

during all qualitative and quantitative sampling periods. This species.

comprised from .45% to 16.07% of the mean relative diatom abundance for

sal~lples collected at stations sampled quantitatively (Table 6)

and overal"1 it comprised 40.96% and 27.99% of the diatoms enumerated in 1976

and 1977, respectively (Table 7). As these data indi~ate, ~ minutissima

was less abundant in 1977 than in 1976. In 1977 taxa such as Synedra

spp. and Cocconeis placentula increased in abundance.

Dominance of per'iphyton communities by A. minutissima has been reported in

lakes (Stockner and Armstrong 1971, Johnson unpublished) and streams

(Douglas 1958, Dillard 1968, Sherman and Phinney 1971, Archibald 1972, Moore

1972). This species is characteristic of clean well aerated water (Lowe 1974)

and has been described as one of the most ubiquitous diatoms known

(Peterson 1943 cited, in Lowe 1974). The reason for increases in Synedra and

.~ placentula is unclear.

Other taxa which were among the three most dominant taxa during any sampling'

period in quantitative samples were Achnanthes linearis, A. linearis var.

~illa., h placentula', Synedra spp., Diatoma tenue var. elongatum,

Navicula spp. and Nitzschia spp. (Table 4). In qualitative samples, the

same taxa occurred among the three most dominant taxa as in quantitative

samples. In addition Tabellaria flocc~llosa, Fragilaria pinnata and L

crotonensis occurred in the t6p three taxa only in qua~itative samples,'

Tables 4 and 5 also list the most frequently collected taxa which are

taxa with a frequency of occurrence equal to or greater than 50%, in at

least one sampling period. Dominant taxa always belong to the most

frequently collected group.

F)I=iELHJlINARY DFi FT S ~I C T' MAJ R fiEVI ION 0 N T U

Page 12

The taxa listed in Tables 4 and 5 are those which are likely to occur in

any Study Area stream.

Seasonal Patterns of Dominant Diatoms

'oTable 8 lists the sampling periods during v/hich dominant di·atom taxa

reached their maximum relative abundance in quantitative samples. Figures

2 through 4 graphically display the seasonal changes in four of the

dominant species at stations where the most continuous sampling was done

and the species was abundant. A. minutissima is the most dominant taxa

at all times of the year and exhibits a spring and fall maximum with a

m-id-summer lm\l (Figure 2). A. linearis (including ~l:- var. pusilla)

tends to be inversely related to !l:-. minutissima; it exhibits a midsummer

maximum, at least in the presence of ~ minutissirna (Figure 2). As

indicated on Table 8, ~ linearis can peak in the spring and A. linearis

var. pusilla can peak in the fall.

h placentula had a midsummer bloom (Table 8 and Figure 3). Most other

dominant diatoms had spring maximums. Species such as Tabellaria spp.

and Diatoma tenue_ var. elongatum probably have fall maximums but sampling

was discontinued too early to observe this peak if it occurred. ~yned}~

spp. exhibited spring and fall maxima (Table 8 and Figure 4).

The seasonal patterns for diatom speci€s are poorly understood. Lowe (1974)

presents limited data on seasonality and much of the seasonal data are

conflicting. For example, Lmve (1974) reports a fall maximum for C.

placentula but in the present study and in data reported by Peters et al.

(1968) ~_ J2las:.entL!J~ had a midsummer maxima. Summer maxima have been

reported for ~ rninutissima (Stockner and Armstrong 1971, Moore 1972) which

PRELlfvllNARY DF( FT SUBJ CT T r\/IAI..J Fi REVISI NON T U T

Page 13

(,. . .~

;s contrary to the current study. These differences probably reflect the

complex set of factors governing the time when a ,diatom obtains its peak

abundance. Factors such as current velocity and temperature which are

important to diatom development will fluctuate differently in relation to

season in different st~eams.

Diatom Diversity

Tab1e 9 presents the 1976 and 1977 divers i ty C:p~2 ) for quant-i tat i ve

samp1es co11 es::ted at prima ry and seconda r'y sta t ions averaged over' three

sampling periods per year. Great~st mean annual diversity was observed at

KC-l and F-1 with values of 8.0 and 7.5 respectively; SL-1 and P-1 had

the lowest diversity, with values of 1.8 and 2.2.

No clear seasonal trends are evident in the data from primary sites

(Figure 5). Major changes in diversity app~ar to be related to changes in

the relative abundance of the dominant taxa such as ~ minutissima, ~

linearis, and ~ placentula.

presented in Figure 6.

1

Two examples of this relationship are

Diversity (IPi 2) was calculated for qualitative samples collected in 1977

(Table 10). Diversity in qualitative samples ranged fr'om 2.4 to 28.4 in

April, ,1977, and from 2.8 to 63.0 in August, 1977. No clear" patterns in

cI i versity \'Je re evi cI ent, a1though di ver sitY was gene ra11 y greater i n qua 1i -

tative than in quantitative samples.

Diatom species diversity in the Study Area is misleading because of the

corninance of A__ mint~_tissillla at many stat'ions. Arch'ibald (1972) reported

that the dominance of !l:-. minu~issima, a clean water species, in some South

Afri can streams cau sed divers'j ty. in lie 1ean II streams to be 10"-Ier than divers i ty 1n

PFiELi~'i1!r\JAFiY DF~ F UBJE T rv1AJ HH VISI ND NT U

Page 14

II po ll uted ll streams. Therefore diatom diversity in Study Area streams does

not adequately reflect water quality differences.

Similarity of Periphyton Communities

The cluster ana.lysis of qua.ntitative diatom data from primary and

secondary stations (Appendix 2, Figures 1-6) provided a method of

determining patterns of similarity in periphytic diatom communities. To

determine groups of similar stations the percentage of times that stations

occurred in the same cluster at the .5 level in 1976 was calculated

(Figure 7). !\fter examining the clusters,. this level \vas chosen as a leve'l

at which clusters could be interpreted. Values from .4 to .75 have been

used to define significance in other aquati~ biological studies (Herricks

and Stanhope 1976, Burlington 1962, Cairns et al. 1970). This analysis was

not performed on the 1977 data as fewer stations were sampled and there was

poor success in retrieving samplers.

Two sets of stations always clustered together: 1) BB-1 and 0-1; and

2) P-l and SL-1. The sites BB-1, 0-1, P-l, SL-l, P-2, and P-5 clustered

together in greater than 66 percent of the analyses. Other groups formed

were less frequent. Station K-2 in the Shagawa River was unique as it

clustered only once with site E-1. It appears that the most important

factor detenllining these groups is the' abundance of A. 1111nutissima.

Because of the overall dominance of a few diatom species in Study Area

streanls, a comparison of stations was made based on mean abundanc~ of

five dominant taxa in 1976 (Figure 8) and four dominant taxa in 1977

(Figure 9). In each year, the annual mean was calculated from data for three

p LI it\! r~Y DFiAF JEC T r\~t\J R F{EVISI N D NOT U T

Page 15

sampling dates. Three general groups were defined based on the relative

abundance of A. minutissima. The cutoff points for each group were chosen

to reflect the groupings evident from the data in Figures 8 and 9. The

groups \'Jere defined as follows: 1) group 1 stat-ions \~here !l:-lwinutissima

. 'is' greater than 49 percent; 2) group 2 stations where the r'elative abundance

of ~ minutissim~ is between 15 and 49 percent; and 3) group 3 stations

where the abundance of 'A. minutissima is less than 15 percent.

In 1976 several other observations could be made concerning the similarity

of stations. ·Group 1. includes those stations which cluster analysis

grouped together with one exception, SR-l. SR-l is included in the cluster group

because it occurred in only one data set which was clustered in 1976.

In group 2, a subgroup of F-1 and KC-l is evident based on the high abun­

dance of T. flocculosa (> 10 percent). Also, K-8, a member of group 2,

is different because Gomphonema pa rvu 1um compri sed 27.5 per'cent of the

diatoms at this station, higher than at any other station sampled quanti­

tatively (Table 4).

The sites K-2 and K-5 comprise group 3 but are different from one another

because of the dominance of L placentula at K-2 and A. linear-is at K-5

(Fig ur'e 8).

In 1977 the three groups were'composedof a slightly different set of

stations. One of the reasons for this appears to be the increased abundance

of ~ynedra spp. at seve)~al stations. Group 1. consisted of stations SL-l,

0-1 and SL~2. P-l could also be included in this group although the

abundance of Il'-. minutissima v~as 45.9 percent. A subgroup within group 2 and

3 consisted of SR-3, K-8 and E-1, all of which had high populations of

BELIMIN RY DF~ F SU J CT T A,J F~ FiEV NON T U

Page 16

Synedra spp. Also within group 3, K-2 and B1-1 formed a subgroup domina~ed

by ~ placentula. K-l was different from other stations because of the

dominance of L angustatum (35.8 percent) at this station in 1977 (Table 4).

The groups of stations defined by dominant diatoms are similar to the

station groups defined by the Water Quality Section (Regional Copper-

Nickel Study 1978c). Group 3 stations which were characterized by high

relative abundance of A. minutissima were also characterized by high conduc­

tivity. Lower conductivity resulted in less abundant A. minutissima and

higher abundance of other diatoms (groups 2 and 3). A. linearis is one

of the species which replaces !1.-- minutissima. A. linear'is and A. linearis

var.. pusilla are closely related to ~ minutissima ecologically although

~ minutissima appears slightly less sensitive to the addition of any

material into the environment (Reimer personal communication). This

sensitivity is reflected in the increased relative abundance of these two

taxa vvith decreasing conductivity. The high relative abundance of T.

flocculosa defined the subgroup of F-1 and KC-1, which were stations with

lOVJ pH. The presence of h 21 acentul a probably i nd i cates

inorganic nutrients, particularly at station K-2 since it prefers elevated

levels of inorganic nutrients. The Water Quality Section did not report

levels of inorganic nutrients significantly higher at K-2 than elsewhere in

the Stu'dy Area (Regional ~~ater Quality Study 1978c) although it seems

possible because of hi~h nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations in Shagawa

Lake upstream. Another explanation for the dominance of h placentula

could be selective grazing by invertebrates at K-2 (Reimer, personal

commun'ication, Patrick 1975; 1978). The dominance of ~ angustatum and

Ii:_ par'.Y_LD~~ at K-1 and K-8 is difficult to explain since' these prefer

F~ Ll IN F~Y DB T SU JECT T J R B VI N D N T U

Page 17

alkaline conditions and pH at these sites is neutral to slightly acid.

Patterns of Production

Average values of production as measured by chlorophyll ~ showed similar

seasonal patterns for all sites and for primary sites only in 1976 and

1977 (Figures 10 and 11). Peak production was recorded in late June and

early July; a second peak occurred in September. During late July and

August chlorophyll production was low.

High mean cel) numbers were recorded in May, 1976, at primary stations when

chlorophyll ~ was low (Figure 11). During the remainder of 1976 there was

a better relationship between cell numbers and chlorophyll a.

The seasonal patterns of periphyton production in Study Area periphyton

are similar to those reported in the literature (Waters 1961, Peters et al.

1968) and generally reflect a spring and fall diatom bloom. The use of

glass slide artificial substrates introduces a sampling bias in cell counts

and probably does not reflect the midsummer increase in g~een and blue-green

algae. These samplers are more efficient in sampling diatoms than other

groups (Reimer, personal communication).

Stations P-l, P-2, K-l, and K-2 were the most productive sites based on 1976

mean annual chlorophyll ~ values while'lrighest average cell densities were

at 81-1 and K-l (Table 11). Lowest cell densities were recorded at KC-l

and F-l. KC-l also had low mean annual chlorophyll ~ as did SR-3 and F-l.

Primary production, therefore, is generally higher in the larger streams in

the Study Area and can be related to stream order.

R LI INARY DFiAFT JeT l\!lAJ R R VI81 N D N T U

Page 18

Relationship Between Stream Order

and Periphyton Communities

Average primary production as measured by chlorophyll ~ generally increased

with increasing stream order (Figure 12), although in L977 a decrease was

noted in fifth order streams. These patterns are similar to those discussed

by Cumm ins (197 5; 197 6) . Tab1e 12 presen t s wa t er qua1i tY val ues averaged

by stream order. Because pH increases with increasing stream order the

relationship .be~ween·the realtive abundance of acidophilous diatoms to

stream order was examined. The acidophilous taxa defined by Lowe (1974)

found in the Study Area are listed in Table 13.

Figures 13 and 14 present the mean relativ~ abundance of acidophilous diatoms

found in qualitative and quantitative samples and average pH in relation to

stream ordei. The abundance of acidophilous diatoms decreases with increasing

stream order with the exception of fifth order streams where a slight

decrease in pH occurs.

Figure 15 presents a scatter plot of pH versus percent relative abundance

of acidophilous diatoms in May, 1976 and September, 1976 qualitative

samples. Linear regressions were calculated for each data set after excluding

the circled points. These points were impacted sites which, it was thought,

would not fit the model. The shift in regression lines is a result of

higher pH in September than in May. The correlation coefficients (r valu2s)

for these data sets were -.69 (May, 1976) and -.85 (September, 1976).

Correlation coefficients (Spearman's Rank Correlation) between stream order

and percent relative abundance acidophilous diatoms are listed in Table 14.

These coefficients ranged from -.5 to -1.0, which indicated a strong

PB NARY DHA su CT T 1\",1 R FiEV1SI N D N T U

Page 19

relationship between stream order and the relative abundance of acidophi-

lous diatoms.

In 1976 quantitative data, decreases in the relative abundance of Eunotia

spp., 1. fenestrata, and 1. flocculosa, the most abundant acidophilous taxa,

can be noted with increasing stream order (Table 15). An exception is the

"'~"'increase of T. fenestrata in fifth order streams. Generally.G- placentula,

~ linearis (including L linearis var. pusilla), and species of Gomphonema

increase in abundanc~ with increasing stream order.

Diatom taxa that occurred at greater than 50 percent of the stations within

any stream order during 1977 qualitative collections are listed in Tables

16 and 17. Acidophilous diatoms such as Eunotia spp. and Frustulia

rhomboides decrease in frequency within increasing stream order. In the

April/f·1ay 1977 sampling period ..!2..:- tenue var. elongatum and L capucina

increased with increasing stream order. T. "fenestrata and T. flocculosa

generally became less frequent with increasing stream order although

T. fenestrata increased in fifth order during April/May 1977 and T. flocculosa

was constant across stream orders during this period.

There was no observable difference in the mean number of acidophilous

diatoms occurring at sites within each stream order in August, 1977

(Table 18). A one-way analysis of variance of qualitative data showed no

significant differences (p > .05) between the mean number of species or

between mean spee i es di versity ( l:P i1 ) among stream orders from both the

April/May and August, 1977 sampling periods. This is in contrast to the

results of Mack (1953, cited in Hynes 1970) who noted an increase in algal

diversity in a downstream direction.

PH LIMINAfi'y' DR T U J CT T J Fl H VISI NON U TE

Page 20

.'A cluster analysis' of stations was performed on the qualitative data from

August, 1977 using the Jacand coefficient of similarity (Figure 16).

This data set was chosen because the greatest array of stations was available.

In general, at the .58 level sites clustered by stream order, with sites in

an adjacent stream order or with closely situated sites in the same

watershed. Table 19 lists those taxa which were present at more than 50%

of the stations within a cluster and therefore are responsible for the

formation of the cluster. A large number of taxa were characteristic of

all sites with small' groups of species in each cluster. Group one (first

and second order streams) has a large number of acidophilous taxa and

Meridion circulare which is characteristic of bog drainages. In the other

groups of sites there is a mixture of taxa which Lowe (1974) has classified

as alkaphilous, indifferent and acidophilous.

These data indicate that there is a relationship between stream order and

diatom communities in the Study Area. As stream order increases there is

an increase in periphyton production and a decrease in the relative abun­

dance of acidophilous diat6ms. Although not studied it is probable that

there is a corresponding increase in the relative abundance of alkaphilous

diatoms. It also appears that most diatom species occur within all stream

orders but that changing ecological conditions such as pH allow different

species and/or groups to flourish in different stream orders.

Currently Itnl2.9cted Streams

Several streams in the Study Area are currently impacted by taconite mining,

contact with the copper-nickel resource, or copper-nickel exploration.

