James B. James B. StriblingStriblingTetra Tech, Inc.Tetra Tech, Inc.

Suite 110Suite 11010045 Red Run Blvd.10045 Red Run Blvd.

Owings Owings Mills, MD 21117Mills, MD 21117

Workshop on Reference Sites and ConditionsWorkshop on Reference Sites and ConditionsCentral Plains Center for Central Plains Center for BioassessmentBioassessmentLawrence, KansasLawrence, KansasApril 14April 14--16, 199916, 1999

2

�� Describe reference condition conceptDescribe reference condition concept�� Different approaches to reference conditionsDifferent approaches to reference conditions�� How calibrated reference conditions address How calibrated reference conditions address

regional/geographic variabilityregional/geographic variability�� Physical, chemical, and biological decision Physical, chemical, and biological decision

thresholds for impairmentthresholds for impairment�� Illustrated examples (Maryland, Florida, Illustrated examples (Maryland, Florida,

Wyoming)Wyoming)

3

A set of chemical, physical, and biological A set of chemical, physical, and biological measurements collectively describing a measurements collectively describing a selected group of minimallyselected group of minimally--impaired impaired (reference) sites of the same type or class(reference) sites of the same type or class

4

“…the concept of sustainability itself is at the center of “…the concept of sustainability itself is at the center of a simmering debate in ecology. Along with sister a simmering debate in ecology. Along with sister concepts like “integrity” and “health”, sustainability has concepts like “integrity” and “health”, sustainability has long been indicted by some ecologists for being vague long been indicted by some ecologists for being vague and impossible to quantify. Other criticsand impossible to quantify. Other critics----many, but many, but not all, outside the fieldnot all, outside the field----argue that these terms are argue that these terms are little more than attempts to cloak a conservation little more than attempts to cloak a conservation agenda in scientific garb.”agenda in scientific garb.”

Science 283 (5410): 1996 Science 283 (5410): 1996 -- 19981998March 26, 1999March 26, 1999

5

“…the ability of an aquatic ecosystem to “…the ability of an aquatic ecosystem to support and maintain a balanced, integrated, support and maintain a balanced, integrated, adaptive community of organisms having a adaptive community of organisms having a species composition, diversity, and functional species composition, diversity, and functional organization comparable to the natural organization comparable to the natural habitats of a region” habitats of a region” ((Karr Karr and and DudleyDudley 1981)1981)

6

“Reference reaches should be designated “Reference reaches should be designated and protected in each of the 76 and protected in each of the 76 ecoregions ecoregions of of the United States. The reference reaches the United States. The reference reaches should include, where possible, should include, where possible, representatives of all orders of streams and representatives of all orders of streams and rivers that occur in the rivers that occur in the ecoregionecoregion.”.”

National Research Council Committee on Restoration of Aquatic National Research Council Committee on Restoration of Aquatic Ecosystems (1992)Ecosystems (1992)

Relationship of Reference Conditions to Relationship of Reference Conditions to Biological Integrity and Ecological HealthBiological Integrity and Ecological Health

ECO

LOG

ICA

L H

EALT

H

Good

Poor

Biological Integrity

Reference ConditionBi

olog

ical

Con

ditio

n

Good

Fair

Poor

Principal Goal of the Clean Principal Goal of the Clean Water ActWater Act

Measurable Definition of Measurable Definition of the Idealthe Ideal

Biological Assessment Biological Assessment Measures Biological Measures Biological Condition as the Indicator Condition as the Indicator of Ecological Healthof Ecological Health

7

8

��Historical dataHistorical data��Empirical modelsEmpirical models

��Expert opinion/consensusExpert opinion/consensus

��Composite data and information from Composite data and information from multiple reference sitesmultiple reference sites

9

�� Physical, chemical, and biological Physical, chemical, and biological characteristics exhibit natural regional variabilitycharacteristics exhibit natural regional variability

�� For biological measurement endpoints to reflect For biological measurement endpoints to reflect changes, must be adjusted to expectationschanges, must be adjusted to expectations

