Grantee Research Project Results
2006 Progress Report: A Watershed Classification System and Geomorphic Tool to Predict Habitat Variables in the Western Allegheny Plateau Ecoregion: Toward Refined Biocriteria and Stressor Identification of Impaired Streams
EPA Grant Number: R831365Title: A Watershed Classification System and Geomorphic Tool to Predict Habitat Variables in the Western Allegheny Plateau Ecoregion: Toward Refined Biocriteria and Stressor Identification of Impaired Streams
Investigators: Rankin, Edward , Stuart, Ben , Carlson, Bill , Verb, Bob , Doyle, Brian , Kinney, Chad , Yoder, Chris , Meyer, Christine , Larkins, Clayton , Lopez, Dina , Hollingsworth, Emily , Springer, Gregory , Dyer, James , Renner, Jared , Zalack, Jason , Johnson, Kelli , Johnson, Kelly , Amaning, Kwarteng , King, Lisa , Stoertz, Mary , Clust, Mike , Vis-Chiasson, Morgan , Smucker, Nate , North, Sheila , Morman, Tracy
Institution: Ohio University - Main Campus
EPA Project Officer: Packard, Benjamin H
Project Period: October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2007 (Extended to September 30, 2009)
Project Period Covered by this Report: January 2, 2006 through September 30,2006
Project Amount: $869,440
RFA: Development of Watershed Classification Systems for Diagnosis of Biological Impairment in Watersheds and Their Receiving Water Bodies (2003) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Watersheds , Water
Objective:
The ultimate goal of this research is the development of a watershed classification system for gauging stream health in terms of refined biocriteria, stressor diagnosis, and geomorphology. Specifically, we are working to develop a refined watershed classification system to explain variations in reference biological assemblages and physical and chemical conditions in wadeable streams of the Western Appalachian Plateau (WAP) ecoregion. We are examining factors that include geographically dependent and geographically independent variables (e.g., Level IV ecoregion and stream gradient). If this refined classification is biologically meaningful we will develop refined biological criteria from these reference sites. More refined goals (biocriteria) will lead to more accurate identification of impaired waters and will enhance our ability to diagnose which stressors are responsible for impairment. We are also working to test a model to predict habitat quality from geomorphic attributes.
We have been working on the historical data to identify major stressors in the WAP ecoregion and their threshold levels using post hoc analysis. Our plan is to demonstrate the classification system, refined biocriteria, and stressor diagnosis methodology on a monitored watershed (historical data) and a non-monitored watershed (Shade River, data collected in summer 2006) in the WAP ecoregion by comparing expected conditions to those identified as impaired. We are also working with Ohio EPA and Ohio DNR to integrate the applications resulting from this research into existing water resource management programs in the WAP ecoregion and disseminate information about them outside the WAP.
Progress Summary:
Work Status and Results: During 2006 we were focused on statistical analyses of historical data and field work on a randomly selected subset of WAP sites that reflected: 1) a gradient of stressed sites in the ecoregion (25 sites) and 2) a focused watershed study on the Shade River watershed (mainly West and Middle Branches). These data will be important in extending (e.g., addition of geomorphology data) and testing some of the stressor identification analyses we will be using on the historical data. The Shade River was selected because it is an under-sampled watershed in southeast Ohio and provides an unbiased dataset on which to examine patterns of stress using a study design (geometric site design of Ohio EPA) used by the State of Ohio in its ongoing monitoring efforts. We can contrast results in this watershed with other nearby watersheds (e.g., Leading Creek) where previous watershed studies have been completed (Rankin 2005). Ohio EPA is working to expand TMDLs in southeast Ohio and ODNR MRM wants to expand their identification of mine impaired waters in Ohio. Both of these organizations are looking for innovative ways to identify impaired waters, the stressors responsible for impact, and the proper goals and targets for remediation and restoration.
Field work is complete, but laboratory identification of macroinvertebrates, algae and fish vouchers will be ongoing into 2007. Similarly water chemistry data parameters will be analyzed and geomorphic data summarized from summer 2006 during the next months.
A major focus across all years of this project is the development of a new data system to share data across disciplines and to compile reference data within existing data systems to begin the classification phase of the project. The goal is to make this database compatible with Ohio EPA’s biological, physical and chemical databases and by extension with STORET and WQX. We have obtained the database structure and relationship table or “schema” for EA3 (Ohio EPA’s ecological data system) and are studying it as the basis for our data system (Attachment 1). This system is designed to be highly compatible with STORET or systems that replace STORET in the future.
Most of the first phase of the project was completed using the fish assemblage data and as mentioned above the sub-ecoregions did not exert a strong influence on the distribution of fish species at least to the extent that indices such as IBI would need to be calibrated differently for each sub-ecoregion. Stream gradient appears to be an important variable that we will examine more closely using some of the geomorphology (field-measured data). Preliminary analyses of geomorphology data, hydrology data, and water chemistry data did not find strong patterns with reference assemblages across the WAP ecoregion. Much of this work is summarized in student theses. Carlson (2006) for example documented the lack of relationship between IBI and hydrologic and network position variables (Appendix 1). Work in 2007 will identify whether any of these variables are important stressors on aquatic communities.
