United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 5
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, Illinois 60604
EPA 905-R-96-004
NTIS
September 1998
C.i
<&EPA Development of Index of
Biotic Integrity Expectations for
The Ecoregions of Indiana
V. Eastern Corn Belt Plain
-------
NOTICE
Use of this document is intended for the objective facilitation of information exchange between
the States and Federal Water Pollution Control Biologists for which it was intended. Mention
of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
When citing this document:
T.P. Simon and R. Dufour. 1997. Development of Index of Biotic Integrity expectations for the
Ecoregions of Indiana. V. Eastern Corn Belt Plain. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Region
V. Water Division, Watershed and Non-Point Source Branch. Chicago. IL. EPA 905/R-96/OQ2.
If requesting copies of this document:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Publication Distribution Center, ODD
11027 Kenwood Road. Bldg. 5 - Dock 63
Cincinnati. OH 45242
-------
EPA 905/R-96/004
Development of Index of Biotic Integrity Expectations for the Ecoregions
of Indiana: V. Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Thomas P. Simon
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Watershed and Non-Point Source Branch
77 West Jackson, WW-16J
Chicago, IL 60604
Ronda Dufour
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
Assessment Branch
100 North Senate Ave., P.O. Box 6015
Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015
September 30. 1998
V.S. Environmental Protection _
Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
7? West Jackson Boulevard, 12th f i
ChicafO, IL 60604-3590
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
I. List of Figures ii
11. List of Tables iv
m. Executive Summary v
iv. Acknowledgements vi
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
Definition of Reference Conditions 2
Criteria for Selecting Reference Sites 3
2.0 STUDY AREA 3
Physiographic Provinces 5
Ecoregions 7
Natural Areas 9
Drainage Features of the Wabash River 11
Historical Eastern Corn Belt Plain data 12
3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS 12
Sampling 12
Site Specific 12
Habitat 14
Community Analysis 14
Metrics 19
Scoring Modifications 54
4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 55
Eastern Corn Belt Plain 55
Biocnteria Comparison of the Eastern Corn Belt Plain 55
5.0 LITERATURE CITED 61
APPENDICES
A. Tolerance, trophic, and reproductive guilds classification for computing
the Index of Biotic Integrity for Indiana taxa.
B. Site classification percentages based on individual metric attributes.
C. Fish nomenclature changes for the species of fish occurring within the
political boundaries of Indiana.
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Number Pace
1 Map of Indiana showing the major and minor drainage basins
(after USGS drainage maps). 4
2 Map of Indiana showing the ecoregions designation
of Omermk and Gallant (1988) 6
3 Map of Indiana indicating the natural areas designation of Homoya
et al. (1985). 8
4 Eastern Corn Belt Plain indicating the location of sampled locations
during 1991 to 1994. 13
5 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in total
number of species with increasing drainage area for the Eastern
Corn Belt Plain. 22
6 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in number
of darter/madtom/sculpin species with increasing drainage area for
the Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 25
7 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in the
proportion of headwater species with increasing drainage area for
the Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 28
8 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in number
of sunfish species with increasing drainage area for the Eastern
Corn Belt Plain. 29
9 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in number of
minnow species with increasing drainage area for the Eastern Corn Belt
Plain. 32
10 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in number
of sucker species with increasing drainage area for the Eastern Corn
Belt Plain. 33
11 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in number
of sensitive species with increasing drainage area for the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 36
12 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in the
proportion of tolerant species with increasing drainage area for
the Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 39
n
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED)
Figure
Number Page
13 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in the
proportion of omnivores with increasing drainage area for the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 41
14 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in the
proportion of insectivores with increasing drainage area for the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 43
15 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in the
proportion of pioneer species with increasing drainage area for the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 45
16 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in the
proportion of carnivores with increasing drainage area for the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 46
17 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in the
catch per unit effort with increasing drainage area for the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 48
18 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in the
proportion of simple lithophil species with increasing drainage
area for the Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 51
19 Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in the
proportion of diseased, eroded fins, lesions, and tumors (DELT)
with increasing drainage area for the Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 53
111
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Number paqe
1 Attributes of Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) classification,
total IBI scores, and integrity classes from Karr et al. (1986). 17
2 Index of Biotic Integrity metrics used to evaluate headwater stream
(< 20 miles2 drainage area) sites in the Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 18
3 Index of Biotic Integrity metrics used to evaluate wadable nver
(> 20- < 1,000 miles2 drainage area) sites in the Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 19
4 The distributional characteristics of Indiana darter (Etheostomatini),
madtom CNoturus). and sculpin (Cottus) species. 24
5 List of Indiana fish species considered to be headwater species for
Evaluating permanent habitat in streams (Smith, 1971). 26
6 List of Indiana sunfish species for evaluating quality pool habitats. 27
7 Distributional characteristics of Indiana sucker species (family
Catostomidae) in the Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 31
8 List of Indiana fish species considered to be sensitive to a wide
variety of environmental disturbances including water quality and
habitat degradation. 35
9 List of Indiana fish species considered to be highly tolerant to
a wide variety of environmental disturbances including water quality
and habitat degradation. 38
10 List of Indiana fish species considered to be omnivores. ' 4U
11 List of Indiana fish species considered to be indicators of temporally
unavailable or stressed habitats (Larimore and Smith 1963; Smith 1971) 44
12 List of Indiana species considered to be simple lithophilic
spawners. 50
13 Species list of taxa collected in the Eastern Corn Belt Plain, Indiana,
collected between 1991 to 1994. 56
14 Comparison of Michigan DEQ (1996) Procedure 51 and Ohio EPA (1989) reference
conditions with reference conditions developed from Indiana's portion
of the Eastern Corn Belt Plain. 59
IV
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987 suggest the development of biological criteria for
evaluating the quality of the nation's surface waters. The watersheds of the Eastern Corn
Belt Plain were investigated in Indiana to determine water resource expectations. A total of
130 sites were sampled in the ecoregion in order to develop and calibrate an Index of Biotic
Integrity for use in this region of Indiana. Based on anticipated variance within the
ecoregion, sub-drainages were established within natural divisions as recognized by Homoya
et al. (1985).
Eight sub-drainages are recognized in our analysis and include the major drainage units of
the Tippecanoe, Wabash, Eel, Mississinewa. Salamonie. White, Wildcat, and St. Joseph River
drainages. Graphical analysis of the data enabled the construction of maximum species
richness lines for calibrating the Index of Biotic Integrity for 12 metrics, as modified for
application to headwater and mid-sized wadable rivers. Metrics were primarily based on the
previous works of Karr (1981), Karr et al. (1986), Ohio EPA (1987), and Simon (1991. 1994,
1997). Metrics are similar to those developed for the Northern Indiana Till Plain. This
includes the number of minnow species, sunfish species, a combination of sensitive species
to replace the intolerant metric, a combined darter, madtom. and sculpin metric, and the use
of percentage of headwater species and pioneer species as separate metrics.
Separate metrics were developed for headwater streams (< 20 miles2) and wadable river (20-
1000 miles2) drainage area. Scoring criteria modifications were instituted when less than 50
individuals were collected from a sampling location. This affected the trophic composition,
tolerance, simple lithophil, and DELT proportional metrics. Stations with drainage areas
less than 20 miles2 used a metric which included darters, madtoms, and sculpins (all benthic
insectivores). These species are sensitive indicators of a high quality aquatic resource.
In reaches with drainage areas greater than 20 miles2 a metric evaluating only darter species
was used following the original IBI. The proportion of pioneer species was substituted for
the proportion of carnivores in small headwater streams. The number of sunfish species was
retained for wadable stream sizes. The percentage of individuals as headwater species were
substituted for headwater sites as a replacement metric.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wishes to express their appreciation to Wayne
Davis, Valerie Jones, and Boniface Thayil, USEPA-Region V, Ambient Monitoring Section, and
John Winters. Dennis Clark, and Lee Bridges. Indiana Department of Environmental Management
(IDEM) who enabled this project to be completed by managing and facilitating logistics and
sampling needs. Thomas Lauer, Fisheries Scientist. Indiana Department of Natural Resources
provided information from the Department's stream reports that enabled sampling at reference
sites. Field assistance was provided by Scott Sobiech and Mike Li twin, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service; Andrew Pelloso, Steve Newhouse. James Stahl. Tony Branam, Ronda Dufour,
and Eric Edberg, IDEM biologists; and Joe Foy, Muncie Bureau of Water Quality. John Dustman,
Indiana University-Northwest, provided work space to process the large volume of samples.
Hydrologic unit and ecoregion maps were prepared by George Graettinger, USEPA, Water
Division, GIS Section. Numerous professional courtesies were provided by colleagues which
facilitated completion of this project: Shelby Gerking. Arizona State University. Chris
Yoder, Marc Smith, and Ed Rankin. Ohio EPA. Historic records were provided by Susan Jewett,
National Museum of Natural History; Douglas Nelson and Gerald Smith, University of Michigan
Museum of Zoology; and William Eschmeyer, California Academy of Science. Special thanks to
Wayne Davis, Lee Bridges, and Steve Newhouse for constructive review comments on a previous
draft of the manuscript. The project manager and chief scientist of this report was Thomas
P. Simon, Ph. D.. Regional Biocriteria Coordinator.
Guest Reviewers:
Dr. Marc Oemke, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
Mr. Marc Smith. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
Dr. Lizhu Wang, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Dr. Dennis Clark, Indiana Department of Environmental Management
Mr. Steve A. Newhouse, Indiana Department of Environmental Management
Mr. James Stahl, Indiana Department of Environmental Management
VI
-------
Development of Index of Biotic Integrity Expectations for the
Ecoregions of Indiana. V. Eastern Corn Belt Plain
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The term "biological integrity" originated
in the Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500) and has
likewise appeared in subsequent versions
(PL 95-217; PL 100-1). Karr and Dudley
(1981) defined biological integrity as,
"the ability of an aquatic ecosystem to
support and maintain a balanced,
integrated, adaptive community of
organisms having a species composition,
diversity, and functional organization
comparable to the best natural habitats
within a region". The use of a biological
component to evaluate the ambient lotic
aquatic community of our nations surface
waters has been well discussed elsewhere
(Karr et al. 1986; Ohio EPA 1987; Whittier
et al. 1987; Simon et al. 1988; Davis
1990; Fausch et al. 1990; Karr 1991).
An assessment of the Eastern Corn Belt
Plain enabled an objective evaluation of
specific metrics performance and
evaluation of reference conditions for the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain. The ecoregion has
impacts associated with channelization and
damming, agriculture, and municipal and
point source dischargers. The primary
point sources are municipal facilities.
chemical manufacturers, and hydro-electric
power generating stations distributed in
the main population centers of the basin.
The affects of channelization and
agriculture have been well documented
including thermal increases (Raney and
Menzel 1969; Brown 1976; Brungs and Jones
1977; Hokanson and Biesinger 1980; USEPA
1980; McCormick et al. 1981: EPRI 1981);
increased nutrient and allochthanous
input, and runoff and riparian zone
clearing.
The objective of this study was to
evaluate the biological integrity of
Indiana water resources based on "least
impacted" reference conditions for
establishing baseline conditions (Hughes
et al. 1986). Least impacted reference
sites are representative of the watershed
under study and reflect the better sites
with minimum anthropogenic change. Least
impacted is not synonymous with pristine.