PR LI IN RY DRAFT SUBJECT T MA,"oJ R FiEVISI N D N u

Page 21

Mine Dewaterin[--Currently operating taconite mines are pumping mine water

into the Partridge River, Dunka River and Unnamed Creek. The effect of ihis

pumping has been to raise the conductivity, alkalinity, and pH of the

receiving waters (Regional Copper-Nickel Study 1978c). The average conduc­

tivity at sites with mine dewatering is 270 lJ mho/l compared to 54 p mho/1

at other sites. Stations 88-1, P-5, P-1 and SL-l are' all impacted by

taconite mine dewatering, and form a group of stations which in 1976 were

characterized by high abundance of f1- minutissima. At unimpacted stations

with physical conditions similar to impacted sites, A. minutissima is still

dominant but A. 1inearis became more abundant and A. minutissima less

abundant (Table 6). Another species change occurs in first and second order

impacted stations. T. f1occulosa and other acidophilous diatoms which are

abundant at un impacted first and second order sites were rare at impacted

stations. Figure 19 illustrates these two shifts in diatom species.

Table 20 pr'esents comparisons of productivity, diversity and number of

taxa at sites impacted by mine dewatering and unimpacted sites. There

appear to be no major differences in the product-ivity of impacted and

unimpacted sites. Although mean diversity for 1976 at impacted sites

appears lower than at unimpacted sites, a t-test indicated no significant

difference (p < .05). A larger number of diatom taxa were found at

impacted sites than at unimpacted sites.

The effect of taconite operations has been to favor the development of A.

minlLt:.:Lssima in affected stY'ea.ms. In first and second order streams acido­

philoliS species are less abundant because of increased pH and in third and

fourth order streams with elevated conductivity the abundance of species

such as A. linearis is reduced. The overall species list found at impacted

PB LI INAn\{ DRAFT U J T l\Ji/\J R FlEVISI N D N T U T

Page 22

and unimpacted sites are probably similar since water quality differences

are not large enough to produce dramatic shifts in the biological

communities.

Unnamed Creek--In Unnamed Cree~ elevated levels of heavy metals are present

···rn' addition to high conductivity. A further impact in this' first order

stream is fluctuating flow as a result of erratic pumping of mine water.

Table 21 presents a comparison of several biological parameters from

Unnamed Creel, Filson Creek, and Keeley Creek. Primary production in

Unnamed Creek is similar to that in other first and second order streams.

Diatom species diversity was lower in Unnamed Creek at 88-1 than in other

first and second order streams, although at upstream sites on Unnamed Creek

diversity was higher than in Filson Ol~ Keeley creeks (Regional Copper-Nickel

Study 1978a). These apparent inconsistencies are probably caused by the

fluctuating flows in Unnamed Creek although insufficient data is availab10

to prove this hJPothesis.

Dominant diatoms are also different (Regional Copper-Nickel Study 1978a).

A. minutissima is the most abundant diatom species in Unnamed Creek as in

the rest of the Study Area. In. addition IL:- ten~ var. elongatum,

Denticula tenuis and F. construens were abundant. These taxa, while present

on the list of dominant taxa for the Study Area (Table 4), were not found

in the rest of the Study Area. during the same time periods as they Vlere

found in Unnamed Creek in 1976. These taxa were also more abundant in

Unnamed Creek than in the rest of the Study Area. The diatom percentage

in Unnamed Creek ranged from 90 to 99 percent which is higher than that

found in the Study Area in general.

PR LI~Ji N BY DFiAFT SU JEeT TO rVlA,J H R VISI NON T U

Page 23

As in the impacted; sites discussed earlier, no significant impact seems to

have occurred in Unnamed Creek. No radical shifts in the dominance of

algal groups such as mentioned by Patrick (1978) '-in relation to. heavy metals

has occurred. A copper effect would not be expected as levels are below

the toxic level of 70 ~g Cull discussed by Patrick (1977). On the other

hand, nickel concentration in Unnamed Creek is at a level (123 ~g/l)

where some effect may occur. Patrick (1977) reported nickel levels as low

as 2 ~10 ~g/l would cauSe shifts in the major periphyton groups while

Hutchinson (1973) reported that 100 ~g/l was toxic to algae. Because

diatoms are still dominant in Unnamed Creek it does not appear that such

an effect has occurred. The dominance of D. tenue var. elongatum has

probably resulted from the high dissolved solids and cold temperatures.

Q:- tenue var. elongatum is very tolerant of high dissolved solids or

conductivity (Lowe 1974) and normally blooms in the spring v1hen tempera­

tures are low (see Seasonal Patterns of Dominant Diatoms). No data are

available on Denticula tenuis while F. construens has ecological

requirements similar to Diatoma.

-Filson Creek-- Filson Creek flows across the mineralized Gabbro contact

and contains elevated levels of heavy metals (median values of 8.0 ~g Cull

and 5.95 pg Ni/l). Comparisons can be made w-ith Keeley C}~e'ek which is a

similar headwater stream with lower heavy metal levels (median values of

1.95 ~g Cull and 3.3 ~g Ni/l}. No effect in the dominant taxa, produc­

tivity or' diversity is evident betvJeen Filson and Keeley creeks (Table 21

and Figure 8). Copper levels in Filson Creek are lower than levels where

effects have been reported by Patrick (1977).

PRELl IN Y DFiAFT SU ~J CT T fVlAJ H F<EVI N D N u

Page 24

INca Seeps--In the vicinity of Filson Creek copper-nickel exploration by

INCa has caused elevated concentrations of copper (20-59 ~g/l) and nickel

(14-37 ~g/l) to be present in seeps draining the exploration site. A.

minutissima was the dominant species at station C above the input of

copper and nickel while below this input species of Eunotia and Tabellaria

were more dominant (Table 22). Colonization of glass slides appeared

normal at the time of collection.

No effects were' observed nor would be expected from copper and nickel in

the seeps whi9h were sampled because copper and nickel levels were below

the level of potential effects reported by Patrick (1977).

Besch et ale (1972) found that groups of di~toms were good indicators of

heavy metal pollution during field surveys in eastern Canada. Species

groups which include ~ minutissima, Tabellaria spp. and Eunotia spp. were

reported as sensitive to copper and zinc pollution. These taxa were all

present in Filson Creek, Unnamed Creek and the INCa seeps. Therefore the

results reported by Besch et ale would seem to indicate that there has

been no effect from heavy met.als in Filson Creek, the INCa seeps, or

Unnamed Creek since sensitive species are still abundant.

p Lf IN DR T U ,J T T ~Ill-\J F' R VISI N 0 f\l U T

Page 25

SU~1t'1ARY

Diatoms are the primary component of the periphyton communities in Study

Area streams comprising an average of 87% of the algal cells. The most

:-important diatom species is Achnanthes minutissima which was dominant

throughout the year and the Study Area. Other important taxa included A.

linearis, Cocconeis Qlacentula, Synedra spp., Diatoma tenue var. elongatum

and Ta bella f'i a flo ccu1os a .

The diatom communities demonstrated a spring and fall maximum in production.

Also most of the dominant species were most abundant in the spring and fall.

No clear seasonal patterns in species diversity were evident although

diversity appeared related to changes in the relative abundance of the

most dominant taxa.

T\'10 aspects of the periphyton community are related to stream order.

First primal~ production increases with increasing stream order and

secondly the abundance of acidophilous species decreases. The species

present is similar in all stream orders.

Several groups of similar stations are eV'jdent based on relative abundance

of diatom taxa. In general, stations impacted by taconite mining were more

similar to one another than to unimpacted stations. Also, stations in

first and second order streams tend to be similar to one another while

stations in third and fourth order streams tend to be similar to each other.

The effect of current taconite mining seems to be a shift in species

which favors the dominance of A. minutissima in all streams and the reduc-

tion in the abundance of acidophilous species in first and second order streams.

PRE!...I INABY Df~ T U J AJ R FiEVISi NON u

Page 26

In third and fourth order streams the species shift is not dramatic as

impacted sites are similar to unimpacted sites in these stream orders.

In first and second order streams the shift is more dramatic as' the

impacted sites resemble third and fourth order sites more closely than

they resemble unimpacted first and second order streams.

R Li CT VISI N D N T U T

Page 27

LITERATURE CITED

Archibald, R.E.M. 1972. Diversity in some South African diatom associationsand its relation to water quality. Water Res. 6:1228-1238.

Besch, W.K., M. Ricard and R. Cantin. 1972. Benthic diatoms as indicatorsof mining pollution in the Northwest Miramichi River System, NewBrunswick, Canada. Int. Revl _ges. H,.-rdrob'iol .. 5.7: 39-74.

Blum, J.L. 1956. The ecology of river algae. Bot. Rev. 22:291-341.

Boesch, D.F. 1977. Application of numerical classification in ecologicalinvestigations of water pollution. United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency. EPA-600/3-77-033. Office of Research andDevelopment, Corvallis, Oregon.

Burlington, R.F. 1962. Quantitative biological assessment of pollution.J. Water Pollute Control Fed. 34: 179-183.

Butcher, R.W. 1946. Studies on the algae of rivers VI. The algal growthincer ta i n high1y ca -I car'eous s t reams. " J. Ecol. 33: 268-283 .

Cairns, J. Jr., G.R. Lanza, and B.C. Parker. 1972. Pollution relatedstructural and functional changes in aquatic communities withemphasis on freshwater algae and protozoa. Proc. Acad. Natur. Sci.Phila. 124: 79-127.

Cairns, J., R.L. Kaesler and R. Patrick. 1970. Occurrence and distri­bution of diatoms and other algae in the upper Potomac River.Notulae Naturae n. 436.

Clifford, H.T. and W. Stephenson. 1975. An introduction to numericalclassification. Academic Press, New York.

Collins, G.B. and C.J. Weber. 1978. Phycoperiphyton (algae) as indicatorsof water qua'iity. Trans. Amer. Micros. Soc. 97: 36-43.

Cummins, K.tv. 1975. The ecology of running vJaters; theory and practice.pp. 277-;293 ,in O.B. Baker, \~.B. Jackson, B.L. Prater eds. SanduskyRiver Basin Symp'os-ium. Internationa'l Joint Comnriss,'ion.

Cu~nins, K.W. 1976. The use of macroinvertebrate benthos in evaluatingenvironmental damage. Pages 139-149 in Rajendza K. Sharma, JohnD. Buffington and l]allles T. ~1cFadden edS. The biologica.l significanceof environmental impa.cts. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.

Dillard, G.E. 1970.Piedmont stream.

The benthic algal communities of a North CarolinaNova. Hedwigig 17: 9-29.

T ~11 .1 fv' .lor~ R \lISI N D N T U

Page 28

Douglas, B. 1958. The ecology of the attached diatoms and other algae'in a small stony stream. J. Ecol. 46: 295-322.

Hend 1ey, N. 1. 1974.gathered diatoms.

The permanganate method for cleaning freshlyMicroscopy 32: 423-426.

Herricks, E.E. and V.O. Stanh6ltz. 1976. Predicting the environmentalimpact of mine drainage on stream biology. Trans A.S:A.E. 1976:271-274.

Hutchinson, T.C. 1973. Comparative studies of the toxicity of heavymetals to phytoplankton and their synergistic interactions.Water Poll. Res .. Canada 8: 68-90

Hynes H.B.N. 1970. The ecology of running \\faters. University ofToronto Press, Toronto. 555 pp.

Johnson, M.J.Superior.

Unpublished. Periphyton of the north shore area of LakeMinnesota Pollution Control Agency. St. Paul, Minn.

Lorenzen, C.J. 1967. Determination of chlorophyll and pheopigments:spectrophotometric equations. Limnol .. Oceanogr. 12:343··346.

Lowe, R.L. 1974. Environmental requirements and pollution toleranceof freshwater diatoms. United States Environmental ProtectionAgency. EPA-670/4-74-005. Office of Research and Development,

. Cincinnati, Ohio.

Mack, B. 1953. Zur algen and Pilzflora des Liesingsbaches. Wett. LebenSonderh. 2: 139-149.

l~oore, J.W. 1-972. Composition and structure of alga-' communities in atributary stream of Lake Ontario. Can. J. Bot. 50: 1663-1674.

Patrick, R. 1967. The effect of invasion rate, species pool, and size ofan area on the structu \"e of the di atorn communi ty. Proc. na tl. Acad.

Sci. 58: 1335-1342.

Patrick, R. 1968. The structure of diatom communities in similarecological conditions. Amer. Natur. 102: 173-183.

Patrick, R. 1973. Use of algae, especially diatoms, in the assessment ofv~ater quality. Pages 76-·95 in J. Cairns, Jr. a"nd fe.L. Dickson, eds.Biological methods for the assessment of \"Iater quality.

Patrick, R. 1975. O"iatoms as bioassay organisms. Pages 139-151 in G.E.Glass, ed. Bioassay techniques and environmental chemistry. AnnArbor Science Publ., Ann Arbor, Mich.

Page 29

Patrick, R. 1977. Ecology of freshwater diatoms and diatom communities.Pages 2840332 in D. Werner, ed. The biology of diatoms. Univ. of .Calif. Press, Berkeley, Calif.

Patrick, R. 1978. Effects of trace metals in the aquatic eco~ystem.

Amer. Scientist 66: 185-191.

Peters, J.C., R.C. Ball and H.R. Kevern. 1968. An evaluation of arti­ficial substrates for measuring periphyton production. MichiganState Univ. Red Cedar River Series, Tech. Report #1. Instituteof Water Research, East Lansing, Mich.

Peterson, J.B. 1943.' Some halobion spectra (diatoms). D. Kgl. Dansk.Vidensk Selsk., Biol. Medd. 17: 1-95.

Potter, I.C., D. Cannon and J.W. Moore. 1975. The ecology of algae inthe Moruga River, Australia. Hydrobiologia 47 (3-4): 415-430.

Regional Copper-Nickel Study. 1977. Aquatic Biology Operations Manual.Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, St. Paul, Minn.

Regional Copper-Nickel Study. 1978a. Erie Mining Study. MinnesotaEnvironmental Quality Board. St. Paul, Minn.

Regional Copper-Nickel Study. 1978b. Stream order. Minnesota Environ­mental Qu'ality Board. St. Paul, Minn.

Regional Copper-Nickel Study. 1978c. Water quality. Minnesota Environ­mental Quality Board~ St. Paul, Minn.'

Shennan, B.J. and H.J. Phinney. 1971. Benthic algal communities of the~.'letol ius River. J. . Phycol. 7(4): 269-273.

Sneath, P.H.A. and R.R. Sokal. 1973. Numerical taxonomy. The principlesand practice of numerical classification. Freeman, San Francisco.

Stockner, J.G. and F.A.J. Annstrong. 1971.mental Lakes Area, northwestern Ontario.28: 215-229.

Periphyton of the Experi­J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can.

UNESCO. 1966. Monographs on oceanographic methodology. 1. Determinationof photosynthetic pigments in sea water. UNESCO, Paris.

\~ate}~s, T.F., 1961. Notes on the chlorophyll method of estimating thephotosynthetic capacity of stream periphyton. Limnol. Oceanogr.486-488.

Weber, C.I. 1973. Biological field and laboratory methods for measuringthe quality of surface waters and effluents. United States Environ­mental Protection I\gency. EPA--670/4-73-001. Office of Researchand Development, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Page 30

~~et ze1, R. G. 197 5. Pr i rna ry produc t ion. Pages 230 - 247 i n t~. A.~vhitton, ed . Ri ve r Ecology . Un i v. 0 f Cal if. Pres s ,Ber ke1ey, Cal if.

Whitton, B.A. 1975 Algae. Pages 81-105 in B. A. Whitton, ed. RiverEcology. University of Calif. Press-:--Berkeley, Calif.

n N D N T LJ

Page 31

Appendix 1. Diatom species found in the Study Area.

Table 1. Distribution of diatOTIl taxa in Study Area watersheds.

Table 2. Species of the pooled genera: .Q.)rrnbella) Helosira,Navicula, Nitzschia, Pinnularia, and·Syn~dra.

1]JJ

r

-z»-<oJJ

0)r-'ii_

c....

-'I

-~

~

»L

JJ

:0

<co

zo

z

~i

..

Tilhl .. I. tllfltrlhlJtlon nf rlilltnm tnxrI in Study Arl'!1

(conte

L

-0OJ

(,Q

CD

WW

o

o.

·0

Whitelac.e_ -Cloquet.~~

II'

o

Emba_r.o

St. Louis Partr.

o

1

II .

I

..

WATERSHED

~IJ

,

o.

1.

