O/<. i4--' ~y~ /1_- / ~igan \ DEER PARK WETLANDS BIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM Annual Report

DEER PARK WETLANDS BIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM 1991 Annual Report Submitted to: Pasco County Public Works and Utilities 7536 State Street New Port Richey, FL 34654 Submitted by: Mote Marine laboratory 1600 Thompson Parkway Sarasota, Florida 34236 (813) 388-4441 ~y~ /1_- / Richard H. Pierce, Ph.D. Director of Research O/<. i4--' ~igan \ Principal Investigator March 17, 1992

List of Tables TABLE OF CONTENTS I. FAUNAL SURVEY 1 Page A. Introduction 1 B. Methods 1 l. Benthic Macroinvertebrates 1 a) Field Collection 1 1) Infauna 1 2) Epifauna 1 b) Laboratory Analysis 2 c) Statistical Analysis 2 2. Mosquitos 3 3. Threatened and Endangered Species 3 4. Fish 3 C. Results 3 l. Benthic Macroinvertebrates 3 a) Infauna 3 b) Epifauna 4 1) River Station 4 2) Wetl and Cell s 5 2. Mosquito Survey 6 3. Threatened and Endangered Species Survey 6 4. Fish 6 II. BOTANICAL INVENTORY 7 A. Introduction 7 B. Methods 7 l. Arboreal Vegetation 7 2. Groundcover Vegetation 7 C. Results 7 l. Arboreal Vegetation 7 2. Groundcover Vegetation 8 III. EVALUATION 9 Appendix: Raw Data for Core Samples i i

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4. Table 5. Table 6. Table 7. Table 8. Rank order of taxa from core samples with all dates and stations combined: core samples. Phylogenetic list of taxa from core samples. Percent of taxa by major faunal groups. Number of taxa by major faunal groups. Percent of individuals by major faunal group. Number of individuals by major faunal group. Rank order of taxa from core samples for each station with all dates combined: Station PR-l. Rank order of taxa from core samples for each station with all dates combined: Station PR-2. Table 9. Summary statistics for each station and date: core samples. Table 10. Rank order of taxa from Hester-Dendy's for PR-l and PR-2 combined all dates combined. Table 11. Phylogenetic species list from Hester-Dendy's. Table 12. Faunal parameters for Hester-Dendy samples. Table 13. Dates and A-B samples combined for each station: Hester-Dendy's. Table 14. Rank order of taxa from Hester-Dendy's, all dates combined at Station PR-l and PR-2. Table 15. Rank order of taxa from Hester-Dendy's, for each station and date. Table 16. Number of trees by species and transect at Deer Park Wetlands, February 1991. Table 17. Basal area (in square cm) for trees at least 10 cm in diameter by transect and species at Deer Park Wetlands, February 1991. Table 18. First Quarter, 1991. Percent relative densities of understory vegetation (less than 1 inch dbh) and bare soil/litter by quadrat and species at Deer Park Wetlands, Pasco County, Florida. ii

Table 19. Second Quarter, 1991. Percent relative densities of understory vegetation (less than 1 inch dbh) and bare soil/litter by quadrat and species at Deer Park Wetlands, Pasco County, Florida. Table 20. Third Quarter, 1991. Percent relative densities of understory vegetation (less than 1 inch dbh) and bare soil/litter by quadrat and species at Deer Park Wetlands, Pasco County, Florida. Table 21. Fourth Quarter, 1991. Percent relative densities of understory vegetation (less than 1 inch dbh) and bare soil/litter by quadrat and species at Deer Park Wetlands, Pasco County, Florida. Table 22. Percent relative densities of understory vegetation (less than 1 inch dbh) and bare soil/litter by species and quarter summarized for all transects by taxon and quarter, Deer Park Wetlands, Pasco County, Florida, 1991. iii

A. INTRODUCTION I. FAUNAL SURVEY Macroinvertebrates are those organisms retained on a 0.5 mm screen and, for the purposes of thi s study, composed of two components: i nfauna and epifauna. Infauna are the organisms existing within the bottom sediments. Epifauna are the organisms associated with the material lying on or attached to the substratum. The study area is composed of three wetland cells and the Pithlachascotee River. Macroinvertebrate samples were collected on a quarterly basis beginning in January with subsequent collection made in April, July and October. During each sampling event, all transects were inspected for the presence of standing water. Only negligible amounts of water were observed in each cell for the first three quarters. As a result, only the two stations established on the Pithlachascotee River were sampled during those sampling events. The first Station PR-l, was located upstream of the study area, and the second, PR-2, was established downstream from Deer Park. However, significant amounts of standing water were encountered at the end of the third quarter, immediately prior to the fourth quarter sampling. Therefore, in addition to the infaunal samples taken at the two river stations, epifaunal sampling and fish collections were conducted where sufficient water was present. B. METHODS 1. Benthic Macroinvertebrates a) Field Collection 1) Infauna Samples were collected on a quarterly basis: January 18, April 25, July 10, and October 15 from each of the two river stations. Samples were collected using a diver operated coring device (12.5 cm x 12.5 cm). Eight replicate samples were taken at each site to ensure adequate representation of the community structure. After collection, each core was sieved through a 0.5 mm ~ox sieve, the residue rinsed into an appropriately labeled jar, fixed with 10 percent buffered formalin with rose bengal stain, and transported to the laboratory. Samples remained in 10 percent formalin for 48-72 hours to ensure proper fixation. The formalin was then decanted off and replaced with 70 percent isopropyl alcohol for storage prior to laboratory analysis. 2) Epifauna Modified Hester-Dendy artificial substrate samplers were utilized to analyze epifaunal colonization. This method is approved as an invertebrate 1

collecting technique by the U.S. EPA and has proven to be an important tool in the analysis of the environment based on the macroinvertebrate community structure in previous studies conducted by Mote Marine Laboratory (MML) and other investigators. Two sampling devices were deployed on each river station concurrent with the collection of benthic infauna. One sampler was subsequently retrieved after two weeks incubation, the second was retrieved after four weeks incubation. The samples were then placed in 10 percent buffered formalin and transferred to the laboratory where they were disassembled and the epizoic growth removed and preserved in 70 percent isopropyl alcohol. Each sample was then analyzed. Only during the fourth quarter was there sufficient standing water to allow the deployment of Hester-Dendy's in any of the wetland cells. Consequently, epifaunal samples were collected from the control cell, and the two transects within Cell A and treated as previously described. Although standing water was present on both transects in Cell C, it was not deep enough to set the artificial substrates. b) Laboratory Analysis After the samples were preserved with 70 percent isopropyl alcohol, the organ isms were sorted from the res i due us i ng a variable power stereozoom dissect i ng mi croscope, then separated into four categori es: 01 i gochaetes, chironomids, mollusks, and miscellaneous taxa. Each group was then identified to the lowest practical taxonomic level {genus and species in most cases) and the date entered on bench sheets. An internal reference collection was compiled for Pasco County. This collection is currently being archived at MML and is available to the County on request. Internal and external labels accompanied each sample invnediately after collection. Each label designates project number, station, replicate, date of collection, collection technique, surface area collected, and initials of collector. All sorted sed i ment from the samples wh i ch have been analyzed wi 11 be disposed of pending satisfaction of the generic quality assurance program and acceptance of the annual report. c} Statistical Analysis Statistical tests were used to determine the variation between stations and detect the seasonal impact on the benthic community structure. For any habitat there are variations -in species composition and faunal distribution. Differences of the community structure within the study area are both temporal and spatial. The magnitude of variation about the mean of these parameters may be characteristic of a habitat type. Analysis of these variations provides for a quantitative comparison of the spatial and temporal changes. A variety of statistical analyses are available. The types of convnunity analyses used for this study included Pielou's index for equitability, Margalef's index for species richness, Bray-Curtis index of faunal similarity, Shannon's, Simpson's and Gini's indices for diversity, and faunal densities (no. organism/m a ). 2