Rather, sites are selected for their
representativeness of the area. The
Eastern Corn Belt Plain has been
dramatically changed over the last 250
years with the draining of the riverine
wetlands and the intensive ditching
projects that completely changed the
landscape. The following project goals
were addressed during the Eastern Corn
Belt Plain biological criteria project:
o Develop biological criteria for
headwater, mid-size, and large river
reaches using the Index of Biotic
Integrity;
o Identify areas of least disturbance
within the Eastern Corn Belt Plain
for establishing reference conditions;
o Develop maximum species richness (MSR)
lines from the reference database for
each IBI metric as a log function of
drainage area;
o Compare biocritena to States of Ohio
and Michigan expectations for the
ecoregion.
This technical report includes specific
Index of Biotic Integrity criteria
including the development of metrics and
maximum species richness lines, to
delineate areas of least disturbance in
the Eastern Corn Belt Plain ecoregion.
Limited field collection has been
conducted in Indiana since the completion
of Gerking's distribution of Indiana
fishes. Less than 2% of Indiana's surface
-------
Indiana Ecoreaion
waters had been assessed at the beginning
of this study. Since limited information
was available for the selection of least
disturbed stations, we attempted to sample
representative stream types of this region
in order to determine where least impacted
stream segments occurred.
Definition of Reference Conditions
In order to make accurate evaluations of
the biological condition of the region,
various baseline geological, geographic,
and climatic differences need to be
assessed. The goal is not to provide a
definition of pristine conditions, since
these types of conditions are either few
in number or nonexistent in heavily
populated states (Hughes et al. 1982;
Whittier et al. 1987). Our expectations
are determined from the structural and
functional attainable natural conditions
of "least impacted" or reference
conditions. Assessment of these criteria
need to be modified nationally, since
regional differences can be attributed to
the expectations based on structure and
function that determine the distribution
of fishes. The ecoregion concept is useful
for clustering large homogeneous regions,
since these areas are influenced by
different physical processes (Omernik
1987).
In order to select stations for sampling
it is necessary to know the geographical
boundary of the "ecoregions" within the
State of Indiana. A valid ecoregion has
boundaries where ecosystem variables and
patterns emerge (Hughes et al. 1986).
Omernik (1987) mapped the ecoregions of
the conterminous United States from maps
of land-surface form, soil types,
potential natural vegetation, and land
use. Each ecoregion was then based on
areas of regional homogeneity. Ecoregions
became a very useful mechanism for
determining community complexity and for
establishing boundaries associated with
various land forms.
Ecoregions provide a geographical
framework for determining the appropriate
response for streams of similar proportion
and complexity. Reference conditions are
used for establishing the areas of "least
impact", and will reveal the current
conditions of the surface waters of
Indiana. Once ecoregional expectations are
determined it is important to consider
that conditions do not remain static. On
the contrary, repeat monitoring and
sampling of stations, both reference and
site specific will need to be conducted in
order to document change over time and
further refine the IBI.
Reference conditions are not the same as
reference sites. Reference conditions are
the subtle patterns that emerge from the
regional database. Few if any nonimpacted
sites occur in North America, thus in
order to determine the extent of
degradation important attributes of stream
fish communities are analyzed to determine
the patterns of "least impacted"
communities. The relevance of including
some sites that are not considered
pristine or "reference sites" is not
important because it is only the upper 5$
of the sites that determine the maximum
species richness lines or 95th percent!le
lines.
Because of subregional differences,
further demarcation was made by examining
the role of the basin or the watersheds
within ecoregions. Fish composition and
community structure is determined, within
a natural area by the availability of
water of appropriate quality and quantity
to ensure existence, provide routes of
emigration, sustain growth, and increase
fitness through reproduction. Likewise,
species-specific differences exist in
community structure that may not reveal
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
differences in current water quality but
may be determined by historical geomorphlc
(Leopold et al. 1964) or zoogeographic
processes (Hocutt and Wiley 1986). Trends
in Indiana water quality were therefore
evaluated using a watershed approach
within an ecoregion framework.
Criteria for Selecting Reference Sites
Several procedures are available for
determining reference conditions. Larsen
et al. (1986) and Whittier et al. (1987)
chose sites after careful examination of
aerial photographs, watershed specific
information review, on-site
reconnaissance, and expert consultation.
This procedure requires that a limited
number of high-quality sites be sampled in
order to predict regional expectations.
The methods chosen for site selection were
based on the evaluation of Regional Water
Quality Planning Maps (USGS undated) that
identified known impact sources and
diffuse nonpoint sources that could
potentially influence a site. A balanced
distribution of sites within all parts of
the Eastern Corn Belt Plain drainage was
maintained against historic collections
sites (Jordan 1877; Gerking 1945; IDEM
1990). All sites were rigorously sampled
in order to get representative, distance
specific, quantitative estimates of
species richness and biomass. Maximum
species richness lines were then compiled
(see methods below), followed by
calculations of the Index of Biotic
Integrity values to reveal those stations
that were the "least impacted" stations
for the ecoregion.
Reference sites are defined as the
stations that cumulatively define the 95th
percent!le line of the individual metrics.
Evaluation of habitat and other physical
parameters refined the final list of
reference sites. Sites that had habitat or
water quality deficiencies, but still
attained high index ratings would have
been removed from the final list. This
action was not required, since poor
habitat and water quality affected various
portions of the community resulting in a
lowered index score. These sites are not
pristine or undisturbed (few exist in
Indiana), but they do represent the best
conditions given the background activities
(i.e. anthropogenic impacts;
channelization; cultural eutrophication).
Sampling was conducted in all size classes
of river reaches in the eight River
categories from the headwater (<20 mile2)
to the largest mainstem drainage area (ca.
1,000 mile2) in Indiana.
2.0 STUDY AREA
Indiana has an area of 36,291 square
miles, and drains the Ohio, the upper
Mississippi, and Great Lakes Regions
(Seaber et al. 1984). These three regions
were further subdivided into nine
subregions (Fig. 1), five of which drain
86* of the State (USGS 1990). The State of
Indiana lies within the limits of latitude
37° 46' 18" and 41° 45' 33" north, for an
extreme length of 275.5 miles in a north-
south direction: and between longitude 84°
47' 05" and 88° 05' 50" west with an
extreme width in an east-west direction of
142.1 miles.
The State has a maximum topographic relief
of about 900.9 ft, with elevations ranging
from about 300.3 ft above mean sea level
at the mouth of the Wabash River to
slightly more than 1.201.2 ft in Randolph
County in the east-central part of the
state.
This report considers only the Eastern
Corn Belt Plain. The main watersheds of
the ecoregion include the Wabash River
tributaries and the Joseph River drainage.
-------
Indiana Ecoregions
71
Great Lakes Basin
Mississippi River
Ohio River
Regional Boundary
Sub-Regional Boundary
Accounting Unit Boundary
Cataloging Unit Boundary
County Boundary
State Boundary
Figure 1. Map of Indiana showing Major and Minor drainage basins (from USGS data).
4
-------
Esstern Corn Belt Plain
The entire Eastern Corn Belt Plain extends
into Ohio, Michigan, and Indiana (Omernik
and Gallant, 1988). Within Indiana, the
ecoregion is found within the central
portion of the state, however, a finger
entends along the St. Joseph River in
northcentral and northeastern Indiana that
drains in a northeastern direction into
Ohio and eventually Lake Erie through the
Maumee River.
The Wabash River drains an area of 32,910
square miles (Hoggatt 1975). It crosses
two ecoregions and is the largest drainage
in Indiana. Principal tributary streams
include the White River, which drains the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain and Interior River
Lowland ecoregions (Omermk and Gallant,
1988). Large tributaries that drain the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain include the
Tippecanoe, East and West Forks of the
White, Driftwood, Big Blue, Flatrock, Eel,
and Muscatatuck Rivers. The St. Joseph
River drains an area of 4,285 mile2
(Hoggatt 1975). It is contained within a
single ecoregion and drains 4.7% of
Indiana.
Physiographic Provinces
Fenneman (1946) divided the State into two
physiographic provinces based on the
maximum extent of glaciation. The
glaciated portion of the State contains
the Central Lowland province, which
includes the majority of the Eastern Corn
Belt Plain, and the unglaciated portion is
termed the Interior Low Plateaus province.
Schneider (1966) further divided Indiana
into three broad physiographic areas that
closely reflect the surface-water
characteristics of the State. The St.
Joseph River drains a portion of the
Northern Lake and Moraine Region, while the
Wabash River drains a portion of the
Tipton Till Plain, Scottsburg Lowland,
Norman Upland, Crawford Upland, Dearborn
Upland, and Mitchell Plain. The Tipton
Till Plain is characterized by a
depositional plain of low relief that has
been modified only slightly by postglacial
stream erosion. The southern section of
the State includes the Wisconsinan glacial
boundary and represents a series of north-
and south-trending uplands and lowlands.
Landforms in this area are principally due
to normal degradation processes.
The Northern Lake and Moraine Region
covers the northern one-fourth of the
State and is of variable relief. Its
characteristic deep peat deposits and
small lakes that are restricted to the
rugged, terminal moraines. Numerous broad
lacustrine and outwash plains occur, often
marked by wide marshes (or marshes now
drained) broken by low sand ridges or
knolls. The northern section of the State
was covered during the most recent
Wisconsinan glacial event.
The last major glaciation event
dramatically altered northern Indiana
during the Wisconsinan period (14,000 to
22,000 years ago). As glaciers advanced
and retreated, the land surface was
dramatically altered as the landforms were
either scoured by advancing glacial ice or
the scoured materials were deposited by
retreating glaciers. Two distinct glacial
lobes are known to have advanced into
Indiana, from the northeast out of Lake
-------
Indiana Ecoregions
Central Corn Belt Plains
Eastern Corn Belt Plains
Northern Indiana Till Plains
Huron/Erie Lake Plains
Interior Plateau
Interior River Lowland
Map of Indiana showing the ecoregions designation
of Omernik and Gallant (1988)
6
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Erie and Saginaw Bay basins and from the
north from the Lake Michigan basin.
Ecoregions
Omernik and Gallant (1988) characterized
the attributes of ecoregions of the
midwestern states. Indiana has six
recognized ecoregions: Central Corn Belt
Plain, Huron-Erie Lake Plain, Southern
Michigan-Northern Indiana Till Plain
(referred to as Northern Indiana Till
Plain), Eastern Corn Belt Plain, Interior
Plateau, and Interior River Lowland (Fig.
2). The current study includes only the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain ecoregion (Omermk
and Gallant 1988).
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Much of the ecoregion consists of
extensive cropland agriculture. It is
distinguished from the Western Corn Belt
Plains by its natural forest cover and
associated soils. The gently rolling
glacial till plain is broken by moraines,
kames, and outwash plains. Elevations
range between 399.3 ft to greater than
1320 ft. The ecoregion is characterized by
low relief, typically less than 66 ft;
however, some morainal hills occur in the
northern portion near Lake Erie. Stream
valleys are long and sinuous and generally
narrow and shallow throughout the 31,800
miles2 of the ecoregion. Small streams have
narrow valley floors; larger streams have
broad valley floors. Precipitation occurs
mainly during the growing season and
averages from 35 to 40 inches annually.
