Biological integrity of Mill Creek, Pine Creek and Tom Miner Creek based on the composition and structure of the Benthic algae community

M^'^I.W.STATE LIBRARY

3 0864 0015 4548 5

BIOLOGICAL INTEGRITY OF
MILL CREEK, PINE CREEK, AND TOM MINER 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
Monitoring and Data Management Bureau

DEQ Contract No. 200012-2

3TATE DOCUMENTS COLLECTION

Prepared by:

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

lAY 2 8 200Z

MONTANA STATE LIBRARY

1515 E. 6th AVE.
HELErJA, MONTANA 59520

November 29, 2000

Printed on lOOt Reayoled Poa t - Con« inner Pmpar

SUMMARY

In July and August 2000, composite periphyton samples were
collected from Mill Creek, Pine Creek, and Tom Miner Creek in the
Paradise Valley south of Livingston for the purpose of assessing
whether these streams are water-quality limited and in need of
TMDLs. The samples were collected following DEQ standard
operating procedures, processed and analyzed using standard
methods for periphyton, and evaluated following modified USEPA
rapid bioassessment protocols for wadeable streams.

Mill Creek had a normal algal assemblage that indicated
slight nutrient enrichment. Diatom association metrics at the
Mill Creek site indicated minor impairment but full support of
aquatic life uses (Table 5) . Slightly elevated percent dominant
species and siltation indexes and a few abnormal diatom cells
resulted in an overall rating of "good" biological integrity.

The algal flora in Pine Creek was sparse, both in terms of
cell numbers and taxa richness. The dominant algal species here
indicated very cold and very fast flowing waters, and very small
concentrations of nutrients. The moderate stress indicated by
the algal assemblage here was probably the consequence of
naturally austere habitat conditions.

The algal assemblages at both sites in Tom Miner Creek
indicated moderate impairment and partial support of aquatic life
uses. The leading cause of this impairment was siltation. Both
sites also had somewhat depressed pollution indexes, indicating
minor organic enrichment. A few abnormal diatom cells were also
found at each site. The two sites on Tom Miner Creek had nearly
80% of their diatom assemblages in common, indicating that they
were virtually identical in their chemical, physical, and
biological characteristics.

INTRODUCTION

This report evaluates the biological integrity, support of
aquatic life uses, and probable causes of impairment to those
uses in Mill Creek, Pine Creek, and Tom Miner Creek, which are
tributaries of the upper Yellowstone River between Livingston and
Gardiner, Montana. The purpose of this report is to provide
information that will help the State of Montana determine whether
these streams are 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.

Evaluation of use support in this report is based on the
species composition and structure of the periphyton (benthic
algae, phytobenthos) community at four sites that were sampled in
July and August 2000. The periphyton community is a basic
biological component of all aquatic ecosystems. Periphyton
accounts for much of the primary production and biological
diversity in Montana streams (Bahls et al . 1992).

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

several advantages of using periphyton in biological assessments:

• 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 gi'owth 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
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).

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. Most
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

^ 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) .

with a slippery brown film.

Some algae, such as the filamentous greens, are conspicuous
and their excessive growth may be aesthetically displeasing,
deplete dissolved oxygen, interfere with fishing and fish
spawning, clog water filters and irrigation intakes, create
tastes and odors in drinking water, and cause other problems.

PROJECT AREA AND SAMPLING SITES

The project area is located in southern Park County in
southcentral Montana. Mill Creek and Pine Creek are east side
tributaries of the Yellowstone River that drain the Absaroka
Mountain Range (maximum elevation 11,206 feet) south of
Livingston. Pine Creek is a short (ca. 8 mi . ) , high gradient
second-order stream that begins at Pine Creek Lake in the
Absaroka-Beartooth Wilderness Area. Much of the upper watershed
is unroaded. Mill Creek is a longer (ca. 22 mi.), third-order
stream with a road running along most of its length.

Tom Miner Creek enters the Yellowstone River from the west
about 16 miles north of Gardiner, Montana. The headwaters of Tom
Miner Creek are in the Gallatin Range (max. elevation 10,992
feet) just north of Yellowstone National Park. Tom Miner Creek
is a third order stream about 15 miles long with a road running
parallel to the stream along most of its length.

All three creeks head in the Middle Rockies Ecoregion of
North America; the very lowest reaches of these streams pass
through the Montana Valley and Foothill Prairies Ecoregion (Woods
et al . 1999) . The surface geology of the watersheds consists
mainly of volcanic rocks of Tertiary age and undifferentiated
metamorphic rocks of Precambrian age (Renfro and Feray 1972) .
Vegetation is alpine tundra at the highest elevations, mixed

conifer forest at intermediate elevations, and mixed grassland at
lower elevations (USDA 1976) .

Periphyton samples were collected at one site each on Mill
Creek and Pine Creek in late July 2000 (Map 1, Table 1) . Both
sites are located at an elevation of about 5,500 feet. Samples
were collected at two sites on Tom Miner Creek in mid August 2000
(Map 2, Table 1) . The elevation of both sampling sites on Tom
Miner Creek is about 5,000 feet.