2. Mosquitos Each transect within the study area was examined for standing water during each sampling event. When standing water was encountered, five discrete dipper samples, using a standard mosquito dipper, were taken per site. The mosquito 1 arvae and pupae were then enumerated and the results recorded ina fi e 1 d notebook. 3. Threatened and Endangered Species During each quarterly reconnaissance of the wetland cells, the wildlife was noted. Particular emphasis was placed on observations for any threatened or endangered wildlife. All observations were recorded in a field notebook. 4. Fi sh Each transect was examined for standing water during each sampling event. When sufficient water was present, possible to harbor a fish community, dip nets were used to collect fish qualitatively. c. RESULTS 1. Benthic Macroinvertebrates a) Infauna The river at the upstream station was approximately five meters across with a great deal of overhanging vegetation. The only exception to this was in July as in 1990, when the river overflowed its banks inundating the adjacent watershed. The substrate was composed of fine sand and detritus. The depth of the river where the samples were collected ranged from less than one meter to 1-1/2 meters during the July sampling. The river at the downstream river station was approximately 7 meters across with very steep banks. Samples were collected immediately downstream from the Little Road bridge. The substrate was generally scoured limestone with isolated pockets of sand and detritus. The depth of the river at this location averaged about 1-1/2 meters except in July when the depth was approximately three meters. A total of 33,446 benthic macroinvertebrates was identified throughout the course of this study representing 159 taxa (Table 1). Of the seven phyla comprising the infaunal community, Arthropoda was the most diverse (Table 2). Although Crustacea was occasionally abundant during this study, Insecta predominated both in terms of species richness and abundance. The breakdown of taxa by major groups for each station and date is presented in Tables 3-6. Chironomidae was the most abundant group of insects collected during this study, comprising between 39 and 687 of the total benthos at both river stations in January and April. The densities of Chironomidae at both stations decreased greatly for the last two quarters of 1991 (Table 6). The predominant taxa at that time was replaced by bivalves. 3

Anne1 ida was the second most diverse phylum throughout the study area (Table 2) composed of 31 taxa. Although leeches were frequently encountered oligochaetes predomi nated. 01 igochaetes generally compri sed between 20 to 36 percent of the total benthos at the upstream station and 14-22 percent at the downstream station (Table 5). Mollusca was the third most diverse phylum. Although Gastropoda represented 11 of the 15 molluscan taxa, Bivalvia was the most numerically dominant. The remaining phyla, Cnidaria, Platyhelminthes and Rhyncocoe1a formed an insignificant portion of the total, rarely exceeding 2 percent of the total benthos (Table 5). The two river stations differed greatly, both with regard to faunal diversity and species composition. The species richness and faunal density over the course of the study was considerably lower at the upstream station (Table 7) with only 8,290 organisms representing 110 taxa, as opposed to 25,156 organisms representing 138 taxa at the downstream station (Table 8). Each station was dominated by a relatively unique combination of taxa. The upstream station could be characterized by four taxa which comprised in excess of 5 percent of the benthic community respectively: the chironomids, C7adotanytarsus sp. and Po7ypedi1um sca7aenum; the oligochaete, Limnodri1us hoffmeisteri; and the Asiatic clam, Corbicu7a mani7ensis. None of these taxa comprised in excess of 5 percent of the total benthos at the downstream station (Table 8). The downstream station also harbored a unique combination of dominant taxa. Five taxa were primarily responsible for the majority of the total benthos over the course of the year: the midges, Tanytarsus sp., Po7ypedi7um ha7tera7e, and Ceratatopogonidae sp., the fingernail clam, Sphaerium partumeium, and the oligochaete, Au70drilus pigueti. Statistical analyses are presented in Table 9. The total number of taxa and number of individuals were consistently higher at the downstream station. The -only e'xception was during the second quarter samp1 ing when the number of individuals was almost identical for both stations. Richness, as indicated by Marga1ef's index, was also consistently lower at the upstream station. Diversity indices (Shannon's, Simpson's and Gini's) were relatively uniform between stations for the first three quarters of 1991. However, the diversity during the fourth quarter was significantly higher at the downstream station. Equitabi1ity is a component of diversity, consequently, the values at each station reflected the same trend as diversity values. 4

bl Epifauna 1) River Station A total of 5,008 organisms representing 92 taxa were identified from the Hester-Dendy artificial substrate samplers during (Table 10). Fewer taxa were recovered from the Hester-Dendy's than the core samples (92 versus 159). Arthropoda was the most diverse phylum comprised, predominately of chironomids. However, substantial numbers of mayflies and caddisflies were also encountered (Table 11). Annelida was primarily composed of Naididae with ten species, however, they were sporadic in their appearance, and never comprised in excess of one percent of the total community. For the most part, Mollusca was represented by sporadic, relatively rare occurrences of individual taxa, consequently they formed a relatively insignificant portion of the epifaunal community. The remaining phyla, Platyhelminthes, Rhyncocoela and Cnidaria were each represented by a single genus. Platyhelminthes was consistently found during the course of the study, however, never in significant densities. Rhyncocoela and Cnidaria, represented by Prostoma rubrum and Hydra, respectively, were very sporadic in their occurrences. The individual faunal densities for each station are summarized in Tables 12 and 13. The faunal densities were only sl ightly higher at the upstream station (2,622 organisms vs. 2,386 organisms), and the number of taxa was almost identical with 74 and 73 taxa at PR-l and PR-2, respectively (Table 14). For all dates combined, each station had three of the top five numerically dominant taxa the same. These taxa were the midges, Tanytarsus sp., PolypedilulII convictum and Polypedilum fallax. 2) Wetland Cells Only during the fourth quarter was there sufficient water on the cells to deploy Hester-Dendys. Although standing water was present in Cell C, the depth was insufficient to set the samplers. The total number of taxa at all transects sampled was fairly consistent with 14 and 17 taxa at Transects 1 and 2 of Cell A, respectively, and a slightly higher number in the control cell with 19 taxa. The number of individuals was slightly more variable, however, the two transects in Cell A were fairly similar averaging 208 organisms, whereas the control had more than twice that with over 500. Two taxa predominated at both transects in cell A, comprising in excess of 50 percent: the oligochaete, Pristina leidyi, and the midge, Polypedilum illinoense (Table 15). Although both taxa were present at the control cell, their combined numbers were less than 10 percent. The dominant taxa at the control cell comprising almost 70 percent of all epifauna were: the midge, Kiefferulus sp. and the oligochaetes, Dero digitata and Dero vaga. 5