�� Classes or groups of sites under ideal Classes or groups of sites under ideal conditions would have similar biological conditions would have similar biological componentscomponents

�� WellWell--formed formed site classificationsite classification provides provides geographic framework for calibrationgeographic framework for calibration

10

�� TopographyTopography�� Vegetative patternsVegetative patterns�� Soil type and structureSoil type and structure�� GeomorphologyGeomorphology�� WaterbodyWaterbody typetype�� WaterbodyWaterbody sizesize�� ElevationElevation�� Natural water chemistryNatural water chemistry

11

�� Physiographic regions or smaller scale Physiographic regions or smaller scale topographytopography

�� Ecoregions Ecoregions or or subecoregions subecoregions (as per (as per OmernikOmernik))

�� Basis of maps is composite of landscapeBasis of maps is composite of landscape--level, level, geographic characteristicsgeographic characteristics

12

A set of chemical, physical, and biological A set of chemical, physical, and biological measurements collectively describing a measurements collectively describing a selected group of minimallyselected group of minimally--impaired impaired (reference) sites of the same type or class(reference) sites of the same type or class

13

1. Develop database1. Develop database2. Identify reference and 2. Identify reference and stressor stressor sitessites3. Develop site classification3. Develop site classification4. Compile candidate metrics4. Compile candidate metrics5. Test candidate metrics5. Test candidate metrics6. Combine metrics into final index6. Combine metrics into final index7. Test index7. Test index

14

�� Sample physical, chemical, and biological Sample physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of concerncharacteristics of concern

�� Apply appropriate QC to all data andApply appropriate QC to all data andmetadatametadata

�� Organize data in flexible management system Organize data in flexible management system (e.g., relational database such as Access or (e.g., relational database such as Access or Oracle)Oracle)

15

�� Ideally, adequate number of reference andIdeally, adequate number of reference andstressorstressor sites for each site classsites for each site class

�� Reference sites are “minimallyReference sites are “minimally--impaired”impaired”�� Stressor sites are “distinctlyStressor sites are “distinctly--impaired”impaired”

�� Define Define quantitativequantitative criteria for each (physical criteria for each (physical and chemical criteria and chemical criteria only)only)

16

�� If possible, criteria should include aspects ofIf possible, criteria should include aspects of›› water chemistry, water chemistry, ›› instream and riparian physical habitat, instream and riparian physical habitat, ›› structure and condition of riparian and floodplain structure and condition of riparian and floodplain

vegetation,vegetation,›› geomorphology,geomorphology,›› hydrology, andhydrology, and›› drainage basin land usedrainage basin land use

17

�� Relative taxonomic abundance from Relative taxonomic abundance from reference sitesreference sites

�� Site similarity indicesSite similarity indices›› BrayBray--Curtis coefficient of similarityCurtis coefficient of similarity›› Jaccard Jaccard coefficientcoefficient

�� NonNon--Metric Multidimensional Scaling (NMDS)Metric Multidimensional Scaling (NMDS)�� Cluster Analysis (e. g., UPGMA)Cluster Analysis (e. g., UPGMA)

18

�� a characteristic of the biota that changes in a characteristic of the biota that changes in some predictable way with increased human some predictable way with increased human influenceinfluence

�� list potential metrics that have some ecological list potential metrics that have some ecological basisbasis

�� representing different categories of informationrepresenting different categories of information›› taxonomic richnesstaxonomic richness›› taxonomic compositiontaxonomic composition›› pollution tolerance or intolerancepollution tolerance or intolerance›› feeding or feeding or trophictrophic typetype›› habit tendencieshabit tendencies

19

��determine responsiveness of metrics to determine responsiveness of metrics to stressorsstressors›› discriminatory power or classification efficiencydiscriminatory power or classification efficiency›› box and whisker plotsbox and whisker plots›› significance testssignificance tests

�� redundancyredundancy��universality and understandinguniversality and understanding