Mill Creek, Pine Creek, and Tom Miner Creek are all
classified B-1 in the Montana Surface Water Quality Standards.

METHODS

Periphyton samples were collected by Patrick Newby of the
MDEQ Monitoring and Data Management Bureau following standard
operating procedures of the MDEQ Planning, Prevention, and
Assistance Division.

Using appropriate tools, microalgae were scraped, brushed,
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.

The 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 Whit ford and Schumacher (1984) . These books
also served as references on the ecology of the soft algae, along
with Palmer (1977) .

After Che identification of soft algae, the 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) . Between 400
and 423 diatom cells (800 to 846 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
tor the diatoms.

Tne 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 from Mill Creek, Pine Creek, and Tom Miner
Creek were compared to numeric biocriteria or threshold values
developed for streams in the Rocky Mountain 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.

Quality 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 the samples were
assigned a unique number compatible with the Montana Diatom
Database, e.g., 1994-01. The first part of this number (1994)
designates the sampling site (Pine Creek Station 1) ; the second
part of this number (01) 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 MDEQ . A portion of the raw sample was
used to make duplicate diatom slides. After completing the
diatom proportional count, the slide used for the count will be
deposited in the University of Montana Herbarium in Missoula.
The other slide will be retained by Hannaea in Helena.

On completion of the project, station information, sample
information, and diatom proportional count data will be entered
into the Montana Diatom Database.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Results are presented in Tables 4 and 5, which are located
near the end of this report following the Literature Cited
section. Spreadsheets containing completed diatom proportional
counts, with species' pollution tolerance classes (PTC) and
percent abundances, are attached as Appendix A.

SAMPLE NOTES

Mill Creek Station 1. In addition to vegetative cells, many
zoospores of Ulothrix were also present.

i

Pine Creek Station 1. This sample was very sparse. The
most abundant diatoms were species of Gomphonema .

Tom Miner Creek Station 1. The Cladophora in this sample
was sparsely branched and resembled Rhizocloniwn .

Tom Miner Creek Station 2. Mosses dominated this sample.
The Cladophora in this sample was sparsely branched and resembled
Rhizoclonium .

NON-DIATOM ALGAE

The periphyton sample from Mill Creek was dominated by
Ulothrix zonata, a filamentous green alga, and by diatoms;
cyanobacteria were rare (Table 4) . Ulothrix zonata is commonly
found in cold, rapidly flowing streams that are somewhat enriched
with nutrients .

The sample from Pine Creek contained chrysophytes and
cyanobacteria, but no green algae (Table 4) . Only two genera of
non-diatom algae were observed. Algal assemblages with few taxa
and a small number of cells are typical of very cold mountain
streams with steep gradients and low nutrient concentrations.
Hydrurus foetidus , a cold-water chrysophyte, ranked first in
biovolume and diatoms ranked second; cyanobacteria {Phormidium
sp.) ranked third at this station.

Samples from both sites on Tom Miner Creek contained a mix of
green algae, diatoms, and cyanobacteria (Table 4) . Diatoms were
the most abundant algae at both sites, followed by the green
filamentous alga Cladophora. In addition, both sites contained
the red alga Audouinella. Euglena, an indicator of organic
enrichment, was rare at the upstream site (Station 1) . The algal
assemblages in Tom Miner Creek indicate a moderate level of

8

enrichment

DIATOMS

Diatom association metrics at the Mill Creek site indicated
minor impairment but full support of aquatic life uses (Table 5) .
Slightly elevated percent dominant species and siltation indexes
and a few abnormal diatom cells resulted in an overall rating of
"good" biological integrity.

The diatom association in Mill Creek was dominated by
Hannaea arcus (Table 5) . This species is common in mountain
streams and large cold lakes in northern latitudes. It tolerates
some nutrient enrichment but is sensitive to pollution from
sewage. Because of the elevated numbers of Hannaea arcus here,
the percent dominant species index sightly exceeded the threshold
for minor impairment. Since this species may be found in large
numbers in relatively pristine waters, its dominance in Mill
Creek may not be due to cultural enrichment.

The sample from Pine Creek was dominated by Gomphonema
olivaceoides (Table 5) . This is a cosmopolitan cold water
species that often dominates the diatom assemblages of mountain
streams. In Montana, it is particularly abundant in streams
draining the Absaroka and Beartooth Mountains (unpublished data) .
Its dominance in Pine Creek, along with a small number of diatom
taxa and a low diversity index, probably indicates natural stress
due to cold water, fast currents, and low nutrients.

The siltation index at both sites on Tom Miner Creek
indicated moderate impairment. and only partial support of aquatic
life uses (Table 5) . Both sites supported a large number of
diatoms in the genera Navicula and Nitzschia. These are motile
diatoms that are adapted to living on aggrading substrates.

Both sites on Tom Miner Creek had somewhat depressed
pollution indexes (Table 5), indicating minor organic enrichment
A few abnormal diatom cells were also found at each site. The
two sites on Tom Miner Creek had nearly 80% of their diatom
assemblages in common, indicating that they were very similar
chemically, physically, and biologically.

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

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

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

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.