. 1

I)'

.(1

I T~ Bea<TA.Y.A _~~HBER Range Fall Shagawa Kawish Island Isabel. Filson Birch D\!!l.ka----S.-tPny..

1IC~~'~TW~5 SUBLIEY!5 V. CRISSA 2q

A\.Ip~rPlE'IJQA sp. Jij

IWPH!PltUPI p(LLUCIDA Ji

A"'P"'r.Pa. 50'"'", 32

I~PHOAA cr"E'EFCA~JS 3:3

.~PHO"1 I)v"'LIS 34

I~PH0AA OYILIS V. APFINIS 3s

I~PHOAA PERPuslLLI 37

.1l .... n'lll!"lE:n'l~ i~ SP III 38

'~CYD[r~'IS SE~l.NS 39

I~OHOEn~E1S SERliN! v. ACUT1 4 0

INo~nEn4E1S SEAI.~5 v. IPICULA iii

I~OWOEo~EIS SER!.~S V. B~ICHYS "'2

l~owoEn~ElS vITRE' 4]

'~O-OEO~E1S IELLEN~IS .....

.5TEAln~ELLI FORMOSA 46

ITTHE11 ZIC HARIISl Ie

CIL'H,E!'; SPa 119

CILONErS IWPHIS~IENI 50

C'LONErS P'CIllU~ 5i

CAVJ'.EI·<; lE"IS!! S2

CAlO'ElS VENTRICnSI 5:;

CALO\EIS VENTRICOSI v. TAUNC,T 54

CILONEIS VENr~!COSI v. SU~UNDU 55

CILa~EIS V[NT~ICnsa ~. MINUT4 51',

CApPiOGPA~A CPUCICULA 5q

COCCO""IS SP. 60

COCCO'I":IS DI"XNUiA 61

COCCO~EIS PL"CENiUL- 6<,

COCCO~"I5 PLACENTULA V. EUGLYP 6)

COCCO'lf'!S PLICENTULA v. LHH:n 64

COCCONEIS PEDICULUS 6 5

('((LOTELlA SP. ~ 6e

JJ

zo

,~

-0

JJ

JJ

c

-1

<

oJJ

z»JJ

-1

mr

>

z-1

c

'T~hlp 1. Di"trlhlltlon of diatom LIXil in St\ldy Area IJ.1tersheds (l~prC8ent,

(contc. )

ITAXAT~~ J~!BER----

Range Fal,l Shagawa KawishBearIsland Isabel.

WATERSHED

Filson Bircht.'hi te

~Jnka Stony St. Louis Parer. Ember. face_---Cloquet ___

L

:0mr

L»JJ-<

:0).">

-I

C/)COJC-

1""'\.)....1

-4-4

>

JJ

:0

<(n

o

z-1

If"-'"-

CYCLOT~lLA c.~. bNrlGUA

CfCLOTrll l 800·~lc·

CTClOTtLll CO~PTi

CYCL0TElli GLO~E~.T.

CYCLOTELLI GLO~£PAT. v. A~GUST

C7 Cl0TElLI ~UTZINGI.~A Vo RAo!

C'CLOTELlA ME~EGH!~I.NI

CYCLOT~LLA STElliGERA

CY"~ElL' SPa

CE,',TlCI)ll Sp.

OUIT IC"L~ I:LEGAN'>

N.'liICllla fE-,vIs

OI.aTOUA SP.

cl,To"", ,l"CEPS

DI.TO~. ELONG'TU~

01~TO"A HlELI/'LE

OTITO~. ~iE~.lE v. HESOOO~

orAio""" TE~UE

OI.I.TC1"1 TE'WE V. ELONGATV'"

01110"11 IIVlG,~,QE:

"11T0 N I VULGIRE v. BREvE C.F.

DIPLONF:1~ <;p.

D!PLO~El<; ELLIPrtCk

DIPLO~~IS FIN~ICI

DIPLO~EIS OCULlr.

DIPlONETS OVAL!S

DlPLO'iE1S puELUI Col".

DIPLO~~TS S~!THII

EI,TO"(J"E 15 sp.

ENTO"U'iE I S ORNA T"

E:PITHE"'U 5P.

EPITkE",rl snQEli

EU'lOT U SP.

!l-;

10

i'j

72

7)

14

15

11

BO

110

HI

112

113

114

115

11t­

111

118

119

12n

121

122

123

124

125

1 2 5

'127

12A

130

13i

132

13)

135 1.

l'

'\

.1

o

'0

. 1

. 0

ii

,1

~

o

!II

~

c

o

-0OJtoCD

W.+::=0

1"I,J,. I. Dfn.rrlf>llrlnn

(conte. )

dl.1tnrn t,"H1 ill :;r'ldy ArC';J wrH

TAXA

fI TAXAj r,r'fBER--------_......

::tange Fall

WATERSHED

Bear

Shagawa Kawish Island Isabel. Filson Birch ~~~ka~tonvWhite

St. Louis Part~J?~.face__Cloquet~

Xl

z

fI..I~·T I A Ar:JC\!$

(lJ',.Jq~ C'uovATA

EU~OTI CUPvATA v. CAPITATA

Ev,·ona 01'100'<

EU',OT!! EL~GA"S

EU,,0T!A l:.JlGUA

EV'.OT!A rA8A

EV~0TIA FLEIU0S.

EU""T!A Fno"lCA

13",

13,~

13'1

14ii

1 ~ 1

142

H3

14 4;

1'''5

'r!

o

1

e t

-0OJ

t.OroW<J1

::tJ-<o:0

-l

'4-I

:0

JJ

zo

z

c

Ev',:); Ii r,.,CI SA

EV';OTlA P:::cTlruUS V. V[NTRIoS

EU~OTI LAPPONICA

(UNOT!A Mn,r.10~

EU~JTIA NlFGELlII

EV~OTII PECTINALlS

EL~OTtl PECTl~IL15 V. MINn~

Ev·{lT!. PPA["'l'IOC1 C.F.

EV~OTI& PRAEPUPTA

(VNIiTIA PPAEPuPTa V. Bl0E~5

EVt.I)T!A PJ:t.E"'vPT~ 'I. M!t~OP

(U\OTIA PAAEoVPTA ~. INFLITA

fVNnTl1 SrPTE~TRIO~ILIS

EU~I)TI& RoSTELLATA

El",OTIA SUEC!A

(VNOTl. SEq"'j V. DIADEM.

Eu~OT!1 TIUTO~ENsIS

E'.IIJOTlA TE~.ELLA

EIj,.C TI A V u,HEvRO(J!

EV,<OTIA \lAtl~EUHCKIT v. b,TE"'.. e:rPaG!La O !£ SP.

FoaGllAP!a ~!CAPiTATA

FpaG1lAO!A 8qEVl~TqIArA

FoaG!LAO!a 8R~YIS;P!ATA v. CAP

1"6

1"1

H13

156

1 5 1

15 2

15)

IS"

1 5 5

156

IS,

15F)

1Sq

161

162

11:>3

164

IE,s

f 6 7

16/3

16<;;

170

171

11'2

,

0,

<l .0

0'

0,

I)

l;

1.,1,1<'· 1. Iil,itrflJ1lt!or1 of dlntlJm t:IYi1 1n Stllrly

(conte.\ -1 TAL'··

J NUl-lEER------------'

l'

. 1

WATERSHED

0'

\ 1

.~ 0

Bear WhiteShagawa Kawish Island Isabel. Filson Birch DuQka Stony St. Louis Partr. Embar. fac~loquet 'V

OJ<.0CD

WOJ

Fall

o .

Range

17J

174

leI

182

175

17",

171

1711

119

186

TX':A

rPlGIl!OI~ P~EV!~T~;ATA V. IN~

I''''IGIUP!A !fJrLATA

Fo~SILiPI CAPU(!N&

fPiG!lAOIA CONSTQJCTA

F~AG!llqIA Pl~~ITI V. STAICTi

FP~GILaoIA CCNSTouENS

rPG!LAoTIA CONSTouENS v. HIR"D

FRASIL~QrA CO~3ToUENS v. PU~lL

FRI~lllol. CONSTPUENS v. VE~TE

FRIGItAO!' CROTO~E~51S»_.~

~j

z

::0

r

--< rp~GILAP!A LEPTOST&UQO~ 18:!1

o rRaGllAPll LEPTO~TAUkON v. DUB 1B4 1 .

JJ

/"'-,~

OJf_

r~AGll!OII PINNAT.

FRIGILAq!1 pIN~ITl V. LANCETTU

FR~GIL&Rl~ Pl~~ITI V. !NTERCFO

,PIGllholl VAUCHEoll

FRiGlllo!l v'uCH~oll v. CIPITE

rRAr.Il~~I~ VIRESENS

r~IGll~RII Vl PESEN$ v. CAPtTAT

18S

18(,

16 ')'

1813

18'1

190

I'll

.0

o

o

-4

--!

-;::z":::::,.,

»,-:a

rp~GILIOI. PARAS!TICI

F~IJSTULlA C;p.

FNUSTULll PHOP~OIOES

I'PUSTULIA PHo~80IOES v. CAPITA

rpuSTUlIA PHO~B?tDES v. SAlONI

r-PuSTULIA PHOM80tDES V. VIP.toU

FPuSTVLIA ~EINHOLDII

00"'P,.0"'<:". SO.

GO~oHO~'''ft AoIC.TU~

192

19 3

19 4

19'5

196

197

198

199

200

-0

o

,0

O'

:0 GOpPHO~EMA ilCUH!NATUM 201 1 .

GOMPHON~Wl 'CU"IN.TU~ v. cnpnN 202

< COMPHONE"! ACUMINATUM V. CLIVU 20::; I)

GOt·,OHO'JfMA ACU"'lr.ITUIJ Y. PIJStL 204

GO~PHON(~I AFfINE 205 i I)

",/

o '\

a:~:"

-~

c

1;,1,1,· 1. nl'1trlhtlt!of\ of dIatom !il)(i] In r;!IIr!y ArPA wllternltPdH (l"'prefH·nt.

(conte

WATERSHED

Bear White.. I Range Fa~l Shagawa Kawish Island Isabel. Filson Birch Dunka Stony St. Louis Partr. Embar. face Cloquet '

o

'\.

1.

'0

';"

1

.0

1 .

,0

.0

1 .

~

i .

l

o

II

',Ol

..(1

(l

o

-0OJtoroW-......J

T;lh1,. 1. Dldrfhqtinn of ,(int(Jm "aXil in ~';t\lrly Arpfl. wnternhpoa

(conte ..

fI

TAXANl..r~tBER

._-----------". -

1J:0

T/\.XA

l.dvlCUl! 5".

?<-EIOIV~ SP.

~;E 1')!J"" l.ICit'INt:

hEIOlv w lalnlS v. I~PLIAT~~

l";E!D!Ut.~ '=!!SULCA70~

~(IO!u"" Gaaclll V. IE~vALE

2~;>

331

33;:>

333

334

336

Range Fall

\?ATERSHED

BearShagawa Kawish Island Isabel. Filson Birch ~a Stonv

T>i'hi teSt. Louis Partr. EmbaL.-J.ac.~--Cloquet--.

vOJ

<..QCD

WCO

_....,.~

>-;i"~

"')'...Ji

-<o,JJ:r>-i

L

()-1

~

»(-

JJ

:JJ

<

zo

z--1

c

~EIOIU"" ~EacrNYCUM C.F.

~£rOluw &Frl~E V. lONG1CEPS

~·EiOlu'" II'll)lS

p.l T"5C1-I1 ASp.

OPEP",l)a~ I'A>lTy!

Pl""'JLlaIA SP.,

PlEU D'J5IG,,1 Sp.

PHIlOsnL£NIA SP.

~HICI)5p\olEhll CU~v~TA

1::l:'HOOAl,..,r,lA SP.

P~1P~L1nll GIBBA

sTH:aS,,:::IS SP.

S'lIUHI)'.EIS ICUH.

51,uaONEIS INCEPS

5TIUHO~ElS INCEP! v. GRACILIS

STAugO~f!S INCEPS v. LINEARIS

STIUP0~EIS K"IEGEal

STt,UPO'iEIS IG'JORATA

Si.QlH:;O'lEIS PI-'OOi[C":NTEqOM

ST.vaO~~IS PHOENICENTEROM V. G

STAUPOIJE:lS SH!TH!I

STAI!P!)',>! 5 'SMY jK11 v. INCtSA

STE"nPT£gOI'lIA So.

STENnPTEuORII INTE~MEutA

STEPHANnDl$CUS SP.

STE?"A~OnyscuS .~TPE.

SiEPHAN0DZSCUS ASTREA V. MIN-VT,

331

3 4 0

34)

;:J4:!

J8(l

3 9 0

426

42~

43 2

433

434

435

.. 36

437 •

4313

439

440

442

1,43

444

·HS

446

447

448

41,<;

~SO Jj

- - . . . 0

. 1

'0

1 1

'1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

€I

"0

~ C \)

0

o

II

I)

\

...

Table 1. DJ.

(con.tc. .. )

~bution of diatom taxa in Study Area watersheds (l=present, O=absent)

-r TAXATAX.A ..f~J:1BER

u

r

~~

>JJ-<'0:0»

5T[O~I~~Dr~cUS INY1SrTITU!

Si:?Ht~~)tscus N!GAPAE

5TfP~I~~Dl~CUS TENUIS

sur..;lOELLA 5-1".

5u~lPELL~ A~GUSTA!TUMI

SUO!PEllA ELE~ANS

SUC!QELl~ rELICaTlSS!MA

SUqTptllA n!O'1>o1A

~uwIPEllA llNEARIS

SUP]PElL£ nVAL1s

5U Q IQELL'\ nVATIl

liSt!

453

4S4

~55

.. 56

"Sr458

459

460

I,/;>1

46 2

Range Fall

WATERSHED

BearShagaw8 Kawish Island Isabel. Filson Birch Du~

1 .

Stonv St. Louis Partr. Embar.White(ac.e Cloquet._-.

,

vOJ

LOroW1..0

~-1

"..­

~--

c.......

-f

»c...

JJ

JJ

<

zo

z

-l

c

SUPIPELlA OVATA v. PINNAlA

SUP!PELlA ULNA

sn.f'Of!A SPa

TA8fLlIQlll SPa

TA?ElLAQIA FENESTRATA

TI8~LlAq!A FlOCCVL~SA

J; 6 :l

464

46 5

~93

4, 9 4

_49!!j

'-

L1

1 -1

o. 1

..

Page 40

"

Table 2. Specles ;of the pooled genera: ~ymbella, Melosira, Navicula,

Nitzschi~, Pinnularia, and Synedra.