The ecoregion has few reservoirs or
natural lakes.
Both perennial and intermittent streams
are common in the ecoregion. Constructed
drainage ditches and channelized streams
further assist in soil drainage in flat,
poorly drained areas. Stream density is
approximately one half mile per square
mile in the most typical portions of the
ecoregion (Fig. 2).
The ecoregion is almost entirely farmland.
The major crops produced are corn and
soybeans. A total of 75£ of the landuse is
cropland, while the remaining 25% is
permanent pasture, small woodlots, or
urban. Emphasis on livestock includes the
growing of feed grains and hay. Swine,
beef and dairy cattle, chickens, and
turkey are raised.
Most of the soils were developed under the
influence of deciduous forest vegetation.
The soils are loamy calcareous glacial
till, overlain by loess deposits. The
soils are lighter in color and more acid
than the adjacent Central Corn Belt Plain.
Hapludolls and Ochraqualf's are the
dominant soil groups on dry and wet upland
sites, respectively. Argiaquolls,
Haplaquolls, and Medisaprists have
developed in flats and depressions.
Hapludalf's and Fragiudalf's are common on
well drained slopes of valleys. Shallow
Hapludolls occur on some valley sides
where erosion has removed the glacial
material and exposed the underlying shale
limestone. Udifluvents and Fluvaquents
have derived from silty alluvium in narrow
floodplains.
The natural vegetation of the area
consists of diverse hardwood forests,
predominantly American beech and sugar
maple. However, a significant amount of
white oak, black oak, northern red oak,
yellow popular, hickory, white ash, and
black walnut exists. Many of the trees are
common in adjacent ecoregions, but most
are comprised of oak and hickory. Wetter
sites include white oak, pin oak, northern
red oak, yellow popular, ash, and sweetgum
primarily, and shingle oak, black oak, and
hickory also occur. Silver maple,
cottonwood, sycamore, pin oak, elm, and
sweetgum grow along rivers and stream
corridors.
-------
Indiana Ecoregion
HOMOYA'S NATURAL REGIONS
OF INDIANA
NORTHERN LAKES
GRAND PRAIRIE—Kankakee Marsh
GRAND PRAIRIE—Kankakee Sand
GRAND PRAIRIE—Grand Paririe
NORTHWESTHN MOJWHL — Chicago Lake
Basin
NORTHERWESTERN MoRAiNAL—Valparaiso
Moraine
NORTHWESTERN MORAWAL—Lake Michigan
Border
CENTRAL TILL PLAIN—"fipton Till Plain
CENTRAL TILL PLAIN — Entrenched Valley
CENTRAL TILL PLAIN -Button Till
Plain
BLACK SWAMP
BLUEGRASS — Muscatatuck Rats and
Canyon
BLUEGRASS — Scottsburg
BLUEGRASS - Switzerland Hills
SHAWNEE HILL — Crawford Upland
SHAWNEE HUL — Escarpment
SOUTHWESTERN LOWLANDS — Glaciated
SOUTHWESTERN LOWLANDS — Plainville
SOUTHWESTERN LOWLANDS — Oriftless
HIGHLAND RIM - Mitchell Karst Plain
HIGHLAND RIM — Brown County Hills
HIGHLAND RIM — Knobstone Escarpment
SOUTHERN BOTTOM LANDS
Figure 3: Map of Indiana indicating the natural areas designation of Homoya et al.
(1985)
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Natural Areas
A natural region is a major, generalized
unit of the landscape where a distinctive
assemblage of natural features is present
(Homoya et al. 1985). It is similar to the
ecoregion concept integrating several
natural features, including climate,
soils, glacial history, topography,
exposed bedrock, presettlement vegetation,
and physiography. It differs from the
ecoregion concept in the utilization of
biodiversity of the fauna and flora to
delineate areas of relative homogeneity.
The Wabash River drainage incorporates the
Central Till Plain, Southwestern
Lowlands, portions of the Highland Rim,
Bluegrass, Southern Bottomlands, and Big
River Natural Regions (Fig. 3).
The Central Till Plain is the largest
natural region in Indiana, formerly in the
forested Wisconsinan till in the central
portion of the state. The Region is
topographically homogeneous although
glacial moraines are common. The region is
a major divide between the communities
with a strong northern affinity and those
with strong southern affinity, the
Entrenched Valley is a concentrated
continuum of northern, southern, eastern
and western affinities. The Tipton Till
Plain subsection is the predominant
subsection of the West and upper East Fork
drainages. The Tipton Till Plain is
characterized by loamy Wisconsinan till.
This section is mostly undissected plain
formerly covered by an extensive beech-
maple-oak forest.
The soils are predominantly neutral silt
and silty clay loams. The northern
flatwoods community associated with these
poorly drained soils were ubiquitous but
are now confined to the scattered
woodlots. Species common to the woodlots
include red maple, pin oak, bur oak, swamp
white oak, Shumard's oak, American elm,
and green ash. In slightly better drained
soils occur beech, sugar maple, black
maple, white oak. red oak, shagbark
hickory, tulip popular, red elm, basswood,
and white ash.
The Southwestern Lowlands Natural Region
is characterized by low relief and
extensive aggraded valleys. The lower
White River and the lower portions of the
East and West Forks occur in this Natural
Region. Much of the area is nearly level,
undissected, and poorly drained, although
in several areas the topography is hilly
and well drained. The region was glaciated
by the Illinoian ice sheet. Three sections
include the Plainville Sand section,
Glaciated section, and Driftless Area
section. The Glaciated Section is the only
area that incorporates a portion of the
West Fork White River.
The Glaciated Section corresponds with the
niinoian till plain. The soils are acid
to neutral silt loams with a thick layer
of loess. Natural communities include
flatwoods forest in the Driftless Section
which include shagbark hickory, shellbark
hickory, pin oak, shingle oak, hackberry,
green ash, red maple, and silver maple.
This section had the greatest amount of
prairie habitat south of the Wisconsian
glacial boundary.
The Highland Rim physiographic region of
the Interior Plateau ecoregion is
subdivided into three subsections:
Mitchell Karst Plain Section, Brown County
Hills Section, and Knobstone Escarpment
Section (Homoya et al. 1985). The Highland
Rim is a discontinuous belt of underlying
strata of Mississippi an age, although some
Pennsylvanian aged strata crop out in
places. The region is unglaciated, with
the exception of a relatively unmodified
glaciated area at the northern and eastern
boundary. The area possesses a large
expanse of karst topography, rugged hills,
-------
Indiana Ecoregion
and steep cliffs. Most of the area was
forested during presettlement times, but
large barrens occurred along with smaller
areas of limestone and siltstone and
gravel wash.
The major feature of the Mitchell Karst
Plain include several natural community
types most notably the karst plain which
comprises caves, sinkhole ponds and
swamps, flatwoods, barrens, limestone
glade and several upland forest types. The
plain is relatively level except for the
limestone cliffs and rugged hills along
the periphery of the range. Caves are
common, the soil is generally well drained
with silty loams derived from loess and
weathered limestone. Acid cherry Baxter
silty loam occurs mostly in the south.
Along the gravel wash is primarily
composed of limestone and chert gravel
that border most streams. Characteristic
species include Indian grass, Carolina
willow, big bluestem, ninebark, pale
dogwood, and bulrush. Several forest
communities occur, however, the western
mesophytic forest type predominates and
include white oak, sugar maple, shagbark
hickory, pignut hickory, and white ash.
The Brown County Hills Section is
characetrized by deeply dissected uplands
underlain by siltstone. shale, and
sandstone. The soils are well drained acid
silt loams with minor amounts of loess.
Bedrock is near the surface but rarely
crops out. The natural communities are
uniform dominated by oak-hickory,
especially chestnut oak, and ravines with
mesic species including beech, red oak,
sugar maple, and white ash. Upper slopes
usually have pure monotypic stands of
chestnut oak, a thick growth of
greenbrier, low growing shrubs, and a
carpet of sedges.
The Knobstone Escarpment Section is
similar in substrate and topography to the
Brown County Hills Section. The major
difference is the presence of Virginia
pine in the upland forest communities. The
pine is commonly co-dominant with chestnut
oak on the many ridge crests and south
facing slopes. American chestnut was
historically dominant and has been taken
over by Chestnut oak. Rock outcrops are
rare and restricted to the ridge tops.
Glades with shaly substrates are present,
but rare, and occur on south facing
slopes. They are usually sterile
environments due to the unstable
substrates and harsh conditions.
The Southern Bottomlands Natural Region is
an alluvial bottomland along the rivers
and larger streams in southwestern
Indiana. It is distinguished from other
bottomland regions in Indiana by the
fauna! affinity to the lower Mississippi
River Valley and Gulf Coastal Plain. The
Illinoian glacial border bisects the
region placing the northern portion in the
Central Lowlands physiographic province
and the southern portion in the Interior
Plateau's province. The glacial border has
had little effect on the bottomland
community. The soils of this Natural
Region are mostly neutral to acid silt
loams and are frequently flooded. The
natural communities included bottomland
forest, swamp, ponds, sloughs, and
formerly marsh and prairie. The bottomland
forest included pecan, sugarberry, swamp
chestnut, pin oak, swamp white oak, red
maple, silver maple, catalpa, shellbark
hickory, sycamore, and green ash. The
southern swamps and sloughs have bald
cypress, swamp cottonwood, water locust,
pumpkin ash, and overcup oak. The unique
fauna of the region includes cottonmouth,
hieroglyphic turtle, diamondbacked
watersnake, eastern mud turtle, northern
copperbelly, swamp rabbit, harlequin
darter, and yellow crowned night heron.
The Bluegrass natural region is named for
its similarity to the physiography and
10
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
natural communities of the Kentucky
bluegrass region. The entire natural
region has been covered by one or more
pre-Wisconsin ice sheets but today only a
thin veneer of till is present. The
northern boundary of the region
approximates the southern terminus of the
Wisconsin glaciation. Most of the natural
area was forested, although a few glade,
cliff, and barren remnants remain, as well
as non-forested aquatic communities. The
natural area is comprised of three
sections, Scottsburg Lowland, Muscatatuck
Flat and Canyon, and Switzerland Hills
Section. Only the Scottsburg Lowland
Section is included in this discussion of
the East Fork of the White River.
The Scottsburg Lowland Section is wide
alluvial and lacustrine plains bordering
major streams. Major soils are acid to
neutral silt loams with a sizeable eolian
sand occurring just east of the East Fork
of the White River. No unique communities
or species are known to be associated with
it. Bedrock rarely crops out, with the
major exception being the Falls of the
Ohio. Predominant natural communities are
floodplain forest and swamp. The swamp
community is characterized by the
occurrence of swamp cottonwood, red maple,
pin oak, river birch, green ash, stiff
dogwood, and buttonbush. The slightly
better drained floodplain forest includes
sweetgum, swamp chestnut oak, swamp white
oak, American elm, black gum, beech,
shellbark hickory, and occassionally
pecan. The rare southern pale green orchid
and northern copperbelly, eastern ribbon
snake, are restricted to this area.
Wetland features include swamps, acid seep
springs, low-gradient, silt-bottomed,
streams, rivers and ponds.