Krammer, K., and H. Lange-Bertalot . 1986. Bacillariophyceae,
Part 2, Volume 1: Naviculaceae . In Ettl, H., J. Gerloff,
H. Heynig, and D. Mollenhauer (eds.). Freshwater Flora of
Middle Europe. Gustav Fischer Publisher, New York.

10

.)»

Kratnmer, K., and H. Lange-Bertalot . 1988. Bacillariophyceae,
Part 2, Volume 2: Bacillariaceae, Epithemiaceae,
Surirellaceae. In Ettl, H., J. Gerloff, H. Heynig, and D.
Mollenhauer (eds.), Freshwater Flora of Middle Europe.
Gustav Fischer Publisher, New York.

Krammer, K., and H. Lange-Bertalot. 1991a. Bacillariophyceae,
Part 2, Volume 3: Centrales, Fragilariaceae, Eunotiaceae.
In Ettl, H., J. Gerloff, H. Heynig, and D. Mollenhauer
(eds.), Freshwater Flora of Middle Europe. Gustav Fischer
Publisher, Stuttgart.

Krammer, K., and H. Lange-Bertalot. 1991b. Bacillariophyceae,
Part 2, Volume 4: Achnanthaceae, Critical Supplement to
Navicula (Lineolatae) and Gomphonewa , Complete List of
Literature for Volumes 1-4. In Ettl, H., G. Gartner, J.
Gerloff, H. Heynig, and D. Mollenhauer (eds.). Freshwater
Flora of Middle Europe. Gustav Fischer Publisher, Stuttgart.

Lange-Bertalot, Horst . 1979. Pollution tolerance of diatoms as
a criterion for water quality estimation. Nova Hedwigia
64:285-304.

Lowe, R.L. 1974. Environmental Requirements and Pollution
Tolerance of Freshwater Diatoms. EPA-670/4-74-005 .

McFarland, B.H., B.H. Hill, andW.T. Willingham. 1997. Abnormal
Fragilaria spp . (Bacillariophyceae) in streams impacted by
mine drainage. Jour, of Freshwater Ecology 12 (1) : 141-149 .

Palmer, CM. 1977. Algae and Water Pollution: An Illustrated
Manual on the Identification, Significance, and Control of
Algae in Water Supplies and in Polluted Water.
EPA-600/9-77-036.

Patrick, Ruth, and C.W. Reimer. 1966. The Diatoms of The United
States Exclusive of Alaska and Hawaii. Volume 1:
Fragilariaceae, Eunotiaceae, Achnanthaceae, Naviculaceae .
Monograph Number 13, The Academy of Natural Sciences,
Philadelphia.

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.

11

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.

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
with map), U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.

12

(^

5
o

o

d

II

s

1

CO
II

s

CO

c
«)
E
<i>

N
O

m

(fi

m

' ..-*;.'- .-'-

r-^

x^

...''-\J;

^m,'

"-'im

-r~^ Jl^ AN

' Xy /-yi .

^•^>^v\ \ •: w ^.^-N

CO

to

Ol

tn
in
II

3

o>

CM

O)

o

II

o
(0

LT

C

^

Table 1. Location of periphyton stations on Mill Creek, Pine
Creek, and Tom Miner Creek: Station codes, sample
numbers in the Montana Diatom Database, latitudes and
longitudes, and sample dates. Stations are listed in
order from upstream to downstream.

Location

Station

Sample

Latitude/

Sample

Code

Number

Longitude

Date

Tom Miner Creek

Station 1

1996-01

45

11

46

08/17/00

at canyon mouth

110

55

07

Tom Miner Creek

Station 2

1997-01

45

12

01

08/17/00

at mouth

110

54

09

Mill Creek

Station 1

1995-01

45
110

20
35

10
13

07/20/00

Pine Creek

Station 1

1994-01

45
110

30
31

01
46

07/27/00

{%

^

c
o

J-)

m u 0)

■H

c

OS

J-)

c
o
2 -a fc

•H U 4J
0) fO

>, a c

-H 0

Cn-O
QJ C

4J (0

o

o

C -H

H ~ iJ

HEX!
n3 m M
U 0

■H

en 4J
O w

o

•H

4J

3

i-l
0)

u

(U

JJ
rO

3

(0 -H
>

(u w

0)
O 3

4.)

c

C 0
O tn
2 O

a
c o

H ^

ij
a

re

m en
> c

•H
4-1 CO

o m

0)

w (U s-i

u tJI u
-H c c
^ n3 -H

(U o

B -4-1

0)
C U 0)

o a

-H OJ

to (u a

-H 4-1 W
U 0) 0)
O M V-i

w
w
m

0

m
o

u

•H

JJ
0)

E

e e

O 05

jJ (U

•H JJ 4-1

D W O

M

0

OJ

c
o

0)

et;

T3
(U

jj
u

0)
X

w

0)

>

4-J

o

0
en
C
rC

0
U

0
S-i
0
4-1
0
Di

U
■H
>-l
JJ
0

2

XI
H

0
w
rO
0
^^
U
0
Q

+
o
o

LD

I

O

o

r-l

w

rH

Xi

4J
■H

n
M

>

-H
Q

01

0)

■H
O
0)
P<

CO

o
111

CO

0

0

0

w

m

M

(0

m

fO

0

0

0

5-1

u

u

U

u

u

0

C

c

Q

M

M

+

o

O

o

.