20

�� discriminatory power or classification discriminatory power or classification efficiencyefficiency

�� calculated as the percentage of correct site calculated as the percentage of correct site classificationsclassifications

�� approach to defining “correct classification” approach to defining “correct classification” affects probability of incorrect assessments affects probability of incorrect assessments (false negatives, false positives)(false negatives, false positives)

21

Metric Responses

Num

ber i

ntol

eran

t tax

a

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

DegradedReference % in

tole

rant

indi

vidu

als

-10

10

30

50

70

90

110

DegradedReference

Strong Weak

22

Test Test CEsCEs Using Different Metric Using Different Metric Scoring MethodsScoring Methods

Met

ric V

alue

95 %ile

25 %ile

medianmean

5

3

1

5

3

1

10 %ile

5

3

1

ReferenceDistribution

Upper Percentile

Lower Percentile

Central Tendency

Ordinal Scores

Ordinal Scores

Ordinal Scores

23

CE = (a/b) x 100

a = number of impaired samples scoring below the 25th percentile of reference distribution

b = total number of impaired samples

24

��Test several suites of metrics for final Test several suites of metrics for final index formulationindex formulation

��Classification efficiencyClassification efficiency��Box and whisker plots Box and whisker plots -- compare compare

percentile distributions of reference and percentile distributions of reference and degraded sites degraded sites

25

��Test with independent Test with independent datasetdataset›› subsequent yearssubsequent years›› new set of sites from same regionsnew set of sites from same regions

��Compare Compare CEsCEs��Percentile distributions between Percentile distributions between

reference and degraded (b/w plots) reference and degraded (b/w plots)

26

Inde

x Va

lue

Reference Degraded

27

�� State of MarylandState of Maryland, Department of Natural , Department of Natural Resources/Maryland Biological Stream Resources/Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS)Survey (MBSS)

�� State of FloridaState of Florida, Department of Environmental , Department of Environmental ResourcesResources

�� State of WyomingState of Wyoming, Department of , Department of Environmental QualityEnvironmental Quality

28

�� ProbabilityProbability--based site selectionbased site selection�� Approximately 1100 sites sampled over 4Approximately 1100 sites sampled over 4--

year periodyear period�� Fish, Fish, benthic macroinvertebratesbenthic macroinvertebrates, physical , physical

habitat, selected field and analytical habitat, selected field and analytical chemistry, land use characterizationchemistry, land use characterization

�� DNR DNR -- develop and calibrate Indices of Biotic develop and calibrate Indices of Biotic Integrity for fish and Integrity for fish and benthosbenthos

29

�� Determined quantitative criteria for reference Determined quantitative criteria for reference and degraded sitesand degraded sites›› field and analytical chemistryfield and analytical chemistry›› instream instream and riparian physical habitatand riparian physical habitat›› land use of land use of catchment catchment areaarea

�� Reference sites must meet ALL reference Reference sites must meet ALL reference criteriacriteria

�� Degraded sites must meet ANY degraded Degraded sites must meet ANY degraded criterioncriterion

30

�� pH pH �� 6.06.0�� ANC ANC �� 5050��eqeq/l/l�� dissolved oxygen dissolved oxygen �� 4.0 4.0

ppmppm�� NitrateNitrate--N N �� 4.2 mg/l4.2 mg/l�� Urban land use Urban land use �� 20% 20%

of of catchmentcatchment�� Forested land cover Forested land cover

��25% of 25% of catchment

�� Remoteness rating Remoteness rating “optimal” or“optimal” or suboptimalsuboptimal””

�� Aesthetics rating Aesthetics rating “optimal” or ““optimal” or “suboptimalsuboptimal””

�� Instream Instream habitat rating habitat rating “optimal” or ““optimal” or “suboptimalsuboptimal””

