An Updated Checklist to the Non-biting Midges (Chironomidae) of Illinois

The Chironomidae, or non-biting midges, of Illinois have been untreated since the early 20th century, and the high level of taxonomic flux in the family necessitates an update, particularly for a group with importance as bio-indicators of freshwater ecosystem health. Herein, 181 species of Chironomidae in 76 genera are recorded from the state of Illinois. Each species entry is annotated with the first Illinoisan record of the species. Two genera, Brillia Kieffer, 1913 and Prodiamesa Kieffer, 1906, are recorded for the first time from Illinois, as are three species: Xenochironomus xenolabis (Kieffer in Thienemann and Kieffer, 1916) (Chironominae); Brillia flavifrons (Johannsen, 1905) (Orthocladiinae); and Prodiamesa olivacea (Meigen, 1818) (Prodiamesinae)

Biotic Integrity of macroinvertebrate communities along the I-294 corridor

Sampled macroinvertebrates following ILEPA protocol at 7 sites in August–September 2015 in the I-294 corridor and calculated biotic integrity metrics • Assessed sites based on the Qualitative Stream Habitat Assessment Procedure (SHAP) • Measured physical (width, depth, velocity) and chemical (pH, conductivity, salinity, total dissolved solids) characteristics • Habitat assessment showed impairment compared to Illinois reference conditions at all sites • Macroinvertebrate Index of Biotic Integrity rated 6 sites as “Poor” and one as “Fair” ▷▷ Total taxa richness ranged from 10 to 19 across sites ▷▷ 4 of the 7 sites had no EPT (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera) taxa ▷▷ No Plecoptera (stoneflies) were collected at any siteIllinois State Toll Highway Authorityunpublishednot peer reviewe

Community-powered urban stream restoration: A vision for sustainable and resilient urban ecosystems

Urban streams can provide amenities to people living in cities, but those benefits are reduced when streams become degraded, potentially even causing harm (disease, toxic compounds, etc.). Governments and institutions invest resources to improve the values and services provided by urban streams; however, the conception, development, and implementation of such projects may not include meaningful involvement of community members and other stakeholders. Consequently, project objectives may be misaligned with community desires and needs, and projects may fail to achieve their goals. In February 2020, the 5(th) Symposium on Urbanization and Stream Ecology, an interdisciplinary meeting held every 3 to 5 y, met in Austin, Texas, USA, to explore new approaches to urban stream projects, including ways to maximize the full range of potential benefits by better integrating community members into project identification and decision making. The symposium included in-depth discussion about 4 nearby field case studies, participation of multidisciplinary urban stream experts from 5 continents, and input from the Austin community. Institutional barriers to community inclusion were identified and analyzed using real-world examples, both from the case studies and from the literature, which clarified disparities in power, equity, and values. Outcomes of the symposium have been aggregated into a vision that challenges the present institutional approach to urban stream management and a set of strategies to systematically address these barriers to improve restoration solutions. Integrating community members and other stakeholders throughout the urban restoration process, and a transparent decision-making process to resolve divergent objectives, can help identify appropriate goals for realizing both the ecological and social benefits of stream restoration

Community-powered urban stream restoration: A vision for sustainable and resilient urban ecosystems

Este artículo contiene 16 páginas, 2 tablas, 3 figuras.Urban streams can provide amenities to people living in cities, but those benefits are reduced when streams become degraded, potentially even causing harm (disease, toxic compounds, etc.). Governments and institutions invest resources to improve the values and services provided by urban streams; however, the conception, development, and implementation of such projects may not include meaningful involvement of community members and other stakeholders. Consequently, project objectives may be misaligned with community desires and needs, and projects may fail to achieve their goals. In February 2020, the 5th Symposium on Urbanization and Stream Ecology, an interdisciplinary meeting held every 3 to 5 y, met in Austin, Texas, USA, to explore new approaches to urban stream projects, including ways to maximize the full range of potential benefits by better integrating community members into project identification and decision making. The symposium included in-depth discussion about 4 nearby field case studies, participation of multidisciplinary urban stream experts from 5 continents, and input from the Austin community. Institutional barriers to community inclusion were identified and analyzed using real-world examples, both from the case studies and from the literature, which clarified disparities in power, equity, and values. Outcomes of the symposium have been aggregated into a vision that challenges the present institutional approach to urban stream management and a set of strategies to systematically address these barriers to improve restoration solutions. Integrating community members and other stakeholders throughout the urban restoration process, and a transparent decision-making process to resolve divergent objectives, can help identify appropriate goals for realizing both the ecological and social benefits of stream restoration.Publication costs were covered by an award from the Society of Freshwater Science’s Endowed Publication Fund (https:// freshwater-science.org/publications/endowed-publication-fund).Peer reviewe

Okefenokee Swamp Macroinvertebrates

Proceedings of the 2001 Georgia Water Resources Conference, April 26 and 27, 2001, Athens, Georgia.The Okefenokee Swamp is one of the largest wetlands in North America, covering 3781 km² of the Southeastern Atlantic Coastal Plain. Despite the prominence and magnitude of the Okefenokee, little is known about the resident invertebrate fauna. We conducted a 2 year study to describe the aquatic invertebrate communities and their spatial and temporal variation within the Okefenokee Swamp. We collected invertebrates from 6 sampling areas spread across 3 hydrologic units. Within each area, sampling was stratified to include aquatic (lake, river, or canal), herbaceous marsh, scrub-shrub, and cypress habitats. Sampling was conducted in May, August, and December of each year The invertebrate community structure is unique, but not especially diverse.Sponsored and Organized by: U.S. Geological Survey, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service, The University of Georgia, Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of TechnologyThis book was published by the Institute of Ecology, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602-2202. The views and statements advanced in this publication are solely those of the authors and do not represent official views or policies of The University of Georgia, the U.S. Geological Survey, the Georgia Water Research Institute as authorized by the Water Resources Research Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-397) or the other conference sponsors

Biotic Integrity of Macroinvertebrate Communities Along the Illinois Routes 53 & 120 Corridor

Sampled macroinvertebrates following ILEPA protocol at nine sites in August and September 2015 in the proposed IL Route 53 and 120 corridor and calculated biotic integrity metrics•Assessed sites based on the Qualitative Stream Habitat Assessment Procedure (SHAP)•Measured physical (width, depth, velocity) and chemical (pH, conductivity, salinity, total dissolved solids) characteristics•Habitat assessment showed impairment compared to Illinois reference conditions at all sites•Macroinvertebrate Index of Biotic Integrity rated one site as “Good” (Des Plaines River at Rt. 120), seven sites as “Fair,” and one site as “Poor” (Buffalo Cr. at Tall Oaks Dr.)▷ Total taxa richness ranged from 8 to 19 across sites▷ % EPT ranged from 0 to 22.4 across sites▷ No Plecoptera (stoneflies), indicators of good water quality, were collected from any site▷ Ephemeroptera (mayflies) were absent from three of the nine sitesIllinois State Toll Highway Authorityunpublishednot peer reviewe