Support of aquatic life uses in Mizpah Creek based on the composition and structure of the Benthic algae community

V

MONTANA STATE LIBRARY

3 0864 1001 6088 9

SUPPORT OF AQUATIC LIFE USES
IN MIZPAH CREEK
BASED ON THE COMPOSITION AND STRUCTURE
OF THE BENTHIC ALGAE COMMUNITY

Prepared for:

\

State of Montana
Department of Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 200901
Helena, Montana 59620-0901

Project Officer: Patrick Newby
DEQ Contract No. 200012-2

Prepared by:

Loren L. Bahls, Ph.D.
Hannaea
1032 Twelfth Avenue
Helena, Montana 59601

STATE DOCUMENTS COLLECTION

OCT 1 i) 2002

MONTANA STATE LIBRARY

1515 E. 6th AVE.
HELENA, MONTANA 59620

March 20, 2001

Printed on 100% Recycled Pomt-Conaumer Paper

SUMMARY

Composite periphyton samples were collected from natural
substrates at 2 sites on Mizpah Creek in northern Powder River
County in southeastern Montana. Samples were collected following
standard operating procedures of the Montana Department of
Environmental Quality, processed and analyzed using standard
methods for periphyton, and evaluated following modified USEPA
rapid bioassessment protocols for wadeable streams.

Diatom metrics assigned both sites to the same use support
categories to which they were assigned in 1999. UMC-1 fully
supported aquatic life uses, with only minor impairment noted
from organic loading and a few abnormal diatom frustules. UMC-1
proved to be a suitable local reference site for use in Protocol
II.

LMC-7 provided only partial support of aquatic life uses
when compared to UMC-1 and to other least -impaired prairie
streams. The major causes for less than full support at LMC-7
were organic loading, sedimentation, and a much different diatom
assemblage than the upstream control site (UMC-1) . Some of the
organic loading at LMC-7 may be internal and therefore natural in
origin.

The algal assemblages at the two sites also indicated that
LMC-7 had larger concentrations of nitrogen and dissolved solids,
and higher water temperatures, than did UMC-1.

•

INTRODUCTION

This report evaluates the biological integrity, support of
aquatic life uses, and probable causes of impairment to those
uses in Mizpah Creek, Powder River County, Montana. The purpose
of this report is to provide information that will help the State
of Montana determine whether Mizpah Creek is water-quality
limited and in need of TMDLs .

The federal Clean Water Act directs states to develop water
pollution control plans (Total Maximum Daily Loads or TMDLs) that
set limits on pollution loading to water-quality limited waters.
Water-quality limited waters are lakes and stream segments that
do not meet water-quality standards, that is, that do not fully
support their beneficial uses. The Clean Water Act and USEPA
regulations require each state to (1) identify waters that are
water-quality limited, (2) prioritize and target waters for
TMDLs, and (3) develop TMDL plans to attain and maintain water-
quality standards for all water-quality limited waters.

The evaluations in this report are based on the structure
and species composition of the periphyton or phytobenthos
community. The periphyton community is a basic biological
component of all aquatic ecosystems. Periphyton accounts for
much of the primary production and biological diversity of
Montana streams (Bahls et al . 1992).

Periphyton is a diverse assortment of simple photosynthetic
organisms called algae, and other microorganisms that live
attached to or in close proximity of the stream bottom. Many
algae, such as the diatoms, are microscopic. Diatoms are
distinguished by having a cell wall composed of opaline glass- -
hydrated amorphous silica. Diatoms often carpet a stream bottom
with a slippery brown film.

Some algae, such as the filamentous greens, are conspicuous
and their excessive growth may be aesthetically displeasing.
Algae may also deplete dissolved oxygen, interfere with fishing
and fish spawning, clog water filters and irrigation intakes,
create tastes and odors in drinking water, and generate toxins
that may be lethal to livestock and other animals.

Plafkin et al . (1989) and Stevenson and Bahls (1999) list

several advantages for using periphyton in biological assessments

of streams:

Algae are universally present in large numbers in all
streams and unimpaired periphyton assemblages typically
support a large number (>30) of species;

Algae have rapid reproduction rates and short life cycles,
making them useful indicators of short-term impacts;

As primary producers, algae are most directly affected by
physical and chemical factors, such as temperature,
nutrients, dissolved salts, and toxins;

Sampling is quick, easy and inexpensive, and causes minimal
damage to resident biota and their habitat;

Standard methods and criteria exist for evaluating the
composition, structure, and biomass of algal associations;

Identification to species is straightforward for the
diatoms, for which there is a large body of taxonomic and
ecological literature;

Excessive algae growth in streams is often correctly
perceived as a problem by the public.

Periphyton and other biological communities reflect the
biological integrity^ of waterbodies; restoring and
maintaining the biological integrity of waterbodies is a
goal of the federal Clean Water Act;

Periphyton and other biological communities integrate the

^ Biological integrity is defined as "the ability of an
aquatic ecosystem to support and maintain a balanced, integrated,
adaptive community of organisms having a species composition,
diversity, and functional organization comparable to that of
natural habitats within a region" (Karr and Dudley 1981) .

effects of different stressors and provide a measure of
their aggregate impact; and

• Periphyton and other biological communities may be the only
practical means of evaluating impacts from non-point sources
of pollution where specific ambient criteria do not exist
(e.g., impacts that degrade habitat or increase nutrients).

PROJECT AREA AND SAMPLING SITES

The project area is located near Powderville in northern
Powder River County in southeastern Montana (Map 1) . Mizpah
Creek heads about 12 miles west of the town of Broadus and flows
northeasterly about 70 miles to the point where it meets the
Powder River near Mizpah, Montana.