CY~8ELLA ~~JTIUSCULA

:; '1l3 EL ~ L\ ~ F F I,~ I .)CVMclLLLA A~~USTATA

CY>h3[LLA ~\SJ[>U\

~; y ',1 ~ l::- L LA' C:: SAT I 1 C F.f;Cr :1] [L L {\ ' CIS TUL :j

Cy ,·\3 t: L LAC I STU L ~.\ \f... l~.~ :E~ 1',:Y~J[LLA CJS~lJATA

Cy ,'1' t1 ELL ,:i. ~~ '( ,'iLl 1 F 0;\ i"1 I SC'{ ;"1 dEl. L I~ L, '( :--1 J l F ~-J-<. i1 I S \/ 6 i ~ J \j P J \j

CYHt3 ~ L LA CJ I LUVI .~~ r~ A.C. Yrv1 J E. LL A tl ::: 3 .<-.l- J I C ,i',. C. F "CY 1'·1 J ELL A r1:: T E "< J F' L t.. U::: A V" S J L3 ~ JCY~8ELLA l~AEOUOL1S

:.: Y'/\ ~H:, LLA L fI:.. E. Ij 1 S::;YM2;i.lLA LJ'JATA:Y~b~LLA ~IC~OCEPHALA

CYJE3 t LLA iH i'llJ J A:::; y ,'11) ELL A ,i I \j U1 A~YrlB£LLA MINJTA \/" rSlUDOS~ACl

:;V',1DElLrl j'vlINUTA V SlLESIA·C{~

CYMbELLA NA~ICJLIFORMlS

C'l'i18ELL[\ F'=<'JS1~L\TH V L\\iE~SHJ,LJI

CYHBtL L r~ F ~ IJ :)( .L 1'1 t\ C F

:~ y :,1 3 ELL i\ SI i\l J AT:\

CY~JtLL~ SJaA QUALlSCY1 ] ELL J,\ f;;:' 1 A 1-1 :.; UL U !'1:; Y 1"1 Qi.::. L L A 1 J "1 I DACY t) [L LA 1J :,.ll. UU'- A C" t:

CY.'1 d l L l fI:.. 1 J ~:~ .:; .L UUL A

Vi t-=: L (,1 S 1 h: .4 j...·l '3 I GJ J\

1'1 f LSI '<, i\ ~\ ~:; rIC .:.\IV) [-. L US 1 ~ A u I ::; T ~l, ,~ s~ I[ L ,J S ~. <2\ l) 1 :..; T I~ ,\j.~ V.ll L P 1 C; r: ~ 1\

"1 c.l U ~ J. ~,~ ~ . L,,", \~ ~, L 1\ T r\r'j~·. JS1:~[1. G<J\t~UL.;4TA ~/1iJ /\iHjUSTIS

• l'vl-~ L J :) 1 <i\ 1:; _. A 1\1::; .L iJ A\1 L 0 ~ 1. A .: r I\' L J .• C ,:\>~ _LJ S 1. -~ L\ 1. r t2I L. I :; f\ V T:-\1 UISS I ...141"\ ::. L ] S ~ f\ V[~ -< 1/\ N ~~

PRELl IN BY DAFT N D N u

Page 41

Table 2 (contd~)

~~L\VICULA A3S0LUTA~AJILULA A~~8MJOA

NL\VJCUl_l\ t\\'E:~.LCI-\dt\

~AVICLLA A1Prl:aULA\J Lj V1[, UL A ~,~ Ii E(,I SISN,\ II leuL 1\ ,L\ T J ~1 USNA vIC UL A lJ, ~ :; 1 L L. U i"10l AVj, C LJ L ~\ '3 ICE r) ~'l ~\L. ANAVICUL~ 0~YO?rlILA

\):'.\V.lCULA CL\i~ALIS

t\j:'.\vICUL.A Ll\PII ATt\Nl\VICULA'(n~ITATA

N~\ v1. CJ LA' ,l..; i-h1 I TMTA V ~ J :\~ LL\ .~ I CL~

~;y \j leU L ~~ 0 ) :; :; u 1\1 i~ ~ F ~:..~' ; I S,\jell) I CUL. '/\

N,~ II I c; UL I~

N-~\VICULL\

.'-U~IJICUL~\

\jL\JICUL ..'\NL\\llCULA~JA'JICU~_A

N~\/ICUL.A

\j~V1CLJLt.\

NAJICULAt,1 AVleu L 1-\

NAJICULA'~L~VICULJ4

\l4JICULi\hl;\'JICGLA\jAvICULA.\lI-\JiCLJLL\'H\vICULI~

\JI~JILUL ..\~~[.\VICULA

:\~AVI CUt.:\~\l F\ J I CLJ L A\li~JlCL'LA

N(. J 1 CUL I~

;\j,J.VI ULi"\\J ... 'J .L l. UL. iJ,

'J i~ Ii 1 CGL ~\

1\1;'\ \jl =:ULi\

."JI~JLCULi~

(" t-\ V .L Cl; L. 4

\l!\'JJl~v' I~

G]'JT-NT~\

CJ~T~\llA J lCfPSC<Y ;; Toe t. P H t\ L ;\CJ:)i):LO~TA

GJ :) .J 1. J .'~ T A v" .L\ >1 U1 ~ U£\L~~J.)SIS

uI;;NI-\L l... :; i I') E r·~ SISt::. _ v l.~ E \~ SIS V J L I~ TCi,

t_~INE~SlS v. NlG~ECJ

L _ ~ I 1'1 ~~ ;1 '':; 1 S V. t'. GS T R ~\, TLX I ~ UA~(IGU~ v~ CA IT~TA

() ~ S T -< J'1'~~I\CILF

l.;'~t.Gr.l,=(IA C .. F"L. '( S I :; ,~::. I\~ SIShL\SSIACAt U >.j ::; -< Jet,HJ:) Tc_ Ji I~i.. '~ J r: F Lr:" i=- iJ SL ~ t. VJ. S '3 I ;~

L !J. .\~ ~: ~. J L P. T L\l L\ TEO PUt· Il.~ T L\ T [\

h c .~ I :::; C~JL. us \/. Ut ::; ~\ LIt...

1.\1 l' 0,

1':.1. .~ U :::; lJ L f\t1JTIC~~\

:. J T I A V" '~ 0 H~! 1 1i< J 1 ,I ~P L\ f,l J ',I~, I~ ~~

\J:\JiCU i\ f\~L_L.==;U OS,fJ,\i 'J 1 CU ~_ A !;1 i\ C ~.J T~

~~V1CULA ~~jl ArTA\i L VI L.. U L. :\ :; L \J LJ ],.) C U -I J FJ ,lIS

PF~ F~ J\ F T T rVI/-\. R Fi IS NO NT U

ct\~)ITATA

ELLI~'TI::A

iiUTATAR[LTAN~JLl\~

Page 42

Table 2 (contd.)

\j A 1/ I CLJ L' L\ PJ FJ U:.. ANI~v~CULA PJPULANAvICULA ~JPJLA V~

~4V~CUL4 ~J~U~~ VNAVICULA ~J?ULA \I.NAJICULA PJPULA J\l~ \/ i CUL f\ I'" ll. J lOS i~\

1\1 AVIC UL i~ ,~L~ JIG S r-\ V" P /\ ? VA\jAVIGuLA r<~JI':JS~ \/" 1[\lf:-.LL4N~JICULA ~YNCHOCEPH~LA

f\! i~ V1. CUL:4 . f--: -~ YNlJ d (j L,; E P HAL A V<l G:::: ~;\J (, \/ : C ~J L ~. AL I >1 i~ .' U '~l

\10 I) 1. l L: L I-~ ~ ~ L 1 l1, ,U 1 V.. I, j 1 E:("1 JN~~lLU_A S~1~JEJE~1 J~ ~S~~M3i

i\::'.VICULI\ S:::~:~t:T:\ V" 1~:)ICUbAT/.l.

,\!'f\VICUL.1J. ~,:::C:"FA

\j L, Ii 1=L; L L\ ~' :=: \: E'\1

;\) 2t, v leuL 1\ S:. ,>1 I !\J.U L U (-1~AVICULA S:::MINULUM v. HUST~OTI

NAVICUL_A SIiiIl..ISI~ ~\ VleUL A J~)"

\j l1, VI CLI L:\ :) J 3 F A-3 CI ATAr: "f III

~AVICUll\ SJJrlAMULATANAVICULA SJ]TILlSSIM~

NAVleUL A TA~J r UL I~

\jAVICULl\ T:::~EL_OIJES

NAvICULA T~I?~NCTATA

NAVICULA VI~IOULA

~AVICULA VI~IGULA

rl AVleU A \j I - I GUL r~ V !~ ~ GU:~ E:;~ S I0J I~ V'l CUL J~ VI -', I UUL ), V ill l- I i, C. ~\ ~ I SN4J~LU_A vI~IJJLA J. OST~LL~T

1< i\ 'J ICU:..,r\ vJ il, L L tI C C. i

N.C TZ 50 C~J I ~\ Li. ~; C0 :'\ :'10 DAT J~

NITL~CHIH ~"::ICJL.A:'\IS

~lTZSCHIA l\SICULA?IS v. AF~ICA

\J 1 TL S !..: H1 ~\ ~:: J::JNlTLSCYIA l\~PrlIJIA

f'lITZ3C'{It~ L\f\I~US'l/~\TJ-\

\J I r z S( HI t\ 3 I~ G;'\ r ;\~lrZSLHIA ~ ~IT LL~TA

1,IITZSL,lLLA ::;l-I~LJSll

\J I TZ SL -I I ,L: ::; 0,'1. ,I J r'l I S1';1 TZSl,Hlh ::;u,'1 JT11\\nrZ~CH A :::;J'J-l:,I~

\lJ.1 Z SCH 1\ ::; <Y 1 GC i) H AL~ I~

~lTZSC~IA : F (PALAES~A)

~jIT!..SCHI/~ J.L=; I i~TA

t'd TZS CHI /\ P I t J HYrIC A

PR lIVllN FiY DR U JeT f\~A R R V N D i\~ u

Page 43

Table 2 (contd.)

'J.i T2::>C HI I~

NITZSCHlf4NI TLSCrllf-,\j~TZSLHIA

'.J TZSLHLt\~,jI TLSCHIAtJITZSC-Ilt:.'H TZSCHIA\jITL~CHli4

I'.dTiSGHlf:Ni TZ SC ...lI f\~ J.L T1. S I~ H I ~\.

til: TZ~C-lI~\

;>.j 'T l ~ Crl L A\i':- TLSC-iI~\\t l' TZ S CHI I~

;'1 1. l L :) LHI II'JITZ~0HII'\

Nl TZSCHli.\NI TZSC>iIANITZSCHIA\1112 SC:-U A'JITZSCrlIAN-I 1Z SCHIA.\1 I T l S LHI f:\\!lTZSCHIA~I TZSC~ilA

\!lTZSCHIA

~ XJl. A \1 A T A C F G

=ASCICULAT~\

r .L L. 1 F 0"( 11 I SrUNTIGULAF .< Us T LJ L U :1

=~USTULU~ Ii. PE~MI~J

=~JSTULU~ ~. SUJSALI:; I~ ACI L 1 S-1 (, .~; Z :.) C HI J\ \'i!-i

I:;NG,~/\Tp> C"F"<J TZ I '! S I t\ NA_J:\ltA IS'1I"~LJSJULh

JJ TUS,;\JI·\_FA

:;Zt_ C I A~J:1ANI\

S 1':; H\3IGI"~OlJr:!'\

3INUATA v. TA8~LLA~1~

S PIC J LU1'·1311\b\JOF\Ui\1S~J JL I UE AKISSJdTILIST -<.Jt·) I CAT" Y6L TO ;~t:LL iJ,r ~. y.~~ L ION EII A .V.~ .J 1 GTIi I. VAX

J1 t:--:::TI~·I/.\L1S

:3 [) E. ~ LISJ. .~~ AJ \1 I'\ I'~ f'i U! i Iv I~ '1 P r: J. G:::. f-) Ii

J::-( VICUST6.TA:; .~ LI J ;~ 1 (~

1..)1\ '> l'y USDIllE. GtNSFO H1Cl\C;c.\lT J:LI~')

I\Jrt.·~h 0 H

PI:H·I UL ~ ~ 1 API .\J;,jUL A <1;~

::> .I. N ~, l) L i-\ ~~ 1 f.:.

F) I ,\I rj J L L\ ,~1 i·1

P1 ;\~ iJ UL A ~~ 1 ~

f~j 1 ~\H;UL ~~l /\;:.~ I \! i'~ UL [\ ":. I ~.

[J.L t.j i~U :J.~:L 1\

t"J ]. I\HHJ L i~ .< I Al>HHJLC\I/\

r) 1. :~ I', U L /\ 1. (',

:... 1 ~. l LJ l. Cl .~ I 1-'

::J.~i~i' ULA:<lP .L ~l >·1 UL r... ~ 1. ;.,

} I~IHJL. ('! (I i l

f-' 1\1,; UL l\ ~~ I·,

P I ;'d'; Ll L l\Z 1 t,lllijUl/:\ lr~

Pll~i,;u [\<.If,;:l J I'~ : ~ U L [;,), fI

A:3 t\ J J ENS I ~::;

:J, 8 AJ j 1\ S 1:; V ..~\ J j J J E \1 S I.) IiL\ 3 ~\ U j (.:. i~ S1~) 1/"D, c.( 0 ') P r'{ {\ t: .-< 3. Af.I.J E \1 \) leu l J', T ~\,

:~ 1~; t:: ," S

I.. I ;.j LA'~J ~ T......,SUOU\l

LI IN FiY DF~ T u F': ~r 'r Fi Fi VIS! N N T

Page 44

Table 2 (contd.)

,:--;Ii~NLJL.A~lrl, LATEvITtYAT/\ V. JO>11;:l 1 !HHJ L A '<, 1 A 1'\ A1 J ~

PINNULA~IA ~cSOLEPTA

::> I :'J N 0 L_ A~, I A ,'1 ESOL t, PTA J" r, ~ -; US T:' I ,J, I U L L\~'~ 1. t'l I .; r< 'J Sl AJ :.: J '1 C" F ,.P.!:f4i~ULA -~l /\ :10:<MOi~O:,(U>I'

:J ,'J ~.! UL. A~.i H >~ J ;) 0 .~~ AF1 q i\l Uc. iL<' I I~ ,( J TT t'l E k I:;111.1·~)Li4~11-i ~T,E-:TJ::~~\~HF

F) I ;~:l UL A~~ 1 A S J J. C ~ PIT AT~P 11'.1f'! UL ~;U ~'~ :.; U~! ~ i~ PIT .~ T D, V Fl AU ::? :~ l'j U L A .~ I:' ;; ~J ~ S (~t·; t~ T CP ,-I 'J :< A

P':'I~I,;ULt\-:;,J. t: 1 C:(~,Yi.i T 1: h:J =.: ~ .~ U L I r-. VI \, I ',',II ~

:> IN;, UL, t.\ ~ li~j I ' . I 1 S J" "11 r·; J ~

S'y :~ L_ 0 r=, ~\ ACT 1 NAST ;< I 0 DESSY!J=,~) A I~CJS

S Y,\H:: ;:h.k ~"::A -j 1= E;; d ~\ L P ~ <l F "Sy r4[ [j i;, A A !", ~ rl I C; EPHAL 1-\ Ii" AUS T -.? i ACL\SYHEDF~A CAJITt\TASy t' U::. Ui'~ A C Y=L.. 0 PJ "1SY~£ORA U~_IC~TISSIM~

S y ;"j ~ [J I':, A 0 t _ 1. CJ\ TIS S I I ~ AJ I) A..~ GU-SSY~~U~A OL~~~A{AE C.F.S YNl Ur')~ f L_ I F 0 ~ i'H S V., EXI LISSY I'~ C. 0 re A i ~l ~ i S~

S y :~ E lJ 1', ~\ M1. \j J SCUL ASy .~ [ Dt'< A N i\ \j I~

SY··jELrd\ Fl\·(I~SlT1CI'J.

SY iL::-: C/- ~ A F 1-\ ~ A S1 T J. C f\ \1 SUUC0 I'rS T -< leT A~. y I'~ L u=< A t.J U ~ ::: :1 c_l. L }.:,S 'l' ~h, D('-' ~\ . FJ U_' ri L L ~ t\ 1/ I) L ~\ CL f\:, T ~

S y \~ t. U £~ ~ (, J I ~\f'-1 SS y ,'.~ C 0 ~•. r~ ~ U \J P E:,1 SS)' ,\j U;- ,A r. I,) :1 p r:: \J S IJ F.f~ I L ~; !~ -< 1 ~~

S )' I~ C, U[. C\ U vI F c j'i S v F i ~ ,.; ,; 1 L :'F~ 0 i Cl~; Y>E LJ [\ 1,;-\ P t: ;\: 3 V S 'J: TIC 1\ C F~Y\I U"A ~)C=JA

:- y "I' LJ ,('., T L\J " ~ (\~) Y' ..1 LJ I, A U L ~ '-\S y r'~~' UI • A U L \I,~ v C (J 1\1 T I-~ [, CT ;\S y "J (~ l) r, I~ J L \J (.\ Ii ,< (~ ,\t:. ~;

F( '\{ D c:- r'- C' T .J R VI N 0 N"--' r: "J

Page 45

Appendix 2. Cluster analysis of quantitative diatom data.

Figure 1. Dendrogram of diatoms collected quantitativelyin May, 1976. Original data matrix was editedat the 5%.level of relative abundance beforeclustering.

Figure 2. Dendrogram of diatoms collected quantitativelyin August, 1976. Original data matrix wasedited at the 5% level of relative abundancebefore clustering.

Figure 3. .Dend rogram of diatoms collec ted quanti ta tivelyin late-September, 1976. Original data matrixwas edited at the 5% level of relative abundancebefore clustering.

Figure 4. Dendrogram of diatoms collected quantitativelyin May, 1977. Original data matrix was editedat the 5% level of relative abundance beforeclustering.

Figure 5. Dendrogram of diatoms collected quantitativelyin late-July, 1977. Original data matrix wasedited at the 5% level of relative abundancebefore clustering.

Figure 6. Dendrogram of diatoms collected quantitativelyin August, 1977. Original data matrix wasedited at the 5% level of relative abundancebefore clustering.