The Big River natural region is defined by
aquatic habitat where the average flow is
7000 cfs or greater. This includes the
Wabash River and its principal tributary,
the lower White River to its confluence at
the junction with the East and West Forks.
The natural area is based on the presence
of several fish species (lake sturgeon.
shovel nose sturgeon, alligator gar,
shortnose gar. skipjack herring,
smallmouth buffalo, goldeye. mooneye, and
blue sucker) and several mussel species.
The alligator snapping turtle, hellbender,
and riverweed are also rare species
restricted to this area.
Drainage Features of the Wabash River
The Wabash River basin begins in the State
of Ohio where it originates in Beaver
Lake. The river drains 285 square miles in
Ohio and enters Indiana in Adams and Jay
County. The Wabash River drains 23.950
square miles exclusively in Indiana. The
River flows east across central Indiana
incorporating the Mississinewa, Salamonie
and Eel Rivers. Near Tippecanoe County
the Tippecanoe River enters the River and
the flow begins to bend to the southwest.
The River flows south to Vigo County where
it forms the political boundary of the
States of Illinois and Indiana. This
shared portion of the River includes 8,704
square miles. The-Wabash River flows
southwest and incorporates its major
tributary of the White River at the
southern extreme of Knox County. Numerous
minor tributaries include Raccoon Creek,
Sugar Creek, and the Patoka River. The
minor tributaries fluctuate with seasonal
flows. The lower Wabash River baseflow
varies dramatically from groundwater and
contributions from the East and West
Forks. Average discharge for the Wabash
River, downstream of the Southern Railway
bridge, at Mount Carmel, (Gibson County)
is 28.130 cfs with ranges of 6.144 cfs
during 7 day, 10 year low flow and 428,000
cfs during 100 year flood periods in March
1913 (Stewart et al.. 1995).
11
-------
Indiana Ecoreaion
Historical Eastern Corn Belt Plain Data
The Wabash River is considered one of
Indiana's highest quality resources. The
biology of the Wabash River and its main
tributary the White River has been
intensively examined (Gammon numerous
studies. 1991: Public Service of Indiana
1977, Kostka et al. 1986; WAPORA 1976; EA
Science and Technology 1992). Although
this is not intended to be an exhaustive
list, included are a few of the most
significant studies in the Eastern Corn
Belt Plain.
The primary reasons for study were a
result of assessing thermal impacts from
generating facilities at Cayuga, Wabash
Generating Facility, and the Breed Plant
(Gammon 1991). The aquatic communities of
the Wabash River have been correlated with
water quality (Limnotech 1979;
Environmental Science and Engineering
1987). The fish community has also been
well studied including distribution
(Jordan 1890; Evermann and Jenkins 1910;
Gerking 1945): thermal influence (Gammon
numerous studies, summarized in 1991;
Public Service of Indiana 1977; Smith
1979; Lewis et al. 1989); and fisheries
potential (Pearson 1975). Additional
studies have concentrated on the upper
Wabash River (Aderkas and McReynolds 1962;
Pearson 1975; Braun 1982, Walterhouse
1988. Braun 1990), middle Wabash
(Robertson 1975). and lower Wabash River
(Forbes and Richardson 1920).
The Wabash River possesses a highly
diverse fish community. Previous studies
have documented a total of 151 species of
fish in the Wabash River basin (Burr and
Page 1986). The earliest records of Jordan
(1877) suggest the river was abundant with
both food and non-game species. The Wabash
River shares 91 native species with the
Ohio River. That amounts to a 75% fauna!
resemblance between the systems. The
Wabash River has the greatest native
species richness compared to the
tributaries and nainstem of the Ohio and
upper Mississippi drainage (Burr and
Page 1986). The fauna! similarity of the
Wabash River is most like the White River
(ca. 82%) and the Green River, Kentucky
(ca. 77%). These Ohio River tributaries
formed a phenetic cluster based on fish
community presence (Burr and Page 1986)
suggesting the Ohio River fauna is
different from the upper Mississippi River
fauna.
3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS
Sampling
Site Specific
In order to answer basin-specific
questions and to calibrate an IBI for
evaluating ecosystem health, a sufficient
number of samples were required from each
of the various drainages. A total of 130
locations (Fig. 4) were surveyed during
June through August 1991 to 1994 in order
to compile the data needed to evaluate the
maximum species richness lines for
calibration of the Index of Biotic
Integrity. Site and collection records are
maintained within the State of Indiana
files. Since the primary purpose of this
study was to evaluate the water quality of
Indiana using biological methodology, no
further evaluation of site specific data
(e.g. site specific taxonomic species
lists) will be included other than an
overall taxa list.
To ensure repeat sampling at the exact
same site, all locations are based on
latitude and longitude. Narrative
descriptions for mileage are from the
center point rather than the edge of the
nearest town since the boundaries of many
Indiana towns will change over the next
12
-------
Eastern Corn Beit PUin
Figure 4. Eastern Corn Belt Plain indicating the location of sampled locations
during 1991 to 1994.
13
-------
Indiana Ecoregion
century. All sites were evaluated based on
drainage area, since this provides a
reliable quantification (Hughes et al .
1986) of stream size. As drainage area
increases fewer locations are available
for comparative analysis.
Habitat
The diversity of habitats sampled has a
major effect on data collection. A
"representative" sample always requires
that the entire range of riffle, run.
pool, and extra -channel habitat be
sampled, especially when large rivers are
surveyed. Atypical samples result when
unrepresentative habitats are sampled
adjacent to the sampling site. Species
richness near bridges or near the mouths
of tributaries entering large rivers,
lakes, or reservoirs are more likely to be
characteristic of large-order habitats
than the one under consideration (Fausch
et al. 1984).
A general site description of each
established sampling location was
conducted using the field observation
procedure of Ohio EPA (1989) and Rankin
(1989). The Qualitative Habitat Evaluation
Index (QHEI) takes into account important
attributes of the habitat that increases
heterogeneity. Scoring incorporates
information on substrate composition,
instream cover, channel morphology.
riparian zone and bank erosion, and pool
and riffle quality. Physical /chemical
parameters were recorded for each sample
site to assist in assessing the biological
data further: dissolved oxygen, pH,
temperature, and specific conductivity.
Equipment utilized for physical water
quality analysis was a Hydrolab SVR2-SU
meter following the specifications of the
manufacturer.
Community Analysis
Sample Considerations
Only one electrofishing gear type is
needed at each location to collect a
representative sample (Jung and
Libosvarsky 1965; Ohio EPA 1989). A T&J
pulsed-DC generator capable of 300 volt
output, 1750 watts was mounted in a
Coleman Sport-canoe, floated in a Sport-
Yak, or attached to a long-line (see Ohio
EPA 1989 or USEPA 1988 for discussion of
gear). We collected by wading in shallow
riffles and runs, and floated through
pools and unwadeable habitat. Sampling
included both shorelines in streams > 5 m
or followed a serpentine pattern on both
shores for streams < 5 m.
All fish encountered were collected at
each site. Adult and juvenile specimens
from each stream reach were identified to
species utilizing the taxonomic keys of
Gerking (1955). Trautman (1981), and
Becker (1983). Cyprinid taxonomy follows
Mayden (1989), changes in species
nomenclature are listed in Appendix C for
comparability with previous
investigations. The young-of-the-year fish
less than 20 mm in length are not included
in Index of Biotic Integrity or composite
totals analysis. Early life stages exhibit
high initial mortality (Simon 1989) and
are difficult to collect with gear
designed for larger fish (Angermeier and
Karr 1986). Collection of fish from this
category will be retained for possible
future use in State water monitoring
programs (e.g. ichthyoplankton index (I2)).
Specimens greater than 20 mm TL are easily
collected using our gear. Juvenile
specimen survival at lengths > 20 mm TL
also show many species begin to function
in distinct trophic guilds and reflect
mature species attributes.
Many different study designs can be
employed to assimilate a reference
14
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
database. Two broad categories of random
and nonrandom designs can enable sampling
localities to be targeted for specific
habitat types or provide a representative
picture of the area under consideration.
We used a nonrandom study design since our
intentions were to avoid known point and
non-point sources of pollution.
An additional consideration for choosing a
non-random design includes spatial
coverage. Numerous studies (Ohio EPA.
1989) have utilized a reference site
approach that compares the very best an
area has to offer against typical or
representative portions of the region.
Additional study is needed to evaluate
site variation and seasonal trends causing
sites to have to be repeat sampled. Ohio
has had a significant advantage in
determining where "least impacted" or
reference sites exist because of the
extensive work of Trautman (1981), and
other ichthyologists before him.
Unfortunately, the historic record for
Indiana begins in the late 1800's and ends
at approxiamtely 1945 with the published
work of Shelby Gerking. Little sampling of
the fish community of Indiana has been
completed since this time. Based on
information presented in the National
305(b) report to Congress, Indiana had
less than 2% of the surface waters
assessed prior to 1990. We initiated this
project to determine where these "least
impacted" sites occurred and assimilated a
database to address immediate data needs
for biocriteria development. We suggest
that the criteria presented in this
document is a "first attempt" to evaluate
Indiana surface waters.
During 1991-1994, drought conditions
prevailed for the streams and inland
rivers of the Eastern Corn Belt Plain in
each of the respective areas surveyed.
Further research is needed to evaluate the
response of the criteria under differing
water cycles.
The length of stream reach sampled is an
important consideration. Karr et al.
(1986) recommended in larger streams to
select several contiguous riffle-pool
sequences rather than relying on a
standard length. When electrofishing
equipment was employed in larger rivers
(i.e. > 1,000 mi2), samples were taken in
units of 0.5 to 1.0 km (Gammon et al.
1981). The length of the sample reach was
long enough to include all major habitat
types. Distances of 11 to 15 stream widths
were generally adequate to sample two
cycles of habitat (Leopold et al. 1964).
Ohio EPA (1989) suggested that after 150-
200 m of stream length no significant
increases in the IBI are observed, however
species richness may still increase until
250-300 m. The additional increase in
effort is not justified by the assessment
capability of the index so the minimum
distance of 15 times the mean stream width
was adopted. Additional site information
(e.g. photographs; latitude and longitude)
were recorded on the data sheet.
Selecting the appropriate time of year for
sampling is critical. Karr et al. (1986)
found that periods of low-to moderate
stream flow are preferred and the
relatively variable flow conditions of
early spring and late autumn/winter should
be avoided. Species richness tends to be
higher later in summer due to the presence
of young-of-the-year of rare species, but
this can be avoided if data analysis does
not incorporate young-of-the-year species.
Samples of limited area may be less
variable in early summer than comparable
samples taken later in the year. Each site
was sampled for a single pass on both
shorelines for nonwadeable locations.
Sample Site Selection
Fish sample sites were selected based upon
several factors:
15
-------
Indiana Ecoreoion
1) Choosing stream reaches not affected
by point source dischargers that were
typical of the region under study;
2) Stream use issues (i.e. municipal
treatment works, non-point source,
nutrient reduction);
3) Location of physical stream features
(e.g. dams, changes in geology,
changes in stream order, presence of
stream confluence, etc.);
4) Location of non-point sources of
pollution (e.g. urban areas or
obvious farm runoff);
5) Variations in habitat suitability for
fish;
6) Atypical habitat not representative of
River reach or basin.
