Furse, M.T.

Symes, K.L.

Winder, J.M.

English

NERC Open Research Archive

0Institute ofFreshwaterEcology1-Natural Environment Research CouncilA NaturalEnvironmentResearchCouncilINSTITUTE OF FRESHWATER ECOLOGYRiver Laboratory, East Stoke, Wareham, Dorset BH20 68BThe faunal richness of headwater streams.A progress report for the period1st October - 31st December 1990.M.T. Furse BScJ.M. Winder BScK.L. SymesProject leader:Report date:Report to:IFE Report ref:TFS Project no.:M.T. FurseJanuary 1991National Rivers AuthorityRL/T04053t1/1TO4053t1This is an unpublished report and should not be cited withoutpermission, which should be sought through the Director of theInstitute of Freshwater Ecology in the first instance.The Institute of Freshwater Ecology is part of the Terrestrial andFreshwater Sciences Directorate of the Natural Environment ResearchCouncil.IIMINININNIMII10IMMIMMINIISOINIMOMPIOMIINSTITUTE OF FRESHWATERECOLOGYTHE FAUNAL RICHNESS OF HEADWATER STREAMS.A PROGRESS REPOR FOR THE PERIOD 1st OCTOBER 1990 - 31st DECEMBER 1990.INTRODUCTION.This report covers the first three months of a project scheduled for the totalperiod 1st October 1990 to 31st January 1995. The complete work programmecomprises four sequential stages, the first of which is of five months duration.The objectives of Stage 1 are detailed in the Project Investment Appraisal (PIA)which Schedule 2 of the Memorandum of Agreement for Research Contract(ref:54015000) between the National Rivers Authority (NRA) and the Institute ofFreshwater Ecology (IFE).These objectives may be summarised as follows: :Undertake a comprehensive search for existing macro-invertebrate data andplanned surveys on headwater streams.Compile a report which collates and analyses the information obtained.Use the results of the foregoing analyses, in consultation with the projectleader, to select catchments and sites to fulfil the objectives of thesubsequent stages of the project.The following text is sectioned in accordance With Schedule 1 of the researchcontract.SECTION 1 TECHNICAL PROGRESS.Progress to date has been directed towards objective a), data aquisition.1.1 Biological DataIn order to construct a suitable data-base fon analysis it is essential that theresults used shall meet consistently high standards of accuracy. In addition,wherever possible, most or all of the major taxonomic groups should beidentified to species level. This is important in providing a balanced pictureof the species diversity of each site in the data-base.The primary source of information of this Ouality is internal to IFE. Itcomprises the results of a series of studies undertaken by the -RiverCommunities" group at the River Laboratory, Derset. Many of these results arecurrently incorporated in the computer piackage RIVPACS (fiver InVertebratePrediction and Qlassification System) which is being used to assistinterpretation of NRA's 1990 River Quality Survey.RIVPACS contains 438 sites for which all taxa, from each of three seasonallydistinct samples, have been consistently identified to species or the nearestachievable level. Sampling procedures for these sites were as standardised aspracticable.In addition the IFE team already hold species level data on a further 400+- sites- and anticipate this figure rising by over 400 in 1991.In the context of these additional samples, the term "sites" is more looselyapplied than in RIVPACS where each site is almost invariably a separategeographical location. Amongst the additional sites particular locations may besampled in more than one calender year and each year-set is regarded as aseparate "site". Similarly more than one set of samples may have been taken fromthe same location in a given calender year. Each sample-set is also regarded asa separate site for the purposes of subsequent analyses.In general taxa from the additional sites have been identified to the same levelas in the RIVPACS data-base but with the: frequent exception of two groups,Oligochaeta (worms) and Chironomidae (non-biting midges). The identification ofthese groups is particularly time consuming.Approximately half of the 400+ non-RIVPACS sites were sampled in three separateseasons during a twelve month period. The principal exceptions are sites sampledin the land-use study programmes jointly funded by NERC and the Department ofthe Environment (DoE).Data from all RIVPACS and additional IFE sites are all held on the same VAXmainframe computer. However, because of the different purposes for which theywere collected and the different analyses'to which they were subjected, thebiological