NARY Dr=~ u ~j CT T R V(Si I\J D N T lJ

-0,JJ

Figure 1. Dendrogram of diatoms co~lected quantitatively in May, 1976. Original datamatrix was edited at the 5% level of relative abundance before clustering

VOJtoCD

~(J')

~...;.\

L

5i1I,Ll-------------,1

pS I j

SR3 ~ I Il.--.J IBll ~l ,-K8

H3 -L------rl------,j"

FlRei I IK2

PI !~Ll ~--l 1 I

~~l I I I IE1J:

- i :.-.:

','")

..j:.~:}

~~<-x-

:i~

~tl.:::~

'~~$~:~

8:;

.25.5.75Station

(J

:0-<

L-

eel

-1

$:»(..AO

JJ

<

z

z

c

1]

.JJ

Figure 2. Dendrogram of diatoms collected quantitatively in mid-August, 1976. Original datamatrix was edited at the 5% level of relative abundance before clustering.

-0OJlOro+:::0""'-.l

"

s.

l--

.25.5.75

r---!- ----------'-I PI J;I !IC;L 1 -L-I 1---------- ---., /i

IBBl jf=t.1---LJ' :;,:..':. *~,I~i -E--:J-

1 =. j iIif1 1 I }] I \1

II ~~3 _L-

1

I ::: I I~].P2 I I - itI K2 ' "x I. Bll JL-------------r---------------~---.J! KS -! j :'

I~P'~i '

Station

-1

JJ

JJ

ifl'i!!

".............,.

-j

::'lJ-<o

<(j)

7'

o

zl~

Figure 3. Dendrogram of diatoms collected quantitatively in late-September, 1976. Original datamatrix was edited at the 5% level of relative abundance before clustering.

-0p;

lOCD

+::>co

r

z""';~";:J-~

JJ-<

•

'­~ ;,

>:'

Ir

J= .. i -l·------ . 75

i D1 _I ojISL1D.; ..;; 33

Ip 2 - :-1 1,' :: . ,

nUl I ;::::; IDLl .,...J I .,', r--------I~i -1 I }, t: IIFl _l -ISL3 J~-__--------_.L_--'KCl ] -- ~--~--r,.".", I=========~=====~- ----T--

J£\.1 :,I~~ .r============:============1 IIsiG ..j_ IIBll

iK8 ~C~===------..:...--=JJ

c:

11

!-~~

L

:1>

JJ

<

zo

z

vOJ

LOCD

+:>1..0

r-Figure 4. Dendrogram' of diatoms collected quantitatively in May, 1977.

Original data matrix was edited at the 5% level of relative abundance before clustering.

z<.")

»--I

r-·L........

.6 .5 .4

P28L1K1Pl8L2

-;'::

~ ! I,,; I I I I

~= 1 ~ I I ~ I

hi..... ~1 . I Ii f"--1__! 1= ;~:

JJ

JJ

C-_

.-'". ~;".\"""",

0)

zo

z

-1

T1

z

::J

~:p

Figure 5. Dendrogram of diatoms collected quantitatively in late-July, 1977.Original data matrix was edited at the 5% level of relative abundance before clustering.

vOJtoCD

<.J1o

.. 75 .5 .'25

.:-;

l::~

rt

~

~

JJ

JJ

<co

z

c:

;.-:

':i

:0

I

?

"TI_v

Figure 6. Dendrogram of diatoms collected quantitatively in August, 1977.Original data matrix was edited at the 5% level of relative ab~ndance before clustering.

v0>

LO(1)

u-,--'

-4

-1

-1

c_

JJ

zo

z

.75 .5

ISL2h ~ IIHi =t--g: $; ] I~J_----,Il.~ ~ -: I I 1' ' ~.

K~ J I; IPI I ;.:::: I

~l ]. I ;;;::; !

~ R.3 -! :.::i~K2!·····

-~i'------------------_;--------_ i ~

.25

x:~" ,,;..)

~)

:j:f

]J

~

'-?<::....

"'*"'4""U

:JJJ

5:

JJ

IJ

~ #' .....

;2:

o

""",,'.c:_

-I

c

Table 1. leriphyton sampling intensity.

CHLOROPHYLL CELL COUNTS ~PECIES PROp·. COUNTS QUALITATIVESTATION DESIGNATION YEAR

A B r> A B C A B C A B Cv

Primary 1976 6 3 6 6 3 5 6 3 5,., 6 3..)

1977 6 3 6 0 0 0 6 3. 3 2 14 2

Secondary 1976 6 3 6 6 3 3 6 3 3 3 18 2

1977 6 3 6 0 0 0 3 3 3 2 14 2

Tertiary 1976 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 18 2

1977 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 14 2

Primary (SCS) 1976 0 0 0 0 0 0 b 0 0 0 0 0

1977 3 3 3 0 0 0 3 3 2 2 14 2

Secondary (SCS) 1976 0 0 0 .0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1977 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 14 2

A. Number of scheduled sample periods.

B. Colonization period (weeks).

C. Number sample sets analyzed.

".:

VOJ~

CD

U'1N

Page 53

Table 2. Mean number of blue-green, green and diatomcells per mm2 of glass slide artificial substrateand percent diatom cells observed in 1976.

Site Blue-green Green Diatoms % Diatom

BB-5 25 32 1068 95

KC-1 24 48 638 90

F-l 42 38 Lf58 85

P-5 34 35 1875 96

BI-l 188 162 3471 91

D--1 55 35 1115 93

E-l 17 Ll3 153 72

SL-3 78 331 667 62

K-1 139 150 860 75

P-1 21 12 1891 98

P-2 106 312 1764 81

SL-1 20 17 2255 98

SR-3 281 53 1761 84

K-1 96 650 2924 80

K-5 119 20 1990 93

K-3 65 13 1385 95

x 73 131 1339 87

"i\'1'1ean for sampling periods Hay, August and late September, 1976

j\ T 1\11 f\. I \! nT

Page 54

Table 3. Number of taxa identified and the numberof samples collected within each watershed.

Watershed It Specie.s Found It Samples Taken

Range 24 1

Fall 78 12

Shagawa 65 10

Km.Jishhvi 93 24

Isabella 87 23

Filson 67 8

Birch 130 48

Dunka 80 18

Stony 97 38

St. Louis 79 27

Partridge 104 45

Embarrass 84 19

Hhiteface 64 4

Cloquet 30 2

FT T R r~E N D N

TABLE 4. Dominance values CD) and frequency of occurrence (F) for diatom speciescollected qualitatively. -- '.. ':"

"'0eutoCD

JJ }I'l/ In 76 L Sept 76 Fb/Mr 77 Ap/Hy 77 Aug 77(J1(J1

V"'::'CA D F D F D F D F D FC:s: Achnanthes lanceolata v. dubia 0 17 0 3 0 I 1.5 9 0 33-- --- IZ i.\..... lirh2aris 13.8 90 1.8 65 0 I 11. 8 85 19.8 93

I> A. linearis v. curta 1.7 31 0 6 0 , 0 32 0 44JJ I

A. linc1.ris 'I:. pusilla 0 69 a 13 a I 2.2 74 15.1 88-< Ia 0 0 a I a 47 a 510 I

67.2 100 53.2 100 83.3 I 62.5 100 95.3 Ina.),J

,> a 17 3.7 71 a , a 9 0 23,

tU vitcea a 66 3.7 58 a I a 65 2.3 47I

-\ fornosa 1.7 31 1. 2· 23 a I a 6 a 9,en Cocconcis placentula v. lineata 0 38 a 35 0 I 0 63 5.2 63

I

~'~C~:~:~~~n~~~:eLuta 0 31 a 16 0 I a 11 a 14I1.7 21 a 32 '0 , 0 37 2.3 37

'"- ,0 34 8.1 34 0 , 0 44 0 74,

() 0 0 1.2 97 0 I 0 0 0 0I-I , 4.3 100 3.7 97 0 , 5.2 0 0 0I-I 0 100 0 97 0 (::1 0 88 2.3 100r-., W........J 1.7 0 0 0 0 Z 0 0 0 0H

~ 10.3 52 1.2 13 25 ~ 13.2 41 0 16)::- 0 62 0 42 0 w 0 50 0 63'::.- H

Cunoti~ "pcctinalis v. minor 0 0 0 16 0 w 1.7 24 0 370 (::1

JJ E:unotia spp. 2.6 66 8.1 69 0H

8.8 50 10.5 98Fragilaria ~pucina 0 10 5.0 13 8.3 0 0 29 0 23

JJ construens 0 76 5.0 61 0 l' 0 32I

< construens v. pumilia 0 24 0 3 0 , 2.2 68 7.0 91I- F .. construens v. venter 0 79 8.1 48 0 I 7.4 68 6.4 91GO I- F. crotonensis 0 0 12.4 52 0 I 0 18 0 14a - I

F. 10.3 79 3.2 42 0 , 16.9 65 26.2 95Z ,

1:' • 10.3 79 4.0 39 16.7 I 2.2 56 0 56,0 F. virescens 0 3 0 0 0 I .7 32 0 160 I

Fragilaria spp. 0 0 21.1 52 0 I 0 59 0 40I,c,:, GO~D t-i2nema an'2;usta t u..rn 0 76 0 42 50 , 7.4 76 a 700 I

Q..:.- cl~-v'ei_ 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 27 0 51-l I

Q..:.- 91i·t.",1r('oides 0 a 0 0 0 I 0 a 0 00

,G ~ LJ::i~\~t.11lL..~ 0 52 0 84 0 , 0 68 0 77

C,

f.0rllDb,:nl2I:.2 spp, 0 0 0 0 I 0 41 0 37~:::~ I

>1 e 10 S-.iJ:.a. ZY" 3 n11 1 aJ:...a I 1.5 88 0 0-\ . 7.8 83 5.6 84 0 I

TABLE 4. continued

vOJ

(,Q

CD

U10'1

Ny In 76 L Sept 76 Fb lvir 77 Ap My 77 Aug 77n f n Ii' D F D F D F

0 82 2.5 84 0 I 0 88 5.2 98I

a 34 0 13 0 I 9.6 41 0 28I

2.6 97 5.0 100 a I 0 0 0 0I

a 0 1.2 100 0 I a 0 0 0I

0 a 0 0 0 I 1.5 a 0 aI

0 100 a 100 0 I .7 91 11. 1 97.7I

a 0 a 10 0 I a 15 .6 17I

1.7 100 0 0 0 I 2.2 91.2 a 0I

0 0 2.5 100 0 I~ 0 a 0 0I

0 0 5.0 100 a 0 0 0 a 0>L1

a 100 0 97 0 z 0 91 3 5 1H

0 62 0 58 0 ~ 0 50 0 610 0 0 0 0 >L1 7.4 N.C. a aE-<a 100 a a 0 >L1 2.9 100 0 a00 0 2.5 100 25 E-< 13.2 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 9.6 N.C. 0 0:z;