The project area is within the Northwestern Great Plains
Ecoregion (Woods et al . 1999). The surface geology of the
watershed consists of coal -bearing deposits of the Fort Union
Formation (Renfro and Feray 1972) . Upland vegetation is mixed
grassland with some open ponderosa pine forest in the headwaters
(USDA 1976) . The main land use is livestock grazing, with hay
production in the valley bottom.

Periphyton samples were collected at 2 sites on Mizpah Creek
on August 28, 2000 (Table 1) . These 2 sites bracket a 20-mile
section of upper Mizpah Creek that extends from Highway 59 north
of Broadus to the Custer County line (Map 1) . Elevations at the
sampling sites range from about 3,200 feet above mean sea level
at the upper site to 2,900 feet at the lowest site. Mizpah Creek
is classified C-3 in the Montana Surface Water Quality Standards.

METHODS

Periphyton samples were collected following standard
operating procedures of the Planning, Prevention, and Assistance
Division of the Montana Department of Environmental Quality.
Using appropriate tools, microalgae were scraped, brushed, and/or
sucked from natural substrates in proportion to the rank of those
substrates at the study site. Macroalgae were picked by hand in
proportion to their abundance at the site. All collections of
microalgae and macroalgae were pooled into a common container and
preserved with Lugol's solution (APHA 1998).

Samples were examined to estimate the relative abundance and
rank by biovolume of diatoms and genera of soft (non-diatom)
algae according to the method described in Bahls (1993) . Soft
algae were identified using Dillard (1999), Prescott (1978),
Smith (1950) , and Whitford and Schumacher (1984) . These books
also served as references on the ecology of the soft algae, along
with Palmer (1977) .

After the identification of soft algae, raw periphyton
samples were cleaned of organic matter using sulfuric acid, and
permanent diatom slides were prepared using Naphrax, a high
refractive index mounting medium, following Standard Methods for
the Examination of Water and Wastewater (APHA 1998) . For each
slide, between 430 and 445 diatom cells (860 to 890 valves) were
counted at random and identified to species. The following were
used as the main taxonomic and autecological references for the
diatoms: Krammer and Lange-Bertalot 1986, 1988, 1991a, 1991b;
Patrick and Reimer 1966, 1975.

Lowe (1974) was also used as an ecological reference for the
diatoms. Bahls et al . (1984) provide autecological information
on important diatom species that live in the Fort Union Region of
Montana, including many of the diatom species found in Mizpah
Creek.

The diatom proportional counts were used to generate an
array of diatom association metrics (Table 2) . A metric is a
characteristic of the biota that changes in some predictable way
with increased human influence (Barbour et al . 1999) .

Metric values for Mizpah Creek were compared to numeric
biocriteria developed for streams in the Great Plains Ecoregions
of Montana (Table 3) . These criteria are based on metric values
measured in least-impaired reference streams (Bahls et al . 1992)
and on metric values measured in streams that are known to be
impaired by various sources and causes of pollution (Bahls 1993) .

The criteria in Table 3 distinguish among four levels of
impairment and three levels of aquatic life use support: no
impairment or only minor impairment (full support) ; moderate
impairment (partial support) ; and severe impairment (nonsupport) .
These impairment levels correspond to excellent, good, fair, and
poor biological integrity, respectively.

Besides the ecoregional biocriteria listed in Table 3,
metrics for the lower site on Mizpah Creek (LMC-7) were also
compared to metrics generated from an upstream, least-impaired
reference site (UMC-1) using Protocol II in Bahls (1993) .
Protocol II is based on the percentage of change in metric values
at the study site(s) from values measured at the local reference
stream. Criteria for evaluating biological integrity using
Protocol II are given in Table 12 in Bahls (1993) .

Protocol II may be used if an upstream reference site is
available that fully supports its aquatic life uses, that is, if
it has a rating of "good" or "excellent" biological integrity
using Protocol I. Mizpah Creek station UMC-l exhibited only
minor impairment using Protocol I and therefore qualifies as a
local reference site.

For Protocol I, only periphyton samples collected in summer
(June 21-September 21) can be compared with confidence to
reference stream samples because metric values change seasonally
and summer is the season in which reference streams and impaired
streams were sampled for the purpose of biocriteria development .
Protocol II can be used at any time of the year.

QUALTIY ASSURANCE

Several steps were taken to assure that the study results
are accurate and reproducible.

Upon receipt of the samples, station and sample information
were recorded in a laboratory notebook and samples were assigned
a unique number compatible with the Montana Diatom Database,
e.g., 1860-02. The first part of this number (1860) designates
the sampling site (Mizpah Creek one mile south of the Custer
County line) ; the second part of the number (02) designates the
number of periphyton samples that have been collected at this
site to date for which data have been entered into the Montana
Diatom Database.

Sample observations and analyses of soft (non-diatom) algae
were recorded in a lab notebook along with station and sample
information provided by Patrick Newby of MDEQ . A portion of the
raw sample was used to make duplicate diatom slides.

On completion of the project, station information, sample
information, and diatom proportional count data will be entered
into the Montana Diatom Database. One set of diatom slides will
be deposited in the University of Montana Herbarium in Missoula.
The other set of slides will be retained by Hannaea in Helena.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Results are presented in Tables 4-6, located near the end of
this report following the Literature Cited section. Spreadsheets
containing completed diatom proportional counts, with species'
pollution tolerance classes and percent abundances, are attached
as Appendix A.