data were not always stored in a directly compatible manner. The samedegree of incompatibility existed amongst files containing locational data andother environmental information.The first stage in the utilisation of internal data has been to standardise theformat of as many of the existing data-sets as practicable.This has provided a master data-base; for. analysis, of 748 "sites". Theseinclude all samples (30) currently identified to species from the 1988 land-useprogramme "Impact of Land-use Change on Aquatic Communities".Shortly to be added to the data-base and available for anayses will be a further92 samples that have currently been identified to species from the 1990 land-useprogramme "Countryside Survey 1990. These will be mainly first or second streamorder. 1Also likely to be added are a variety of Mainly one off samples collected duringother minor contracts but identified to the same high standard. These couldcontribute up to an extra 21 sites which are again mainly low stream-order.The total data-base available for analysis in mid-January could thereforecomprise 861 sites.A secondary source of data is the NRA regions. At a meeting of NRA biologistsheld in December 1990 the project leader requested that the regional biologistsmake available, to IFE, any such relevant information on headwaters as could beeasily extracted.A letter from IFE, re-iterating this request and defining the nature and extentof data required, will be circulated td each NRA and River Purification Board(RPB) Region in early January 1990. Corlyespondents will also be asked toidentify any specific headwater study programmes that have been, or will be,undertaken in their regions.A tertiary source of information could be published data in the public domain.No effort has yet been made to carry out a literature search. Such a search isnot thought likely to be cost-effective for the reasons outlined later inSection 6.1.2 Environmental Data.For the purposes of this study headwater streams have been contractually definedas those of first or second stream order. First order streams are those thathave no tributaries. Second order streams are those which have only first ordertributaries.No stream order information was held for any of the IFE sites and the values hadto be determined for each of them before the biological data could be examinedon this basis. Orders were calculated using all of the watercourses marked onthe Ordnance Survey 1:50,000 "Landranger" series of maps.The complexity of the stream network for particular catchments varies markedlyaccording to topography and geology. For example upland streams on igneous rockhave highly bifurcate networks with large numbers of very short first ordertributaries. Thus rivers in landscapes of this sort rapidly reach fourth orfifth order although they may still have low discharge and be very near thesource. In contrast lowland chalkstreams have extremely few tributaries and maybecome quite substantial watercourses when still only second order.It is therefore proposed to examine the macro-invertebrate data in relation totwo additional criteria, distance from source and annual mean flow. Values ofeach of these variables were held for the majority (700+) of the IFE sites.Missing values are being determined.For ease of interpretation values of anntialmean flow and distance from sourceare best divided into a series of categories. Annual mean flow values werealready held as categories but distance firomsource values are currently beingconverted from absolute measurements.The annual mean flow categories adopted correspond to those shown on the RiverPollution Survey of England and Wales,1975ChemicalClassificationmapsasissued by DoE Water Data Unit. These are as follows:-CATEGORYVALUE RANGE(Cubic metres per second)10.31orless2 > 0.31 0.623 > 0.62 -,1.254 > 1.25 -2.505 > 2.50 -5.006 > 5.00 -'10.007 > 10.00 20.00> 20.00 40.009 > 40.00 -80.00101> 80.00The distance from source categories adopted were as follows:-CATEGORY,VALUE,RANGE(Kilometres)1 > 01.22 1.32.53 2.65.04 5.1 -: 10.05 10.1 -, 20.06 20.140.07 40.180.08 80.1 -,160.0> 160.01.2 Environmental Data.For the purposes of this study headwater .streamshave been contractually definedas those of first or second stream order. First order streams are those thathave no tributaries. Second order streams are those which have only first ordertributaries.No stream order information was heldfor any of the IFE sites and the values hadto be determined for each of them before the biological data could be examinedon this basis. Orders were calculated