O

o

•

o

o

ro

<y\

H

O

o

1

o

o

o

o

(U

•o

d
o

•H

o

X

0)

-d

H

a
o

-H
4J
(0
■U
rH
•H
CO

CTi
CTi

M

m

m

n

•u

CTl

en

OJ

CTi

CTl

rH

rH

3

W

w

o

iH

iH

XI

^

x:

^^

fC

m

fC

PQ

m

PQ

X
0)

-d

0)

o
n)

IQ
-H
P

0

0

0

0

0

0

w

w

CO

to

en

CO

m

m

m

ro

ru

ro

0

0

0

0

0

0

u

^^

M

in

U

U

u

u

u

U

u

u

0

C

c

0

0

d

Q

M

M

Q

Q

M

+
o
o

(Ti

CTl

CO

rH

x;

rC

0)
4J

o
u

n
0)

-H

o
p<

CO

o

o
o

r
O

m

CTl
CTl
CTl

ro

-u
<U

U

1=1

o

X!
^^
(0
PQ

n

a)

•H

o

(U
Pi
CO

4J

a

■H

6
o
o

■u
0)

o
u
a)

P4

+

o
rsj

CTl

fO

4J

ro

rH

Sh
ro

U
2

CQ

(U
U

(d

o

4J

a

0)

o
u

0)

+

o

o
CO

LD
CTl

Sh

0

rO
jJ
jJ
■H

x;

X

0)

JJ

•H

rH
-H

6

-H
CO

+

o

o
CO

I

o

Ch

ro

0)

m

o
Id

•H

4J
-H
P<

4J

a
(1)
o
u
(1)

04

o
o

CTl

o

C

en

0

C

CO

0

C

>

ro

0

X3

JJ

0

U}

t-D

CQ
0)
rH
-H
,a
Qa
O

0)
4J

a

0)

o

0)

5h
^0

rH

rO
Sh

jJ
(0
C

jJ
rO

x:

0
e
o
tn

0
en

ro
0

C
0

•H
iH
JJ

c

■H

en
0
en
ro
0
Jh
U

ro

5 Q

en

jj
0 Cn
x; '-'

u

en

Sh O
"^ JJ

u
0

en

"3 ,

>i

JJ

■H

en
5h
0
>

■H
73

O

c

ro

x:
in

a
en
0
Sh

JJ

T3

0

G

rH

rO

ro

JJ

^

U

ro

0

••H

m

^

1

O

0

CO

en

N

C

■u

rO

"J^

.J

is;

X!

T!
0

en

■H

en
en
ro

en
0
u

ro
S-i
0

rH

O
JJ

0

0

O

ro
M

O

••H
>

ro
Sh
0

0

en

0

x:
JJ

en

ro

CO

ro

•■H
CO

en

■•H

■u

3

en
QJ
x;
■u

q
res

4H

o

0
u
a

ro
T)
C

XI

ro

a
0
u

0

04

fi0

>,

w

1-1

i->

1

1

O (0 1

G

-H ^

<T\

O Oi

o

<T\

o

S W JJ rH QJ

JJ QJ en c -H e •

JJ H-l

to QJ

a\

o cr\

o

(J\

o

O -H C 3 6 O QJ

C O ■!->

rH n

LD

^ Ln

CN

n

fS

]it/JQ)U-HiHO-HCQCn

0) u

•H a

A

V

■^-HXlQJC-HgW C

= m 0)

e M

T-iXlJJaQJQJfO II to

S H w > ^ >, x:

-1 e s

-H

■rH (T5 O

O)

^ JJ iHJJa)VH<AoU

m 0) rH

rH

^ to x; QJ > QJ CT^

-^ • U JJ IJH -H > • iH

a i-l

JJ to

6 4J 0)

^ 1

1

1

niEcQfOGGJJ cr>0

-H m jc; •

0 in w

O

o o

O

en

en

n to C! tt) -H (0 II rrn
■^ QJ O o\o rH 1 fO

H (D

U O M

■

•

•

iH a -u

iH C rH

o

O rH

rH

en

en

^iH-HiHJJO0oV>Og

^jjjJOd>^iHen •

fO -H -H

(D X3 QJ
a 2 U

A V

A

4J nj • en

p U) fC MH O • O -

■^ -H x^JJQJencNW

C -U w

QJ C C >i

JJ

QjuwjJWxiLn fO

e ;3 O T!

JJ C W

roEO0-HffljJ A --iH

C 0 -H id

a fO 0

1

1

Lj^fOWdSQJ 0)0

0 6 JJ J->

0) C -H

o

O (T\

O

en

en

fj M W rH rH Q) tjlrH

>-i tC W

U -rH U

.

