1. Benthic Analysis: Mr. Ingle’s Pond X Group Tarah Johnson McClure Tosch Stephen Wells Lance Keller

2. Overview Objectives Study Area Materials & Methods Results Conclusions Summary

3. Objectives Sediment Type Organic material Benthic invertebrate population

4. Study Area Deep: 9’2” Shallow: 3’ 5”

5. Methods Assessment was split into two parts: –Benthic sampling for macro invertebrates Eckman Dredge 15 cm x 15 cm –Weight sampling for sediment loading and organic concentration KB corer 2 inches in diameter

6. Methods Both assessments were taken in triplicate totaling 6 samples each –Deep 3 Eckman Dredge samples 3 Core samples –Shallow 3 Eckman Dredge samples 3 Core samples

7. Methods: Eckman Samples Sieved on site Biota preserved with formalin Transported to lab for analysis

8. Methods: Eckman Samples Filtered to wash off formalin –80 micrometer (μm) sieve Large samples –Sub-sampled when needed Observed under dissecting scope –Counted and identified to family T-test and an ANOVA –Difference in count and composition

9. Methods: Core Samples Core samples were sectioned on site –2cm sub-sample to 10cm Wet weight –Crucible weight (zeroed out) –Crucible + sediment sample

10. Methods: Core Samples Oven Dry Weight –24 hours at 150° C Organic Weight –Furnace: 3 hours at 500° C T-test and an ANOVA –difference in composition between shallow and deep samples.

11. Results: Profiles

12. Results: Eckman Samples

13. Greater Diversity in shallow samples Shallow samples were more even distributed Shallow samples had more taxa

14. Results: Eckman Samples Major Taxa Found - Chaoboridae - Chironomus Minor Taxa Found - Ceratopogonidae - Oligochaeta

15. Results: Core Samples

17. There was no difference in moisture content There was a difference in percent organic The sediment is mainly composed of silt

18. Conclusions Fish feed on Chaoboridae and Chironomus larvae (Sweetman 2006). Chironomus larvae suggest highly eutrophic pond (Saether 1979) Chaoboridae larvae specifically Chaoborus migrate vertically to avoid predation (Sweetman 2006).

19. Conclusions The percent water content suggests a silt/clay sediment Dr. McDaniel concluded the sediment was mostly silt The difference in percent organic might be from differences in Chaoboridae numbers.

20. Summary The high Chaoboridae and Chironomus populations are good fish food but might not be available to eat. There is a difference in organic soil content between deep and shallow probably due to Chaoboridae pop. There was no difference in sediment loads between the shallow and deep end of the lake.

21. Acknowledgments Mr. Ingle Picture Credits –iodeweb5.vliz.be/.../AndersonBook/SampEqui p.htmiodeweb5.vliz.be/.../AndersonBook/SampEqui p.htm –Dr. Wilhelm Other Credits – X Group Bathometric Group – X Group Light and Temperature Profiles

22. References Jon N. Sweetman, a, and John P. Smola Reconstructing fish populations using Chaoborus (Diptera: Chaoboridae) remains – a review Paleoecological Environmental Assessment and Research Laboratory (PEARL), Department of Biology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ont., Canada K7L 3N6 a a Saether, O.A. 1979. Chironomid communities as water quality indicators. – Holarct Ecol. 2: 65-74

23. Questions?