�� Riparian buffer width Riparian buffer width ��15m15m

�� No No channelizationchannelization�� No point source No point source

dischargesdischarges

catchment

31

�� pH pH �� 5.0 5.0 andand ANC ANC �� 0 0 ��eqeq/l/l

�� dissolved oxygen dissolved oxygen �� 2.0 2.0 ppmppm

�� NitrateNitrate--N N �� 7.0 mg/l and DO 7.0 mg/l and DO �� 2.0 2.0 ppmppm

�� Urban land use > 50% of Urban land use > 50% of catchment catchment area and area and instream instream habitat rating habitat rating ““poorpoor””

�� Instream Instream habitat rating habitat rating ““poorpoor”” and bank stability rating and bank stability rating ““poorpoor””

�� Channel alteration rating Channel alteration rating ““poorpoor”” and and instream instream habitat habitat rating rating ““poorpoor””

32

MBSS Site ClassificationMBSS Site Classification

Tree Diagram for 130 SitesUnweighted pair-group average

Dissimilarities from Jaccard matrix (Taxa >= 5 occ.)

Linkage Distance

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3

Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3Heterogeneous Sites

33

Non-Coastal PlainCoastal Plain

Dimension 1

Dim

ensi

on 2

-1.6

-1.2

-0.8

-0.4

0.0

0.4

0.8

1.2

-1.6 -1.2 -0.8 -0.4 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2

34

��Ecoregions Ecoregions investigated investigated -- insufficient insufficient number of reference sitesnumber of reference sites

��Two groupings of sites Two groupings of sites ›› Coastal PlainCoastal Plain›› NonNon--Coastal PlainCoastal Plain

35

36

��Benthic macroinvertebratesBenthic macroinvertebrates��List compiled from previous workList compiled from previous work��57 metrics grouped into 5 categories57 metrics grouped into 5 categories

›› Taxonomic RichnessTaxonomic Richness›› Taxonomic CompositionTaxonomic Composition›› Tolerance/IntoleranceTolerance/Intolerance›› Trophic Trophic or Feeding Statusor Feeding Status›› HabitHabit

37

�� discriminatory power (stressor vs. reference)discriminatory power (stressor vs. reference)›› significance testssignificance tests

�� MannMann--Whitney UWhitney U�� KolmogorovKolmogorov--SmirnovSmirnov

›› classification efficiencyclassification efficiency

›› percentile distributions (box and whisker plots)percentile distributions (box and whisker plots)

�� redundancy redundancy

�� universality and ecological understandinguniversality and ecological understanding

38

�� metrics selectedmetrics selected›› several combinations testedseveral combinations tested

�� significancesignificance

�� highest CEhighest CE

�� clear trend between stressed and referenceclear trend between stressed and reference

�� at least one metric from each categoryat least one metric from each category

�� useful in multiple site classesuseful in multiple site classes

39

�� NonNon--Coastal Plain metricsCoastal Plain metrics›› Total Total taxataxa›› EPT EPT taxataxa›› Ephemeroptera taxaEphemeroptera taxa›› Diptera taxaDiptera taxa›› % mayflies% mayflies›› % % TanytarsiniTanytarsini›› Intolerant Intolerant taxataxa›› % tolerant individuals% tolerant individuals›› % collectors

�� Coastal Plain metricsCoastal Plain metrics›› Total Total taxataxa›› EPT EPT taxataxa›› % mayflies% mayflies›› % % Tanytarsini Tanytarsini of all of all

midgesmidges›› Beck’s Biotic IndexBeck’s Biotic Index›› Scraper Scraper taxataxa›› % clingers% clingers

% collectors

40

MBSS MBSS -- Combine Metrics into IndexCombine Metrics into Index

��

›› Coastal Plain (n = 25)Coastal Plain (n = 25) 92%92%›› Non Coastal Plain (n = 26)Non Coastal Plain (n = 26) 85%85%

41

MBSS MBSS -- Site Class Comparison of Site Class Comparison of Percentile DistributionsPercentile Distributions

42

MBSS MBSS -- Test with Independent DatasetTest with Independent Dataset

��VerificationVerification CEsCEs›› Coastal Plain (n = 16)Coastal Plain (n = 16) 94%94%›› Non Coastal Plain (n = 7)Non Coastal Plain (n = 7) 100%100%

