1. Aquatic invertebrates and water quality monitoring in the Little Luckiamute River Aquatic invertebrates and water quality monitoring in the Little Luckiamute River Dr. Karen Haberman and the students of General Ecology, Fall 2004, 2005 and 2006

2. Talk outline  Watersheds: an overview  Key stream macroinvertebrates  Ecological questions  Educational Goals  Methods

3. Watershed, defined  A watershed is the entire network of rivers and streams that feed into a common system. It also includes all of the surrounding land and subsurface waters.

4. Substances in the river  Water!  Dissolved gases (examples)  Inorganic material  Dissolved (examples…)  Particulate (Examples…)  Organic material  Dissolved (examples…)  Particulate (examples…)  In which categories do “pollutants” fall? What makes something a pollutant?

5. What happens to these substances?  Collection, accumulation, storage  Processing, transport, distribution  What happens to a leaf that drops into the river at its headwaters? Photo: Kevin Wolf

6. River continuum (pictures from Stroud Water Research Center) Headwater Mid-reaches Near mouth

7. River continuum

8. Human impact  Photo: US Army Corps of Engineers

9. Order Ephemeroptera: mayflies Image: Xerces Society

10. Order Plecoptera: stoneflies Image: Xerces Society

11. Order Trichoptera: caddisflies Drawing: University of Michigan Illustration: University of Illinois, Entomology

12. Order Diptera: flies Chironomidae (midge) larvae Simulidae (black fly) larvae Images: Xerces Society

13. Other Insect Orders with common aquatic members  Order Coleoptera: beetles  Order Odonata: Dragonflies and damselflies  Order Hemiptera: True bugs  Order Neuroptera: Dobsonflies, for ex.

14. Why study stream macroinvertebrates?  They are food for developing salmonids  Particular groups/species are sensitive to particular pollutants  Overall, higher diversity is correlated with healthy streams  Macroinvertebrates integrate impacts over time  Surveys are relatively inexpensive.  What is the key limitation?

15. Ecological questions  Are there significant differences in diversity/biological integrity for sites on the Little Luckiamute River upstream of Fall City compared to sites within/downstream of Falls City?  Do numbers/types of pollution-intolerant groups differ significantly among sites?  Are there correlations between the macro- invertebrate community and other measures of water quality?  Is water quality changing over time?

16. Educational goals  Teach students about watershed ecology in general, and about their own watershed in particular.  Give students experience with field work, macroinvertebrate identification and data analysis.  Provide students with the opportunity to think critically about their methods and results, and to write a scientific paper based on class data.

17. Methods overview  General logistics  Surveys take place in the first 2 weeks of October.  Two surveys are conducted upstream of Falls City; two surveys are conducted downstream of Falls City.  Currently have three years of data.  Survey and collection (DEQ protocols; Xerces Society [Jeff Adams et al.])  Macroinvertebrate collection  Water chemistry and associated measurements  Substrate measurements (Wolman pebble count)  Sorting and identification to family in lab

18. Collecting macroinvertebrates

19. “Picking” in the field

20. Assessing substrate size ( Wolman pebble counts)

21. Water test kits