11.2 100 2.4 100 a I 2.2 0 0 0I

a 100 1.2 100 a I a a a aI

1.7 100 a a a I .7 100 0 0I

17.2 100 2.4 100 16.7 I n.8 a a 0I

a 100 a 100 a I a 100 22.7 98I

9.5 79 1.6 65 24 I 5.2 79 2.9 72I

31 90 3.2 58 a I 34.6 91 18.6 95I

~'~ .. kutzingiana

s. Ininuscula

~. s~crcta v. apiculata

~l. palea

~[€l 3i::2 spp.~er dio~ circulare~dV cula cryptocephala

S. r2ci~E1S-----~ ~2pens

~ rump ens v. familiarisS. tenura-----

~13.\· i cula spp.;J e i J hm s pp •~itzschia acicularis

______ spp.spp.

~~~phicephala

S .delicatissima

-=--e.::-c:..:::.:::....::... ;3 PP •Tabellaria fenestratah floccu 1osa

-!oSo>c-oJJ

JJm<

_1

-l

~,~ ~~

(0

CCDc.._m

-(

z~ ~. r~Jl3Sa

:IJ,).'>

o

r

-c:0

(J)

oz

N.C. not calculated

oozo-j

oIC

oI~

TABLE 5. Dominance values (D) and frequency of occurrence (F) for diatoms species collectedquantitatively

--;JPJ

<.0(D

tTl'-J

-0 Ny Jun 76 L Jly 76 Ma Aug 76 E Sept 76 L Sept 76 L Hay 77 L Jly 77 Aug 77JJ Tc'L'\A D F D F D F D F D F D F D F D F

r- 6:chns'Ll:thes 12nceolata 0 41.2 0 42.9 0 60. 0 66.7 0 40 0 9. l' 0 8.3 0 0~- .l<-. lir:c:lr i...o-':.. 4.4 29.4 17.9 100 13.3 80 33 100 15.0 73.3 0 63.6 a 75 a 72.7Z At J-i:1g~ri_~ ~v. pusilla 30.9 82.4 35.7 71.4 36.7 93.3 a 33.3 a 60 0 36.4 39.6 83.3 45.5 90.9"'"t-,.,.;;..-

6-,,- Llj_'}ut--,-~~~im2 91.2 100 53.5 100 66.7 100 95.8 100 91. 6 100 56.8 100 58.3 100 70.5 90.9-r"""l..A./

-< pellucida a 35.3 0 42.9 0 53.3 a 83.3 1.7 60 a a 0 8.3 a 36.4

0::ol2rions a 5.9 0 57.1 0 20.0 0 66.7 0 0 0 0 0 16.7 0 0

JJ A.""itre:L. 4.4 82.4 0 71.4 0 86.7 0 66.7 0 86.7 0 54.5 0 41.7 0 45.5GQc::...c-'.:me:LB... 121acentula ·V. lineata 13.2 58.8 50.0 100 46.7 80 42 83.3 10 80 0 9.1 27 66.7 45.5 81.8

"T1 C>cl.Q.t.::::] 1.?-... spp. 4.4 35.3 0 71.4 0 40.0 0 66.7 1.7 80 a 27.3 a 16.7 0 27.3-:1

CY'::...'J c·lla... spp. 5.9 94.1 a 85.7 0 9~.3 a 100 5.0 86.7 a 100 2.1 91.7 0 81.8(j)

Di'2c'Y~'3_ ti'rru~ v.. elongatum 0 29.4 a 28.6 a 13.3 0 16.7 a 6.7 47.7 100 0 66.7 0 36.4C

~';':ioti~:L sp 4.4 100 10.7 71.4 11. 7 93.3 0 50 0 66.7 a 0 0 41.6 a 63.6tf" E.:LJ~::-,LlJ r -i a £..QJ1..5-...tJ:.11 e 11 S 1.5 47 10.7 57.1 1.7 80 0 33.3 3.3 80 0 18.2 0 0 0 a

L r:..c..D..SJ:J:.l.l2.Dii. v. p..J..lcin"L 0 a 0 14.3 a a 0 16.7 0 0 0 63.6 2.1 58.3 4.5 63.6

-1L LQlJ.s...t 111 F' f1 C; v. :LeJ1.t.f'J:... 0 41.2 3.6 28.6 0 60 0 16.7 6.7 60 0 36.4 '0 33.3 0 36.4L .e..:t::..QJ:J.JJ..0n.::-;c; 0 70.6 0 28.6 0 40 0 50 0 40 0 36.4 0 16.7 0 18.2

-'I E...~ ]]" nn'J l2... 0 47.1 0 28.6 0 46.7 0 50 0 46.7 0 9.1 0 25 0 27.30

F .. :L:1~lcr.G"ria 0 Ld .2 0 14.3 0 66.7 0 83.3 3.3 26.7 6.8 100 0 83.3 0 63.6~ .E.L2.:::il2.r:....i....a... s pp . 0 17.6 0 71.4 0 26.7 0 50 8.3 53.3 0 ~5.5 0 50 0 36.4»

G..QL-:'pl:~'2..k.f Gila...c....1..1.T1 ina t..1Jill.. 0 41.2 0 57.1 0 60 0 100 0 73.3 0 81.8 0 50 0 36.4::....·0 G-L .at.F i n e.. 1.5 11.8 0 0 0 0 0 16.7 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 9.1:0 S_ BLt~:l,LS-t.JJ:Jd."'R 8.8 64.7 0 71. 4 3.3 73.3 0 83.3 0 66.7 18.2 81.8 20.8 83.3 15.9 63.6

JJ G...... .c.le~Le..i. 0 0 0 14.3 0 6.7 0 33.3 0 0 6.8 18.2 6.3 50 0 36.4m G-..- :.- ,- 3 C i 1 ,,, 0 23.5 0 0 0 6.7 0 0 0 6.7 0 63.6 0 58.3 0 36.4< ~ :2 r Ll.l.1Dldi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.7 0 54.5 0 25 0 27.3-

.G- -IL:L.1:u.l.u.rrL. 2.9 100 14.3 71.4 0 93.3 8.3 100 11.7 93.3 0 54.6 14.6 83.3 4.5 90.9- G('I0',~hi-l-nOTTl~ spp. 5.9 41.2 0 57.1 0 60 0 100 0 73.3 o· 81.8 0 50 0 36.40Z '\ i '" 1 r~ "'.i:r:..a. s PP• 4.4 88.2 10.7 71.4 6.7 73.3 16.7 66.7 10 73.3 0 54.5 0 42 0 45.5

0 F'1-"''-'''1.''l. spp. 0 88.2 0 85.7 0 33.3 8.3 100 8.3 100 0 72.7 0 75 0 63.6

0 'Ij t~:3,...hia spp. 7.4 82.4 7.1 85.7 10.0 93.3 8.3 100 48.3 100 0 90.9 0 75 0 90.9

Z.s~-"l;or1-.., spp. 16.2 9ff.l 0 85.7 0 100 4.2 100 16.7 100 56.8 100 31.3 91.6 25.0 90.9

0I~hojl)Li2 Fcno~trar~ 'J 70.6 0 71.4 0 46.7 0 50 0 53.3 0 63.6 2.1 41.7 0 45.5

"""';1 .I.- [1 0,..... ,--r11 n..:::~ 10.3 70.6 0 71.4 5.0 60 0 33.3 0 66.7 9.1 81.8 6.3 58.3 2.3 63.6"0

c0-

-aJJ

:-

zTaole 6. Hean relative abundance of dominant diatom taxa. lvleans are caJculated for ~,lay, August, and late-Se~tember, 1976,

and May, late-July, and August. IS77.

-0OJtoro

U1co

"'--:-...,..;.--

S TAT ION _~~~_ ~ .~ ~ _Id order 3rd ord-.e.'-'--r_-.- -,--___:__

KC-l P-!:i 81-1 0-1 [-1 SL-2 \ SL-3

137 -- 0.03 0 0 U 0.13 0 0.27 U -- 0 I U.~7 --Y7 -- 0.97 0.47 0.2 0 0.13 0.03 4.1 0.13 -- 2.25 I 4.G7 --43 -- 4.3 5.33 27.1~ 12.6 1.~ 4.~J 9.17 18.73 -- 2S.US 1'd.33 -­37 -- 54,13 27.63 26.27 0.2 63.83 67.4 36.5 10.63 -- 6U.Y 32.U~ --U3 -- U.<:! 0.U7 \ 0.73 U U.23 U.03 3.1 U -- U U.'d3--73 -- 1.67 0.2 0.37 0 2.u3 1.'d3 0.53 0 -- 0.2 1.4 --03 -- 0.03 16.9 I 4.43133.4 0.13 U 5.97 4.13 -- 1.3 0.07--47 -- 0.1 0 1.2 0 4.07 0.U3 0.37 U -- 0 U.23--57 -- 2.7 2.7 U.53 0.2 ,1.b7 1.9 1.17 O.~3 -- O.!:i 2.37--

-- 1.13 13.77 0 0 U.57 5.S3 0 4.93 -- 0.1 0 --43 -- U.b7 1.17 1.37 0.13 1.43 0.07 1.U 1.47 -- 0 2.23--3 -- 1.43 0.4 U.23 0 0.1 0.43 U.47 0.2 -- 0.4 3.e3--97 -- 1.1 U I 4.33 0 G.67 0.07 U.a 0 -- 0 U.07--

-- 0 U.4 0 0 0 U.3 U U.43 -- 0.2 0 --63 -- 1.U7 0.13 5.53 U 1.4 0.47 U.2 U -- 0 0 --23 -- U.16 0.47 U.U3 0.2 1.33 U.U7 u.33 1.~3 -- U.1 0.03--47 -- U.3 0.13 U.37 0 I U 0.17 2.4 U.4 -- 0.4 U.2 --

-- 0 u 0 0 i U U u U -- 0 U --17 -- 1.73 U.9 13.93 0 II U.43 0.47 0.13 23.b -- 0.3 5.1 --

-- 0 U U 0 U U.13 U U -- 0 U ---- 0.1 0.u7 U U.2 U U U U -- U.4 U --

4- -- 2.1 U.43 \ 0.e7 0 i 1.33 !J.l7 1.. 33 U.67 -- 0.9 L.b7--~ -- U.67 U.13 1.27 U : 1,77 U.13 U.SJ U -- 0.1 2.47--6 -- 3.63 0.47 I ~.Y3 U I ~.Y U.~7 'd.7~ u.t.! 1-- U.3 2.77--43 -- 5.~7 1.27 3.67 0 I 7.Y U.27 Ib.Y, 1.13 -- u.6 S.'d3--~r -- 7.~7 21.i)3 4.U~ 0.2 L.~ 1U.. 7? 3.;3 2Y.43 -- t..? 3.17--/3 -- 0.2 U U.43 U U.3 U.43 U.2 U -- U.L U.97--4 -- 1.137 1.87 2.u7 U I U.37 ~.77 U.17 0.U3 -- 3.U 1.2 --

I

lo:;t order r 2n88-1 I F-l

. .mi s::' ima

TA.':<P-Ach nthe lanceolataA. near sA. near s v. pusilla

0.27 -- 2.4 -- U.1.'07 -- 4.'d -- U.3.U3 -- 2.4 -- 5.

4Y.b3 -- 31.77 -- 26.0.43 -- U -- U.1.17 -- 1.'03 -- 1.2.2 -- U.U3 -- U.u.t.7 -- 1.13 -- 2.3.Y -- 1.73 -- 1.2.23 -- U -- 01.77 -- 5.3 -- 6.U.U3 -- 0 -- 2.2.2 -- 4.17 -- 4.U -- U -- U

G.Y -- 1.Y3 -- 1.U.17 -- 3.U6 -- O.U.4 -- 0.3 -- O.

U -- U -- 01.U7 -- 1.3 -- 1.u -- U -- UU -- U -- 0

2.3 -- 1.U -- 1.1'\el:Jsira sp • U.C57 -- !::J.Y7 -- 9.

icul so. 4.2 -- 2.3 -- 2.itzschi s p. b.4 -- 4.3 -- 3.

00. ~.27 -- 2.Y7 -- 3.lar ii' fenestrata U.47 -- 2.2, ::1 1~'

T. flocculosa 1.'d7 -- j.U~.

eura pel1ucidaAnomaecneis vitreaCocccneis placentula

lotc::lla spp.1a spp.

ato~a tenue v. elongatumEunotia spp.

ilaria spp.F. construen sF. co~struens v. pumilaF. construens v. venterF. auch f2riae'':'omphonema spp.G. <3.ffi neG. angustatumG. cleveili. qrurlmdi'..J. oatvul um

o-;7

"'-

<m

o

z.,....,l ..i-j

-4

!l-4

o

-j

JJo

oc

(/)

c

O'j

o-,.,.4·1..)

~J

o

:0

~»'--

L

STATION, --- 4th order' . I 1 5th order I

K-2 \ P-1 I P-2 I SL-l [ SR-1 ! SR-2 I SR-3 K-1 K-5 ! K-~ I

_!J

rs;:-pL..

-<o.../•..J)~

':")

Crr'1

C-ill

~

--2o~

>C-

OJJ

:0m<cr.)

oL.

oozo--!

o,-­\_-

o-1

Table 6. Continued

1" r\ '/ (\l/-'l.)\t\

Achn nthe lanceolataA. 1 near sp\. 1 near s v~ pusilla

nutissimdipi2ura pellucida

Anonoeoneis vitreaCocconeis placentula

atell a spp.1a spp

Di ato!na tenue v. e10ngatumEunotia s;JP.,Fragilaria spp.F. co::struensF. construens v. pumilaF. const~uens v. venterF. v2.ucheriaeliomphonema spp.G. affineG. angustatumb. cleveiG. gruno\f/iiI~. parvul urn1'\ e los ira s pi\la icula s p

tzschia pp.spp

1arl a fenestrataT. f1occulosa

i 3.03 U U.3 0.07 U 0 0.03 0 0 -- 1-- 0 0.3 U 0.U3 U I U.b~ u.1 U.2\ 4.~ 0 0.3 0.4 1.43 1.25 0.63' 0.u7 U -- ,-- 0.2. 26.7 U.37 U.4 O.L 0.1 U.b5 1.7I U.U3' U U.U7 0.1 11.3 3U.65 4.6 26.2 15.6 -- -- 3.7S 1.77 1.4 19.77 U.b5 ~5.4 26.7 1.~5

9.97 U.4::; '07.3 4S,'.93 54.U3 34.U5 176'0,7 51.6 'I 72.U -- -- 36<2 22.47 15.2 31.::17 3.45 111.35 23.~5 2Y.~U 0 U.3 0.U7 U.L 0 0.03 0 0 -- -- 0 1.77 U U 0 10.05 0 Uo 0 0.33 0.47 U.13 0.2 0.67 0.23 1.9 -- -- 0.05 3.B7 0.7 U.13 0 i O.uS 0.2 0.65

14~.43 9B.b5 .23 16.~~ 12U.37 4.0 3.e3 7.U7 0 -- --0 _ G.?3 0 19.1~ 2.b 124.~5 2U.~S O.~S1.7 U 0 U.U3 0 '0.1 0.17 0 0 -- -- 0.U5 U.37 0 I U.13 O.US I 0 U.2 U.2l.b U 4.77 2.~ 0.27 U.7 0.5 0.7 0.7 -- -- 1.1 2.27 0.77 I 0.7 0.15 0.4 U.S 0.55o U.2 U.13 1.43 0 b.l 0 0.5 0.3 -- -- 14.1 U 3.27 0 1.45 0 0.1 2.25

U.23 U 0.07 0.03 0.4 0.1 0.47 0.07 0.4 -- -- 0 b.1 U.13 U.13 0 U.95 U.1 0.U5U.7 0 U.27 U 0.63 0 0 U 0 -- -- 0.55 3.S3 U.4 0.03 0.55 0.2 U.l 0u.7 U 1.U U 0.2 0 0.37 0.03 0 -- -- U U.4 U 0.2 0 G.U5 U U.5o U 0 0.27 U 0 0 0.53 0 -- -- 0.15 U 3.77 U O.US U u.s U

1.b3 0.1 0 0.1 U 0.2 U.13 U.U3 0 -- -- 0 u.03 U.B7 U.1 0 0 U U0.33 u.l U.U3 1.43 0.03 O.B 0.67 0.4 U -- -- 5.L 1.13 U.b 1.S 6.15 0.U5 2.35 U.b2.57 U 0.37 U.27 0.2 0 1.S7 0.u3 1.7 -- -- 0.9 2.0 U.07 0.47 U.35 0.2 U UU 0 0 0 U 0 U 0.1 0 -- -- U 0.27 U U 0.U5 0 0 2.05

2.Ll U U.13 1~.37 0.1 U 0.57 U.4 U -- -- U.B 1.57 U.57 1.5 35.75 U.j 3.U 1U.3u U U 0.~7 0 0 0.33 5.7 0 -- -- 3.1 U U 0 Y.L 0 2.4 UU U U U U U U U.U3 0 -- -- 0.2 U 0.9 U 0.35 0 3.45 U

2.3 0 1.2 U.~ 3.U 0.75 3.U3 4.U 4.4 -- -- 9.0 U.17 1.43 5.77 9.b5 1.35 5.7 27.451.U3 U.2 U.u3 U.2 U U 0.U3 0 0.3 -- -- U 1:~ U.27 5.57 2.95 U.YS 0.75 5.U54.d U.1 2.73 2.9 U.77 U.2 0.33 U.U7 0.7 -- -- U.2 3.d3 0.2 1.4 0.4 U.l 0.2 U.25b.~3 0.1 4.43 2.73 2.73 0.7 2.S3 U.l U.3 -- -- 0.~5 5.67 U.57 2.67 U.b u.3 U.S 1.25L.b U 2.76 3.9 3.57 15.9 2.67 1.23 0.9 -- -- 17.6 3.~ 5b.73 1.9 15.15 U.75 5.1 1U.1U.l U U 0.07 U U.4 0 0 U -- D.bb O.S? 0.7 2.7 5.1 1.2 1.45 1.150.03 U 0.b3 U.2 U 1.25 0 0.03 U -- -- 3.55 1.23 10.d U U U.2 U.5 l U.25

o0.17U.37

14.c.7

~:~3 iU.lLJ.U31. c.37.2U.U3

Uu

0.530.132.53U.17

U11. 971.2U.034.U31.77U.17 iu. cU

49.73U.77O.Y

""1:Jp;

<.!:lroC'1\.0

Page 60

r'

Table 7. Annual mean percent relative abundance ofdominant t~xi collected quantitatively.

--IAL<J.jXAc.t.-' ]_,9_7_6 1_9_7_7 _

Achnanthes lanceolataA. linearisA. linearis var. EusillaA. minutissima

A"0phipleura pellucidaAnomoeoneis vitreaC~C'~ 0 n e-:rs-pl acen t ulaCyclot_e)la sp p.C~~lla spp.Diatoma ten~ val'. elongatumEunotia, sPp.Fragilaria, sPp.F. construensF. construens var. pumilIaF. construe~s var. ventenF. vancheriaeGornphonena spp.G. affine- ----Q. allgustaturr~

G. cleveiG. .grunm"iiG. ,paryulumMelosira spp~

Navicula spp.Nitzschia spp.SY~1eQr a sPp.Tabellaris fenestrata------T. flocculosa

0.523.1310.6940.960.511.098.2Lf0.731. 610.391.70.771.27a0.860,,580.800.172.150.020.013.622.220.394.663.630.781.73

o. 01.0.4411.1827.990.010.3118.250.04] .a14.330.280.220.010.510.151.590.210.016.651.620.402.740.460.410.7316.430.691.86

Fi L IN u T VISI N 0 N u

Page 61

Table 8. Number of stations Vlhere dominant taxa reachtheir peak abundance during each sampling period.Taxa must also comprise at least 2 percent ofsample to be considered at peak abundance.

~Month1976 ksl 1977

Taxa l'fY JY A E-S l-J -JY A