Statistical parameters for the epifaunal analysis are summarized in Table 14. Except for Station PR-l in the fourth quarter, the total number of taxa for each station remained fairly consistent throughout the year, ranging between 31 and 46 taxa. The upstream station averaged fewer taxa tnroughout the study. 2. Mosquito Survey Lack of standing water in any of the cells in January prevented an evaluation of mosquito larval abundance. Although water was present in all cells during the remainder of the year, only on Transect 2 in Cell A during the second quarter sampling were larvae encountered. The number of larvae per dipper ranged from 10 to 30, with an average of 14. 3. Threatened and Endangered Species Survey No threatened or endangered species of plant or animal was encountered during this study. Although no deer were sighted, their presence was evident by the numerous fresh deer prints seen around Cell A in July and Cell C in April. The only wildlife actually encountered was a small (about 3 ft) alligator patrolling under the bridge at Station PR-2 in April. 4. Fish The depth of the water in the wetland cells during most of the year was inadequate to support any fish communities. However, at the end of the third quarter, a sufficient amount of water had accumulated in all cells to allow dip net co 11 ect ions. These co 11 ect ions were fi rst made on September 30 and subsequently on November 14. No fish were encountered on either transect in Cell C. In the control cell the mosquito fish, Gambusia affinis was present, but very sparse. Gambusia were also present on both transects of Cell A, but, as at the control area, were very sparse. These fish were only collected during the September 30 sampling. Although a similar effort was carried out on November 14, no fish were found. 6

A. INTRODUCTION II. BOTANICAL INVENTORY Botanical sampling for the Deer Park Wetlands Biological Monitoring Program cons i sted, in part, of a Quant i tat i ve inventory of arboreal and groundcover vegetation. This report presents the methods used and results obtained in carrying out this aspect of the monitoring program for the year 1991. The Deer Park Wetlands consist of four isolated wetland cells: A, B, C, and a control. Botanical monitoring was carried out in all but wetland Cell B. Two transects are located in each of wetland Cells A and C, and a single transect is located in the control cell. Three 10 x 10 m Quadrats are located along each of the transects, for a total of fifteen Quadrats. Each Quadrat was sampled on an annual basis for arboreal vegetation, and subsamples of each of the Quadrats were made for groundcover vegetation every Quarter. B. METHODS 1. Arboreal Vegetation Arborea 1 samp 1 i ng was carri ed out by measuri ng the diameter at breast height (dbh) of all trees at least 10 cm in dbh in each of the fifteen 10 x 10 m Quadrats. Samp 1 i ng was carri ed out in February. Trees were i dent i fi ed, measured and the tag number of each noted. 2. Groundcover Vegetation Groundcover {herbaceous and woody vegetation with a stem diameters of on~ inch or les ~ ~as sampled within each of the fifteen 10 x 10 m Quadrats. Ten 1 m Quadrats were sampled along the back edge of each 10 x ~ m tree plot. That is, a one by 10 m strip was sampled. The strip of ten 1 m Quadrats was marked with PVC stakes to ensure consistency between sampling events. Percent cover was estimated visually in each 1 m 2 Quadrat for all vascular plant species. Standing water was encountered in the study plots for the first time in two years. Therefore, a value for open water (unshadowed by groundcover vegetation) was also included where applicable. A value for soil/litter "cover" was obtained by subtracting the total vegetation plus open water cover from 100 percent. C. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1. Arboreal Vegetation Numbers of individuals for each arboreal species in each of the Quadrats and overall relative density of each species is presented in Table 16. Basal areas and relative basal areas are shown in Table 17. There were seven species of trees among all of the Quadrats. The most abundant was Taxodium ascendens 7

(pondcypress). T. ascendems also had the highest basal area. Other arboreal species included l1ex cassine (dahoon holly), Nyssa biflora (swamp tupelo), Acer rubrull (red maple), Gordonia lasianthus (loblolly bay) and Persea palustris (swamp bay). A swamp-laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) grew into the overstory tree size class in the control transect. Although Ilex cassine was second in abundance and basal area to Taxodium ascendens for trees 10 cm dbh or more, it was (qualitatively) the most abundant understory tree (dbh 4-10 cm) in most of the transects. This species coppice sprouts profusely, and often produces a rather dense understory. Little change from the previous year was recorded (see the First Annual Botanical Monitoring Report). A total of 121 trees was sampled in 1991, two fewer than were counted in 1990. 2. Groundcover Vegetation Percent relative densities for understory species with a dbh of one inch or less are presented for each of the fifteen 10 x 10 m tree plots in Tables 18-21. Relative density values of taxa summarized for all four quarters are shown in Table 22. The total vegetation cover ranged from 20.42 percent in the fourth quarter to 52.39 percent in the third quarter. The high value in the third quarter is in large part due to a very high cover value (29.86 percent) for duckweed (species of Lemnaceae) present during this sampling event. When duckweed was present in the third and fourth quarters, it was found in Cell A and the control cell, but not in Cell C. The control cell and Cell A both have residential development as adjacent uplands, whereas Cell C does not. Based on conversations with Pasco County Mosquito Control, biological control methods to lower mosquito populations were used in these wetland cells (Cell A and control) at the request of nearby human residents. Duckweed may have been inadvertently introduced in these cells as well. In the third and fourth quarters, standing water was found throughout much of the sampling area. Access to the quadrats required wading in water up to 4-1/2 feet deep in several areas. Water was particularly deep in Cell A. The water depth in the second half of the year resulted in a significant lack of herbaceous species as compared to aquatic (Lemnaceae primarily) and shrubby vegetation. Eupatorium capi17ifo7ium, usually an aggressive dominant herbaceous species, was measured at a relative density of only 0.07 percent in the third quarter, off from 2.87 percent in the second, and 3.38-percent in the first quarter. It was completely absent in the fourth quarter. Open water accounted for 30.31 percent of the overall relative density in third quarter and 23.27 percent in the fourth quarter. These values do not include areas covered by floating aquatic vegetation. Total percentage of submerged land can be determined by adding the values for Lemnaceae to the values for open water. The total number of taxa recorded for the year was fifty-eight. The most abundant species was Lyonia lucida (fetterbush) in all quarters except the third 8 /

when duckweed dominated due to high water. Other corlnon species included Cepha7anthus occidenta7is (buttonbush), WoodWardia areo7ata (chain fern), Woodwardia virginica (Virginia chain fern), Osmunda rega7is (royal fern), Myrica cerifera (wax-myrtle), Osmunda cinnamomea (cinnamon fern), Lycopus rube77us, and 87echnum serru7atum. 9