Ij to (0 - Cn •• C iw

■H 0) -H

iH 6 (U

LD

m (Ti

o

I*

^

QJ >gjJ(Ocnro

> rH U 0)

(u o a

(N

(N 'J'

in

r-

[^

u -^ B lOtodOJXJiH

C X3 O ^

Oi Q C/3

V

A

n, jJOQ)QJ CnjJUiO

0) m w 4J

^ JJ U iH QJ -H rH

'^CfOi::jJ>OKl}H-H
rjo-HfOWfOJJ eg

0) w

-T) n3 >-i

in w T)

>, to o

0) (U 0)

7] TJ -a x; >, c -H

JJ S g M-l

XI 14H -H JJ

1

1

.;: QJ a Q) tj -a -h cq

■H O

E O u C

CT,

O CTl

o

en

O

^jJ!:!dg>iQJdgM

^-HQJXJfOrHWJJ -H
C-MQJ(OWrHdW -T)

i-l C -U CD

3 0) 13

OJ

(N CN

H

rH

H

tn-H m c

s a 0

A

V

0) -H -H

C/3 U

S to CQ

U 4J TD •!-)

.^rH JJjJaiiHQJjJtO>,
n'OQJiUXlQJXlCiHiH

G u m

0

•H O U W

u

.L^iHXlQJjJC Q)OQ)

Dj-h

c

Cj-1 U QJOUrH>

^i::>iiHCCnwiO«4H
"^ O JJ QJ O rH -r-i II
.H O -H a rH to TD iH

r-l OiSi .H

to X

1

1

fO d -1-1 -H

Xi Q)

O

O (Ti

O

en

en

u w c; m

U TJ

.

•

.

•

•rH Q) U

:i a

LD

in CTl

o

>*

rf

p iH tn rH to to o\o
.5gfCOQJ-H>, rHO

tn QJ i2 0)

JJ M

(N

(N "*

if)

r~-

:^

0 en >

CO

V

A

rnfOrHSrHSlOa-rH •

QJ-HJJMH gOJgO

.H 13 )-l O

-H

0 o

Q

.^i-lg itH- QJ-HCN

rvjj-HQj-HtnwSwv

-H OJ l)-! 0)

J3 4-1 x;

•H W iJ

C

Commun:
ired up
ristic
er of t
jacent
urbatio
93) . P
curs be
omewhat
change ;

<W rH U

o

1

1

O -H W

-H X

O

O CTl

o

cn

en

U ^^ -H

JJ QJ

■

.

.

to -H iJ

to n

o

O CTv

o

a\

<Ti

M iJ (1) U

JJ c

rsi

rsi n

^

in

in

<U n3 e -H

rH M

V

A

> 3 ^1

-H

jjfCOrHT3JJenuw

■? arH rH < iH H O 0
m g 4H fO 0 II JJ

ri-H g a w JJ (0

0) Wt3 j->

w

iH fO 0) 0)

■u B

c

tDX) U

o

1

1

r. C '^-^ W ■ rH ro o\o iH

c a 0) 0)

-H X

o

H O

o

o

o

a, dO WrHj3£:cn0
^ 0 0 (0 (0 JJ • Tl

'^C0^JJJJPQ OiO

-H fO r-l C

JJ QJ

in

O ID

in

o

in

4J QJ O

13 T3

•

.

.

(0 - W

rH a

(N

CM (N

H

CN

H

j,fO0jJ-H!::^>iLng

^ W >i

rH M

A

V

n ^ w Q) iH 1

^ O tJ)MH g C 0 o ~

m en C

o

>-i Qj a m

Ch

Endex
ite t
he de
sum o
both
viron
commo
recov
; 40.
loras

O ^^ -H

M-l JJ W >-l

>, -s

W d O

JJ a

1

1

(0 14-1

-H ><; o

CTl

O CTl

O

en

o

•H H fO

M 0) c

en

O CTl

o

en

o

M JJ o a 0 t-i

sh to a CD

iH 'o c:

.

S-. 0 JJ 0 a iH tn

QJ S-i fU C

QJ a to

CN

CN CN

rH

H

H

4J d 4J -rH

> M ^

A

V

."i^'a0jJ5::iH (Oto

-rH OJ C 4-1

■H W

QJ

Liar;

stu
asur

is
ommo
es o
oras
ment
o ch
imil

iH rO 0 to

Q —

4J

JJ

U C S iH

U

(0

Q)

rH ^. iJ rH Q)

u o

5h

iH JJ

(0 >, c to w

JJ rH

o a

QJ

Q) U

p:fC0'C)O-HrHiHCm
.5 EC iH <JH -H w

•

U AJ Q) iH D

a M

c a

T)

> O

n

•H -H g d "^ JJ

0) 3 JJ

•H 3

O rH JJ

Q) a

rn 0 to W to to --H

"^^u -Hjjgawo

Cn iH S iJ W iH

rH fc ^H

s w

2

to iH

w a

<D

O Cn-H (Owe

rH\ O

•H O

\ d

(,, to -H W d o g to

^aiH0JJXlJ-l-HiHJJ

EgJJJJtO-HfO Oto

■^ O 0-H^ ^-HUHrH^:^

rH

rH QJ (0 S Q) D

Q) QJ a

T) rH

U

JJ Dj

iH t/3

X!

o JJ a u Q

u c a

O rH

•H

u a

o c

to

-H C 6 iH JJ 3

X o :i

O 3

(0

to d

O 0

Eh

CQ M M O (/) W

w s w

O ClH

u,

Oj W

ft s

^ UgMjJjJT30H-lS

0^

^

«

Table 4. Relative abundance of cells and rank by biovolume of
diatoms and genera of non-diatom algae in periphyton
samples collected from Mill Creek, Pine Creek, and Tom
Miner Creek in the summer of 2000.