Whenever possible, sites were located
upstream from pollution sources and
adjacent tributaries (Gammon 1973).
Stations were selected to include natural
areas, parks (Federal, State, County, and
Local), exceptional designated streams.
and from historical sampling locations
whenever available.
When non-impacted areas were not present,
"least impacted" areas were selected based
on the above criteria. Sites were chosen
that indicated recovery from
channelization or potential non-point
source areas, and had a suitable riparian
buffer on the shoreline. When a series of
point source dischargers were located on a
river, every effort was made to sample
upstream of the discharger or to search
for areas of recovery between dischargers
(Krumholz 1946).
When impoundments or other physical
habitat alterations had been imposed on a
river, sampling was conducted in the
tailwaters of a dam (area immediately
downstream). Tailwaters possess the
greatest resemblance of the lotic habitat.
The serial discontinuity concepts of
Stanford et al. (1988) predicts that the
thermal character of a stream below a dam
will be "reset" toward that typical of the
stream reaches above the dam. In areas
where sampling could not be accomplished
downstream of the physical structure due
to lack of access, stream tributary
segments were located upstream of the dam
away from the immediate influence of the
pooled portion. Likewise, bridges were
sampled on the upstream side, away from
the immediate vicinity of the structure
and latent bridge construction effects. If
downstream sampling was conducted because
of better habitat considerations, sampling
was terminated at least 50 m downstream of
the bridge.
Fish from each location were identified to
species and enumerated. Smaller and more
difficult to identify taxa were preserved
for later examination and identification
in the laboratory. All fish were examined
for the presence of gross external
anomalies. Incidence of these anomalies
was defined as the presence of externally
visible morphological anomalies (i.e.
deformities, erosion, lesions/ulcers).
Specific anomalies include: anchor worms;
leeches; pugheadedness; fin rot; Aeromonas
(causes ulcers, lesions, and skin growth,
and formation of pus-producing surface
lesions accompanied by scale erosion);
dropsy (puffy body); swollen eyes; fungus;
ich; curved spine; and swollen-bleeding
mandible or opercle. Incidence is
expressed as percent of anomalous fish
among all fish collected. Incidence of
occurrence was computed for each species
at each station.
Hybrid species encountered in the field
(e.g. hybrid centrarchids, cyprinids) were
recorded on the data sheet, and when
possible, potential parental combinations
recorded.
16
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Table 1. Attributes of Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) classification, total IBI scores,
and integrity classes from Karr et al. (1986).
Total IBI
score
Integrity
Class
Attributes
58-60
48-52
40-44
28-34
12-22
Excellent Comparable to the best situation without human disturbance: all
regionally expected species for the habitat and stream size.
including the most intolerant forms, are present with a full
array of age (size) classes; balance trophic structure.
Good Species richness somewhat below expectations, especially due to
the loss of the most intolerant forms; some species are present
with less than optimal abundances or size distributions; trophic
structure shows some signs of stress.
Fair Signs of additional deterioration include loss of intolerant
forms, fewer species, highly skewed trophic structure (e.g.
increasing frequency of omnivores and other tolerant species);
older age classes of top predators may be rare.
Poor Dominated by ommvores, tolerant forms, and habitat generalists;
few top carnivores; growth rates and condition factors commonly
depressed; hybrids and diseased fish often present.
Very Poor Few fish present, mostly introduced or tolerant forms; hybrids
common; disease, parasites, fin damage, and other anomalies
regular.
No Fish Repeated sampling finds no fish.
Index of Biotic Integrity
The ambient environmental condition was
evaluated using the Index of Biotic
Integrity (Karr 1981; Karr et al. 1986).
This index relies on multiple parameters
(termed "metrics") based on community
concepts, to evaluate a complex biotic
system. It incorporates professional
judgement in a systematic and sound
manner, but sets quantitative criteria
that enables determination of a continuum
between very poor and excellent based on
species richness and composition, trophic
and reproductive constituents, and fish
abundance and condition. The twelve
original Index of Biotic Integrity metrics
reflect insights from several perspectives
and cumulatively are responsive to changes
of relatively small magnitude, as well as
broad ranges of environmental degradation.
Since the metrics are differentially
sensitive to various perturbations (e.g.
siltation or toxic chemicals), as well as
various degrees or levels of change within
the range of integrity, conditions at a
site can be determined with considerable
accuracy. The interpretation of the index
scoring is provided in six narrative
17
-------
Indiana Ecoreoion
Table 2. Index of Biotic Integrity metrics used to evaluate headwater stream
(<20 miles2 drainage area) sites in the Eastern Corn Belt Plain.
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Classification
3 1
Species
Composition
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total Number of Species
Number Darter/Madtom/Sculpin Spp
% Headwater Species
Number of Minnow Species
Number Sensitive Species
% Tolerant Individuals
% Omnivore Individuals1
< 20 square miles
% Insectivores Individuals1
< 20 square miles
% Pioneer Species Individuals1
Catch per Unit Effort1
% Simple Lithophil Individuals1
% DELT Individuals1
Varies with drainage area (Fig. 5)
Varies with drainage area (Fig. 6)
Varies with drainage area (Fig. 7)
Varies with drainage area (Fig. 9)
Vanes with drainage area (Fig. 11)
<25* 25-503! >50* (Fig. 12)
<25*
25-50*
>50* (Fig. 13)
>50* 25-50$ <25 (Fig. 14)
< 25* 25-50* >50* (Fig. 15)
Varies with drainage area (Fig. 17)
>40* 20-40* <20* (Fig. 18)
<0.1* 0.1-1.3* >1.3* (Fig. 19)
Special scoring procedures are required when less than 50 individual fish are collected.
categories that have been tested in the
midwestern United States (Karr 1981; Table
1).
Several of the metrics are drainage size
dependent and require calibration to
determine numerical scores (Tables 2-3).
Drainage size effects were determined by
evaluating trends in species or
proportions of individuals with increasing
(log adjusted) drainage area. The
ecoregion approach developed by USEPA-
Corvallis, Oregon, was utilized to compare
"least impacted" zones within the region
(Omernik 1987). Ohio EPA (1987), modified
several of the original 12 metrics in
order to make them more sensitive to
environmental effects based on their
experiences in Ohio and to account for
stream and river size, faunal differences,
and sampling gear selectivity. The current
study utilizes the experiences of the Ohio
EPA and Karr et al. (1986) in developing
an IBI for Indiana streams and rivers.
18
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Table 3. Index of Biotic Integrity metrics used to evaluate wadable river
(>20 - <1,000 miles2 drainage area) sites in the Eastern Corn Belt Plain.
Metric
Category
Metric
Scoring Classification
3 1
Species
Composition
Trophic
Composition
Fish
Condition
Total Number of Species
Number of Darter Species
Number of Sunfish Species
Number of Sucker Species
Number of Sensitive Species
% Tolerant Individuals
% Omnivore1 Individuals
< 1,000 square miles
% Insectivores1 Individuals
< 1,000 square miles
% Carnivores1 Individuals
Catch per Unit Effort
% Simple Lithophils Individuals
% DELT l Individuals
Varies with drainage area (Fig. 5)
Varies with drainage area (Fig. 6)
> 3 2-3 < 2 (Fig 8)
>3 2-3 <2 (Fig. 10)
Varies with drainage area (Fig. 11)
<25* 25-50* >50* (Fig. 12)
<25*
>50*
>10-25*
25-503!
25-50*
25-50* &
5-10*
>50* (Fig. 13)
<25* (Fig. 14)
>50* (Fig. 16)
& <5*
Varies with drainage area (Fig. 17)
>40* 20-40* <20* (Fig. 18)
<0.1* 0.1-1.3* >1.3* (Fig. 19)
1 Special scoring procedures are required when less than 100 individual fish are collected.
Metrics
In general, the metrics utilized for the
current study are those developed by the
State of Ohio (Ohio EPA 1989) for analysis
of surface water designated use-
attainment. This includes modification of
several of the original Index of Biotic
Integrity metrics as proposed by Karr
(1981).
Although the methodology and application
of the ecoregional expectations are
similar in approach to Ohio and much of
the information below is taken directly
from the Ohio document (Ohio EPA 1989), a
significant difference exists between the
Indiana and Ohio reference conditions.
This difference exists in how the metric
expectations are developed. In Ohio, the
ecoregional reference stations were
19
-------
Indiana Ecoreoion
combined into a single data set for the
entire State, and later modifications were
developed for a single ecoregion.
In Indiana, "least impacted" conditions
are being developed on a regional basis,
with a priori recognition of basin
differences within ecoregion, based on the
natural division classification of Homoya
et dl. (1985). Further evaluation at the
completion of the study will determine if
differential metric treatment is warranted
for basin specific or larger scale
criteria development.
The Index of Biotic Integrity is sensitive
to differences in collection effort and
gear type. In order to account for these
inherent biases, separate expectations are
developed for each of the two stream
classification types utilized in the
current study. Headwater stream sites (<
20 miles2) were primarily sampled for 50-
100 m using wading techniques. These sites
were sampled using a long-line
configuration usually off bridges, while
larger wadable rivers (> 20-1000 miles2)
were sampled using the sport-yak
configuration. This technique requires a
sampling distance of 100-300 m and wading
in all available habitats.
Below is an explanation of each of the
twelve metrics utilized for the
calibration of the Indiana Index of Biotic
Integrity for the Eastern Corn Belt Plain.
Due to inherent differences at
approximately 20 miles2 drainage area,
different metrics were necessary to
evaluate both headwater (<20 miles2
drainage area) and wadable rivers (>20-
1000 miles2 drainage area). No differences
were observed between the subbasins for
most metrics. This was anticipated due to
the limitations of the gear type chosen
and that large rivers tend to be
integrators of the upstream drainage area.
Maximum species richness lines were drawn
following the procedure of Fausch et al.
(1984) and Ohio cPA (1987). Scatter plot
data diagrams of individual metrics were
first evaluated for basin specific
patterns. The trisection method was used
to depict the maximum species richness
lines. This requires the uppermost line to
be drawn so that 95% of the data area lies
beneath. The other two lines are then
drawn so the remainder of the area beneath
the 95th percentile line is divided into
three equivalent areas. In situations
where no significant deviation in
relationship was observed within the three
basin segments, the segments were pooled
to reflect an ecoregional consensus.
Likewise, if no relationship with
increasing drainage area was observed, the
maximum species richness lines either
leveled off at the point where no
additional increases were exhibited or
horizontal plots were delineated
indicating no increase with drainage area.
Differentiation between headwater and
wadable stream and river sites are
indicated on the graphs by a vertical
dashed line on the appropriate metrics.
This relationship was determined by
searching for bimodal patterns in the
basin specific data set plots. The tails
of distribution of the data are not
significant. However the point where the
data differentiates into two distinct
peaks suggest that the transition between
headwater and wadable streams is at 20
miles2 (% headwater taxa) and between
wadable and large rivers at 1,000 miles2 (%
large river individuals). Finally, a
comparison was made between criteria
established for the ecoregion between
Ohio, Michigan, and Indiana.