I I I. EVALUATION For most of the year, the wetland cells were dry except for isolated pools of standing water. The only exception to this was during the fourth quarter of the year when the control cell and Cell A had sufficient water to deploy Hester Dendy samplers and collect fish using dipnets. The two stations on the Pithlachascotee River were sampled, however, on a quarterly basis for both benthic infauna and epifauna. The upstream region could generally be characterized as a narrow stream with numerous riffles and shallow pools. The bottom was generally fine sand and detritus resulting from the extensive canopy.jb The water was very clear, but had a distinctive coffee color as a result of ta ~lns leached into the water. The downstream station was much wider with steep slopes and no riffles except further downstream from the samp 1 i ng 1 ocat ion. The water depth was between 1-1/2 and 2 meters, and a fairly rapid current was generally evident. The bottom was scoured limestone and boulders with pockets of gravel and sand. The clarity of the water was good with the discoloration by tanins as noted for the upstream site. - The infaunal community at each site on the river was composed of a unique assemblage of invertebrates. The differences between the community structures was a reflection of the variation of the substrates, which is frequently the determining factor for the establishment of certain species. The epifaunal communities at the river stations which colonized the Hester Dendy artificial substrates at each site exhibited little variation with regard to the dominant taxa. This similarity indicates a consistency of water quality between the upstream and downstream location. The epifaunal communities in the wetland cells had lower diversities and densities than the river; probably as a result of the short period of inundation. As a result, the species comprising the dominant populations were opportunistic naidids and midges. Many of the taxa encountered during this study are indicative of "good" or even "pristine" water conditions, and ~an only inhabit 10tic ecosystems free from organic pollutants. Most of the specles found in the Pith1achascotee River have been documented throughout south-central Flori da watersheds. The abundance of mayfl ies, caddisfl ies, naidid 01 igochaetes, the high diver-sity of midge larvae, and even the presence of stonef1ies indicates that this river is very clean, free from the stressful conditions frequently created by loading a water system with organics or other pollutants. The results of the 1991 study of the benthic infauna and epifauna of the Pithlachascotee River are remarkably similar, with respect to seasonal variation and community composition. These results indicate that the water quality of the river has changed little, if any, between the two years. 10

The Deer Park Wetlands is a system of isolated pondcypress domes, an ecosystem found throughout much of Central Florida. These wetland depressions were previously surrounded by pine flatwood uplands, but now are being ringed by suburban development. The cypress domes of Deer Park Wetlands were probably logged-out some (IS-50) years ago. Most of the trees are now of small to moderate girth. Old stumps and logs are abundant in wetland Cell A, and the center of the control cell has very little tree cover. Nevertheless, the forested ecosystem is in a period of regrowth and there is little evidence of recent disturbance. The rapid human development presently occurring in the uplands surrounding each of the isolated wetland cells will, of course, alter the hydrology within the wetlands. It will be difficult to determine whether changes that may be detected in future monitoring of the Deer Park Wetlands were the result of activity by the Deer Park Water Treatment Plant or the result of runoff from, or altered hydrology in, the surrounding developed uplands. This concern was realized in the third quarter when Mosquito Control possibly impacted the wetland cells surrounded by residential development in a very substantial way, presumably at the request of nearby human inhabitants. Although this particular impact was learned of and confirmed, other human impacts not related to the presence of the water treatment plant may be more difficult to detect. 11

Tabl e 1. Taxa Rank order of taxa from core samples with all dates and stations combined: core samples. Organisms Taxa Organisms TANYTARSUS SP. SPHAERIUM PARTUMEIUM LIMNODRILUS HOFFMEISTERI CERATOPOGONIDAE SP. POLYPEDILUM HALTERALE AULODRILUS PIGUETI CLADOTANYTARSUS SP. CORBICULA MANILENSIS POLYPEDILUM SCALAENUM HYALELLA AZTECA ABLABESMYIA SP. PISIDIUM SP. SLAVINA APPENDICULATA SPHAERIIDAE SP. PROCLADIUS SP. DUBIRAPHIA SP. TUBIFICIDAE SP. WI (IMM) CRYPTOTENDIPES SP. PAGASTIELLA OSTANSA ANCYLLIDAE SP. DICROTENDIPES SP. TANYTARSINI SP. (PUPA) HYDRACARINA SP. DERO DIGITATA STENELMIS SP. PRISTINA BREVISETA CRYPTOCHIRONOMUS SP. HABER SPECIOSUS POLYCENTROPUS SP. NAIS PARDALIS CAENIS SP. ENCHYTRAEIDAE SP. ENTOMOBRYIDAE SP. LUMBRICULUS VARIEGATUS CRICOTOPUS SP. ASELLUS SP. GAMMARIDAE SP. (JUV) BRACHYCERCUS SP. STENOCHIRONOMUS SP. PROSTOMA RUBRUM BAETIDAE SP. NECTOPSYCHE SP. HYDROPTILA SP. OECETIS SP. 5479 DERO TRIFIDA 80 2807 DUGESIA TIGRINA 71 2174 HELOBDELLA ELONGATA 67 1879 MENETUS CF. DILATATUS 63 1817 MICROTENDIPES SP. 63 1590 POLYPEDILUM CONVICTUM 58 1543 RHEOTANYTARSUS SP. 51 1377 PRISTINA SYNCLITES 47 1173 PARACLADOPELMA SP. 45 1050 NANOCLADIUS SP. 44 831 CHIRONOMINI SP. (PUPA) 42 819 PARALAUTERBORNIELLA SP. 41 721 PSAMMORYCTIDES CONVOLUTUS 40 711 COLLEMBOLA SP. 35 702 ECLIPIDRILUS PALUSTRIS 33 700 TRICORYTHODES ALBILINEATUS 32 696 TANYPUS SP. 30 500 POLYPEDILUM ILLINOENSE 30 408 LABRUNDINIA SP. 29 370 STEMPELLINELLA SP. 25 346 TRICLADIDA SP. 23 322 CHEUMATOPSYCHE SP. 22 305 CORYNONEURA SP. 22 299 SMYNTHURIDAE SP. 21 298 BAETIS SPIETHI 21 266 RHEOCRICOTOPUS SP. 21 263 ZAVRELIA SP. 20 241 PRISTINA AEQUISETA 19 236 PHYSELLA SP. 17 224 GAMMARUS SP. 17 178 CHIRONOMUS SP. 17 149 MOOREOBDELLA MICROSTOMA 16 148 TRIANODES SP. 16 147 LABRUNDINIA NEOPILOSELLA 16 145 NAIS COMMUNIS. 15 127 POLYPEDILUM SP. 14 124 PLANORBIDAE SP. 13 120 AEOLOSOMA NR. MARCUSI 12 118 GOMPHUS SP. 12 114 ACHAETA SP. 11 101 MENETUS SP. 11 95 HEMIPTERA SP. 11 90 LAEVAPEX FUSCUS 10 84 HEBETANCYLIS EXCENTRICUS 10 12