State of FloridaState of Florida

Department of Environmental Department of Environmental ProtectionProtection

44

Distribution of Metric “Distribution of Metric “EPT EPT TaxaTaxa””Among Florida Among Florida SubregionalSubregional Reference SitesReference Sites

EPT

Tax

a

0

4

8

12

16

20

65F 65G 65H 75A 75B 75C 75D 75E 75F

Min-Max25%-75%Median value

Ecoregion

45

Distribution of “EPT Distribution of “EPT TaxaTaxa””in Aggregatedin Aggregated EcoregionsEcoregions

20

16

EPT

T

8

12axa

Min-Max25%-75%Median value

4

075EFNortheast

75BCDPeninsula

6575APanhandle

46

Core Metrics of the Stream Core Metrics of the Stream Invertebrate Index of Florida (SIIF)Invertebrate Index of Florida (SIIF)

Core Metrics Panhandle(65,75a)

Peninsula(75b,c,d)

# of Total TaxaEPT Index

# Crus + Moll% Dom Taxon

% Diptera% Crus + MollFlorida Index

% Filterers% Shredders

XX

XX

XXX7

XXXXXXXXX9

State of Wyoming State of Wyoming

Department of Environmental QualityDepartment of Environmental Quality

49

�� Middle Rockies Middle Rockies -- CentralCentral�� Middle Rockies Middle Rockies -- East (Black Hills)East (Black Hills)�� Middle Rockies Middle Rockies -- WestWest�� Southern RockiesSouthern Rockies�� Wyoming BasinWyoming Basin�� Western High PlainsWestern High Plains�� Northwestern Great PlainsNorthwestern Great Plains�� Middle Rockies West Middle Rockies West -- newnew

50

Wyoming Wyoming Ecoregions Ecoregions and Ranges of and Ranges of Chemical and Physical Measurement ValuesChemical and Physical Measurement Values

Con

duct

ivity

(um

hos/

cm)

20

50

80

200

500

800

2000

5000

8000

NGPWHP

WBMRWnew

MREMRC

MRWSR

Sulfa

tes

(mg/

l)

5

8

20

50

80

200

500

800

2000

NGPWHP

WBMRWnew

MREMRC

MRWSR

Turb

idity

(ntu

)

0.01

0.04

0.09

0.40

0.90

4.00

9.00

40.00

90.00

NGPWHP

WBMRWnew

MREMRC

MRWSR

Hab

itat S

core

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

NGPWHP

WBMRWnew

MREMRC

MRWSR

Rip

aria

n w

idth

(sco

re)

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

NGPWHP

WBMRWnew

MREMRC

MRWSR

Embe

dded

ness

(sco

re)

-2

2

6

10

14

18

22

NGPWHP

WBMRWnew

MREMRC

MRWSR

Wyoming DEQ

51

WYWY--DEQ draft reference/impaired criteriaDEQ draft reference/impaired criteria

List Criteria for Reference Sites

52

Wyoming Wyoming Ecoregions Ecoregions and Taxonomic and Taxonomic Dissimilarity Dissimilarity -- NMDSNMDS

Axis 1

Axis

2

EcoregionMRWMRCMRESRMRW newWBWHPNGP

53

Wyoming DEQ Wyoming DEQ Benthic Benthic Macroinvertebrate Macroinvertebrate Core MetricsCore Metrics

�� Total Total taxataxa�� Ephemeroptera taxaEphemeroptera taxa�� Plecoptera taxaPlecoptera taxa�� Trichoptera taxaTrichoptera taxa�� % non% non--Chironomidae Chironomidae

taxa

�� % non% non--InsectsInsects�� % 5 Dominants% 5 Dominants�� HilsenhoffHilsenhoff Biotic IndexBiotic Index�� % % TolerantsTolerants�� % Scrapers% Scrapers

taxa

Index Classification Efficiency = 81.8%