20
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Metric 1. Total Number of Fish Species (Headwater and Wadable Sites)
Impetus
This metric is utilized for all of the
stream classification types used for
calibrating the Indiana Index of Biotic
Integrity. Unlike the Ohio metric, exotic
species are included in the total number
of taxa. The premise behind this metric is
based on the observation that the number
of fish species increases directly with
environmental complexity and quality of
the aquatic resource (Karr 1981: Karr et
al. 1986). Although the number of exotic
or introduced species may be indicative of
a loss of integrity (Karr et al. 1986:
Ohio EPA 1989), the differences between
lower levels of biotic integrity
resolution may be due to colonization of
habitats by pioneer or tolerant taxa that
tend to incorporate exotic species.
This single metric is considered to be one
of the most powerful metrics in resolving
water resource issues since a direct
correlation exists between high quality
resources and the numbers of species for
warmwater assemblages (Ohio EPA 1987;
Davis and Lubin 1989; Plafkin et al. 1989;
Simon, 1991). As total number of species
increases, species become more specialized
and have narrower niche breadths, numerous
higher level interactions occur and
presumably enable greater efficiency in
resource utilization. The delimitation
between headwater and wadable Indiana
streams was made primarily on the data
from this metric. Headwater and wadable
streams are differentiated at 20 miles2
drainage area.
Headwater and Wading Sites
The number of species is strongly
correlated with drainage area at
headwater, wadable stream, and river sites
up to ca. 1,000 miles2. Determining the
Index of Biotic Integrity scoring criteria
for this metric did not require the
recognition of watersheds. Comparison of
maximum species richness lines for the
appropriate basin and drainage area did
not reveal any significant differences
between ecoregion or subwatershed (Fig. 5;
headwater and wading sites).
21
-------
CO
yy
o
OC
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Tippeca A Wabash O Eel + Mississi
Salamon • White ? Wildcat o St. Jos
1 1O 1OO
DRAINAGE AREA (SO. Ml)
"9"re 5- 2±riJS2_r1..««i»i, t^
1OOO
in
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Metric 2. Number of Darter/Madtom/Sculpin Species (Headwater < 20 miles2)
Number of Darter Species (Wadable Rivers > 20- <1,000 miles2)
Impetus
Karr et al. (1986) indicated that the
presence of members of the tribe
Etheostomatini are indicative of a quality
resource. Darters require high dissolved
oxygen concentrations, are intolerant of
toxicants and siltation. and thrive over
clean substrates.
Life history information for all of the 28
Indiana species indicates darters are
insectivorous, habitat specialists, and
sensitive to physical and chemical
environmental disturbances (Page 1983:
Kuehne and Barbour 1983). Darters are
excellent indicators of a quality
resource, and are generally found in
riffle habitats.
Headwater and Wadable Streams and Rivers
The darters include the genera:
Ammocrvpta. Crystallaria. Etheostoma. and
Percina. Of the 28 species recorded from
Indiana, six are commonly found throughout
the State and are not restricted to a
particular stream size (Gerking 1945).
Thirteen of these 28 species are confined
to the Ohio River basin: none of the
species are restricted to the Mississippi
River basin; and a single species occurs
only in the Great Lakes drainage.
For sites having drainage areas less than
20 miles2, this metric also includes
members of the family Cottidae and
Ictaluridae (madtoms; genus NoturusHTable
4). The sculpins and madtoms are benthic
insectivores and functionally occupy the
same type of niche as darters. Their
inclusion enables a greater degree of
sensitivity in evaluating streams that
naturally have significantly fewer darter
species. By adding madtoms and sculpins
this metric does not asymptote with
increased drainage area for headwater
sites (<20 miles2)(Fig. 6). The number of
darter, madtom and sculpin species was
found to increase with increasing drainage
area for each of the eight watersheds. No
differences in watershed expectations were
observed between sites of the Eastern Corn
Belt Plain.
Wadable River Sites
Madtoms and sculpins are more difficult to
collect with increasing drainage area,
since madtoms are typically nocturnal in
their habits. The expected number of
sculpin and madtom species declines in the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain with increasing
drainage area. Thus, only the number of
darter species are included in cumulative
scoring for drainage areas greater than 20
miles2 due to sampling bias and the patchy
distribution of sculpins and madtoms in
wadeable rivers (>20-1000 mi2). This
conforms with the original IBI and is
consistent with Karr's original intentions
(Karr 1981).
23
-------
Indiana Ecoregion
Table 4. The distributional characteristics of Indiana darter
(Etheostomatini), madtom (Noturus). and sculpin (Cottus) species.
Distribution in Indiana Drainages
Species
Statewide
Ohio
River
Great
Lakes
Mississippi
Ri ver
Ammocrvpta pellucida
A. clara
Crystal 1 aria asprella
Etheostoma asprigene
£. blennioides
£. caeruleum
£. camurum
£. chlorosoma
£. exile
£. flabellare
£. gracile
£. histrio
£. maculatum
£. microperca1
£. niarum
£. spectabile
£. squamiceps
£. tippecanoe
£. variatum
£. zonale
Percina caprodes
£. copelandi
£. evides
£. maculata
P. phoxocephala
£. sciera
£. shumardi
£. viail
Noturus eleutherus
M- flavus
IL gyrinus
N. exi 1 is
N. miurus
N. nocturnus
N. stigmosus
Cottus bai rdi
L. carolinae
L. cognatus
X X
X
Restricted to northern portions of these drainages.
24
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
IN}
cn
o Tippeca A Wabash o Eel + Mississi
A Salamon • White V Wildcat o St. Jos
O.1
1 1O 10O
DRAINAGE AREA (SQ. Ml)
1OOO
Figure 6. Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in number
of darter/madtom/soil pin species with increasing drainage area for
the Eastern Corn Belt Plain.
B
IB
?
a
-------
Indiana Ecoregion
Metric 3. Percent Individuals as Headwater Species (Headwater <20 miles2)
Number of Sunfish Species (Wadable Sites >20 - <1,000 miles2)
Impetus
This metric followed Karr (1981) and Karr
et al. (1986) by including the number of
sunfish species (family Centrarchidae) and
excluding the black basses (Micropterus
spp). Unlike the Ohio metric, the redear
sunfish Lepomis microlophus is included
because it is native to Indiana (Table 6).
Hybrid sunfish are not included in this
metric following Ohio EPA (1989).
This metric is an important measure of
pool habitat quality. It includes all
members of the sunfish genera Ambloplites
(rock bass), Centrarchus (round sunfish),
Lepomi s (sunfish), and Pomoxi s (crappies),
as well as. the ecological equivalent
Elassomatidae (Elassoma zonatum). Sunfish
normally occupy slower moving water that
may act as "sinks" for the accumulation of
toxins and siltation. This metric measures
degradation of rock substrates (i.e.
gravel and boulder) and instream cover
(Pflieger 1975; Trautman 1981), and the
associated aquatic macroinvertebrate
community that are an important food
resource for sunfish (Forbes and
Richardson 1920; Becker 1983). Sunfish are
important components of the aquatic
community since they are wide ranging, and
distributed in most streams and rivers of
Indiana. They are also very susceptible to
sampling using electrofishing gear. Karr
et al. (1986) found sunfish to occupy the
intermediate to upper ends of sensitivity
of the index of biotic integrity (IBI).
Headwater Streams
Pool habitat is a limiting factor in many
headwater streams. This prohibits sunfish
colonization because of their deep-bodied
morphology. I replaced the number of
Table 5. List of Indiana fish
species considered to be
headwater species for
evaluating permanent
habitat in streams
(Smith, 1971).
Common Name Scientific Name
Least brook lamprey Lampetra aepvptera
American brook lamprey L appendix
Redside dace Clinostomus elongatus
Blacknose dace Rhinichthvs atratulus
So Redbelly dace Phoxinus ervthroaaster
Brook stickleback Culaea inconstans
Fantail darter Etheostoma flabel lare
Mottled sculpin Cottus bairdi
Banded sculpin £. coanatus
sunfish species with the proportion
of headwater species at sites with
drainage areas less than 20 miles2 (Ohio
EPA, 1987). Nine headwater species were
defined by Ohio EPA (1987) and their
presence indicates permanent habitat with
low environmental stress (Table 5). The
presence of headwater species does not
show a trend with increased drainage area
(Fig. 7).
Wadable Streams and Rivers
Sunfish colonization is limited by the
amount of pool habitat in many river
26
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
reaches. This metric did not show any
difference in scoring based on sub-basin.
The number of sunfish species increased
with increasing drainage area (Fig. 8).
Table 6. List of Indiana sunfish
species for evaluating
quality pool habitat.
Common Name Scientific Name
Rock bass
Flier
Green sunfish
Pumpkinseed
Warmouth
Ambloplites rupestrl s
Centrarchus
macropterus
Lepomis cvanellus
L,. qibbosus
L. gulosus
Orangespotted sunfish L- humi11s
Bluegill
Longear sunfish
Redear sunfish
Spotted sunfish
Bantam sunfish
White crappie
Black crappie
L.macrochirus
L- megalotis
L.microlophus
L. punctatus
L- symmetricus
Pomoxis annularis
IL_ m'romaculatus
Banded pygmy sunfish Elassoma zonatum
27
-------
PERCENT HEADWATER SPECIES
<-t" ~u !2
3- -3 Cu
fD O X
m o g
Q> -5 C
(/) rt 3
rt -••
CD O t/i
-> 3 "O
= O S
O -h -'•
3 (D
O> -5
CD Q. -"•
o> S n
o>
_J. (I)
fD C/>
3 CD
fD -i-
Q> 3
-i. a
rs ua
(a
rt
Q. -5
Qj 3
-•• Q-
3 to
QJ
U3 -J.
ft) 3
cu rt
fD fD
Cu
£^
0) T3
fi>
O
O
I?
s
O *
^1
w w.
SD
I
O
5
o
-5
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
c/)
y
o
5
o
CL
o Tippeca ^ Wabash o Eel + Mississi
A Salamon • White v Wildcat o St. Jos
0.1
1 1O 1OO
DRAINAGE AREA (SO. Ml)
1OOO
Figure 8. Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in number
of sunfish species with increasing drainage area for the Eastern
Corn Belt Plain.
r>
3
-------
Indiana Ecoreoi on
Metric 4. Number of Minnow Species (Headwater Sites < 20 miles2)
Number of Sucker Species (Wadable Sites (>20-< 1000 miles2)
Impetus
The original Index of Biotic Integrity
metrics included the number of sucker
species (Karr 1981; Karr et al. 1986).
Suckers represent a major component of the
Indiana fish fauna since their total
biomass usually ranks them among the
highest biomass contributors in the
community. Most sucker species are
intolerant to habitat and water quality
degradation (Phillips and Underhill 1971;
Karr et al. 1986; Trautman 1981; Becker
1983) and this results in metric
sensitivity at the higher end of
environmental quality. Suckers, due to
their long life span (10-20 years),
provide a long-term assessment of past
environmental conditions. Of the 19
species historically found in Indiana,
Laaochila lacera is considered extinct,
seven species are widely distributed
throughout the State (Table 7). Extant
sucker genera include: Cvcleptus.
Carpi odes. Catostomus. Erimvzon.
Hvpentelium. Ictiobus. Minvtrema. and
Moxostoma.
Headwater Sites
The number of minnow species is
substituted for the number of sucker
species in headwater sites (Fig. 9). The
number of sucker species decreases rapidly
with declining drainage area (Fig. 10).