using all of the watercourses marked onthe Ordnance Survey 1:50,000 "Landranger".series of maps.The complexity of the stream network for particular catchments varies markedlyaccording to topography and geology. For example upland streams on igneous rockhave highly bifurcate networks with large numbers of very short first ordertributaries. Thus rivers in landscapes of this sort rapidly reach fourth orfifth order although they may still have low discharge and be very near thesource. In contrast lowland chalkstreams have extremely few tributaries and maybecome quite substantial watercourses when still only second order.It is therefore proposed to examine the macro-invertebrate data in relation totwo additional criteria, distance from source and annual mean flow. Values ofeach of these variables were held for the majority (700+) of the IFE sites.Missing values are being determined.For ease of interpretation values of annul& mean flow and distance from sourceare best divided into a series of dategories. Annual mean flow values werealready held as categories but distance from source values are currently beingconverted from absolute measurements.The annual mean flow categories adopted.correspond to those shown on the RiverPollution Survey of England and Wales, 1,975 Chemical Classification maps asissued by DoE Water Data Unit. These are •s follows:-CATEGORY1VALUE RANGE(Cubic metres per second)0.31or less2 > 0.31- 0.623 > 0.62 - 1.254 > 1.25- 2.505 > 2.50 - 5.006 > 5.00 - 10.007 > 10.00 - 20.008 > 20.00 - 40.009 > 40.00 - 80.0010> 80.00The distance from source categories adopted were as follows:-,CATEGORY VALUE;RANGE(Kilometres)1 > 0 - 1.22 1.3 - 2.53 2.6 - 5.04 5.1 - 10.05 10.1 - 20.06 20.1 - 40.07 40.1 - 80.08 80.1 -,160.09 > 160.0SECTION 2 INTERIM RESULTS.2.1 Biological dataNo detailed analyses of biological datd are currently available. Analyses canonly be undertaken once all the environmental data have been obtained andtransferred to computer.2.2 Environmental data.By the end of the reporting period a total of 748 sites had stream order,discharge and distance from source data av'ailable.The values for the remainingsites to be included in the data-base will be determined in early January.The number of sites, out of 748, in each category for each environmentalvariable is as follows:CATEGORY STREAM ANNUAL DISTANCE	ORDER MEAN FROMFLOW SOURCE1 49 187. 322 81 80; 433 189 751 884 222 119 1085 136 98 1716 60 69 1727 8 71: 958 0 29 309 0 16 610 0 1 0UNCLASSIFIED 3 3 3TOTAL 748 748 748In addition to the variables listed above,;the county and hydrometric area inwhich each site is situated were also computer coded, as were the 1:50,000 OSmaps on which each site occurred. This information will be of value on examiningtaxon diversity within individual catchments or geographic areas and inselection of study catchments for subsequent stages of the project.Output of analyses will show the comparative frequency of each taxon in eachstream order and each discharge and distanee from source category. Results willbe presented both for the whole data-base and for a limited series of selectedcatchments.Appropriate procedures for defining taxa with a statistically significantaffinity with headwater streams are being'discussed with NERC statisticians. Itis anticipated that any ensuing results will also be included in the Stage 1report.3. COST OF WORK DURING THE REPORTING PERIODA financial statement of the costs incurred during the reporting period has beenrequested from the IFE Finance Officer. 1Such details normally take six weeks,' from the completion of the period ofinterest, before they become available. This inevitable delay has been discussedwith the NRA project leader.The required information will be made ;available to NRA at the earliestopportunity.4. ESTIMATE OF TOTAL COST OF WORKSThe estimated total cost of the works under each category of expenditure remainas listed in Section 10 of the PIA and Schedule 8 of the project contractIt should be noted that the listed figures are given on a cost increase basiswith a base date of 1990-91.Additional information is now available on the staffing of the project works.The IFE Scientific Officer signified by a + on the third page of Schedule 4 ofthe project contract is J.M.Winder B.Sc. The IFE Assistant Scientific Officersignified by a + on the fourth page of the schedule is K.L.Symes.The Resource Input figures given on the fourth page of Schedule 4 are incorrect.The input for Symes (+) should read 202 and not 6, as stated. The input forD.Morton (not Norton, as stated) should read 8 