Josephine Strauss

Lab 4 Water Quality, Post-Lab (35 points)

NOTE: Youll be using the whole-class, compiled dataset to do the following lab.
Also Note: All graphs that we ask you to paste in to the lab report should have axes
properly labeled and should be titled.

1) (6 points) What is the relationship between invertebrate score ("Macroinvertebrates

Observed" as described on the lab protocol sheet) and Dissolved Oxygen? Create a
scatter plot. Paste in your scatter plot. Talk about trends and possible reasons for trends.
What did you expect to see, and why?
One noticeable trend in the graph, is the parabola shape to the data. At around 10 ppm the
dissolved oxygen content seems to cap off and the invertebrate score starts to decrease. This
could be because after a certain content of dissolved oxygen, the water would become to
oxygenated for some species to survive. This graph depicts what one would typically expect,
with no apparent outliers and all the points forming a noticeable pattern. Note how two of the
data points are represented in one point because they have the same score.

Does dissolved oxygen depend on water depth? Make another scatter plot of this, with
trendline (and think about which axes dependent and independent variables should be on ).
Describe what you see? What is a possible reason for this? What are some related variables
that you might want to look at to further test your reasoning?
It would appear that the relationship between depth and dissolved oxygen has a very slightly
positive slope. There could be several reason for this. One, could be that since the water is
relatively shallow and fast moving, the water gets mixed up often and dissolve oxygen does not
have to opportunity to collect at the top. Some variables could be the amount of drops in the
stream that would cause numerous turnovers in the stream or the time of year (seasonal turnovers
in lakes and such typically occur in the spring and fall). You could test the dissolved oxygen in a
more calm, slow moving part of the stream and then compare it to the fast moving parts.
(graph on page below) Note: depth displayed as averages from the each of the groups

1
2) (4 points) Provide the mean (average), median, and variance for all class measurements
of stream width, stream depth, and temperature. How do these numbers compare to your
own, within-group measurements? Did the variance increase or decrease with sample size?
Mean Median Variance
Width 2.064 2.065 .642
Depth 9.648 10.5 21.502
Temperature 11.932 12 1.574
In my group, our width seems to be pretty inline with the Mean and Median calculated from all
the data. However, our temperature was definitely higher than the Mean and Median of the class.
Also, our section of the stream seems to be much deeper. Variance decreased with an increase in
sample size.
3) (2 points) Why do you think benthic macroinvertebrates are used so often to describe
stream health? Give at least 2 reasons (hint: think about financial reasons).
First off, for financial reason, benthic macroinvertebrates are small and very accessible so they
would provide an easy, low-cost test of the stream/ river quality. Also, because they can be so
sensitive to pollution they provide a very authentic look in to water quality.
4) (2 points) What is the ratio of group 1 inverts to group 2 to group 3 for all of Ravenna
Creek. Figure out the best way to show this graphically and make a figure showing it. Paste
in your figure.
Ratio: 25:3:2

5) (4 points) The most common professional water quality index based on benthic
macroinvertebrate diversity is called the B-IBI index (below).

2
What is the total B-IBI score for Ravenna Creek?
The B-IBI score for Ravenna Creek is 18.

Using the index above, come up with a B-IBI index for Ravenna Creek. Note that we did
not divide our orders into species. Assume 1 taxon per order to be conservative. Long-lived
include taxa include the trichoptera (caddisflies) and water pennies (they have a multiyear
period in development). Intolerant taxa are anything in Group 1. Predators include the
trichoptera (caddisflies). Note that the index in places calls for number of taxa and other
places number of individuals. Clinger species include the beetle (water penny),
Ephemeroptera (mayflies), and Trichoptera (caddisflies). % dominance means, what are
the 3 most common taxa and what percent of the whole do individuals in those taxa make
up of all individuals across all taxa?
So to get you started, looking at the first category, we had fewer than 20 taxa (orders) in the
park, so that is a score of 1. We dont know how many Ephemeroptera taxa we had, but to
be conservative (and assuming we had at least one species in the order Ephemeroptera),
well say 1so another score of 1. Same for Plectoptera, and Trichoptera, two more scores
of 1. Were at 4 points total so far for the B-IBI index. Number of long-lived taxa was 2
(water pennies and caddisflies, again assuming we found both of these), so another score of
1. Were up to 5 points now. And so on, down the list, keep tallying the score as you go
down.
In the two graphs below (from a King County stream survey), which stream(s) is our B-IBI
(called VP Index here) score most similar to, and where does that stream(s) fall on a
continuum from developed to forested (second graph)[in other words what is the ratio of
forest to development in the stream watershed(s) that most closely resembles our water
quality?]? Is the ratio of forested vs. developed land a reliable way to predict water quality
(explain)? Although the upper Ravenna Creek appears to be a very forested basin when
you are in the park, the entire watershed also includes the gentle slopes above the steep
valley we were in. Take a look at the map of the upper Ravenna Creek Watershed below the

3
graphs, and estimate what percentage is forest and what is developed (red line indicates
approximate watershed boundaries).