•

FIELD AND SAMPLE NOTES

Mizpah Creek UMC-1. The sample from this site contained
Myriophyllum and bits of terrestrial plants. A small flat piece
of a Nostoc colony was observed in this sample, as well as
isolated filaments. The Phorrnidium species here had very narrow
filaments and most of the diatom frustules in this sample were
empty .

Mizpah Creek LMC-7. The sample collected here contained
bits of aquatic macrophytes . Monostroma occurred here as an
expanded sheet one cell thick; cells were mutually compressed and
not in groups of four. Most of the diatoms in this sample were
alive (contained chloroplasts and protoplasm) .

NON- DIATOM ALGAE

Cyanobacteria and chrysophytes, including diatoms and
Trihonewa, were the only algae observed in the sample collected
at UMC-1 (Table 4) . Trijbone/na prefers cool, fresh waters (Smith
1950) . Green algae were not present at the upstream site.

Only four genera of non-diatom algae were observed at UMC-1.
Least -impaired prairie streams contain an average of 13 genera
(Bahls 1993). Although they were only common, diatoms accounted
for most of the biomass as UMC-1. The relative abundance of
cyanobacteria, particularly the nitrogen- fixer Nostoc, the
absence of green algae, and the small number of algal genera
probably indicate nitrogen deficiency at this site.

In contrast, green algae and diatoms were abundant at LMC-7
(Table 4) . This site supported 9 genera of non-diatom algae,
including two reliable indicators of organic loading: Euglena
and Stigeoclonium. The most abundant green alga at LMC-7 was
Monostroma, which is a good indicator of brackish water (Smith
1950) . The appearance of Oedogoniuw, Anabaena, and Nodular ia,

8

and the disappearance of Nostoc, may indicate warmer water at
LMC-7 than at UMC-1.

DIATOMS

All but one of the major diatom species in Mizpah Creek were
either very tolerant or somewhat tolerant of organic pollution
(Table 5). The only sensitive species- -Cocconeis placentula- -was
much more abundant at the upstream site (UMC-1) .

Very tolerant species, especially Navicula circumtexta and
Navicula veneta, were much more abundant at LMC-7, resulting in a
very small pollution index (1.36) at this site. These taxa,
along with Nitzschia reversa, also indicate an increase in
dissolved solids between UMC-1 and LMC-7.

Over 80% of the diatom species at LMC-7 were motile and
adapted to living on unstable substrates. This resulted in a
very high siltation index, even for a prairie stream. LMC-7 also
had borderline values for diatom species diversity, percent
dominant species, and percent abnormal cells (Table 5) .

Diatom association metrics indicated good to excellent water
quality and biological integrity at UMC-1. This site proved to
be a suitable reference site for use in Protocol II. UMC-1 also
supported a significant percentage of diatoms in the family
Epithemiaceae, indicating that nitrogen was probably the limiting
nutrient here. The two sites had less than a third of their
diatom associations in common, indicating that a significant
amount of environmental change occurred between them.

BIOASSESSMENT

PROTOCOL I

All diatom association metrics for UMC-1 indicated full
support of aquatic life uses when compared to least-impaired
reference streams elsewhere in eastern Montana (Table 5). Minor
impairment, but still full support, was indicated by two metrics:
Pollution index and percent abnormal cells. Full support of
aquatic life uses was also noted at UMC-1 in 1999 (Bahls 2000) .

A very low pollution index and an exceptionally large
siltation index indicated only partial support of aquatic life
uses at LMC-7 when compared to prairie reference streams in
eastern Montana (Table 5) . The pollution index was lower and the
siltation index was higher in 2000 than they were at this site in
1999. This site also exhibited moderate impairment and partial
support of aquatic life uses in 1999 (Bahls 2000) .

PROTOCOL II

Metrics at LMC-7 were compared with those at the upstream
control site (UMC-1) following Protocol II and using the criteria
in Table 12 in Bahls (1993) . This comparison also indicated that
LMC-7 provided only partial support of aquatic life uses and was
moderately impaired. Impairment was due primarily to the very
low pollution index, indicating a high level of organic loading,
and to the dissimilarity between the two diatom associations.
Some of the organic loading here may be internal in origin, i.e.,
resulting from the breakdown of aquatic plants.

10

LITERATURE CITED

APHA. 1998. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater. 20th Edition. American Public Health
Association, Washington, D.C.

Bahls, L.L. 1979. Benthic diatom diversity as a measure of
water quality. Proc . Mont. Acad. Sci. 38:1-6.

Bahls, L.L. 1980. Salinity and The Structure of Benthic Algae
(Periphyton) Communities in Streams of the Southern Fort
Union Region, Montana. Environmental Sciences Division,
Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences,
Helena .

Bahls, L.L. 1993. Periphyton Bioassessment Methods for Montana
Streams (Revised) . Montana Department of Health and
Environmental Sciences, Helena.

Bahls, L.L. 2000. Biological Integrity in Mizpah Creek Based on
Periphyton Composition and Community Structure. Montana
Department of Environmental Quality, Helena.

Bahls, L.L., Bob Bukantis, and Steve Tralles . 1992. Benchmark

Biology of Montana Reference Streams. Montana Department of
Health and Environmental Sciences, Helena.

Bahls, L.L., E.E. Weber, and J. 0. Jarvie. 1984. Ecology and
Distribution of Major Diatom Ecotypes in the Southern Fort
Union Coal Region of Montana. U.S. Geological Survey
Professional Paper 1289, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington.

Barbour, M.T., J. Gerritsen, B.D. Snyder, and J.B. Stribling.

1999. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and
Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates and
Fish. Second Edition. EPA/841-B-99-002 . U.S. EPA, Office
of Water, Washington, D.C.