Field Season 2 – 2006
We completed the second field season successfully during summer 2006. Of the 50 sites allocated for 2006, 25 sites were selected that reflected a gradient of stressed sites across the WAP ecoregion, including some re-sampled reference sites also sampled during 2005. Low flow had an important influence again in 2006 and backup sites were sampled especially in the Shade River at some of the small headwater streams that were ephemeral.
All of the biological data and most of the other data has been proofed and completed and has been available for investigators and students on the ILGARD ftp site. Each of the Co-Investigators successfully completed data collection and entry and data is currently being analyzed. The biological data was collected via a subcontract with MBI in coolaboration with Dr. Kelly Johnson and her students and consisted of fish and macroinvertebrate community data, plus habitat data (QHEI). This was collected using the standard and well-tested Ohio EPA methods used to develop Ohio’s existing biocriteria. Additional data was collected to test another index (MAIS) that has been used in similar areas in the Appalachians. Dr. Vis-Chiasson and her students collected algal community data and is currently comparing the PIBI (Periphyton IBI) with new algal indices. Dr. Stoertz and her students collected hydrologic measures at each site as well as extracted other data from USGS stations and extracted modeled flow data based on USGS methods (see below). Dr. Springer and his students performed a geomorphic assessment at each site. This was done to provide geomorphology data not available with the historic datasets.
Quality Assurance Plan: All data collection followed our QA/QC plan we developed at the beginning of the study. Each Co-Investigator was responsible for the day-to-day QA/QC tracking and we utilized a message board on our Web site to facilitate communication between investigators relative to QA/QC and other issues that could affect data quality
Plans for 2007: We will working on the second and third phases of this project during 2007. We will be examining historic data along a gradient of human disturbance to identify the predominant stressors in the WAP ecoregion. Biological, water chemistry, habitat and other data has already been compiled for sites across the region. GIS layers are being compiled for a randomly selected subset of sites across the ecoregion. The addition of the geomorphology data and the hydrology data adds element beyond what we may find in the historic data set.
Statistical Approach
We will be identifying the predominant stressors across the region using the Water Environment Research Foundation’s (WERF) Integrated Impact Analysis (IIA) methodology to discriminate among the most important stressors within each of the classification strata we may have created for the WAP ecoregion. The technique uses a number of statistical methods—Chi-square Automatic Interaction Detection (CHAID), All-Possible Regressions, and Principal Components Analysis PCA)—to isolate the stressors likely to contribute the most to the observed biological impairment. The strength of this approach is that it examines many (sometimes obscure) potential associations or possibilities for impairment. Then, rather than relying on statistical inference, IIA employs a formal validation process on held-back data (verification data set). This dataset will focus on biological condition indices (IBI, ICI) and several major metrics (number of sensitive taxa) as response variables as well as on the suite of abiotic measures mentioned above, including chemistry (water column and sediment), habitat, LULC measures, and others. The LULC metrics will be important because they will include some estimate of the scale of anthropogenic changes as will some summarized measures
We will also begin working closer the Ohio EPA and Ohio DNR in terms of what would be useful in terms of 1) refined biocriteria, 2) identification of impaired waters and 3) identification of stressor restoration targets. Ohio EPA is interested in our work as part of their TMDL efforts in this ecoregion. Ohio EPA already used data Ohio U. and watershed groups collected and analyzed in the Leading Creek watershed as the basis for a TMDL project (Rankin 2005). Our plan is provide more comprehensive and innovative tools for TMDLs in the WAP ecoregion. Ohio DNR has utilized the many of the same types of data in their Acid Mine Drainage Abatement and Treatment (AMDAT) program and could benefit from these same tools. Southeast Ohio has active watershed groups and they will be an important target of our work as well. Watershed groups work hard to collect and contribute data to both Ohio EPA TMDLs and Ohio DNR AMDAT projects.
References:
Rankin, E. T. 2005. Fish and Macroinvertebrate Study of Leading Creek, 2004 Field Year, Athens, Gallia, and Meigs Counties, Ohio. June 30, 2005, MBI Technical Report MB/2005-3, Prepared for: Division of Mineral Resources Management, Ohio Department of Natural Resources.
Journal Articles:
No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 20 publications for this projectSupplemental Keywords:
RFA, Scientific Discipline, Water, ECOSYSTEMS, Ecosystem Protection/Environmental Exposure & Risk, Water & Watershed, Monitoring/Modeling, Terrestrial Ecosystems, Environmental Monitoring, Ecology and Ecosystems, Watersheds, ecosystem modeling, watershed classification, wetlands, aquatic ecosystem, monitoring, biodiversity, natural resource management, watershed, conservation, geomorphic tool, integrated watershed model, aquatic ecosystems, ecosystem restoration, ecological indicators, ecology assessment models, watershed assessment, ecological models, predicting habitat variables, biological impairmentProgress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.