Table 1. Continued. Rank order of taxa from core samples with all dates and stations combined: core samples. Taxa Organi sms Taxa Organisms -------------------------- --------- TANYPODINAE SP. {PUPA} 10 HYDROPTIlIDAE SP. 2 PARACHIRONOMUS SP. 10 CHlMARRA SP. 2 NIlOTHAUMA SP. 10 EINFElDIA SP. 2 DERO loden I 9 ENAllAGMA SP. 2 DINEUTIS SP. 9 CORDYlOPHORA lacustris 1 HYDRO PORUS SP. 8 lumbriculidae SP. 1 OXYETHlRA SP. 8 STYlARIA lacustris 1 CHIRONOMIDAE SP. {PUPA} 8 HElOBDEllA STAGNALIS 1 COElOTANYPUS SP. 8 GlOSSOPHONIIDAE SP. {JUV} 1 ORTHOClADIINAE SP. 8 FERRISSIA FRAGILIS 1 PRISTINElLA SIMA 7 PROMENETUS EXACUOUS 1 MYZOBDEllA lugubris 7 ASTACIDAE SP. 1 CHIRONOMINAE SP. {PUPA} 7 PAlAEMONETES SP. 1 PEDIONOMUS BECKAE 6 CERAClEA SP. 1 ORTHOClADIUS SP. 6 BOYERIA VINESA 1 HElOBDEllA TRISERIAlIS 5 DROMOGOMPHUS NR. ARMATUS 1 STENONEMA SP. 5 MESOVEl I IDAE SP. 1 GOMPHIDAE SP. 5 ElMIDAE SP. 1 TRIBElOS SP. 5 CHRYSOMELIDAE SP. 1 CHAETOGASTER DIASTROPHUS 4 NEURECLIPSIS SP. 1 EPHEMEROPTERA SP. {DAM} 4 HYDROPSYCHIDAE SP. 1 NYCTIOPHYlAX SP. 4 HYDROPSYCHE SP. 1 POlYPEDIlUM SIMULAUS 4 leptoceridae SP. {PUPA} 1 DEMICRYPTOCHIRONOMUS SP. 4 CULICIDAE SP. {DAM} 1 EUKIEFFERIEllA SP. 4 POL YPEDIlUM FAllAX 1 EMPIDIDAE SP. 4 CLINOTANYPUS SP. 1 HYDRA SP. 3 PARATENDIPES SP. 1 AEOlOSOHA TRAVANCORENSE 3 BATRACOBDElLA PHAlERA 3 Total Individuals 33446 HYDROBIIDAE SP. 3 Total Taxa 159 GAMMARUS NR. PSEUDOlIMNAEUS 3 CRANGONYX FlORIDANUS 3 MACROMIA SP. 3 DIPTERA SP. 3 POTTHASTIA SP. 3 PENTANEURA SP. 3 NAIS SP. 2 GASTROPODA SP. 2 laevapex SP. 2 STENONEMA FLORI DENSE 2 ARGIA SP. 2 LIBEllULIDAE SP. 2 GYRINIS SP. 2 POlYCENTROPODIDAE SP. 2 13

Table 2. Pithlachascotee River benthos. Phylogenetic list of taxa from core samples. PHYLUM CNIDARIA CORDYLOPHORA LACUSTRIS HYDRA SP. PHYLUM PLATYHELMINTHES TRICLADIDA SP. DUGESIA TIGRINA PHYLUM NEMERTEA PROSTOMA RUBRUM PHYLUM ANNELIDA CLASS OLIGOCHAETA FAMILY AELOSOMATIDAE AEOLOSOMA NR. MARCUSI AEOLOSOMA TRAVANCORENSE FAMILY LUMBRICULIDAE LUMBRICULIDAE SP. ECLIPIDRILUS PALUSTRIS LUMBRICULUS VARIEGATUS FAMILY ENCHYTRAEIDAE ENCHYTRAEIDAE SP. ACHAETA SP. FAMILY TUBIFICIDAE TUBIFICIDAE SP. WI (IMM) LIMNODRILUS HOFFMEISTERI AULODRILUS PIGUETI HABER SPECIOSUS PSAMMORYCTIDES CONVOLUTUS FAMILY NAIDIDAE PRISTINELLA SIMA SLAVINA APPENDICULATA STYLARIA LACUSTRIS PRIST INA SYNCLITES PRIST INA AEQUISETA PRISTINA BREVISETA DERO LODENI DERO TRIFIDA CHAETOGASTER DIASTROPHUS DERO DIGITATA NAIS SP. NAIS COMMUNIS NAIS PARDALIS CLASS HIRUDINEA HELOBDELLA TRISERIALIS HELOBDELLA ELONGATA HELOBDELLA STAGNALIS BATRACOBDELLA PHALERA MOOREOBDELLA MICROSTOMA GLOSSOPHONIIDAE SP. MYZOBDELLA LUGUBRIS PHYLUM MOLLUSCA 14 CLASS GASTROPODA GASTROPODA SP. ANCYLLIDAE SP. FERRISSIA FRAGILIS LAEVAPEX SP. MENETUS CF. DILATATUS HYDROBIIDAE SP. LAEVAPEX FUSCUS HEBETANCYLIS EXCENTRICUS PLANORBIDAE SP. PROMENETUS EXACUOUS MENETUS SP. PHYSELLA SP. CLASS PELECYPODA CORBICULA MANILENSIS SPHAERIIDAE SP. SPHAERIUM PARTUMEIUM PISIDIUM SP. PHYLUM ARTHROPODA CLASS CHELICERATA HYDRACARINA SP. CLASS CRUSTACEA ORDER ISOPODA ASELLUS SP. ORDER AMPHIPODA GAMMARIDAE SP. GAMMARUS SP. GAMMARUS NR. PSEUDOLIMNAEUS HYALELLA AZTECA CRANGONYX FLORIDANUS ORDER DECAPODA ASTACIDAE SP. PALAEMONETES SP. CLASS INSECTA ORDER COLLEMBOLA COLLEMBOLA SP. ENTOMOBRYIDAE SP. SMYNTHURIDAE SP. ORDER EPHEMEROPTERA STENONEMA SP. STENONEMA FLORI DENSE BAETIDAE SP. BAETIS SPIETHI EPHEMEROPTERA SP. BRACHYCERCUS SP. CAENIS SP. ORDER ODONATA ARGIA SP.