Dillard, G.E. 1999. Common Freshwater Algae of the United
States. J. Cramer, Berlin.

Johansen, J.R. 1999. Diatoms of Aerial Habitats. Chapter 12 in
Stoermer, E.F., and J. P. Smol (eds.), The Diatoms, Cambridge
University Press, New York.

Karr, J.R., and D.R. Dudley. 1981. Ecological perspectives on
water quality goals. Environmental Management 5:55-69.

11

Patrick, Ruth, and C.W. Reimer. 1975. The Diatoms of The United
States Exclusive of Alaska and Hawaii. Volume 2, Part 1:
Entomoneidaceae, Cymbellaceae, Gomphonemaceae,
Epithemiaceae . Nonograph Number 13, The Academy of Natural
Sciences, Philadelphia.

Plafkin, J.L., M.T. Barbour, K.D. Porter, S.K. Gross, and R.M.
Hughes. 1989. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in
Rivers and Streams: Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish.
EPA 440-4-89-001.

Prescott, G.W. 1978. How to Know the Freshwater Algae. Third
Edition. Wm. C. Brown Company Publishers, Dubuque, Iowa.

Renfro, H.B., and D.E. Feray. 1972. Geological Highway Map of

the Northern Rocky Mountain Region. American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Smith, G.M. 1950. the Fresh-Water Algae of The United States.
McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.

Stevenson, R.J., and L.L. Bahls. 1999. Periphyton Protocols.
Chapter 6 in Barbour, M.T., J. Gerritsen, B.D. Snyder, and
J.B. Stribling. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in
Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic
Macroinvertebrates and Fish. Second Edition. EPA/841-B-99-
002. U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.

Stevenson, R.J., and Y. Pan. 1999. Assessing Environmental

Conditions in Rivers and Streams with Diatoms. Chapter 2 in
Stoermer, E.F., and J. P. Smol (eds.), The Diatoms:
Applications for the Environmental and Earth Sciences.
Cambridge University Press, New York.

USDA. 1976. Climax Vegetation of Montana (map). U. S.

Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,
Cartographic Unit, Portland.

Whitford, L.A., and G.J. Schumacher. 1984. A Manual of Fresh-
Water Algae (Revised) . Sparks Press, Raleigh, North
Carolina .

Whittaker, R.H. 1952. A study of summer foliage insect

communities in the Great Smoky Mountains. Ecological
Monographs 22:1-44.

Woods, A.J., Omernik, J.M., Nesser, J. A., Shelden, J., and

Azevedo, S.H. 1999. Ecoregions of Montana (color poster

13

APPENDIX A: DIATOM PROPORTIONAL COUNTS

Mizpah Creek UMC-1 (8/28/00)

3/19/01

Siun^le "-f : Qmviiimf^li<MiMfe^^

!iPciiiiiiiid*Ki[ic«;C^

Count

: ■ Percent 11

1 85702 Achnanthes lanceolata

2

11

1.28

1 85702 Achnanthes minutissima

3

4

0.47

1 85702 Amphipleura pellucida

2

16

1.86

185702

Amphora coffeaeformis

1

63

7.33

185702

Amphora libyca

3

2

0.23

185702

Aulacoseira distans

3

1

0.12

1 85702 Aulacoseira granulata

3

0

0.00

185702Aulacoseira italica

3

0

0.00

1 85702 Caloneissilicula

2

0

0.00

185702!Cocconeis pediculus

3

2

0.23

1 85702 Cocconeis placentula

3

206

23.95

185702

Cyclotella meneghiniana

2

9

1.05

185702

Cymbella cymbiformis

3

1

0.12

185702

Cymbeila mexicana

3

1

0.12

185702

Cymbella pusilla

1

10

1.16

185702

Cymbella silesiaca

2

0

0.00

185702

Denticula subtilis

2

2

0.23

185702

Entomoneis paludosa

2

1

0.12

1 85702 Epithemia adnata

2

53

6.16

1 85702 Epithemia argus

2

2

0.23

185702

Epithemia turgida

3

7

0.81

1 85702 Fragilaria capucina

2

1

0.12

1 85702 Fragilaria construens

3

13

1.51

185702 Fragilaria elliptica

2

39

4.53

1 85702 Gomphonema angustatum

2

2

0.23

185702

Gomphonema clavatum

2

14

1.63

185702

Gomphonema gracile

2

2

0.23

185702 Gomphonema mexicanum

2

2

0.23

185702 Gomphonema parvulum

1

2

0.23

185702[Gyrosigma spencerii

2

1

0.12

185702

Mastogloia elliptica

2

0

0.00

185702

Navicula cuspidata

2

4

0.47

185702

Navicula elginensis

3

2

0.23

185702

Navicula erifuga

2

5

0.58

185702

Navicula gregaria

2

6

0.70

185702

Navicula halophila

2

18

2.09

185702

Navicula oblonga

2

1

0.12

185702

Navicula peregrina

2

10

1.16

185702

Navicula salinarum

1

2

0.23

185702

Navicula veneta

1

132

15.35

185702

Nitzschia amphibia

2

37

4.30

185702

Nitzschia apiculata

2

6

0.70

185702

Nitzschia aurariae

1

6

0.70

185702

Nitzschia capitellata

2

4

0.47

185702

Nitzschia frustulum

2

52

6.05

185702

Nitzschia gracilis

2

1

0.12

185702

Nitzschia hungarica

2

13

1.51

Page 1

Mizpah Creek UMC-1 (8/28/00)

