Koontz, J., D.G. Huggins, C.C. Freeman, D.S. Baker - Central Plains ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

observed between reference and randomly selected EM sites. Significant differences in native plant richness were observed between study populations when lacustrine and palustrine sites were evaluated separately (Figure 52c and d). Only one Riverine type was observed in the reference samples, and thus ANOVA testing could not include this group. Lacustrine Native Plant Richness Unconsolidated Bed FQAI Scores 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 a 1 2 Study Phase c 1 2 Study Phase FQAI Scores Palustrine Native Plant Richness Figure 52. (a) Median box plots of floristic quality index scores for Unconsolidated Bed wetlands and (b) All wetland types among the entire study population (n = 53). Median Box plots in graph (c) and (d) show differences in native plant richness. Box area represents inner quartile range, while “whiskers” represent the upper and lower observations. Wetland Types and MMI Scores The macroinvertebrate MMI was evaluated with ANOVA tests, and no significant differences were found between wetland types or classes (Figure 53a and Figure 54a). However, when samples were grouped within reference and random populations both EM and UB types showed significant between population differences (p = 0.001 and 0.004, respectively) (Figure 53b and c). Others types lacked sufficient sample size within each study phases to warrant testing. ANOVA tests for class differences by study population revealed that there were significant difference between MMI class scores (Figure 54b and c). This supports the idea that the reference palustrine and lacustrine sites do support better macroinvertebrate communities than the random sites. 30 25 20 15 10 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 72 of 84 5 0 b AB EM MIX UB Study Phase d 1 2 Study Phase
MMI Scores UB Wetland Type MMI Scores 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 a AB EM MIX UB Wetland Type c 1 2 Study Phase EM Wetland Type MMI Scores Figure 53. Median box plots of MMI scores for all wetland types and comparisons between Phase I and Phase II samples within types. EM = Emergent Macrophyte Beds, UB = Unconsolidated Beds. Box area represents inner quartile range, while “whiskers” represent the upper and lower observations. 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 73 of 84 0 b 1 2 Study Phase
Page 1 and 2:
Assessment of Floodplain Wetlands o
Page 3 and 4:
Nitrogen ..........................
Page 5 and 6:
Executive Summary This project soug
Page 7 and 8:
other wetland parameters and assess
Page 9 and 10:
quality of plant community, respect
Page 11 and 12:
was inevitable, but care was taken
Page 13 and 14:
Evidence that waterfowl and/or amph
Page 15 and 16:
Floristic Quality Assessments Flori
Page 17 and 18:
FQAI ALL 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Figure
Page 19 and 20:
MEAN CONSERVATISM ALL 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Page 21 and 22: Mean Conductivity mS/cm 0.6 0.5 0.4
Page 23 and 24: Table 7). The wide range of values
Page 25 and 26: Nitrogen - N mg/L Total Nitrogen mg
Page 27 and 28: N:P ratio 30.0 24.0 18.0 12.0 6.0 0
Page 29 and 30: Chlorophyll a ug/L 200 180 160 140
Page 31 and 32: wetlands, respectively. Macroinvert
Page 33 and 34: from analysis did not show signific
Page 35 and 36: major wetland classes when ANOVA an
Page 37 and 38: measurement. There are sites within
Page 39 and 40: measurements, turbidity was conside
Page 41 and 42: TOC mg/L TOC mg/L 16 14 12 10 8 6 4
Page 43 and 44: Nitrate:Ammonia Ratio Phase II Tota
Page 45 and 46: CDF 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10
Page 47 and 48: was true for organic nitrogen (R 2
Page 49 and 50: Figure 34. Error bar plots of mean
Page 51 and 52: and deethylatrazine were both prese
Page 53 and 54: suspected that differences in sampl
Page 55 and 56: Figure 38. Cumulative distribution
Page 57 and 58: Table 11. Metrics used in the devel
Page 59 and 60: tested: Percent Clingers (+) (p=0.0
Page 61 and 62: CDF Figure 42. Cumulative distribut
Page 63 and 64: Total Nitrogen mg/L Mean Conductivi
Page 65 and 66: Percent Hydroptilidae = 1.463766 +
Page 67 and 68: Table 14. Descriptive statistics fo
Page 69 and 70: MMI Scores 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30
Page 71: ecoregions. Mean pH was also found
Page 75 and 76: Acknowledgements Field crew members
Page 77 and 78: Smith, L.M., N.H. Euliss, D.A. Wilc
Page 79 and 80: a. Land and soils coverage maps. b.
Page 81 and 82: Code Phase Longitude Latitude Site
Page 83 and 84: Appendix C. Laboratory measurements
show all

Koontz, J., D.G. Huggins, C.C. Freeman, D.S. Baker - Central Plains ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?