Table 2. Continued. Pithlachascotee River benthos. Phylogenetic list of taxa from core samples. ENALLAGMA SP. BOYERIA VINESA LIBELLULIDAE SP. MACROMIA SP. GOMPHIDAE SP. DROMOGOMPHUS NR. ARMATUS GOMPHUS SP. ORDER HEMIPTERA HEMIPTERA SP. MESOVELI IDAE SP. ORDER COLEOPTERA HYDROPORUS SP. DINEUTIS SP. ELMIDAE SP. STENELMIS SP. DUBIRAPHIA SP. CHRYSOMELIDAE SP. GYRINIS SP. ORDER TRICOPTERA POLYCENTROPODIDAE SP. NEURECLIPSIS SP. POLYCENTROPUS SP. NYCTIOPHYLAX SP. HYDROPSYCHIDAE SP. CHEUMATOPSYCHE SP. HYDROPSYCHE SP. HYDROPTILIDAE SP. HYDROPTIlA SP. OXYETHIRA SP. LEPTOCERIDAE SP. (PUPA) CHIMARRA SP. OECHIS SP. NECTOPSYCHE SP. CERACLEA SP. TRIANODES SP. ORDER DIPTERA DIPTERA SP. EMPIDIDAE SP. FAMILY CULICIDAE CULICIDAE SP. FAMILY CERATOPOGONIDAE CERATOPOGONIDAE SP. FAMILY CHIRONOMIDAE CHIRONOMIDAE SP. (PUPA) POTIHASTIA SP. COELOTANYPUS SP. PROCLADIUS SP. RHEOCRICOTOPUS SP. ALBILINEATUS CORYNONEURA SP. CRICOTOPUS SP. MICROTENDIPES SP. STENOCHIRONOMUS SP. TANYTARSUS SP. CHIRONOMUS SP. TANYPUS SP. TANYPODINAE SP. (PUPA) CRYPTOCHIRONOMUS SP. POLYPEDILUM SP. POLYPEDILUM FALLAX POLYPEDILUM CONVICTUM POLYPEDILUM HALTERALE POLYPEDILUM ILLINOENSE POLYPEDILUM SCALAENUM POLYPEDILUM SIMULANS CLADOTANYTARSUS SP. CLINOTANYPUS SP. ABLABESMYIA SP. DICROTENDIPES SP. NANOCLADIUS SP. PARALAUTERBORNIELLA SP. PARATENDIPES SP. PEDIONOMUS BECKAE PENTANEURA SP. RHEOTANYTARSUS SP. STEMPELLINELLA SP. ORTHOCLADIINAE SP. ORTHOCLADIUS SP. PAGASTIELLA OSTANSA PARACHIRONOMUS SP. TRIBELOS SP. TRICORYTHODES ZAVRELIA SP. TANYTARSINI SP. (PUPA) CHIRONOMINI SP. (PUPA) DEMICRYPTOCHIRONOMUS SP. EINFELDIA SP. EUKIEFFERIELLA SP. CRYPTOTENDIPES SP. LABRUNDINIA SP. ODONATA SP. LABRUNDINIA NEOPILOSELLA PARACLADOPELMA SP. NILOTHAUMA SP. CHIRONOMINAE SP. (PUPA) 15

Table 3. Percent of taxa by major faunal groups. Year 90 90 90 90 91 91 91 91 Month FEB APR JUL OCT JAN APR JUL OCT Station PR1 PR1 PR1 PR1 PR1 PR1 PR1 PR1 Faunal Group ------------ -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ANNELIDA Oligochaeta 13.92 8.89 30.00 18.92 11.11 10.53 21.43 13.64 Hirudinea 1.27 2.22 5.00 2.70.00 2.63 3.57.00 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 15.19 11.11 35.00 21.62 11.11 13.16 25.00 13.64 MOLLUSCA Gastropoda 5.06 11.11 10.00 2.70 6.67 5.26 7.14 9.09 Bivalvia 5.06 4.44 15.00 5.41 6.67 7.89 14.29 9.09... -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 0'1 SUB-TOTAL 10.13 15.56 25.00 8.11 13.33 13.16 21.43 18.18 ARTHROPODA Isopoda. 1.27 2.22.00 2.70 2.22.00 3.57.00 Amphipoda 2.53 6.67.00.00 2.22.00 3.57.00 Oecapoda.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00 Insecta 67.09 53.33 40.00 59.46 66.67 68.42 39.29 63.64 Collembola 2.53.00 5.00 2.70 2.22 2.63 3.57 4.55 Ephemeroptera 5.06 6.67.00 2.70 2.22.00 3.57.00 Odonata.3.80 2.22.00.00 2.22.00.00.00 Hemiptera 2.53.00.00.00.00 2.63.00.00 Coleoptera 5.06 4.44.00 5.41 6.67 5.26 3.57 9.09 Tricoptera 3.80 4.44.00 8.11 4.44 13.16.00.00 Diptera 1.27.00.00.00.00.00.00.00 Cul icidae 1.27.00.00.00.00.00.00.00 Ceratopogonidae 1.27 2.22 5.00 2.70 2.22 2.63 3.57 4.55 Chironomidae 40.51 33.33 30.00 37.84 44.44 42.11 25.00 45.45 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 70.89 62.22 40.00 62.16 71.11 68.42 46.43 63.64 MISCELLANEOUS 3.80 11.11.00 8.11 4.44 5.26 7.14 4.55 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Table 3. Continued. Percent of taxa by major faunal group. ~ --..J Year 90 90 90 90 91 91 91 91 Month FEB APR JUL OCT JAN APR JUL OCT Station PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 Faunal Group ------------ -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ANNELIDA 01 i gochaeta 12.86 9.52 18.89 16.67 7.27 11.67 18.18 8.33 Hirudinea 1.43 1.59 4.44 2.08.00.00 4.55 2.78 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 14.29 11.11 23.33 18.75 7.27 11.67 22.73 11.11 MOLLUSCA Gastropoda 5.71 4.76 4.44 2.08 9.09 6.67 9.09 5.56 Bivalvia 4.29 4.76 2.22 6.25 5.45 5.00 6.82 8.33 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 10.00 9.52 6.67 8.33 14.55 11.67 15.91 13.89 ARTHROPODA Isopoda 1.43 1.59 1.11.00.00.00.00.00 Amphipoda 4.29 3.17 2.22 4.17 5.45 3.33 4.55 2.78 Decapoda.00.00 1.11.00.00.00 2.27.00 Insecta 60.00 68.25 56.67 60.42 67.27 66.67 50.00 61.11 Collembola 2.86 1.59 2.22 4.17.00 3.33 2.27 2.78 Ephemeroptera 5.71 7.94 5.56 2.08 5.45 8.33 4.55 2.78 Odonata 2.86 1.59 2.22 2.08 3.64 3.33 2.27 2.78 Hemiptera 1.43.00 1.11 2.08.00.00 2.27.00 Coleoptera 4.29 4.76 5.56 4.17 5.45 5.00 4.55 5.56 Tricoptera 8.57 11.11 6.67 6.25 9.09 10.00 9.09 5.56 Diptera.00.00 1.11.00.00.00.00.00 Cul icidae.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00 Ceratopogonidae 1.43 1.59 1.11 2.08 1.82 1.67 2.27 2.78 Chironomidae 32.86 39.68 31.11 37.50 41.82 33.33 22.73 38.89 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 65.71 73.02 61.11 64.58 72.73 70.00 56.82 63.89 MISCELLANEOUS 10.00 6.35 8.89 8.33 5.45 6.67 4.55 11.11 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Table 4. Faunal Group Number of taxa by major faunal groups. Year 90 90 90 91 91 91 91 90 Month APR JUL OCT JAN APR JUL OCT FEB Station PRI PRI PRI PRI PRI PRI PRI PR2 ------------ -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ANNELIDA Oligochaeta 4 6 7 5 4 6 3 9 Hirudinea 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ---~---- SUB-TOTAL 5 7 8 5 5 7 3 10 MOLLUSCA Gastropoda 5 2 1 3 2 2 2 4 Bivalvia 2 3 2 3 3 4 2 3... -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 00 SUB-TOTAL 7 5 3 6 5 6 4 7 ARTHROPODA Isopoda 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 Amphipoda 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 Decapoda 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Insecta 24 8 22 30 26 11 14 42 Collembola 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 Ephemeroptera 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 4 Odonata 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 Hemiptera 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Coleoptera 2 0 2 3 2 1 2 3 Tricoptera 2 0 3 2 5 0 0 6 Diptera 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cul icidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ceratopogonidae 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Chironomidae 15 6 14 20 16 7 10 23 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 28 8 23 32 26 13 14 46 MISCELLANEOUS 5 0 3 2 2 2 1 7 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL 45 20 37 45 38 28 22 70