■ Relative Abundance^ and (Rank)
Taxa Mill Creek Pine Creek Tom Miner Creek

Station 1 Station 1 Station 1 Station 2

Chlorophyta (green algae)

Cladophora f (2) a (2)

Closterium o (6) c (3)

Ulothrix d(l) f(3) o(5)

Euglenophyta

Euglena r (7)

Chrysophyta (golden algae)

Diatoms a(2) o(2) a(l) a(l)

Hydrurus c (1)

Rhodophyta

Audouinella c (5) c (4)

Cyanophyta ( cyanobacteria) ^
Amphithrix r (3)

Anahaena r (4) o (6)

Phormidium o (3) f (4)

^ d = dominant; a = abundant; f = frequent; c = common; o =
occasional; r = rare

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 Mill Creek, Pine Creek, and Tom
Miner Creek in the summer of 2000.

2

Species/Metric Percent Abundance/Metric Values

;Pollution Tolerance Class) ^

Mill Cr. Pine Cr . Tom Miner Cr.

Sta. 1 Sta. 1 Sta. 1 Sta. 2

Achnanthes minutissirna (3) 5.36 13.38 5.76 6.26

CyTnjbella silesiaca (2) 8.60 0.25 1.32 1.06

Fragilaria construens (3) 6.48 2.40 2.25

Fragilaria vaucheriae (2) 3.87 12.11 10.76

Gomphonema angustatum (2) 0.87 11.00 0.24 0.35

Gomphonema olivaceoid.es (3) 5.49 62.25 2.40 2.72

Hannaea arcus (3) 28.30 3.25 1.80 0.71

Navicula cryptotenella (2) 1.50 0.50 7.31 6.50

Nitzschia dissipata (3) 1.75 20.98 15.37

Nitzschia paleacea (2) 7.61 5.16 1.89

Cells Counted 401 400 417 423

Total Species 52 25 65 69

Species Counted 47 25 54 62

Species Diversity 4.12 2 .08 4.50 4.80

Percent Dominant Species 28 .30 62.25 20.98 15.37

Disturbance Index 5.36 13.38 5.76 6.26

Pollution Index 2.65 2.86 2 .42 2 .41

Siltation Index 22.44 2.25 54.93 50.50

Percent Abnormal Cells 0 .62 0.00 0 . 60 0 . 59

Percent Epithemiaceae 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Similarity Index 21.84 78.86

^ 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 criteria
for mountain streams in Table 3 .

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

APPENDIX A: DIATOM PROPORTIONAL COUNTS

r

r

Mill Creek Station 1

11/28/00

Sample

Q<Miug;re»p0cie$/V|i!r«ty

PoHution ToSefaitce Ctos& Count

P««em

_199501Achnanthes lanceoJata.

J99501Achnanlhes minulissima_
_1 99501. Amphora pedicuLus^

199501.Cocconeis placentula^
_1995Ql!cymbellaj:iymbifomnis

iOl|Cymbella minuta

19950JjCymbella siiesiaca

1 99501 piatoma anceps

1 99501 Diatoma hiemale

JL995Q 1 Diatoma mesodon

199501 Diatoma vulgaris

jLOaSDlpragilaria brevislriata.

199501 Fragilaria construens

,19950 IjEragil aria JeptQStauroiL
199501 Fragilaria pinnata

199501 Fragilaria vaucheriae

.29.

Al.

A&.

_6a.

.52.

JU

Jl

JL62

.^.35

jiaz

,2^4

JL12

JL25

-SLfiQ

JL12

A25

Am

JLQQ

JLfiZ

6.48

1 37

AA2

JLSZ

199501 Gomphoneis minuta

0.12

1 99501. Gomphonema angustatum

1 99501 iGomphonema clevei

DliG omphoaema kobayasii

199501 Gomphonema minutum

2.

AA.

JIM

JL12

JLI5

^.32

199501 iGomphonema olivaceoides

AA-

.5.49

199501 iGomphonema olivaceum

JLaZ

iOI ^Gomphonema parvulum

199501|Hannaea a reus

1 99501 iHantzschia amphioxys

.221.

JL25

_2a^

QJIQ

199501

Meridion circulare

1 99501 [Navicula capitatoradiata

JLjL2

199M1 bJavicula crypto cfiphala_
1 995QltlavLcula.cryptotenella_
199501 [Navicula gregaria
199501

JL12

Navicula menisculus

Jl2_

JL5Q

JL5Q

JLQQ

JL25

199501

Navicula minima

0.75

199501

Navicula minuscula

0.75

1995Q1

Navicula novaesiberica

_1995Q1 Navicula^ pupula_
J.9950U

Navicula reichardtiana

JL25

JLQQ

0.25

199501

Navicula tripunctata

0 12

19950HNitzschia bacillum

Ldissipata.
9.95QJlNitz£chiaionticQia_
JL995Q.1

Nitzschia hantzschiana

JL4.