Achnantpes l' - . 1 2 4 3 5 1 0 1_lne,q r].s1L. linearis v. 12usi lla 9 3 Lf 0 0 0 5 5~ -L1nceolrrt.a 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0A.. ~1liDJ1 ..ti.~i.D:lE. 8 0 2 2 6 4 5 3Amp..b_ip_Leru:.a p..ell1-lCida 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0Anomoeoneis vitrea 1 1 3 1 3 2 0 0GQ.ccQQ..~iE J!.la_Cf'Il 1'111 a 0 3 5 1 1 0 2 8Cyclotella spp. 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0c;.;~lla spp. 6 2 1 1 2 3 1 1IlJ-at.oma_ ~~nue v. elongatum 2 0 0 0 0 9 0 0Eunotia spp, 3 3 4 0 0 0 0 2Frag i1...a1'ia ~0Il:..s t ruens_ 3 1 2 0 2 0 0 0F. construens v. pumila 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0f.... construens v. venter 1 1 2 0 2 0 0 0F. vaucheriae 2 0 2 1 2 2 3 1Fragilaria spp. 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0G0l11Bll 0 nema spp. 2 1 1 2 1 0 0 0G. angl1statum 5 1 1 0 1 1 3 2G. clevei 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 2-----G. gUl1O\vii 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1G. par\~ulum 6 1 1 0 6 0 3 3G. affine 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Helosira spp. 0 3 2 1 4 0 1 1Navicula spp. 3 0 1 3 8 0 1 0Ni t z schiel spp. 0 0 2 3 12 0 1 1.§..ynedra spp. 6 0 3 1 6 9 2 0TaheLlari.~_ fene:=;tra~~~ 4 0 0 1 1 1 -2 0I... tJ.o~~ulosa 5 1 1 1 0 3 2 0

D U ,J Iv'j A J lSI N D hI

Page 62

Table 9. Species diversity (Ip1i 2 ) of diatomcommunities colonizing glass slides at primaryand secondary stations.

Site M A L-S x M L-JY A x

P-1 1.4 2.2 3.0 2.2 1.9 3.3 5.0 3.4

BB-·1 Lf • 6 2.9 4.1 3.9

BI-1 2.7 2.2 10.2 5.0 1.4 1.4

SR-3 4.0 1.9 12.9 6.3 2.0 2.5 3.5 2.7

S1,-3/2 3.3 '9.0 5.8 6.0 1.5 2.4 2.0

P-5 3.2 2.7 3.5 3.1 2.5 2.8 3.4 2.9

K-5 1.8 2.7 2.3 6.4 3.4 Lf • 9

K-2 5.5 1.4 7.5 4.8 1.04 1.01 1.0

F-1 10.1 7.4 5.0 705

KC-1 9.98 8.0 6.1 8.0

SL-1 1.27 2 0[~3 1.62 1.8 1.45 3.31 3.29 2.7

E-1 2.19 7.4 1.76 3.8 2.0 2. [1 5.8 3.4

D-1 3.59 2.43 1.60 2.5 3.88 1,,5 1.65 2.4

SR-1/2 1. 83 2.07 3.00 2.3 4.8 3.2 4.0

P-2 1.74 2.97 2.71 2.5 3. [,- 2.2 2.8

K-1 2.50 4.79 5.3 4.2 2.,97 7.52 5.3

K-8 4. LJ,9 6.04 2.92 4.5 2.86 1.51 5.08 3.2

----------=.<,

L IN U JeT NON T

Page 63

Table 10.- SpeCi:s'diversity (l:~i2) of qualita tive diatomsamples col~e~ted in 1977.

Site Ap/Hy A

BC-l 2.32 5.73BI-1 6.97 8.12C4-1 8.-49 6.30D-l 11.62 9.35D-2 16.37 15.12D-3 8.1 Lf

DC-I 4.36E-l 11.04 4.41E-2 28.36 8.72F-1 10.06 11.44I-I 19.98 6.31K--] 9.83 2.80K-2 22.19 14.41K-5 6.86 11.08K-6 3.25 3.63K-7 3'.63 8.54K-8 5.43 6.03KC-l 3.29 9.24KC-2 2.40 5.31LJ--1 19.7LI-2 5.97LI-3 6.84N-1 3.38t-TR-l 8.75NH-1 5.40 20.42P--l 4.01 6.07P-2 9.58 4.25P-3 2.46 12.75P·-4 11./f 3 2.71P~,5 10.7 13.79SC-l 6.42 16.12SE-l 11.25SE-2 12.67 14.42SG-~ I 5.99SH--l 5.37 12.34SL-1 5.03 7.82SL--2 19.21 5',59SP-l 7.17SR-l 5.78SR--2 10.81 4.56SR-3 16.49 7.10SIZ--4 9 31 50SR-S 9.67 5.861'--1 6.96 13.23

LI Id VI N T U

Tab Ie 11. Hean anI~uaIi, chlorophyll ~ and cells /mm2

determined from samples collected on glassslide artificial substrates.

x xSites Chlorophyll a cells/mm2

BB-l 3.97 1109

KC-l 2.70 385

F-l 4.21 388

P-5 5.59 1819

BI-l 6.03 3784

D-l 4.34 1225

SL-~3 6.27 1104

K-2 8.13 1148

P-l 8.93 1923

P-2 12.66 2179

SL-l 5.29 2290

SR·· 3 3.09 2095

K-1 7.15 3669

K--5 4.86 2128

K-8 6.69 1496------------

*mean of samples collec ted in 1'1ay" mid-Augis t, andlate September, 1976.

I I T .IFf~ 1\/1 \fISl N D T U

Page 65

Table 12. Median water quality dataaveraged by stream order.

Stream Specific Total TotalOrder Conduct ( mhol/l) p ( g / Hl) N (mg/l)pH Alk. (mg/l) Ca(mg/l) Turb (NTU)

1* 18.5 90 2215 6.7 55 1L~.8 2.5

.. 2 55.5 25.7 1158.3 6.4 18 4.6 2.0

3 86.9 29.3 1109.2 6.7 36.3 8.2 2.7

4 89.3 21..7 716.2 7.0 33.2 8.6 2.7

5 50.8 18.8 612/5 6.9 18.8 6.2 1.9

II () \11 n

Page 66

"Table 13. Acidophtlous diatom taxa

found in the Study Area. 1

Achnanthes flexellaCyclotella bodanica.f. glomera taEun~i~ spp.Frustulia rhomboides-----Gomphonem~ subtileMelosira distansNavicula seminula val'. hustedtiiStauroneis .9ncep~_

Sten terobia intermediaSyneclra nanaS. tenero.- _.~-----

Tabellaria fenestrataT. flocculosa

1 Based on Lowe (1974)

T ~r' N

Page 67

Table 14. Correlation coefficientslfor comparisonsbetween strea~ order and mean percent relativeabundance of acidophilous diatoms.

Stream order vs. acidophilous diatoms.

Period 1 (Quant.) -.8

Period 1 (Qual.) -1.0

Period 4 (Quante) -.8

Period 6 (Quant.) -.8

Period 8 (Qual. ) -.5

Period 13 (Qual.) -.8

lSpearmans rank correlation test.

I ! 1111 , j I!

Page 68

Table 15. Hean annual ;', percent relative abundanceof dominant diatom taxa averaged by streamorder. Samples collected from glass slideartificial substrates in 1976.

2ndSTREAJ:vl GlIDER

3rd 4th 5th

Achnanthes lanceolata--------,."A. linearis

A. ~inearis v. pusillaA. minutissimaAmphipleur~ pellucideAnomoeoneis vitrea----------Cocconeis lacentula'----Cyclotella. spp.~clla spp.Diatoma tenue v. elongatumEunotia spp.Fragi1aria sp p.F. construensF. construens v. pumilIaF. construens v. ventaF. vaucheriaeGomphonema spp.G. affineG. angus tatumG. c1eveiG. gruno\\1ii.Q.. parvulumMelosir~ spp.Navicula sp p.Nitzschia spp.Synedra sp p.Tabellaria fenestrata------T. f1occulosa

1.12.254.0437.650.311.740.031.232.00.384.11.24·3.41o1.541.150.36o1.4o0.031.55.382.844.3313. 7 l+

1.717.11

0.172.1314 "II39.761.221.082.561.471.440.141.511.011. Lf2o1 .. 780.430.74o3.65oo1.531.514.098.343.38o,Ll-8

0.95---

0.615 .. 665.5650.310.381.1513.850.371.690.071.280.8550.45o0.300 .. 371.400.050.77oo2.350.532. 193 .. 702.730.110.32

0.290.7325.6724,,410.020.2814 .710.110.550.750.380.080.25o0.030.780.220.854.03oo11.523.860.581.414.251.680.15

* Mean of sampling periods May, August and late September, 1976.

Page 69Table 16. Percent frequency of occurrence of diatoms by stream order in April, 1977.

Taxa included have a 50% frequency of occurrence in any stream order.

STREAM ORDER

J

Achn~nthes linearis

A. linearis var. pusilla

A. linearis var. curta

A. marginu1ata

A. minutissima

Anomoeoneis serians var.brachysira

A. vitrea

Cocconeis placentula

Cyclotella spp.

Cymbella spp.

Diatoma tenue var.elonga.tUm

Eunotia spp.

E. curvata

E. diodon

E. elegans

E. incisa

E. pectinclis var. minor

E. praerupta var. inflata

Fragilaria spp.

Fragilaria capucina

F. constricta

F. construens

~. construens var.pumilIa

F. construens var.venteJ:

F. pinnata

F. vancheria

F. viresens

Frustula rhomboides

Gomphonema spp.

G. angus tatum

G. clevei

G. gruno,vii

G. parvulum

Nelosira spp.

Meridian circulare

Navicula spp.----Nitzschia spp.

Pinnularia spp.

Synedra spp.

Tabellaria fenestrata

T. flocculosa

1st

50

50

50

a100

25

25

100

25

75

25

75

50

50

50

50

50

50

25

a50.

50

50

50

oa

25

50

75

50

aa

75

75

75

75

75

75

100

100

100

2nd

83

83

17

83

100

50

67

33

83

83

17

83

83

aa

17

17

50

50

17

33

50

83

50

17

a50

100

17

17

67

100

67

83

83

33

100

83

100

3rd

100

75

42

58

100

33

75

42

42

83

25

50

58

aa

25

33

25

75

33

a42

83

67

58

42

33

42

58

75

25

8

50

100

25

100

92

75

100

75

92

4th

71

71

14

43

100

28

71

57

28

100

57

14

28

aa

14

14

28

57

28

a28

86

71

43

86

28

14

14

71

57

14

86

57

43

86

100

28

100

57

86

5th

100

80

40

20

100

20

60

20

60

100

100

20

aaa

20

aa

80

80

aa

20

40

40

100

60

aa

80

a80

80

100

a100

100

a100

100

80

PF<ELlM1NAF\Y DRAFT SUB.JECT TO MAJOR REVISION DO NOT OUOTE:

Page 70Table 17. Frequency of occurrence of diatolns by stream order in August, 1977.

Taxa in~luded have 50% frequency of occurrence in any stream order.

Achnanthes flexella

Achnanthes lanceolata var.dubia

Aclmanthes linearis

A. linearis var. pusilla

A. linearis var. curta

A. m;uginulata

A. minutissima

Amphora ovalis

Anomoeoneis vitrea

~1omoeoneis serians var.---b~sira

Asterionelia formosa

Cocconeis piacentuia

Cyciotelia meneghiniana

CycIote11a spp.

Cymbe1Ia spp.

Eunotia spp.

E. curvata

E. pectinalis

E. pectinalis var. minor

Fragilaria construens

F. construens var. pUJniIla

F. construens var. venter

F. pinnata

F. vancheria

Frustulia rhomboides

Gomphonema angus tatum

G. clevei

~ parvulum

~lelosira spp.

Meridian circulare---------

Na~icula spp.

Nitzschia spp.

Pinnularia spp.

Synedra spp.

TaheJlaria fenestrata-----

T. f locculosa

1st

a

a100

100

50

100

100

17

50

35

a50

33

83

100

100

67

50

67

17

83

83

100

17

67

67

50

67

100

67

100

100

83

100

83

100

2nd

22

22

77

89

33

56

100

11

56

33

o56

33

78

100

78

44

33

44

44

89

100

100

56

33

78

67

78

89

67

89

100

47

89

67

100

STREAN ORDER3rd

33

60

93

87

60

53

100

20

73

47

o73

40

87

100

93

80

27

33

53

93

93

100

39

20

67

47

80

100

7

100

100

87

100

80

100

4th

25

o100

88

13

25

100

63

50

63

13

50

50

38

100

87

38

a13

25

87

87

100

97

a60

50

87

100

13

100

100

38

100

38

75

5th

60

60

100

80

50

20

100

40

80

60

60

80

20

80

100

60

80

20

o20

100

80

60

100

40

80

60

80

100

o100

100

20

100

100

100

Pf-IELlMlf\l/\RY DFU\FT SUBJECT '1'0 MA,IOR REVISION DO NOT QUOTE

Page 71

Table 18. Mean number of acid-tolerant taxa, mean numberof species and species diversity found in qualitativesamples.

PR LlI'vi N/\FiY DF1AF"T U J T T

Page 72

Table -19. Diatom taxa which have a frequency of occurrencegreater than 50% within groups from qualitativecluster (Figure 16).

SITEC~O\'}l'

(Sec STHi-:gt~~_r_e_l_6_)_OC<_'O_I:_R Il..'.ll\~~"' _

COl\¥Qon

3

4

5

6

7

8

All

1 &. 2

2 <'I. 3

3,4,5

4

1,2,3

44.5

Achn,1nthes 1inenr1s7:... ll·~-;;rl s-~ar. Pt; 5 i 118

~. U1inus-!cs_~~n1.:1

Anomacnc i 5 vi treaCymb~Q.~---;pp: -fra~ilari~ construens var. ~illaF. con5t~cn5 v;~~nterI . .2InrLl !;.'!.. ---

G01:l.phon~<:!. parvulurn~~spp.

Navicula spp.Helosira spp.~.1!,edr~ spp.Tilbell~riB floceulosai~~t-;ata

Ach~ marginulata~~ pectinJlisfrustllll~ rhc~~oides

Gomph~n,c-nCl ..i1...m;ustat;~~feridion eit-culare

A. linearis val'. curtaCoceone~ J2.laecntula var. lincataEunotia pecti~alis var. minorGomphon~~ a~~tur:l --Q.. gracile

Amphora ovaHsFragilarT;-vauc heriaGompho-~~;~~~

A. laneeolata val'. dubiaAch~-;:;:the"s m:Irgil1~lat;.~f.pcco...~~ .pl_!!cen!;'y~ var. l.!..tleataF. cc.l1strUCI1Sr. ~tost~uron var. dubiaFragl.l~;-vall~he.ria-­Gompi~o-;;';'~~~um

~.~~~A. flexella!;;,Jpho;;- ov~lis£ul10tl~ £u_r~;ta

Ac.:.b.n<lth..£.fc l1nC';)ili v~r• .c1c:,'el( ~~oq~e~~i~ ~trc~)

fo~c.2.np.~ £~3s:~_~~uTa val' • .li.~~£y£lot-'U_1..~ l:1.£'l..J;hi!..'....i.3!0..FI::il..& i} .1r 1.1 can ~ tru(~ns

Ira...EJJ...~u:"i; l~~c~t-:~l:on var. du~g_~hon..£..~ Z"l L.,7{';.-t---

1; Absent from thill group

p LI I\F~Y DH F u T 'I' R Fi v N 0 T T

Page 73

Table 20. Compari~on of productivity and diversityat impacted and unimpacted sites in the StudyArea. Data from 1976 sampling season.

ImpactedI

(range) Unimpacted 2 (range)Sites Sites

Mean total cells Ut/mm 2 ) 1673 (1109-2290) 1909 (385-3669)

Mean chlorophyll ~ Cmg/mm2) 5.62 (3.9-12.9) 6.18 (2.7-12.7)

.t>lean diversity 2.74 (1.8-3.9) 5.02 (2.3-6.3)

Hean number of species 59.8 (34-68) 49.4 (35-68)

I p _ 1 , SL~I, D-I, P-5, BE-I.

2K-I, K-2, K-5, K-8, SR-I, SR-3, BI-I KC-I, F-I, SL-3, P-2.

If\/1 N !=<V n T tIR.!F: 1" ·rC) r~~ .Ion F~EVI~:~! N D I''-J T U

Page 74

Table 21. Comparison of productivity and diversityat F-1, KC-I, and BB-1Data from 1976 sampling season.

F-1 KC-1 BB-1

Mean cells/mm2 380 385 11.09

.. ....)'fean chlorophyll a (mg/mm2) 4.21 2.70 3.97-

Hean diversity ~[ii2) 7.5 8.0 3.9

Number of species 49 57 4.9

DFL4 T SU .1 CT J n nEVi N D N

Page 75

Table· 22. Comparison of diatoms collected from a small creek above(Station C) and below (Stations AR and BR) a seep from

,... the INca eArploration site. Samples col~ected July 5, 1977from glass slides.

=~TIONTAXA -___

Achnanthes cleve!