~ Table 4. Continued. Number of taxa by major faunal groups. Faunal Group Year 90 90 90 90 91 91 91 91 Month FEB APR JUL OCT JAN APR JUL OCT Station PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 ------------ -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ANNELIDA 01 igochaeta 9 6 17 8 4 7 8 3 Hirudinea 1 1 4 1 0 0 2 1 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 10 7 21 9 4 7 10 4 MOLLUSCA Gastropoda 4 3 4 1 5 4 4 2 Bivalvia 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 7 6 6 4 8 7 7 5 1.0 ARTHROPODA Isopoda 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 Amphipoda 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 1 Decapoda 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Insecta 42 43 51 29 37 40 22 22 Collembola 2 1 2 2 0 2 1 1 Ephemeroptera 4 5 5 1 3 5 2 1 Odonata 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 Hemiptera 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 Coleoptera 3 3 5 2 3 3 2 2 Tricoptera 6 7 6 3 5 6 4 2 Diptera 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Culicidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ceratopogonidae 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Chironomidae 23 25 28 18 23 20 10 14 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 46 46 55 31 40 42 25 23 MISCELLANEOUS 7 4 8 4 3 4 2 4 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL 70 63 90 48 55 60 44 36

Table 5. Percent of individuals by major faunal group. Year 90 90 90 90 91 91 91 91 Month FEB APR JUL OCT JAN APR JUL OCT Station PRI PRI PRI PRI PRI PRI PRI PRI Faunal Group ------------ -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ANNElIDA Oligochaeta 14.98 31.34 68.67 12.20 19.53 22.97 35.74 3.53 Hirudinea.05.33.63.07.00.16.80.00 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 15.03 31.67 69.30 12.27 19.53 23.13 36.55 3.53 MOllUSCA Gastropoda 8.72 1.66.63.21.35.70 1.20.19 Bivalvia 10.49 7.53 20.89 22.14 11.43 28.59 38.55 89.69 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- N SUB-TOTAL 19.21 9.19 21.52 22.34 11.79 29.30 39.76 89.88 0 ARTHROPODA Isopoda.32.66.00.14.53.00 3.61.00 Amphipoda.54 1.00.00.00.09.00 2.01.00 Decapoda.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00 Insecta 64.53 56.59 9.18 64.36 67.63 46.88 16.47 6.50 Collembola 3.64.00 1.58.21.26.23 2.41.09 Ephemeroptera 1.71.55.00.34.35.00 1.20.00 Odonata.27.33.00.00.09.00.00.00 Hemiptera.11.00.00.00.00.08.00.00 Coleoptera 1.61 2.44.00.75 1.06.78.80.19 Tricoptera.37.55.00.62.18 1.88.00.00 Diptera.11.00.00.00.00.00.00.00 Cul ic1dae.05.00.00.00.00.00.00.00 Ceratopogonidae 1.44 4.10 1.90 5.62 3.17 5.00 3.61.09 Chironomidae 55.22 48.62 5.70 56.82 62.27 38.91 8.43 6.13 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 65.38 58.25 9.18 64.50 68.25 46.88 22.09 6.50 MISCElLANEOUS.37.89.00.89.44.70 1.61.09 ------------ -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Table 5. Continued. Percent of individuals by major faunal group. Year 90 90 90 90 91 91 91 91 Month FEB APR JUL OCT JAN APR JUL OCT Station PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 Faunal Group ------------ -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ANNELIDA Oligochaeta 17.61 10.93 47.02 18.81 4.92 16.91 22.08 14.01 Hirudinea.15.22 3.99.04.00.00 2.01.08 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 17.77 11.15 51.00 18.85 4.92 16.91 24.09 14.09 MOLLUSCA Gastropoda.24.42 3.86.04.87 7.99 1.06.17 Bivalvia 13.34 8.06 4.40 19.26 3.91 6.26 47.11 50.17 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- N SUB-TOTAL 13.58 8.48 8.26 19.29 4.78 14.25 48.17 50.34... ARTHROPODA Isopoda.21 2.15.23.00.00.00.00.00 Amphipoda 8.03 13.47 4.06.14.74 1.80 1.30.08 Decapoda.00.00.03.00.00.00.12.00 Insecta 59.38 63.40 30.11 60.18 88.23 62.88 23.14 34.80 Collembola.39.31 1.33.07.00 1.49.71.08 Ephemeroptera 1. 73 3.57 1.54.68.33 2.51 1.65.08 Odonata.03.03.08.05.13.16.12.08 Hemiptera.03.00.08.07.00.00.24.00 Coleoptera 2.83 1.90 3.05 3.17 5.65 7.99 5.67 6.88 Tricoptera 1.36 1.84 4.17 1.32 2.24 2.27 2.60.42 Diptera.00.00.03.00.00.00.00.00 Culicidae.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00 Ceratopogonidae 2.49 1.39 4.74 13.70 11.37 3.13 2.95 5.60 Chironomidae 50.51 54.36 15.11 41.12 68.49 45.26 9.21 21.65 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 67.62 79.01 34.44 60.32 88.96 64.68 24.56 34.89 MISCELLANEOUS 1.03 1.37 6.30 1.53 1.34 4.15 3.19.68 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Table 6. Number of individuals by major faunal group. Year 90 90 90 90 91 91 91 91 Month FEB APR JUL OCT JAN APR JUL OCT Station PRI PRI PRI PRI PRI PRI PRI PRI Faunal Group ------------ -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ANNELIDA 01 igochaeta 280 283 217 178 222 294 89 38 Hirudinea 1 3 2 1 0 2 2 0 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 281 286 219 179 222 296 91 38 MOLLUSCA Gastropoda 163 15 2 3 4 9 3 2 Bivalvia 196 68 66 323 130 366 96 966 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 359 83 68 326 134 375 99 968 ~ ARTHROPODA Isopoda 6 6 0 2 6 0 9 0 Amphipoda 10 9 0 0 1 0 5 0 Decapoda 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Insecta 1206 511 29 939 769 600 41 70 Collembola 68 0 5 3 3 3 6 1 Ephemeroptera 32 5 0 5 4 0 3 0 Odonata 5 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 Hemiptera 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Coleoptera 30 22 0 11 12 10 2 2 Tricoptera 7 5 0 9 2 24 0 0 Diptera 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cul icidae 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ceratopogonidae 27 37 6 82 36 64 9 1 Chironomidae 1032 439 18 829 708 498 21 66 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 1222 526 29 941 776 600 55 70 MISCELLANEOUS 7 8 0 13 5 9 4 1 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL 1869 903 316 1459 1137 1280 249 1077