3/19/01

illl^le: ' ' I ■"■ Ws^m^^^^^M^^^^^^

iraii^iiiifiiii^^i^ii^

\ wlMbUJR^^^^^^^^VCjU«K^K:^^^^;^>:|

1 85702 Nitzschia liebetnjthii

2

14

1.63

185702jNitzschia microcephala

1

2

0.23

185702 Nitzschia palea

1

9

1.05

185702 Nitzschia pusilla

1

6

0.70

185702,Nitzschia tryblionella

2

0.12

185702 Nitzschia valdestriata

2

0.12

185702 Nitzschia venmicularis

2

0.12

1 85702 Pinnularia viridis

3

0.12

1 85702 Plagiotropis arizonica

2

0.12

1 85702 Pleurosigma delicatulum

2

0.12

1 85702 Rhoicosphenia curvata

3

2

0.23

1 85702 Rhopaiodia brebissonii

1

2

0.23

1 85702 Rhopalodia gibba

2

8

0.93

185702 Rhopaiodia operculata

1

0

0.00

1 85702 Stauroneis tackei

2

2

0.23

1 85702 Stephanodiscus hantzschii

2

3

0.35

1 85702 Surirella ovalis 2

1

0.12

1 85702 Synedra delicatissima

2

1

0.12

1 85702 Synedra famelica

2

7

0.81

1 85702 Synedra fascicuiata

2

30

3.49

185702 Synedra pulchella

2

1

0.12

185702 Synedra ulna 2 0 0.00

Page 2

'A ">

r.'=\~^-\-

'T N

iS

i^imtm.

v'*;^"

^&^'

y -~ i 7-4- 9

-.m-

^^i^^

//•'

3«i-_t

.f^>'v

:\N^oQ

.4 !iir*^-^.-^'

i:e:^g

ic^'

0^1

':/^

J

^ cT"

^i/i^'

Ty^^J.h^

W^^mS^Ml

4:

CO
CO

E
o

CM

CSI

CO

H

o

z
q"

CO

CM

iS

ra

Mizpah Creek LMC-7 (8/28/00)

3/19/01

Sample \ 0««»8iSj(Sii6les?V«fl6l¥"^ .t;

I^P^iii^i^ai^^c^i^^

f Count

P«reertt

186002,Amphora coffeaeformis

1

8

0.90

1 86002 Anomoeoneis sphaerophora

^

3

0.34

1 86002 Caloneissilicula

^

2

0.22

186002;Cocconeis pediculus

3

0

0.00

1 86002 Cocconeis placentula

3

38

4.27

186002bvclotella meneqhiniana

2

3

0.34

186002'cYmatopleura elliptica

2

0

0.00

1 86002 Cvmbella pusilla

1

17

1.91

1 86002 Diatoma tenue

2

1

0.11

1 86002 Entomoneis alata

2

4

0.45

1 86002 Epithemia adnata

2

5

0.56

1 86002 Gomphonema clavatum

2

1

0.11

1 86002 Gomphonema qracile

2

49

5.51

186002 Gomphonema parvulum

1

4

0.45

186002:Gvrosiama SDencerii

2

4

0.45

186002

Mastoqioia smithii

2

0

0.00

186002lNavicula capitata

2

2

0.22

1 86002 Navicula cincta

1

2

0.22

186002'Navicula circumtexta

1

120

13.48

186002'Navicula erifuqa

2

10

1.12

186002 Navicula oerearina

2

5

0.56

186002 Navicula pyqmaea

2

5

0.56

186002 Navicula recens

2

5

0.56

186002'Navicula saiinarum

1

19

2.13

186002 Navicula sp.

2

1

0.11

186002 Navicula tenelloides

1

3

0.34

186002 Navicula veneta

1

424

47.64

1 86002 Nitzschia apiculata

2

3

0.34

1 86002 Nitzschia aurariae

1

2

0.22

186002

Nitzschia calida

2

1

0.11

186002

Nitzschia capitellata

2

0

0.00

186002

Nitzschia fmstulum

2

6

0.67

186002

Nitzschia hunqarica

2

44

4.94

186002 Nitzschia liebetmthii

2

1

0.11

186002 Nitzschia microceohala

1

3

0.34

186002

Nitzschia obtusa

1

3

0.34

186002

Nitzschia ovalis

1

1

0.11

186002

Nitzschia palea

1

7

0.79

186002

Nitzschia pusilla

1

2

0.22

186002

Nitzschia reversa

2

65

7.30

186002|Nit2schia tryblionella

2

2

0.22

186002 Nitzschia vemiicularis

2

1

0.11

1 86002 Pleurosiqma delicatulum

2

0

0.00

1 86002 Rhoicosphenia curvata

3

6

0.67

186002

Rhopalodia brebissonii

1

1

0.11

186002

Stauroneis tackei

2

2

0.22

186002

Surirella brebissonii

2

1

0.11

186002

Surirella briqhtwellii

2

1

0.11

1 86002 Svnedra famelica 1

2

2

0.22

186002

Synedra fasciculata

2

1

0.11

186002

Svnedra puichella

2

0

0.00

Page 1

•

Table 1. Location of periphyton stations on Mizpah Creek:

Station codes, sample numbers in the Montana Diatom
Database, sample dates, and legal descriptions.

Location Station Sample Legal Latitude/

Code Number Description Longitude

Mizpah Creek at

Roy Irion's UMC-1 1857-02 T03SR50E26CC 45 32 34

(below Highway 59) 105 31 39

Mizpah Creek one LMC-7 1860-02 T01SR51E11BC 45 46 18
mile south of 105 24 22

Custer County line

♦)

C

o

.

