Jump to main content.


Information Sources

pixel.gif
 This image is a drawing of a caddisfly larva in its case. Caddisflies are aquatic insects that are used by biologists to monitor the environmental quality of streams.


D.4. Field Stressor-Response Association Gallery

Examples of stressor-response relationships computed from field data are provided here. They illustrate stressor-response relationships that have been observed in several datasets, using some of the methods described in the Analyzing data section. We recommend that you review the description of the methods and the Fundamentals of data analysis section prior to viewing or using the graphs.

These graphs and models show you what to expect from these analyses and show the types of relationships that are found between some common stressors and biological responses. However, it is unlikely that the stressor-response relationships shown here will be exactly applicable to your particular situation. Please review the metadata provided with each graph carefully. Examine whether the sampling and analysis methods are comparable. Evaluate whether the response and explanatory variables are relevant to your aquatic system and causal analysis. Additional stressor-response relationships will be added in future updates to this page. Please contact us with comments and suggestions.

Click on a thumbnail for a larger image and metadata.

Regression Analysis

EPT Taxa Richness vs. Percent Sands and Fines for Minnesota Streams
EPT Taxa Richness vs. Percent Sands and Fines for Minnesota Streams
 
EPT Relative Abundance vs. Percent Sands and Fines for Minnesota Streams
EPT Relative Abundance vs. Percent Sands and Fines for Minnesota Streams
 
Non-insect Relative Abundance vs. Percent Sands and Fines for Minnesota Streams
EPT Relative Abundance vs. Percent Sands and Fines for Minnesota Streams
 
Chironomid Richness vs. Metals Toxicity Units for Colorado Streams
Chironomid Richness vs. Metals Toxicity Units for Colorado Streams
 
EPT Taxa Richness vs. Metals Toxicity Units for Colorado Streams
EPT Taxa Richness vs. Metals Toxicity Units for Colorado Streams
 
Salmonid Abundance vs. Metals Toxicity Units for Colorado Streams
Salmonid Abundance vs. Metals Toxicity Units for Colorado Streams

Quantile regression

EPT Taxa Richness vs. Percent Sands and Fines for Minnesota Streams
EPT Taxa Richness vs. Percent Sands and Fines for Minnesota Streams
 
EPT Relative Abundance vs. Percent Sands and Fines for Minnesota Streams
EPT Relative Abundance vs. Percent Sands and Fines for Minnesota Streams
 
Non-insect Relative Abundance vs. Percent Sands and Fines for Minnesota Streams
Non-insect Relative Abundance vs. Percent Sands and Fines for Minnesota Streams
 
Chironomid Richness vs. Metals Toxicity Units
Chironomid Richness vs. Metals Toxicity Units
 
EPT Taxa Richness vs. Metals Toxicity Units for Colorado Streams
EPT Taxa Richness vs. Metals Toxicity Units for Colorado Streams
 
Salmonid Abundance vs. Metals Toxicity Units for Colorado Streams
Salmonid Abundance vs. Metals Toxicity Units for Colorado Streams

Conditional Probability Analysis

Chlorophyll a > 30 vs. Total Phosphorus for Northeast Lakes
Chlorophyll a > 30 vs. Total Phosphorus for Northeast Lakes
 
EPT Taxa Richness < 16 vs. Turbidity in Oregon Coastal Streams
EPT Taxa Richness < 16 vs. Turbidity in Oregon Coastal Streams
 
EPT Taxa Richness < 9 vs. Percent Fines for Mid-Atlantic Highland Streams
EPT Taxa Richness < 9 vs. Percent Fines for Mid-Atlantic Highland Streams
 
Fish IBI < 40 vs. Total Suspended Solids for Iowa Streams
Fish IBI < 40 vs. Total Suspended Solids for Iowa Streams

Stressor-Response Gallery Home    Next Figure

Local Navigation


Jump to main content.