N w Table 6. Continued. Number of individuals by major faunal group. Year 90 90 90 90 91 91 91 91 Month FEB APR JUL OCT JAN APR JUL OCT Station PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 PR2 Faunal Group ------------ -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- ANNELIDA 01 igochaeta 1026 392 1805 1056 147 216 187 165 Hirudinea 9 8 153 2 0 0 17 1 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 1035 400 1958 1058 147 216 204 166 MOLLUSCA Gastropoda 14 15 148 2 26 102 9 2 Bivalvia 777 289 169 1081 ll7 80 399 591 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 791 304 317 1083 143 182 408 593 ARTHROPODA Isopoda 12 77 9 0 0 0 0 0 Amphipoda 468 483 156 8 22 23 II 1 Decapoda 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Insecta 3459 2274 ll56 3378 2638 803 196 410 Coll embol a 23 II 51 4 0 19 6 1 Ephemeroptera 101 128 59 38 10 32 14 1 Odonata 2 1 3 3 4 2 1 1 Hemiptera 2 0 3 4 0 0 2 0 Coleoptera 165 68 ll7 178 169 102 48 81 Tricoptera 79 66 160 74 67 29 22 5 Diptera 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Cul icidae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ceratopogonidae 145 50 182 769 340 40 25 66 Chironomidae 2942 1950 580 2308 2048 578 78 255 Misc Arthropods 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- SUB-TOTAL 3939 2834 1322 3386 2660 826 208 416 MISCELLANEOUS 60 49 242 86 40 53 27 3 ---~---- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- TOTAL 5825 3587 3839 5613 2990 1277 847 ll78

Table 7. Rank order of taxa from core samples for each station wi th all dates combined, Station PR-l. Station PR-l Organisms Station PR-l Organisms -------------------------- --------- -------------------------- --------- CORBICULA MANILENSIS 1372 LABRUNDINIA SP. 10 CLADOTANYTARSUS SP. 1215 ENCHYTRAEIDAE SP. 9 LIMNODRILUS HOFFMEISTERI 1080 LAEVAPEX FUSCUS 8 POLYPEDILUM SCALAENUM 1024 ECLIPIDRILUS PALUSTRIS 7 SPHAERIUM PARTUMEIUM 484 HYALELLA AZTECA 7 TANYTARSUS SP. 310 NECTOPSYCHE SP. 7 SPHAERIIDAE SP. 281 NILOTHAUMA SP. 7 CERATOPOGONIDAE SP. 262 PLANORBIDAE SP. 6 CRYPTOCHIRONOMUS SP. 258 POLYPEDILUM CONVICTUM 6 HABER SPECIOSUS 230 NANOCLADIUS SP. 6 POLYPEDILUM HALTERALE 228 ORTHOCLADIUS SP. 6 TUBIFICIDAE SP. WI (IMM) 183 GAMMARUS SP. 5 ANCYLLIDAE SP. 176 SLAVINA APPENDICULATA 4 STENOCHIRONOMUS SP. 114 DERO DIGITATA 4 PISIDIUM SP. 74 NAIS PARDALIS 4 DUBIRAPHIA SP. 71 HELOBDELLA TRISERIALIS 4 ENTOMOBRYIDAE SP. 67 STENONEMA SP. 4 ABLABESMYIA SP. 64 GOMPHUS SP. 4 MICROTENDIPES SP. 55 HYDROPORUS SP. 4 PRISTINA SYNCLITES 46 POLYPEDILUM SP. 4 TANYTARSINI SP. (PUPA) 43 POLYPEDILUM SIMULAUS 4 PARACLADOPELMA SP. 42 ORTHOCLADIINAE SP. 4 PROCLADIUS SP. 37 EUKIEFFERIELLA SP. 4 BAETIDAE SP. 31 CRYPTOTENDIPES SP. 4 ASELLUS SP. 29 PRO STOMA RUBRUM 3 PSAMMORYCTIDES CONVOLUTUS 27 MOOREOBDELLA MICROSTOMA 3 PARALAUTERBORNIELLA SP. 26 MYZOBDELLA LUGUBRIS 3 STEMPELLINELLA SP. 25 MENETUS CF. DILATATUS 3 RHEOCRICOTOPUS SP. 21 MACROMIA SP. 3 CHIRONOMINI SP. (PUPA) 20 DINEUTIS SP. 3 CHEUMATOPSYCHE SP. 19 CHIRONOMUS SP. 3 HYDRACARINA SP. 18 DEMICRYPTOCHIRONOMUS SP. 3 CORYNONEURA SP. 15 CHIRONOMINAE SP. (PUPA) 3 HELOBDELLA ELONGATA 14 EMPIDIDAE SP. 3 OECETIS SP. 14 TRICLADIDA SP.. 2 DICROTENDIPES SP. 13 DUGESIA TIGRINA 2 SMYNTHURIDAE SP. 12 NAIS SP. 2 CAENIS SP. 12 LAEVAPEX SP. 2 GAMMARIDAE SP. (JUV) 11 CRANGONYX FLORIDANUS 2 RHEOTANYTARSUS SP. 11 STENONEMA FLORI DENSE 2 ZAVRELIA SP. 11 HEMIPTERA SP. 2 AULODRILUS PIGUETI 10 POLYCENTROPODIDAE SP. 2 COLLEMBOLA SP. 10 POLYCENTROPUS SP. 2 STENELMIS SP. 10 CHlMARRA SP. 2 POLYPEDILUM ILLINOENSE 10 DIPTERA SP. 2 24

Table 7. Continued. Rank order of taxa from core samples for each station with all dates combined, Station PR-l. Station PR-l Organisms TRICORYTHODES ALBILINEATUS 2 STYLARIA LACUSTRIS 1 PRISTINA BREVISETA 1 BATRACOBDELLA PHALERA 1 GLOSSOPHONIIDAE SP. (JUV) 1 GASTROPODA SP. 1 TRIANODES SP. 1 FERRISSIA FRAGILIS 1 HYDROBIIDAE SP. 1 HEBETANCYLIS EXCENTRICUS 1 PROMENETUS EXACUOUS 1 BOYERIA VINESA 1 DROMOGOMPHUS NR. ARMATUS 1 MESOVELI IDAE SP. 1 ELHIDAE SP. 1 OXYETHlRA SP. 1 CULICIDAE SP. (DAM) 1 CHIRONOHIDAE SP. (PUPA) 1 PARATENDIPES SP. 1 PENTANEURA SP. 1 Total Organisms 8290 Total Taxa 110 25