While few different sucker species have
been observed at locations with drainage
areas less than 20 miles2. The number of
minnow species generally correlates with
increased environmental quality. This
metric includes members able to represent
a wide variety of biological integrity.
Species such as the hornyhead chub
(Nocomis biauttatus) and rosyface shiner
(Notropis rubellus) are examples of minnow
species that can occur in high quality
headwater streams. Minnow species
represent both ends of the biological
integrity continuum. A direct relationship
exists between increasing number of minnow
species and increasing drainage area (Fig.
9).
Wadable River Sites
The number of sucker species, with the
exception of Catostomus commersoni.
Ictiobus and Carpi odes, represent
sensitive species intolerant to thermal,
siltation, and toxins stresses. The
redhorses are particularly important
indicator organisms in rivers. The most
sensitive suckers include members of the
genera Cvcleptus. Hvpentelium. Moxostoma.
Minvtrema. and Erimvzon. These species are
effectively sampled with electrofishing
gear and comprise a significant component
of riverine fish faunas. Their feeding and
reproductive requirements are sensitive to
turbidity and marginal to poor water
quality. The number of species were not
significantly different among the four
watersheds (Fig. 10).
30
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Table 7. Distribution
characteristics of Indiana sucker
species (family Catostomidae).
Large Rare
Species Statewide Rivers Taxa
Cvcleptus elongatus X X
Carpi odes carpio X X
£. cypnnus X
Catostomus catostomus X
Catostomus. cominersonl X
Erimvzon oblongus X
£. sucetta X
Hypentelium nigricans X X
Ictiobus buba_1 us X X
1. cyprinellus X X
1. niger X
Laaochila lacera EXTINCT
Minvtrema melanops X
Moxostoma anisurum X X
M. carinatum X X
M. duquesnei X X
M. erythrurum X X
M. macrolepidotum X X
M. valenciennesi X X
31
-------
-n
*j.
c
NUMBER OF MINNOW SPECIES
vo
III
£ C
in
"O to
co "o
2.8
CO ->•
V} CO
in
-'• ~i
e-t- -"•
3- O
=3 fD
O In
13 fD
ID tn
O. -h
"5 O
QJ -i
_j.
3 Q.
cu m
IQ rt-
fD (B
Oi 3
-J -••
fD 3
Ql _J.
-hlQ
fD
Q.
in
rf
m
01
in
CO 3
-j c.
o
o
-5
?•>
8
(/> H
0) -5
ffl" 'D
3 ®
1 8
sh
I?
ft
0)
o +
fri
w w.
w
VflF
3
9
5
do
2
CD
ucibsjoag Bueipui
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
CO
CO
CKER SPECIES
6
0J b
u.
O
cr
I
o
0
o Tippeca A Wabash o Eel + Mississi
A Salamon • White ? Wildcat o St. Jos
1 — i i i 1 1 ni — i n • ' ' '"' ' ' " ' '
* +
A a V A V
/ • •A+ • V4»HD vom w oo o •
y^/b. m^HK>&o AM
-------
Indiana Ecoreoion
Metric 5. Number of Sensitive Species (Headwater and Wadable Sites)
Impetus
The number of sensitive species metric
distinguishes between streams of highest
quality. Designation of too many species
as intolerant will prevent this metric
from discriminating among the highest
quality resources. However. Karr (1981)
and Karr et al. (1986) calibrated
expectations based on watershed scales and
not regional or state scales. Only species
that are highly intolerant to a variety of
disturbances were included in this metric
so it will respond to diverse types of
perturbations (Table 8; see Appendix A for
species-specific information).
The number of intolerant taxa (Ohio EPA
1989) is a modification of the original
index as developed by Karr (1981). The
intolerant species metric is not
synonymous with the sensitive species
metric. The metric includes moderately
intolerant species when sampling at
headwater sites. This combination is
called sensitive species since few
intolerant taxa are expected. The
moderately intolerant species meet most of
the established criteria of Ohio EPA
(1987). An absence of these species would
indicate a severe anthropogenic stress or
loss of habitat.
The criteria for determining intolerance
is based on the numerical and graphical
analysis of Ohio's regional data base,
Gerking's (1945) documentation of
historical changes in the distribution of
Indiana species, and supplemental
information from regional ichthyofaunal
texts (Pflieger 1975; Smith 1979; Trautman
1981; Becker 1983; Burr and Warren 1986).
Intolerant taxa are those that decline
with decreasing environmental quality and
disappear, as viable populations, when the
aquatic environment degrades to the "fair"
category (Karr et al. 1986). The
intolerant species list was divided into
three categories, all are included in this
metric for scoring:
1). common intolerant species (I):
species that are intolerant, but are
widely distributed in the best
streams in Indiana;
2). uncommon or geographically restricted
species (S): species that are
infrequently captured or that have
restricted ranges;
3). rare or possibly extirpated species
IR1:intolerant species that are
rarely captured or that lack recent
status data.
Commonly occurring intolerant species
should comprise 5-10$ of the common
species in Indiana, however represent 35-
40$ of the entire statewide list. This was
a recommended guideline of Karr (1981) and
Karr et al. (1986). Although the addition
of species designated as uncommon or rare
sensitive species (categories 2 and 3),
inflates the number of intolerant species
above the 10Z guideline, nowhere in the
State do all of the species coexist. In
order to evaluate streams in the headwater
and wadable site categories, only the
sensitive species metric will be used
until further resolution is possible with
additional ecoregion sampling.
Headwater and Wadable Streams and Rivers
The number of sensitive species increases
with drainage area among headwater and
wading sites (Fig. 11). Intolerant taxa
are scarce in headwaters of the ecoregion
and increase at larger wading sites.
34
-------
Eastern Corn BeU PUIn
Table 8. List of Indiana fish species considered to be sensitive to a
wide variety of environmental disturbances including water quality and
habitat degradation.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Common Name
Scientific Name
Ohio lamprey
Northern brk lamprey
Least brook lamprey
American brk lamprey
Paddlefish
Goldeye
Mooneye
Redside dace
Streamline chub
Gravel chub
Speckled chub
Bigeye chub
Pallid shiner
Rosefin shiner
Hornyhead chub
River chub
Pugnose shiner
Popeye shiner
Bigeye shiner
Ironcolor shiner
Blackchin shiner
Blacknose shiner
Sand shiner
Silver shiner
Rosyface shiner
Weed shiner
Mimic shiner
Pugnose minnow
Longnose dace
Blue sucker
Highfin carpsucker
Northern hogsucker
Silver redhorse
River redhorse
Black redhorse
Golden redhorse
Shorthead redhorse
Greater redhorse
Ichthvomvzon bdellium
1. fossor
Lampetra aepvptera
L. appendix
Polvodon spathula
Hiodon alosoides
H_. teraisus
Clinostomus elongatus
Erimystax dissimil is
£. x-punctata
Extrarius aestivalis
Hybopsis amblops
H. amnis
Lvthrurus ardens
Nocomi s biguttatus
M- micropogon
Notropi s anoaeniis
M. ariommus
M. boops
M. chalvbaeus
M. heterodon
N. heterolepis
N. ludibundis
N. photoaenis
M. rubellus
N. texanus
N. volucellus
Opsopoeodus emiliae
Rhinichthvs cataractae
Cvcleptus elonoatus
Carpi odes velifer
Hvpentelium nigricans
Moxostoma anisurum
M. carinatum
M. duquesnei
M. ervthurum
M. macrolepidotum
M. valenciennesi
Mountain madtom
Slender madtom
Stonecat
Brindled madtom
Freckled madtom
Northern madtom
Southern cavefish
Southern cavefish
Northern studfish
Starhead topminnow
Brook silverside
Rock bass
Longear sunfish
Smallmouth bass
Western sand darter
Eastern sand darter
Greenside darter
Rainbow darter
Bluebreast darter
Harlequin darter
Spotted darter
Spottail darter
Tippecanoe darter
Variegate darter
Banded darter
Logperch
Channel darter
Gilt darter
Slenderhead darter
Dusky darter
Saddleback darter
eleutherus
1. exi 1 i s
H- flavus
M. miurus
M. nocturnus
M. stigmosus
Amblvopsis spelaea
I subterraneus
Fundulus catenatus
£. dispar
Labidesthes sicculus
Ambloplites rupestri s
Lepomis megalotis
Micropterus dolomieui
Ammocrvpta clara
A. pellucida
£ blennioides
£. caeruleum
£. camurum
£. histrio
£. maculatum
£. squamiceps
£. tippecanoe
£. variatum
£. zonale
Percina caprodes
P. copelandi
P. phoxocephala
P. vigil
35
-------
Eastern Cora Belt Plain
OJ
CTi
o Tippeca
A Salamon
Wabash o Eel + Mississi
White y Wildcat o St. Jos
o»+« {BOO ooo o
uuJ
10 too
DRAINAGE AREA (SO. Ml)
1OOO
Figure 11. Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in number
of sensitive species with increasing drainage area for the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain.
-------
^Eastern J^orn Belt Plain
Metric 6. Percent Abundance of Tolerant Individuals (Headwater and
Wadable Sites)
Impetus
This metric is a modification of the
original index metric, the percentage of
green sunfish (Karr et al. 1986), by Ohio
EPA (1989). This metric detects a decline
in stream quality from fair to poor
categories. The green sumfish, Lepomis
cvanellus. is a species that is often
present in moderate numbers in many
Midwest streams and can become a dominant
member of the community in cases of
degradation or poor water quality.
Competitive advantage in disturbed
environments enables the green sunfish to
survive and reproduce even under perturbed
conditions. Although the green sunfish is
widely distributed in the Midwest, it is
most commonly collected in headwater
streams. This introduces an inherent bias
for moderate to large rivers. Karr et al.
(1986) suggested additional species could
be substituted for the green sunfish if
they responded in a similar manner.
Several species in Indiana meet this
criteria of increasing in proportion with
increasing degradation of stream quality.
This increase in the number of tolerant
species increases the sensitivity of this
metric for various sized streams and
rivers. Since different species have
habitat requirements that are correlated
with stream size, compositional diversity
of the tolerant species metric does not
change with drainage area.
Indiana's tolerant species are listed in
Table 9. This list is based on a
numerical and graphical analysis of Ohio
EPA (1989) and checked against Indiana
catch data and historical changes in the
distribution of fishes throughout Indiana
(Gerking 1945). Species listed as tolerant
taxa exhibit diverse tolerance to thermal
loadings, siltation, habitat degradation,
and certain toxins (Gammon 1983; Ohio EPA
1989). Tolerant species were selected
based on the following criteria:
1) present at poor or fair sites: Based
on our data base of Indiana
collections these species are
commonly collected at sites ranked
either fair or poor.
2) historically increases in abundance:
Based on historical collection
information (Gerking 1945) these
species increase in abundance and
have not indicated any reduction in
distribution.
3) increased tolerance to degraded
conditions: these species increased in
community dominance when
environmental conditions shifted
from good to fair or poor
environmental quality.
Headwater and Wadable Streams and Rivers
No relationship was evident for drainage
areas (Fig. 12), nor was there any
relationship with sub-basin apparent for
the Eastern Corn Belt Plain.