0.00

JLZ5

050

0.25

199501

Nitzschia inconspicua

A&.

JZ2A

199501

Nitzschia linearis

0.12

199501 Nitzschia palea

jL99501,NitzscJiia paleacea

99501 [Nitzschia perminuta
J1995Q1
JL995Q1

MlzscMa4iura_

Reimeiia^imiata,

199501 Rhoicosphenia curvata

JL995M Synedra rumpens
199501 Svnedra ulna

31

Aft.

-2Q.

.25.

JL5Q

J131

JLaZ

0-62

2.49

3.12

JL25

JL251

Page 1

Pine Creek Station 1

11/28/00

Sample

Genus/SpeciesA/arieiy

Poitution Tolefance Ctos

Count

Percent

1 99401 [Achnanthes bioretii

3

4

0.50

199401

Achnanthes lanceolata

2

2

0.25

199401

Achnanthes minutissima

3

107

13 38

199401

Amphora inariensis

3

2

0.25

199401

Amphora pedicuius

3

2

0.25

199401

Cocconeis placentula

3

9

1.13

199401

Cymbella affmis

3

3

0.38

199401

Cymbella cymbiformis

3

2

0.25

199401

Cymbella minuta

2

2

0.25

199401

Cvmbella silesiaca

2

2

0.25

199401

Diatoma hiemale

3

2

0.25

199401

Diatoma mesodon

3

8

1.00

199401

Fragilaria leptostauron

3

2

0.25

199401

Gomphonema angustatum

2

88

11.00

199401

Gomphonema kobayasii

3

6

0.75

199401

Gomphonema minutum

3

2

0.25

199401

Gomphonema olivaceoides

3

498

62.25

199401

Gomphonema parvulum

1

7

0.88

199401

Gomphonema subtile

3

4

0.50

199401

Hannaea arcus

3

26

3.25

199401

Meridion circulare

3

4

0.50

199401

Navicula cryptotenella

2

4

0.50

199401

Navicula radiosa

3

2

0.25

199401

Navicula sp.

2

2

0.25

199401

Reimeria sinuata

3

10

1.25

Page 1

Tom Miner Creek Station 1

11/28/00

Sample [ Genua/SpeclesAAariety

Pollution Tolerance CfaBS

Count

Percent

1 99601 Achnanthes lanceolata

2

25

3.00

199601 Achnanthes lapidosa

3

0

0.00

199601 [Achnanthes minutissima

3

48

5.76

199601

Amphora inariensis

3

0

0.00

199601

Aulacoseira crenulata

3

1

0.12

199601

Cocconeis pediculus

3

1

0.12

199601

Cocconeis placentula

3

15

1.80

199601

Cymbella silesiaca

2

11

1.32

199601

Diatoma mesodon

3

2

0.24

199601

Diploneis oblongeila

3

1

0.12

199601

Eunotia sp.

3

11

1.32

199601

Fragilaria capucina

2

18

2.16

199601

Fragilaria construens

3

20

2.40

199601

Fragilaria lapponica

3

1

0.12

199601

Fragilaria leptostauron

3

1

0.12

199601

Fragilaria pinnata

3

0

0.00

199601

Fragilaria vaucheriae

2

101

12.11

199601

Frustulia vulgaris

2

0

0.00

199601

Gomphoneis eriense

3

7

0.84

199601

Gomphoneis minuta

3

2

0.24

199601

Gomphonema angustatum

2

2

0.24

199601

Gomphonema minutiforme

3

6

0.72

199601

Gomphonema minutum

3

4

0.48

199601 Gomphonema olivaceoides

3

20

2.40

199601 Gomphonema olivaceum

3

0

0.00

199601

Gomphonema parvulum

1

3

0.36

199601

Hannaea arcus

3

15

1.80

199601

Melosira varians

2

17

2.04

199601

Meridion circulare

3

1

0.12

199601

Navicula acceptata

2

4

0.48

199601

Navicula capitatoradiata

2

12

1.44

199601

Navicula contenta

2

5

0.60

199601

Navicula cryptocephala

3

2

0.24

199601

Navicula cryptotenella

2

61

7.31

199601

Navicula exigua

2

2

0.24

199601

Navicula exilis

2

1

0.12

199601

Navicula gregaria

2

1

0.12

199601

Navicula lanceolata

2

4

0.48

199601

Navicula libonensis

2

0

0.00

199601

Navicula menisculus

2

5

0.60

199601

Navicula minima

1

15

1.80

199601

Navicula minuscula

1

2

0.24

199601

Navicula novaesiberica

2

0

0.00

199601

Navicula sp.

