Sediment Quality in Puget Sound Year 2 - Center for Coastal ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Appendix E. Continued. - - -- - - - - Phylum Class Family Taxon Author Page 262 Magelona berkeleyi Jones 1971 Trochochaetidae Trochoc17~~eta multisetosa (0rsted 1844) Chaetopteridae Clzc~etopterns vuriopedatns (Renier, 1804) P/~j~llocIzaetopterits prolifica Potts 1914 Spiochaetopterus costarum Mesochaetopterus taylori (Claparede 1870) Cirratulidae Cirratulidae Cirraths sp. Cirratiihis robi~sti~s Cirrc~ti~lits spectabilis Caulleriella pacified Aphelochaeta sp. Aphelochaeta monilaris Aphelochaeta sp. 2 Aphelochaeta sp. N1 Chaetozone sp. Chaetozone nr. setosa (Hartman 1960) Chaetozone coli~nzbicma Chaetozone commonalis Chaetozone acuta Chaetozone sp. N1 Tharyx sp. N1 Blake 1996 Monlicellim tesselata Monticellina sp. N1 Monticellina sp. (Hartman 1960) Cossi~ra pvsodactylata Cossura bansei Jones 1956 Flabelligeridae Brada villosa (Rathke 1843) Bda sachalim Flabellip qffinis Pherusa plumosa Annenkova, 1922 Scalibregmidae Sealibregma inflaturn Asclerocheilus beringiamis Rathke 1843 Opheliidae A rmandia brevis (Moore 1906) Travisia brevis Moore 1923 Travisia pupa Moore 1906 Ophelim acuminata 0rsted 1843 Sternaspidae Sternaspis scutata Capitellidae Capitella capitata hyperspecies Heteronzc~st~~s,filobranchs Berkeley & Berkeley 1932 Notomastus sp. Notonzastus tennis Moore 1909 Notonzastus latericeus Mediomastus sp. M. Sars 185 1 Decamastiis gracilis Hartman 1963
Appendix E. Continued. Phylum Class Family Taxon Author Bc~rantolla nr. anzericc~nc~ Maldanidae Maldaniclae sp. Chiiimici simi1i.s Maldane sen's! Nicomache lz~~nhricalis Nicomache personata Notoproctus pc~cificiis Petaloproctiis borealis Axiothella rubrocineta Praxillella gracilis Praxillella pcicifici Euclymeninae Rhodine bitorq;/c~tc~ Enclpene cf. zonalis Clynemira grc1ci1i.s Microclynene caiidala Niconzachim I.socimis longiceps Oweniidae OweniafhifOrmis Myioclzele heeri Galathowenia oculata Sabellariidae Idantllsrsiis ~a.xica\~us Neosahellaria cementurium Pectinaridae Pectinaria gran;i/at~/ Pectinaria culiforniensi.~ Ampharetidae Ampharetidae Terebellidae AiHUge Cl170jXS Anzplzc~rete sp. Ampharete aciit~j?onLs Ampharetefinmarc17icc1 Ampharde lahrops Ampharete cf. crassiseta Amphicteis scaphobranchiata Anzphicteis mucronata Melinna oculata Anobotlzr~~s gracilis Asabellides sibirica Asabellides lineata Schistoconms hiltoni Terebellidae Amphitrite robusta Malmgren 1865 (Fabricius 1780) Johnson 1901 (Moore 1906) Arwidsson 1907 (Johnson 1901 ) (M. Sars 1861) E. Berkeley 1929 Moore 1923 Hartman 1969 (Moore 1923) Delle Chiaje 1841 (Moore 1906) Hartman 194 1 (Johnson 190 1 ) (Gmbe 1860) Hartman 196 1 Moore 1906 Moore 1923 Hartman 1969 (Malmgren 1866) (Berkeley & Berkeley 1943) Chamberlin 19 19 Johnson 190 1 Ezpolynnia l~etero/~ranchic~ (Johnson 190 1 ) Nicolea sp, Nicolea zostericola Pista sp. Pista elongata Moore 1909 Page 263
Page 1 and 2:
National Status and Trends Program
Page 3 and 4:
Sediment Quality in Puget Sound Yea
Page 5 and 6:
Human Reporter Gene System (Cytochr
Page 7 and 8:
List of Appendices Appendix A . Det
Page 9 and 10:
Figure 10. Results of 1998 Microtox
Page 11 and 12:
Figure 38. Central Puget Sound stat
Page 13 and 14:
Table 14. Number of 1998 central Pu
Page 15 and 16:
Table 34. Triad results for 1998 ce
Page 17 and 18:
Abstract As a component of a three-