A. linearis

A. linearis v. curta

A. marginulata

A. roinutissima

A. sp.

Arnphipleura pellucida

Anomoneis vitrea

Cocconeis placentula v. lineata

Cymbella minuta

Diatoma tenue v. elongatum

Eunotia arcus

E. curvata

E. curvata v. capitata

E. diodon

E. elegans

E. fallax

E. flexuosa

E naegelii

E. parallela

E pectinalis

E pectinalis v. minor

E praeminor

E praerupta

E praerupta v. bidens

E praerupta v. inflata

E rostellata

E septentrionalis

Esp.

E tenella

E vanheurckii

Fragilaria.construens v. pumila

F pinnata

F sp.

F. vaucheria

c

<1

2

<1

<1

30

<1

o<1

< 1

1

2

<1

3

o2

-0

1

<1

5

o<1

<1

o<1

<1

<1

<1

<1

7

<1

o<1

<1

<1

<1

AR

o<1

oo4

o<1

oo

<1

oo9

3

o<4

<4

7

9

<1

<1

8

<1

<1

o<1

oo6

6

, < 1

oooo

BR

o2

oo3

ooooooo

13

<1

ooo7

23

oo3

ooo

<1

<1

o14

2

oooo

<1

r=, 1.. 1 li\l ny DR T U .J A.J Fi n V I SIN D T

Page 76

Table 22. continued

-==== STATIONTAXA C AR BR-Frustulia rhornboides 1 2 2

Gornphonema angustatum 1 <1 0

G. clevei <1 0 <1

G. gracile t+ 0 0

G. grunouii 2 0 <1

G. parvulum 2 <1 <1

G. SPA <1 0 <1

Meridion circulare 1 <1 0

Navicula arvensis 0 <1 0

N. cocconeiformis <1 0 0

N. gysingensis <1 0 0

N. pupula v. rectangularis 0 <1 0

N. salinarum v. intermedia <1 0 0

N. secreta v. apiculata <1 0 0

N. seminulum 0 <1 0

N. seminululll v. hustedti <1 <1 0

N. SPA <1 0 0

N. td.punctata <1 0 0

Neidium bisulcatum <1 <1 0

Nitzschia bacata <1 0 0

N. frustulum v. subsalina <1 <1 <1

N. ignorata 0 <1 0

N. kutzingiana <1 0 0

N. linearis <1 0 0

N. paleacea 0 1 0

N. parvula <1 0 0

N. sp. 0 <1 <1

N. sublinearis <1 <1 0

Pinnularia abaujensis 0 <1 0

P. subcapitata v. paucistriata <1 0 0

P. sp. 0 <1 0

11• substornatophora 0 0 <1

Surirella sp. 0 '< 1 0

1\

v n II J \11 i () 1\1 L!

Page- 77

Table 22. continued

STATIONTAXA C AR BR

Synedra amphicephala <1 <1 0

S. minuscula 2 0 0

S. radians <1 0 0

S. rumpens <1 0 <1

S. sp. <1 0 <1

S. tenera <1 0 0

S. ulna 0 <1 0

Tabellaria fenestrata <1 8 5

T. flocculosa 20 30 23

L"I I /lltd!\D\f in 0 I::) r:: \f I (~ In f\l n (l f\! n.,,, nil

..

- I

-0OJlCro'-.ico

PS-8!OI.1P.SS

PC-CHLOROPHYL,,,

Fu-r: ,'.TO~,i (}'JANT.

SC-Sf.:DII,1:::NT COUN

LP-LE-;.r PA.CK

N NIP CREEK

NR NIRA CREEK

NW NORTH BRAt,CH

WHITEF.\,CE RIVE

P PA,RTRIDGE RIVER

SC SNAKE CREEK

SE SNAKE R:VER

SG SPRiNG CREE:<:

SH SHIVER CREEK

SL ST. LOUIS R.

SP SPHAGNUM CR.

SR STONEY RIVER

T TOIM! CREI::K

88 UNNAIJ.ED CREEK

Be BEAR CREEK

BI BEAR !SLMm CR.

ey COYOTE CREEK

D DUNKA RIVER

DC DENLEY CREEK

E EMBARRASS R.

EM U~JNAMED CREEK

(ER!E \1ININGl

F FILSON Ci'lEEK

j ISABELLA fllVER

K KAW1SHlvVj R.

KC KEELEY CREEK

LI LITTLE 1~5ELLA R.

1:422.400

STATiON CLASSIFiCATiON

BIOLOGY STREAM STATiONSS,T, STRFA' I NA' 1" I '''.~ <:; nrnE'" N' I ,-CCI..'C I.~ r... IV\- .~~~

2 KC- j/! ~)0 so ~l.~cl-..._~/ -'-, .~------­"IlrE~JA"lE ~o\~, lV:re.~1~r~II-;11$"'ATI0

AND hUl,.1B(~ O;:,2LP r:: ... A 1::"rICA11';:-'~~ ':,.ASSIFICA'TIJJN

SAMPLlt'-lG T'fF'ES BY CLASS YEARit '''' d '""D-DRIFT

H-HC:STEF: - DC-.JDY

Ol-OUALIT,ATiVE

INVERTEBRATES

QP-QUALITATIVE DIATOMS

PR...,fJRIMARy

SD""SECONDAR'r

TR""TERTIARY

PC""PR1".'ARY STF1EAM Clf,SSIFIC!lTII)~~ SITE

SC""SECONDARY S1REAM CLASSIFICATION S!Y

NS.. "NOT S,"'~,1PL'::J

,A,O\ IATI~ Rlnl()~Y STRJ= At-J STP.,T!()t,JSF\GURE 1.

Page 79 Figure 2. Relative abundance by sampling periodof Achnanthes ndnutissima and 1\.. linearis(including /2.. lint'dris var pusTlla) ats ta ti on SL-l,

88807'2

64

564840

322Lf

16

80

8Q)

16uc::("j .)/

"Cl_"I

l: 32:J,..0

40tU

Q) 48:>'r!

56'-'(1j

rl 6LfQ)

l-< 7280

88

96

iAchn

7t':::.

~.::;::

8~.:-:-:;'

t1~

£±

P' 0' '~~~ ill

anthes minutissima

56

48

4032

2416

8()

Q) 3uc:: IG('J

"Cl 24c:::J

,..0 32("j

Q) 40:>

'M 48'-'(1j 56rl(l!

(1!j~

sampling period

p1

:\

ill7 r

:J>.~ \

:}

\

,

Achnanthes linear is

72~

80

38

9f,

sampling period

P Fi EL 11'j)! NAn D n 1', F T IJ ,J E T TOM /\ .J 0 F{ r-1 E V lSi 0 N 0 0 l\j 0 T Q t\ 0 T

Page 80 Figure 3. Relative seasonal abundance ofCocconeis placentula var. lineataat P-1 and SL-1

40P-1

36 ;,:

322824

20

16128

..Q)

u 4~ 0('j

:;;:::~'0~ 8;:l

.g 12Q) 16>

"'-' 20 7:.weurl 24Q)

~ 28

3236

40

:>... .w .w :>... :>.....-l p.. p.. ..-l ..-l::J Q) Q) Q) ::J ;:l .w

:>... to; OJJ U) U) :>... ~ to; to; tJJ p..til ,j ::J

~ ~ ~::J

~::J <l.J;;;:; <t: 'J H <t: U)

sampling period

SL-1

:>. .w p :>, ~>'"rl p.. p.. rl rl;:l Q) Q) Q) ::J ::l JJ

~'.>--) 'J M U) U) >... ~ 'J 'J bC 0..et; ,j ::l W ,j ...<.:! ::J

~;:J Q)

>-:: <: "'-' 'J ~ <r: U)

sampling period

pnELIMINP".RY DFl,I\FT SUE3,JECT TO MA,JOR HEVISION DO r\JOT OUOT

P-1

Page 81

Figure 4. Relative seasonal abundance of Synedra spp

at P-1 and SL-1

20:.:0"164

124

l.~~~~8:::t:

12 ))164

20 ~~}:~~~}!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:t:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t~~~~~:~:~~~;~;~:~:~:~I

H LJ

1976

A ES LS 'M

MONTH

J EJ LJ

1977

A S

SL-120 IT16 Z12 ~;~~

..:.: ..>:

~tb'~~G~12 ~;,.:.

::::::::16 :12

0~~?ii:~:~:~;~:~:~;~:~;~:~~I~.~~~~~~~~{:~tJ~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~t~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~l~:~:~:~~~:~:~:~:~:~:l~:~:~:~:~:~:~~~:~~~l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~:I:~~~:~:~~~~~~~t~~~:~i:~:~~~~~:~~~;~~~~~~~~~l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;~~l

LJ

1976

A . ES LS H

MONTH

J EJ LJ

1977

A s

PFi LI INAR lJ \.JECT'T MAJ H Fi VISI N D N T U

vOJlOCD

CoN

S1-1

K-l

D-l

M EJ 1J·A 8

"" .., AlIT JfI!F .is'

..~~-

~

­~

-

,~\

-'~~ ,- ~~

- ­~ \

- -- \

- -,\

\,,~

-,~

­,­~f,~

----~

----

M EJ 1J HA ES L8

6

8

2

10 ~

:t:8;

:::::::

Ilt:~::::::F:::t/l{:r:::t:/J/:l:tt:::l:IltJIJ

:>....wOM

er.J~Q)

>'MQ

er.JOJ

'M()(l)

~ 4

at fir" primary sites in 1976 and 1977.( L(~iL))

E-l

K-8

Species diversity

~m51m..R1.ro:nmJl

.8jijl!!~,~

!iiil!i .

~w

::~;>~:~

lilli,

wSv:::r::l:/J::::H::F:J::t::::n:::f:tr:ifM .LJ A ES LS M A 8

Figure 5.

8

6

4

2

10

ZPI:11

:0

:0

r-

:>...+-J

'OMer.J~rQ)

>0"'"'=- Q

er.JQ)

I .,...,.....,()

CJ-i 0.,U)

»C-_

JJ

JJ

-'"'"0""",--'7

0

/'<:.-

1976 1977 1976 1977

c

Page 831

Figure 6. Species diversity LPi2 and relative abundance

of Achnanth{;s minutissima at stations D-'J. and SL-1.

D-J.

19761'1onth

SL-l

1977

, q:::::::::::::::::::::~:::::::::::::::::::::~:::::::::::::::::::::t::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::r::::::::::::::::::::i;:::;::::::::::::::::f::;:::::::::::::::::t:::::::::::::::::::::,,::::::::::::::::::::~* 100

r JA r10 . ~~t;.JKmll~~af~··

j\ ~~;~;' Ii\ /~ A~\ I / ~ 50 Q)

5::::. I I' :::: :>~:,~ \ I / :j:i 'j

f::.·,:l .\l..................... . : '" ..:.:.:.'~,: ~~_~ @=Q&.QQSw.u«w~~es~.~ H

o ~J':::::::::::::::;:::':f':':':':':':::::':::'l:::::::::::'::::;;:::~:::::::::::::::::::::f::::;:::::::::;::::::l:::::::::::::::::::::$::::::::;::::::::::::t::::::::::::::;;:::::f::::::::::;::::::::::l::::::::::::::::::::& 0

M L-J 1'1-A E-S L-S J E-J L-J A S

1976Honth

1977

PH L.I INP\f-iY DI::AF'r SU .JEeT T rvl/J·\ Fi H ViSl N 0

I-r

I

I- r -

Figure 7. Percent of time statioITs occurred inclusters at the .5 level of similarity

Figure 8. Hean rela tive abundance of the Achna.fithes minutissima, !!:.. lineuris (including.6.. linearisvar pusilla), Cocconeis placentula (including~. placentula var. lineata), Tabellaria flocculosa,and Synedra spp. at primary and secondary stations in 1976. Stations are ordered accordingto the abundance of A. minutissima.

UPJtoCD

co<.J1

....

.;....;.,

.......~

:1~!:<u!!!< !!:::!:l!:!:::t!!:!!j::lc~t[~~i~@~~n\'~',~~b~? K{~~L~~:d,.

::: -i~~-~ r" . G ~ ~ /~l:(

~ -:~~~~:-: _ ''-J ~~0;. I.... t::::::<.J IIJ~I

100 ,1I:II{::I':~~~~~";t"':'{";"'I{':"'?:dt"tIII,,:?t?'l"':';""itt'I,;':,;,'n~~'~!~:~J':':;:';l\;,;t?::r!.~:~~~~:kL 0. ~

illoz«oz:Jco«w>I­<C-Jill-rr?f<

-1

<

~~

:0

:0

zo

z

\.-

SL-1 SR-1 P-1 .0-1 P-5 P-2 88-1 E-1 SL-3 K-1 F-1 K-8 KC-1 81-1 SR-3 K-5 K-2

B<?txf_. ,/xX SYNEDRA SPP.

T/\8ELLARIA FLOCCULOSA

OJJIJ COCCONEIS PLACENTULA

[[-=--~ ACHNANTHES UNEARtS

k::::::::::j ACHNANTHES MINUTISSIMA

1'\

Figure 9. Mean relative abundance of the taxa Achnanthes minutissima, A. linearis (including A. linearis'var. pusilla) , Cocconeis placentula (including f. placentula-var. lineata), and Syn;dra spp.at primary and secondary stations in 1977. Stations have been ordcqed according to theabundance of A. minutissima. -

VOJ

t.OCD

OJOJ

GROUP, 1 i ' GROUP '2, I"· GROUP 3[}}}}~;J~}tf)ft~rftrJ~:)rr~{f)??I~lt!!tf/l!!?t~r!;

--

~ I I ! I I I

mIT, :iiiil!I!IIII:llillllllllllllil~:::::::::::::::: ::::::::;::::::: <::::::

llmmmm, milmmmmY~11111mmm~ millllllllllllL

!1~!I!11111'::::::~"::::::::::::l':':':-:-:-:':I::::::::::::::l:::::::::::::~:::::::::::::l:::::::::::::j::::::::::::::1::::::::::::::

U-lml"'~(

\rh~~~~.1~ liliUI' .oO:O"C'U~Q" I0° , 0 t~ucc>o. . I

D- (" "Qo.... , , , , . Q0 C' f:::::::J OrL W. I .,

nnnnn.~ O?" 0 tL' . .O:CJ·6~

·,·'<+·············1·:-:·:·:-:·:·1·:-:·:·:·:-::: ::::::-:·:·:-l:·:-:::::-:::>:::-:·:·:·:-:~4:o"·<!'3 °ll

;1:::::::i:::t1:1:::::~I:t: ::::1::::P::::I:·~::I::::: ::1::·1F::U:h:::m>::f:?~(~S '

50

JJ

z

zo

~.-C::- 0-1 SL-2 SL-1 P-1 SR-2 P-2 P-5 K-5 SR-3 K-8 E-1 K-1 K-2 81-1

[0]]] SYNEDRA SPP.

~~ COCCONE!S PLACENTULA

k::·;·····c'·! ACHNANTHES Ll NEARIS

~:::::::::::::l ACHN HES MINUTISSIMA

10

.Page 87

Figure 10. Mean chlorophyll ~ in 1976 and 1977

averaged over all stations sampl~d

in each sampling period.

17j1

~.-..'.:1

~ 5~or.r;o:::u

76

N RY DF{ T u TT ,J REVISI u

Page 89

Figure 12. Mean chlorophyll ~ averaged over all sites

within each stream order in 1976 and 1977.

10

rdlHH

~ 5p...,o0:::.oH~U

54

R ER197"6

1977

- __. __~, --J-I__~__-,-I__

1 2 3

STnEA

C} fv'lA,j H R VISl N 0 N T

Page 90

Figure 13.

:: of

Average percent relative abundance by stream order

of acidophilous diatoms collected on glass slide

artificial substrates in 1976 and average pH by stream order

0'70

25

r-r.-----------.--------------:ii.'2!jy~-~~-------..__17

PH

6

1 . 2 3

fvi ER

4. 5

DF1 F~r U ,J T R j:1EVJSI NO u

%

Page 91

Figure 14. Average percent relative abundance by stream order

of acidophilolis diatoms collected qualitatively in

1976 and average pH by stream ord"_e_r -..7

PH

5

~...

6

_.-'__.>..L.... -!"

1

STRE

3

RDER

4 5

! !

40

30-

20

10

92

Figure 15. Scatter plot and regression lines

of the percent relative abundance

of acidophilous diatoms collected

qualitatively and pH in May and

September, 1976.

6.5 7'PH

\1

Figur~ IG . Dendrogram for diatom species collecLed qlwlLt<lLlvl'ly during August 1977.

VPJtoro1..0w

STATION

CY-1](::;-1

I-IK--:-~

D-JP-::i!i-I

F-l

rr,J-l2'-1

Bl-l~F-5

r -3P *J~

.90onDER

2

21

2

~3

'3

1

,70

",:~r--7"-';'

.60

8r-l!!

.50 AO

'.j

V-1

1(-7D-2(, -5

SR-4s~ -2Ir.: -15~-i

V-8

r-2'iL-1SR-1!' -1y~ -2

<;P -1,

:'£-1LT -JS:::-2LI-lS~-l

1-1SR-,;r-~

Sli-lUP,-l

LI-2

i,

3433

5

4{~

44-4

2J1J33

I

L

~ ..~..~:...«::'c

, :,,~.:;,""'_'r:=~'~'"

"1

~

"",.u

""" --t"-----I

I

£-2 J

K-l 5IJC-1 2

Figure 17. Shift in dominant species bet\veen unimpacted sites

(SR-l and KC-l) and impacted sites (SC-l and P-S)

"7i thin q th order and 2nd order s trearns.

90

80

·,0

60z

50(j)

o0_ 40

()

30

20

10