■H

tn

4-1

w

m

U

0)

c

Q)

^

(0

S-l

jj

u

•H

w

c -d

o

rH

s x)

m

(1)

i-l

G

4J

3

-rH

U

JJ

Q)

to

>i a c

4J

X

-H

(U

i-l

i-l

o

en -a

OJ

fi

a

jj

fT3

0

c

■H

■H

^

iJ

W

03

iH

£ Xi

(C

to

iH

U

0)

3

-H

^

4->

CD J-)

i-l

O

w

0

.H

a

0

(0

-H

a

u

X!

to

•rH

4J

a

0)

c

0)

4-)

o

cn

(C s

o

13

a

r-i

a

0

fC

•iH

M

>

4::

01

m

4J

QJ

c

0

13

to

4J

rH

to

tn

T)

>

c

0)

-H

w

4-1

m

m

0

to

QJ

m

0)

iH

u

Cn u

■rH

C

C

V-l

to

-H

iJ

i-l

0)

0

6

0)

4-1

c

u

0)

o

c

w

-H

0)

a

OJ

i-l

0

to

0)

ft

■H

IW

m

u

Q)

0)

o

U

iH

w

m

u

n3

..

•H

w

iH

£

e

4J

0

to

0)

4J

0)

e

fO

^^

•H

JJ

4H

Q

CO

0

CN

(U

1

1— 1

nJ

E-«

0)

w

G
O

a
w

QJ

73

Q)

4J

U
QJ

a

X

QJ

>

tt)

tn
to

QJ

u
c

QJ

iH

QJ
MH
QJ
Di

U
4J
QJ

QJ

m
to

QJ
Vh
U
QJ
Q

+
o
o

o

o

Ch

rH

J3
to

m

jJ

•H
CQ

0)
>
•H

Q
n

0)
•H

o

0)

w

o
a

CO

QJ

QJ

QJ

CQ

m

m

to

to

to

QJ

0)

QJ

U

U

iH

U

u

U

QJ

G

a

Q

M

M

o
o

I

o
o

X
0)
■O

a

H

o

-H
■U

;3

o

CM

+
o

o

I
O

o

0)
X)

a
o

•H

nJ

4J
rH
•H
W

O

o

o
o

<y\

a\

CTi

iH

>~H

re

n

ro

w

CTi

<T>

QJ

cn

a^

rH

H

iH

3

CQ

w

0

rH

H

X!

^

4:;

^H

to

to

fO

m

CQ

PQ

0)

u
a
n)
XI

■U
01
•H

Q

QJ
w
to

QJ

iH

U
0)

Q

+
o
o

ro

CQ
H

to
PQ

XI
0)
4J

a

o
u

n

0)
•H

o

0)

o

QJ
CQ

to

QJ

iH

U
C
M

O
O

ID

cr\
cn
cn

to

-u
OJ

iH

d
o

X5

iH

to

CQ

Q

(U
•H
U
0)

cu
w

4->

ci
nJ
a

•H

o

Q
■u

a

0)

o

M
0)

Q4

QJ

CQ
(0
QJ

iH

U
C
M

+
O

o

(N

cn
cn

■H

to

■u
QJ

C
to

H
U

to
u

01

u

n)

o
Pi

a

0)

o
u

0)

134

Q)
CQ

to
Q)

iH

U
QJ
P

+
o

o
00

tN
LT)

cn

iH

QJ
M
to
4-)
4-)

-H

xi

0)

•d

4J
-H

(0
rH
-H

•H

QJ
CQ

to

Q)

iH

U
QJ
P

+
o

o

00

cn
cn
cn

to

c
o

CQ

c

QJ
>
QJ

4.)

C/5

(1)
(0
(1)

u

-H

xi

■H
M
4J

o

M
0)

QJ
CQ

to

QJ

iH

CJ

c

O
O

cn

G
QJ

CQ
G
to

Xi
O

1-0

CQ
0)
rH
■H

O
U
0)

ri:

ri

0)

u

0)

u

4J ,,

to

iH

G

4J

to

G

4J

to
Xi

Q)

e
o

CQ

G
Q)

-rH
iH
4J

G
G

G

-rH

CQ
QJ

to
0

iH

u

G
-H

QJ
4-1

to

to

Q)

C ^
-H O

>1

to

O

QJ 51

G -1

CQ

O

CQ
Q)

QJ
CQ

QJ

O

to h

>1

CQ
iH

0
>

-H
X)

C

o

G
G
to
£1
CO

Ui

B
ni
QJ

iH
4J
CQ

G

•H

to

4J

G
G
O
B

o

H

to

4J

u

QJ

m

I

QJ
cn
G
to

>1

XI

■d

QJ
G
cn

-H
CQ
CQ

to

CQ
QJ
U
G
to
U
QJ
H
O

4J

G
O

-H
.U

3

o

ft

Q)
4-)

O

CQ
Q)

■rH
U
QJ
ft

CQ

CQ 5
ftr.

X

Q)

O

gs

Q)

ft"^

B'^

o

u

X)
G
to

to

■-H

u

CQ
N

■U

to

M

O
■■H

to

iH

QJ
G
QJ

Cn

QJ

Xi

4J

G

-rH

CQ
QJ
-H
U
QJ
ft
CQ

O

CQ
Q)
V

G
to
T!
G
G
X!
to

4J

c

QJ
U

iH

QJ
ft

to

-H
QJ

O.