2

3

0.36

199601

Navicula tripunctata

3

12

1.44

199601

Nitzschia archibaldii

2

4

0.48

199601

Nitzschia bacillum

3

1

0.12

Page 1

Tom Miner Creek Station 1

11/28/00

Sample

Oenus/Sp6<bieafVteiiet¥

:;ll0llUti0l!fe:lGli&M^

;.::.;;eQil*li::::::

,v..:vP^ent„:„„

199601 Nitzschia dissipata

3

175

20.98

199601

Nitzschia fonticola

3

7

0.84

199601

Nitzschia frustulum

2

4

0.48

199601

Nitzschia gracilis

2

0

0.00

199601

Nitzschia heufleriana

3

0

0.00

199601

Nitzschia inconspicua

2

27

3.24

199601

Nitzschia linearis

2

26

3.12

199601

Nitzschia palea

1

22

2.64

199601

Nitzschia paleacea

2

43

5.16

199601

Nitzschia perminuta

3

5

0.60

199601

Pinnularia borealis

2

0

0.00

199601

Reimeria sinuata

3

5

0.60

199601

Rhoicosphenia curvata

3

33

3.96

199601

Rhopalodia gibba

2

0

0.00

199601

Surirelia minuta

2

10

1.20

199601

Synedra parasitica

2

2

0.24

199601

Synedra rumpens

2

4

0.48

199601

Synedra ulna

2

4

0.48

Page 2

Tom Miner Creek Station 2

11/28/00

Sample

Genus/SpeciesA/ariettf

Pollution Toierance Cktss

Count

Percetrt

1 99701 y^chnanthes lanceolata

2

32

3.78

199701 Achnanthes lapidosa

3

2

0.24

1 99701, Achnanthes minutissima

3

53

6.26

199701

Annphora pediculus

3

5

0.59

199701

Auiacoseira italica

3

5

0.59

199701

Cocconeis pediculus

3

33

3.90

199701

Cocconeis placentula

3

15

1.77

199701

Cymbella silesiaca

2

9

1.06

199701

Diatoma hiemale

3

3

0.35

199701

Diatoma mesodon

3

3

0.35

199701

Fragilaria capucina

2

22

2.60

199701

Fragilaria construens

3

19

2.25

199701

Fragilaria lapponica

3

0

0.00

199701

Fragilaria leptostauron

3

1

0.12

199701 Fragilaria pinnata

3

2

0.24

199701 Fragilaria vaucheriae

2

91

10.76

199701

Frustulia vulgaris

2

0

0.00

199701

Gomphoneis eriense

3

10

1.18

199701

Gomphoneis minuta

3

2

0.24

199701

Gomphonema angustatum

2

3

0.35

199701 Gomphonema kobayasii

3

12

1.42

199701 Gomphonema minutiforme

3

2

0.24

199701

Gomphonema minutum

3

4

0.47

199701

Gomphonema olivaceoides

3

23

2.72

199701

Gomphonema parvulum

1

3

0.35

199701

Gomphonema pumilum

3

4

0.47

199701

Hannaea arcus

3

6

0.71

199701

Melosira varians

2

25

2.96

199701

Meridion circulare

3

1

0.12

199701 Navicula accomoda

1

0

0.00

199701 Navicula capitatoradiata

2

20

2.36

199701

Navicula caterva

2

2

0.24

199701

Navicula cincta

1

0

0.00

199701

Navicula cryptocephala

3

1

0.12

199701

Navicula cryptotenella

2

55

6.50

199701

Navicula lanceolata

2

3

0.35

199701

Navicula libonensis

2

1

0.12

199701

Navicula menisculus

2

8

0.95

199701

Navicula minima

1

8

0.95

199701

Navicula minuscula

1

5

0.59

199701

Navicula mutica

2

2

0.24

199701

Navicula novaesiberica

2

2

0.24

199701

Navicula pelliculosa

1

6

0.71

199701

Navicula reichardtiana

2

2

0.24

199701

Navicula sp.

2

0

0.00

199701

Navicula tripunctata

3

13

1.54

199701

Navicula veneta

1

1

0.12

Page 1

Tom Miner Creek Station 2

11/28/00

Sample

Genus/SpeciesA/^ariety

PolCtition Tolerance Class

Count

Percent

199701 Nitzschia alpina

3

3

0.35

199701

Nitzschia archibaidii

2

1

0.12

199701

Nitzschia dissipata

3

130

15.37

199701

Nitzschia fonticola

3

7

0.83

199701

Nitzschia heufleriana

3

4

0.47

199701

Nitzschia incognita

2

0

0.00

199701

Nitzschia inconspicua

2

35

4.14

199701

Nitzschia lacuum

3

2

0.24

199701

Nitzschia linearis

2

4^

4.96

199701

Nitzschia palea

1

28

3.31

199701

Nitzschia paieacea

2

16

1.89

199701

Nitzschia perminuta

3

1

0.12

199701

Pinnularia sp.

3

1

0.12

199701

Reimeria sinuata

3

12

1.42

199701

Rhoicosphenia curvata

3

24

2.84

199701

Rhopalodia gibba

2

0

0.00

199701

Simonsenia delognei

2

1

0.12

199701

Surirella angusta

1

2

0.24

199701

Surirelia linearis

3

1

0.12

199701

Surirella minuta

2

14

1.65

199701

Synedra rumpens

2

' 2

0.24

199701

Synedra ulna

2

1

0.12

Page 2

•

\