Page 19 and 20:
tests; and 3% of the area in the cy
Page 21 and 22:
Data from this central Puget Sound
Page 23 and 24:
Project Background Introduction hi
Page 25 and 26:
Considerable research has been cond
Page 27 and 28:
toxicants in regions of Puget Sound
Page 29 and 30:
This report includes a summary of t
Page 31 and 32:
stations within each stratum were c
Page 33 and 34:
jugs which had been washed, acid-st
Page 35 and 36:
clean, filtered (0.45 um), Port Ara
Page 37 and 38:
have been exposed to one or more of
Page 39 and 40:
enforcement studies. Seven addition
Page 41 and 42:
analyses will be reported elsewhere
Page 43 and 44:
100 samples were compared to the up
Page 45 and 46:
Correlations were determined for al
Page 47 and 48:
Results A record of all field notes
Page 49 and 50:
As a corollary to and verification
Page 51 and 52:
to station 15 1, then decreased ste
Page 53 and 54:
variance of the other tests with re
Page 55 and 56:
espectively, and each station had 1
Page 57 and 58:
exceeded state criteria and nationa
Page 59 and 60:
assays, enzyme induction was very h
Page 61 and 62:
Isomers of DDT and most PCB congene
Page 63 and 64:
Total abundance of miscellaneous ta
Page 65 and 66:
(i.e., increasing toxicity), there
Page 67 and 68:
Triad Synthesis: A Comparison of Ch
Page 69 and 70:
Stratum 6, in Puget Sound's central
Page 71 and 72:
grain size, rather than the toxicit
Page 73 and 74:
Eight samples collected along the s
Page 75 and 76:
Inlet), 170- 17 1 (Dyes Inlet), 1 1
Page 77 and 78:
The results in the amphipod tests p
Page 79 and 80:
Human Reporter Gene System (Cytochr
Page 81 and 82:
The highest concentrations of mixtu
Page 83 and 84:
and Conner, 1980; Gray, 1982: Becke
Page 85 and 86:
However, benthic data have been gen
Page 87 and 88:
data for benzoic acid, 44 samples h
Page 89 and 90:
Literature Cited Adams, D.A., J.S.
Page 91 and 92:
California Department of Fish and G
Page 93 and 94:
and vicinity. NOAA Tech. Memo. NOS
Page 95 and 96:
Strait of Juan De Fuca Figure 1. Ma
Page 97 and 98:
Figure 3a. Central Puget Sound samp
Page 99 and 100:
Figure 3c. Central Puget Sound samp
Page 101 and 102:
Figure 3e. Central Puget Sound samp
Page 103 and 104:
I / Amphipod survival 0 not toxic s
Page 105 and 106:
Figure 6. Summary of 1998 amphipod
Page 107 and 108:
Amphipod survival 0 not toxic 0 sig
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Whidbey Rlsland Figure 14. Results
Page 115 and 116:
Figure 16. Results of 1998 cytochro
Page 117 and 118:
Seattle Figure 18. Results of 1998
Page 119 and 120:
Figure 20. Sampling stations in Por
Page 121 and 122:
1 6 0 Sinclair 1 9 Inlet ]\ 0 No Cr
Page 123 and 124:
0 Rho = 0.928 o p < 0.0001 Sample 1
Page 125 and 126:
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 600
Page 127 and 128:
Rho = -0.584 p < 0.0001 0 20 40 60
Page 129 and 130:
Rho = 0.875 p < 0.0001 0 500 1000 1
Page 131 and 132:
I 0 1 Stations lacking any signific
Page 133 and 134:
0 Stations lacking any significant
Page 135 and 136:
Table 1. Central Puget Sound sampli
Page 137 and 138:
Table 2. Continued. Oxychlordane To
Page 139 and 140:
Table 3. Chemistry Parameters: Labo
Page 141 and 142:
Table 5. Benthic infaunal indices c
Page 143 and 144:
Table 6. Continued. Stratum Locatio
Page 145 and 146:
Table 6. Continued. Stratum Locatio
Page 147 and 148:
Table 7. Continued. 100% pore water
Page 149 and 150:
Table 7. Continued. 100% pore water
Page 151 and 152:
Table 8. Results of MicrotoxTM test
Page 153 and 154:
Table 8. Continued. ~icrotox~~ EC50
Page 155 and 156:
Table 8. Continued. Microtox"" EC50
Page 157 and 158:
Table 10. Spearman-rank correlation
Page 159 and 160:
Table 12. Samples from 1998 central
Page 161 and 162:
Table 13. Samples from 1998 central
Page 163 and 164:
Table 13. Continued. Stratum, Sampl
Page 165 and 166:
Table 14. Number of 1998 central Pu
Page 167 and 168:
Table 14. Continued. - > ERMa > sQs
Page 169 and 170:
Table 14. Continued. > E RM~ - > SQ
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Table 22. Total abundance, major ta
Page 179 and 180:
Table 22. Continued. Annelida Arthr
Page 181 and 182:
Table 22. Continued. Annelida Arthr
Page 183 and 184:
Table 23. Continued. Central Basin
Page 185 and 186:
Table 23. Continued. Stratum Sample
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
if; c if; c Page 167
Page 191 and 192:
Page 169
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 176
Page 200 and 201:
Page 178
Page 202 and 203:
Page 180
Page 204 and 205:
Page 182
Page 206 and 207:
Page 184
Page 208 and 209:
is-
Page 211 and 212:
Page 189
Page 213 and 214:
Page 191
Page 215 and 216:
Table 35. Distribution of results i
Page 217 and 218:
Table 37. Spatial extent of toxicit
Page 219 and 220:
Table 39. Spatial extent of toxicit
Page 221:
Appendix A Detected chemicals from
Page 224 and 225:
Appendix A. Continued. SQS Chemical
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 206
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 2 10
Page 234 and 235: Page 2 12
Page 238 and 239: Page 216
Page 240 and 241: Appendix B. Continued. Stratum Samp
Page 250 and 251: Appendix C. Continued. Tenip- Salin
Page 256 and 257: Appendix D. Table 1. Continued. % %
Page 258 and 259: Appendix D. Table 1. Continued. 22
Page 260 and 261: Appendix D. Table 2. Total organic
Page 262 and 263: Appendix D. Table 2. Continued. Str
Page 272 and 273: Appendix D, Figure 1. continued. St
Page 274 and 275: Appendix D, Figure 1. continued. St
Page 279 and 280: Appendix E. 1998 Central Puget Soun
Page 281 and 282: Appendix E. Continued. Phylum Class
Page 283: Appendix E. Continued. Phylum Class
Page 297 and 298: Appendix F Percent taxa abundance f
Page 299 and 300: Appendix F. Percent taxa abundance
Page 303 and 304: 2 Â¥^ 2 ca so a * .0 cn 00 a 5 I
Page 305 and 306: Appendix G Infaunal taxa eliminated
Page 307 and 308: Aooendix R. Infaunal taxa eliminate
Page 309: Appendix H Triad data - Results of
Page 314 and 315: Page 292 nine
Page 324 and 325: nine OJllIO,) JO % Sl! [L'A!AJIls p
Page 328 and 329: atuni. Sample, Location umber of ER
Page 334 and 335:
Stratum, Sample. Location Number of
Page 336 and 337:
a~i11*31~!~3! [OJ1UO,) JO % Sl! J31
Page 338 and 339:
Page 3 16
Page 340 and 341:
Page 3 18
Page 343 and 344:
Appendix I. Ranges in detected chem
Page 345 and 346:
Appendix I. Continued. 9(H)Carbazol
Page 347 and 348:
Appendix I. Continued. Mercury Nick
Page 349 and 350:
Page 327
Page 351:
Appendix J SEDQUAL surveys for the
Page 354 and 355:
Appendix J. Continued. Agency Name
Page 356 and 357:
Page 358 and 359:
Page 360 and 361:
Page 338
Page 362 and 363:
Page 340
Page 364 and 365:
Appendix K. Continued. Chrysene Dib
show all

Sediment Quality in Puget Sound Year 2 - Center for Coastal ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?