CO

•-H
CQ
CQ

■M

rj

CQ
QJ

q
to
q
•q
o

o

Q)
U
G

to
-d

G
G
X!
to

4J

G
QJ
U

iH

Q)

>,

u

^ ^

4J

1

1

0 (0 1

•

•H -,

5h X

CTl

0 en

0 cn

0

S m 4-) rH <U

.u 0) cn C -H E •

4J

fd 0)

CTl

0 cr\

0 cn

0

n -H C 3 E 0 dJ
r^MdJU-HSnO-Hwcn

C -i-i

-H T3

in

■* m

(N ro

OJ

0) 4-1 w

■H C

A

V

■^-H£!d)C-HEW C

S O <1)

E M

T-,j:^4Jftd)d)fO II (fl
>i H m > x; >, Xi

^ 4J 5h 4J d) 5h o\° u

H S

■H

•H t/) O

W

m £ rH

rH

w m jC d) > d) o>

'"^ • U 4J 4-1 -H > • 5h

tt fC

4-) m

E 0) dj

^ p

1

1

niEwn3G04J cno

■<-{ U Xi ■

(U S w

0

0 0

0 cn

cn

n fO C dJ -H fC 11 ro -1-1
"^ d) 0 oV rH 1 (t)

4-) E-i dJ

U 0 rH

•

r-l W 4J

5h C M

0

0 rH

^-^ cn

en

^ Sh -H Sh 4J 0 dJ o\o 0 E
^4-)4-)03U)SHCn •
p W m 4-1 0 • 0 -
^ -H j::4JdJcnoJW

fO -H

0) ^ 0)

cu ^ u

A V

A

iJ to • U3

C C w

0) -H C >,

4J

dJUWjJWXJin m

£ fl O T3

4J C w

1

;:^EOd)-HfC4JA->SH

C iH -H d

a rc dJ

0

0 <y\

0 cn

cn

Ir^fCwdSd) djo

O fti-) J-)

(U C -H

.

•

it: W CQ rH rH dJ CnrH

5-1 fT5 W

U -H U

in

in en

0 <*

^

IJ rtrrs- Cn--!:;4-i

-H 0) -H

5h E OJ

(N

(N ^

in r-

i>

d) >E-i-''t3W'C

> .H U (U

Qj 0 a

V

A

(.jciE rcm:3dJ£:5H

C X) O 45

Ph Q CO

m4JOdJdJ cnxJum

(U (C W iJ

ri 4J u Sh dJ -H rH

75Gm!::4J>om5H-H

,o-HmcQf04J oE

(D W

~T) (13 U

5-1 MX)

>i fO O

0) OJ Q)

Tj T3 T) Si >, C -H

4-1 !3 E 4-1

n 4-1 -H 4J

1

1

.tj dJ CO) T3 Ti -rl W

-H 0

E 0 u a

CTl

0 cn

0 cn

0

_24Ja;3E>id)dEcn

$-Hd)XlfOrH[04-) -H

±,wdJmmrH3w -TJ

S-i C 4J tD

13 0) d

m

n ro

CS CN

OJ

Cn-H fC a

s D4 0

A

V

(U -H -H

CO U

& m w

4J iJ T) -U

K^rH 4J4JdJ5Hd)4JfO>i

^'omaxjdJXicsHSH
.t:sHXidJ4JC d)Od)

C 5-1 re

0)

-^^ O U i-4

u

Dj-h

a

r]4J U d)OUrH>

i:c;>iSHacnwm4-i

rH Djx: >H

m X

1

1

m 3 jj iH

X3 (1)

0

0 a\

0 cn

cn

■^ 0 4J dJ 0 rH -r-i II

u w C fC

5h t3

•

•

■Hu-Hft rHmT35H

-H (U i-l

d a

in

in CTl

0 ^

^

S 5H to rH (T3 nj o\o

.5En30d)-H>, rHO

iH CJl OJ X) (U

4J M

(N

(N ^

in t^

i>

ly 0 en >

w

V

A

rnfCrHSrHS(T3C-rH •

nH ;3 S-l o

■H

■'dJ-H4J4-l Ed)Eo

O 0

Q

.J-lE 4-1- dJ-HOJ
rV4J-Hd)-HWC0SCQV

•H OJ 4-1 OJ

X! 4-t 4::

riinmxiUCU-U

•H W 4-)

c

^ft 4J ODja)4J--
q;3u 4J-H xjmo)
E -H 4H a 4-> £1 cn
a'04J0dJ(C •cQ^c

g0W UXl^SHdJrO
[S-J s-i -H Sh ftS 5h ro d E x:
^•HSHd)T-i:3cnO0U

4-1 rH U

0

1

1

0 -rH W

■H X

0

0 en

0 cn

cn

V U -H

4J 0)

.

•

CO -H 4J

fO t3

0

0 en

0 cn

cn

M 4J 0) U

4-1 C

in

in u)

r- CO

c»

0) fC E -H

M M

V

A

> :3 >-i

•H

,itCOrHT34Jcnuw

Qj CT'd 4J

CO

7; ftrH rH (< Sh H 0 d)

^, E 4-1 m d) II 4J
i^ -H E ft w 4J fO

nH m oj 0)

4-) E

a

1

1

UlT) U

0

in

VD ID

m in

in

X C 4-1 m • rH 03 o\o Sh

a a 0) (u

-H X,

CM

r- (N

OJ r-

04

nilDO WrH^XlcndJ

^ dJ dJ (C m 4J • TJ

•rH to rH G

4J Q)

•

.