In the graph above on the left, our stream most closely resembles is that of the Holder stream
(HO). In the forest verse development graph, Holders stream is at the very base of the developed
line, near the 0% of area developed. The ratio of forest vs. developed land should be a good way
to test water quality because the forest would have less chance of pollution from nearby
business/ residential/ agricultural centers. I would estimate that the forested area is about 10%
and the non-forested is about 90%.

4
[FYI, A professional team surveyed Ravenna Creeks benthic macroinverts in August 2011.
Their B-IBI Score was 22. They rated the creek as poor.
http://pugetsoundstreambenthos.org/Visit-Details.aspx?SV=3674]

6) (3 points) Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) are all Group 1

organisms, intolerant of pollution. It is obvious why the B-IBI index focuses on them. Why
does the B-IBI index also focus on predators? On % dominance of 3 most common taxa?
On long-lived taxa? [hint: these are three different reasons]
By focusing on predators, most common taxa, and long-lived taxa, you can observe and track
how the ecosystem is going to evolve over a long period. Because we pay such close attention to
the long-lived, we know they dont die as rapidly as some species so we have a more long-term
view. The predator measurement allows for us to take into account other reason for a population
decrease that are the result of nature. And most common taxa, like many other ecosystems, allow
us to use what we observed about these taxa in this particular stream and compare it to other
streams in similar areas.
7) (4 points) (Below are some data for the Elwha River (the table and bar graph on the
following pages). What results strike you as being similar to ours, and what aspects are
very different? What might account for differences between their results and ours? For
extra credit, at the end of the assignment, you can speculate on the reasons for differences
above, below, and between the dams, but dont do that here.
Similar to us, the results from the mainstem (MS) section of the Elwha has high numbers of
mayflies. In fact they found very similar species that we did, and this is probably because the
river/ stream are in a similar location with similar weather conditions. Some differences in their
results and ours could be related to the fact that they sampled many more parts of the river than
we did the stream and they also sampled different parts of the river (slow moving water and fast
moving). This difference makes a big impact in the results because slower water may be warmer
or if the water is deeper the there may be less dissolved oxygen down where the invertebrates
inhabit the river bed.

5
8) (4 points) What is the relationship between density (invertebrates per m^2) and
invertebrate score ("Macroinvertebrates Observed" as described on the lab protocol
sheet)? Graph it using a scatter plot, and paste in the plot here. Why do you think this
relationship exists in our data? Because as the density increases then it is reasonable to assume
that the number of observed macroinverts would also increase. However one should take note of
two things, one that once density reaches a certain point, inverterate score goes down. This could
be a result of predation or inability of system to support such a large population. Two, the outlier,
this could be a result of an increase in nutrients in that section of the stream sampled from
fertilizer runoff or the likes from nearby residential area.

6
9) (6 points) Create 2 more graphs using our data and paste them in. What question(s) are
you exploring with the graphs? Make sure your graphs are the best way to explore those
questions, and make sure you describe the trends and interpret them. There are definitely
some more really interesting patterns in our data; have fun and get creative with it.

How does Invertebrate score compare with the channel score? It would seem that as the Channel
score (observed score based on appearance) goes up the invertebrate content dcreases. This could
be a result of the fact that an increase in intertebrates would also cause the visible appearance of
the stream to degrade because of an increased pressence of algea and such.

How do hyrdolic scores and invertebrates per m^2 relate? It would appear that the higher the
hydrolic score the less dense the invertebrate population. A reason for this is because benthic
invertebrates flourish off the nutrient rich areas and when the hyrdolic score is high the river
floods and could displace the invertebrate. In our data, the hydrolic score was relatively moderate
so flooding and displacement would be less prominent.

10) (2 points) Extra Credit: Describe the data in the Elwha graph above labeled Figure 6.
What are the major differences above, between, and below dams on the Elwha, and what
do you think might be causing them?
A major difference that I noticed was the variance in the taxa groups across each sample. In some
areas the numbers and percent was quite high, but in others the were very few to no of some of
the group one and group two taxa.