and not 17. The duration of inputfor Symes should be amended to read 12.90 - 3.94.5.ESTIMATE OF COSTS FOR THE NEXT REPORTING PERIOD.The work is fully on schedule. It is ahticipated that the cost of work for theperiod 1-1-91 to 31-3-90 will be the difference between the figure given inSchedule 8 of the contract and the costs incurred in the current reportingperiod (see Section 3 of this report and:the figures to be provided shortly).6. FACTORS LIKELY TO AFFECT THE SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF THE WORK.There are no current budgetary problems associated with the completion of thework.The data-base immediately available for.anaysis within IFE is substantial (>850"sites") and is of a consistently high accuracy. However other sources of datawhich are of potential importance will probably not be available within thereporting period for Stage 1 of the contract.For example, the two existing NERC/DoE funded land-use studies undertaken by IFEwill yield approximately 500 running-water macro-invertebrate samples, collectedthroughout Great Britain during 1988 and,1990. These will all be identified tospecies in due course and will be of particular value in the context of theheadwater study.Progress with the identification of these samples is dependant on the annualfunding available. Thus, to date, only 123 of the samples have been identifiedand incorporated in the data-base for the current project. Most of theremaining, approximately 400, samples will become available for analyses duringthe 1991-1992 reporting year. Most of these are expected to be from first orsecond order streams within 3km of the source.Information requested from NRA region'smay also provide interesting insights.However it is uncertain when and how much data will be made available to IFE.Furthermore the formats in which the data will be provided are unknown but arelikely to be very variable. It may take quite some time to make them compatiblewith the internal IFE data-base and therefore be of value in analyses.Finally, literature searches for information on headwater streams are likely tobe very time consuming and the compatibility and accuracy of data could each beextra sources of complication. For these reasons it has been considered neithercost nor time-effective to search the literature at this stage.Therefore, whilst the size and quality of,the existing data-base is consideredperfectly adequate for the purposes of this,study, more extensive data will come"on-stream" during 1991-92. A supplement to, or revision of, parts of the Stage1 report may provide a mechanism for making this wider data-base available.MIOIMMMIMENNSIMIMIMMISIMIMIM'Waal=DISTRIBUTION. SHEET(To be completed by all Project Leaders completing commissioned researchproject reports. Please bind a copy of this distribution sheet us thefina1 page in all internal (IFE) copiies of the report.)1. AUTHORS: M.T. Furse, J.M. Winder, K.L. Symes ITITLE: The faunal richness of headwater streamg. A progress report for the neriod1st October - 31st December 1990REPORT 2E17: RL/T04053t1/1MASTER COPY HELD BY: M.T. FurseREPCRT ACCESS CODE (please assign a suitable code from list overleaf): C2.DISTRIBUTION LIST (A-C standard distribution; H other) Nos. copies DateA)Cnntra ct Customer: 223.1.91B J.G. Jones (requires copj of title page .and3b5;:ract only)C A.D. Pickering (1 copy of all reports)D IFE Internal Coordinator for Commissioned Research I t(one copy of all reports)11TOTAL NOS COPIES MADE:11345,78.E Project Leader: M.T. FurseF FBA Libxary, Windermere (1 copy of all reports)G)FBA Library, River Lab. (1 copy of all reports)H)OTHER:- please list below and indicate nos. copiesin RH column.J.M. WinderK.L. Symcs9REPORT ACCESS CODESCODEIn strict confidence -restricted accessAccess Lo namedcusLomer(s) - (couldbe named individuals),IFE Directointe, ProjectLeader and nll authors.In confidence -restricted access'Normal' accessAccess toDirectoraLeader, aIVE staffof Projeccustomer, IVELe, Project11 authors, andwith permissiont Leader.Access to customer, andall TEE staff. Access tovisitors and generalpublic with permission ofProject Leader.General access General access Lo anyone,as required.JB 10/89

The faunal richness of headwater streams: progress report for the period 1st October 1990 - 31st December 1990

http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/502436/1/N502436CR.pdf

The faunal richness of headwater streams: progress report for the period 1st October 1990 - 31st December 1990

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NERC Open Research Archive