4J 0) 0

3 TS

OJ

H (N

H H

H

^CdJ4:^4J4JPQ cno

ro ~ w

rH a

A

V

i,(T3d)4J-H!:!^>iLnE

u ui >,

rH M

^ Sh W dJ 5h 1
'-' 0 Cn4H E a d) 0 -

W CD G

0

s-< oj c m

a

>^4JdJOx:GO> -m
?) T3 4JOEOom
rrtdJ EO^hEO^Sh

^4Jd)3Xl--H0d) 0
jill-H^IJCQ >05H--rH

0 i-l -H

4H 4J W M

>1 —

w :3 0

4-) C

1

1

fO 4-J

•H X 0

cr\

0 cn

0 cn

0

-rH M n3

W Q) C

a\

0 cr\

0 cn

0

•^ W 4J 0 C dJ 4H

Sh fO a Cn

5-1 -0 fl

.

■

•

K^ dJ 4J d) c 5h tn
^>,w£; -hocsh

0) !h m d

Qj a fO

m

ro ro

O) CM

CM

4J ;3 4J -H

> M £3

A

V

*:T3d)4Ja5H mn3

•rH 4J C 4J

-H CO

0)

■[JdSH OOWiJJIIrH

5-1 (0 0 (T3

Q --

4J

JJ

'Sww-HEwSHd) E

u cs. u

u

(0

QJ

iH ~^ 4-) tH 0)

u 0

u

5h 4J

'J (13 Od)OEO-H

fO >, d (tJ m

4J t-{

0 ft

Q)

0) Sh

SfOdJ-OO-HrHSHfiW

5 £5=1 Sh 4H -H m

.

U 4J OJ 5h D

C rH

C ft

-d

> 0

n

■M -ni E 13 --^ 4J

en 5h 5H 4J m 5h

0) 3 4J

■H p

0 rH 4J

Q) ft

rr, <i> (T3 W 03 03 --H

rH pLl 5H

S CO

S m ^

CO ft

"^^SHO -H4JEftW'C)

OJ

0 Cn-H rO m 0

rH\ 0

^•H 0

\ :3

(,, 03 -H w 13 0 E n3

^ ftSH d)4JXl-l-'-H 5h4J

riE-i-'4J03-Ho3 oo3

•^ 0 dJ-Hj:^ SH-H4HrHX!

A. '-I

rH Qj m 2; (u D

0) 0) a

TD -H

5-1 4J ft

5h W

V' -o

0 4J D4 5h p

oca

0 rH

•H Sh ft

0 C

^ ro

•H C 6 5h 4-1 P

X 0 :3

0 7i

fO m d

0 0

H

PQ M M 0 CO CO

w 2; CO

0 Ii4

bH a< CO

CU s

^ oEW-i-'4-)X!04h5

Table 4. Relative abundance of cells and rank by biovolume of
diatoms and genera of non-diatom algae in periphyton
samples collected from Mizpah Creek in August 2000.

Taxa

Relative Abundance and (Rank)
UMC-1 LMC-7

Chlorophyta (green algae)
Monos troma
Oedogonium
Stigeoclonium

abundant ( 2 )

occasional (7]

common ( 5 )

Euglenophyta (euglenoid algae)
Euglena

rare (10)

Chrysophyta (golden algae)
Bacillariophyceae
TriJbone/na

common ( 1 )
occasional (5)

abundant {!]

Cyanophyta (cyanobacteria) ^
Anajbaena
i\7odu2aria
Nostoc
Oscillatoria
Phormidium
Spirulina

occasional (4)

occasional (3)

common ( 2 )

occasional (8)
common (6)

common (4)

frequent (3)

occasional (9)

^ Formerly known as blue-green algae

Table 5. Percent abundance of major diatom species^ and values
of selected diatom association metrics for periphyton
samples collected from Mizpah Creek in August 2000.

Species/Metric
(Pollution Tolerance Class) ^

Percent Abundance/Metric Values^

UMC-1

LMC-7

Amphora coffeaeformis (1)
Cocconeis placentula (3)
Epithemia adnata (2)
Gomphonema gracile (2)
Navicula circumtexta (1)
Navicula veneta (1)
Nitzschia frustulum (2)
Nitzschia reversa (2)

Cells Counted
Total Species
Species Counted
Species Diversity
Percent Dominant Species
Disturbance Index
Pollution Index
Siltation Index
Percent Abnormal Cells
Percent Epithemiaceae
Similarity Index

7

33

23

95

6

16

0

23

15

35

6

05

430

69

62

4

24

23

95

0

47

2

01

38

84

0

23

8

60

0.90
4.27
0.56
5.51
13.48
47.64
0.67
7.30

445

51

45
3 .05

47.64
0.00
1.36

83.15
0.34
0.67

29.33

A major diatom species is here considered to be one that
accounts for 5% or more of the cells in one or more samples of
a sample set.

Underlined values indicate good biological integrity, minor
impairment, and full support of aquatic life uses; bold values
indicate fair biological integrity, moderate impairment, and
partial support of aquatic life uses,- all other values
indicate excellent biological integrity, no impairment,
and full support of aquatic life uses when compared to diatom
criteria for mountain and plains streams in Tables 3 and 4.

3 = sensitive to pollution; 2 = tolerant of pollution;
1 = most tolerant of pollution.

Table 6. Metric scores and impairment ratings for Mizpah Creek
Station LMC-7 based on a comparison with Mizpah Creek
Station UMC-1, following Protocol II and Table 12 in
Bahls (1993) . Underlined values indicate full support
of aquatic life uses, minor impairment, and good
biological integrity,- bold values indicate partial
support of aquatic life uses, moderate impairment, and
fair biological integrity; all other values indicate
full support of aquatic life uses, no impairment, and
excellent biological integrity.

Metric Metric Score (%)

Shannon Diversity Index 72

Pollution Index 68

Siltation Index 47

Similarity Index 29