37
-------
Indiana Ecoreoion
Table 9. List of Indiana fish species considered to be highly tolerant to
a wide variety of environmental disturbances including water quality and
habitat degradation.
Tolerant Species
Common Name
Scientific Name
Longnose gar(
Shortnose gar1
Gizzard shad
Central mudminnow
Carp
Goldfish
Red shiner
Golden shiner
Bluntnose minnow
Fathead minnow
Blacknose dace
Creek chub
River carpsucker1
Quill back1
Smallmouth buffalo1
Bigmouth buffalo1
White sucker
Channel catfish1
Flathead catfish1
Yellow bullhead
Brown bullhead
Banded killifish
Freshwater drum1
White bass1
Green sunfish
Lepi sosteus osseus
L. platostomus
Dorosoma cepedianum
Umbra limi
Cvprinus carpio
Carrasius auratus
Cvprinella lutrensis
Notemi aonus crvsoleucas
Pimephales notatus
£. promelas
Rhinichthvs atratulus
Semotilus atromaculatus
Carpi odes cvprinus
£_. carpio
Ictiobus bubal us
1. cvprinellus
Catostotnus commersoni
Ictalurus punctatus
Pvlodictis olivaris
Amieurus natal is
A. melas
Fundulus diaphanus
Aplodinotus arunniens
Morone chrvsops
Lepomi s cvanellus
Species indicated are considered tolerant only for drainage areas > 1,000 mi;
38
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
OJ
o Tippeca £ Wabash o Eel + Mississi
A Salamon • White ? Wildcat o St. Jos
10O
CO
0
a 7C
ft 75
i-
<3[
a:
in so
d
h-
Z o*
§
DC
tf
O
O
i 1 i i i i 1 1 1 i 1 i 0 i i iQ V i i i • • • • M ' ' ' ' ' ' 1
O '
O A 3J <5 O
^ CK ^" '9
A O0^ O ° i o O ^
i -t^ — j 3
r A <}> A^ ^
: o m : v* *A 1 :
o * | o
* A1 ^ AA 'to
A • + +0 •
^ * A_ /* '
A 1 ' ^Qr n *
«!* A • ^ v +
* O Ato* AA % ^ A S
• AA^*%V A^^7 v '
i . ... .Q- -i ' Q ' q ' ft ' ' • .1 » • • 1 1 1
! 1 10 1OO 1OOO
DRAINAGE AREA (SO. Ml)
Figure 12. Maxliura species richness lines for determining trends in the
proportion of tolerant species with increasing drainage area for
the Eastern Corn Belt Plain.
-------
Indiana Ecoreaion
Metric 7. Proportion of Omnivores (Headwater and Wadable Rivers)
Impetus
The definition of an omnivore follows that
of Karr (1981) and Karr et al. (1986).
that requires species to consume
significant quantities of both plant and
animal materials (including detritus) and
have the ability (usually indicated by the
presence of a long gut and dark
peritoneum) to utilize both. Omnivores are
species whose diets include at least 25$
plant and 25$ animal foods. Fishes that do
not feed on plants but on a variety of
animal material are not considered
omnivores. Dominance of omnivores suggests
specific components of the food base are
less reliable, increasing the success of
more opportunistic species. Specialized
filter-feeders are not included in this
metric after Ohio EPA (1989) since these
species are sensitive to environmental
degradation, e.g. paddlefish, Polvodon
spathula and lamprey ammocoetes, Lampetra
and Ichthvomvzon. Facultative species that
shift diet due to degraded environmental
conditions are also not considered
omnivores. e.g. Semotilus atromaculatus
and Rhinichthvs atratulus. This metric
evaluates the intermediate to low
categories of environmental quality (Table
10; see Appendix A for species-specific
feeding guild classification).
Headwater and Wadable Streams and Rivers
Only those species that consistently feed
as omnivores were included in our
analysis. These values differ from the
omnivore percentages of Karr et al. (1986)
but resemble Ohio EPA's (1987)
classification. No relationship with
drainage area was found for headwater or
wadable stream and river sites (Fig. 13).
Table 10. List of Indiana fish
species considered omnivores.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Gizzard shad
Threadfin shad
Dorosoma cepedi anum
D_. petenense
Central mudminnow Umbra limi
Goldfish
Grass carp
Carp
Cypress minnow
Miss, silvery minnow
Silver carp
Black carp
Bluntnose minnow
Fathead minnow
Bullhead minnow
Rudd
River carpsucker
Quill back
Highfin carpsucker
White sucker
Carassius auratus
Ctenopharvnaodon
idella
Cvprinus carpio
Hybognathus havi
tJ. nuchal is
Hvpopthalmichthvs
molitrix
Mvlopharvngodon
piceus
Pimephales notatus
£. promelas
£. viailax
Scardinius
ervthrophthalmus
Carpi odes carpio
£. cvprinus
£. velifer
Catostomus commersoni
The lack of a drainage area pattern is
anticipated since degraded habitats are
not exclusive to any particular size
waterbody.
40
-------
117
PERCENT INDIVIDUALS AS OMNIVORES
c:
n>
rn -o 31
CM "J f±)
en o X
fD o 3
-5 -5 C
O
o o
co ro
fD O en
-o < n
—' O 3-
CU -1 3
—*• n> n>
3 en
to
rr 3
ID
—i. en
O -^
~s o
fD
CU
-•
=5
m
Q.
fD
rt-
-
Co 3
•-J. -u.
rs 3
CU (O
eo
rD
a>
ro Q.
a> en
O
-5
09
ft
O
UJ63
-------
Indiana Ecoreoion
Metric 8. Proportion of Insectivore Individuals (Headwater and
Wadable Sites)
Impetus
The proportion of insectivores is a
modification of Karr et a/.'s (1986)
original metric, i.e. proportion of
insectivorous cyprinidae. This metric is
intended to respond to a depletion of the
benthic macroinvertebrate community that
comprises the primary food base for most
insectivorous fishes. As disturbance
increases, the diversity of insect larvae
decreases, triggering an increase in the
omnivorous trophic level. Thus, this
metric varies inversely with metric 7 with
increased environmental degradation. The
inclusion of all insectivorous species was
based on the observation that all regions
of Indiana do not possess high proportions
of insectivorous cyprinids in high quality
streams, e.g. Central Corn Belt Plain and
Interior Plateau ecoregions. This metric
was recalibrated following the
recommendation of Karr et al. (1986; see
Appendix A for species-specific trophic
level classifications) and includes
classifications insectivores (I) and
invertivores (V).
Headwater and Wadable Streams and Rivers
Insectivorous species are an important
link in transfer!ng energy between lower
trophic levels to keystone predator
species. Species designations generally
conforms to that provided in Karr et al.
(1986). however, I concur with Ohio EPA in
the elimination of the opportunistic
feeding creek chub, Semoti1 us
atromaculatus. and blacknose dace.
Rhinichthvs atratulus. from the
insectivore designation. Leonard and Orth
(1986) felt that the current trophic
definitions of Karr et al. (1986) were
rather arbitrary since they observed a
negative correlation between insectivores
and biotic integrity in a West Virginia
stream. Plots of the MSR lines showed no
relationship existed between drainage area
and proportion of insectivorous fishes in
the eight sub-basins in the Eastern Corn
Belt Plain (Fig. 14).
42
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Tippeca
Salamon
Wabash
White
Eel +
Wildcat o
Mississi
St. Jos
1000
DRAINAGE AREA (SO. Ml>
Figure 14. Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in the
proportion of insectivores with increasing drainage area for the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain.
-------
Indiana Ecoreoion
Metric 9. Proportion of Pioneer Species (Headwater Streams)
Proportion of Carnivores (Wadable Rivers)
Impetus
Karr (1981) developed the carnivore metric
to measure community integrity in the
upper trophic levels of the fish
community. It is only in high quality
environments that upper trophic levels are
able to flourish. This metric includes
individuals of species in which the adults
are predominantly piscivores, although
some may feed on invertebrates and fish as
larvae or juveniles. Species that are
opportunistic do not fit into this
metric, e.g. creek chub or channel
catfish, Ictalurus punctatus (Karr et al.
1986; Ohio EPA 1987). Karr et al. (1986)
suggest that some members of this group
may feed extensively on crayfish and
various vertebrates, e.g. frogs. Species -
specific classifications are included in
Appendix A and include piscivores (P) and
carnivores (C).
Headwater Streams
Carnivores are generally not abundant in
headwater streams. An alternate metric was
developed by Ohio EPA (1987) to determine
the permanence of the stream habitat.
Smith (1971) identified a signature
assemblage of small stream species that he
termed "pioneer species" (Table 11). These
are species that are the first to colonize
sections of headwater streams after
desiccation. These pioneer species
predominate in unstable environments
affected by anthropogenic stresses and
temporal desiccation. A high proportion of
pioneer species indicates an environment
temporally unavailable or stressed. The
metric does not change with increases in
drainage area (Fig. 15).
Table 11. List of Indiana fish species
considered to be pioneer
species, indicators of temporal
habitats (Larimore and Smith
1963; Smith 1971).
Common Name
Central stoneroller
Largescale
stoneroller
Silverjaw minnow
Bluntnose minnow
Fathead minnow
Creek chub
Creek chubsucker
Lake chubsucker
Green sunfish
Scientific Name
Campostoma anomalum
£. oliaolepis
Ericvmba buccata
Pimephales notatus
Pimephales promelas
Semotilus
atromaculatus
Erimvzon oblonous
£ sucetta
Lepomis cvanellus
Johnny darter Etheostoma niarum
Orangethroat darter Etheostoma spectabile
Wadable Sites
Karr (1981) suggested that the proportion
of carnivores should be a reflection of
drainage area. Such a correlation in
streams greater than 20 miles2 was not
found by Ohio EPA or previous ecoregion
studies (Simon, 1991). An increasing
percent of individuals as carnivores was
observed with increasing drainage area in
the Eastern Corn Belt Plain. The
proportion of carnivores from the current
data base was considerably higher than
that approximated in Karr et al.'s (1986)
original numbers (Fig. 16).
44
-------
PERCENT INDIVIDUALS AS PIONEER SPECIES
m ~o
OJ -3
CO O
("*• "O
fD O
-3 T
3 r+
-3
3 O
00 ~*
fD "O
n- o
"O fD
0, -5
3 CO
0
fD
CO
5
r+
=T
-_*.
O
-3
fD
Co
CO
3
ua
CL
-3
OJ
DJ
(O
fD
O)
•f
fD
OJ
-s
rt
fD
1 oc
»» _l
I-..
S
X
=3
i
^D rj
O •TI
>
t/> M»
1 iS J
fD — ' /
CO Q '
-^ 2
1 >
CO (
fD C5 O {
1
S
•
r+
-s
§
I §;
3-
fD
N
) 0
-
fc A
L
O
1 0
) ft >
r <
0 *
jfl V
• C
< +
^
^L
^
0 *
CO
1 -N
> a
()
\s
&
^
^f
0
* o^
.J>
> > (
> ft,
>>
o
• 0
>
»
o
! g
-
.
-
-
•
+ :
^** > ^
»o
F?
°* :
o
0
1
* o
0 i1
0) TJ
j Jr
8 S
• >
ff
q
<3 O
1-
0)
rt-
O +
T
c/^ ^?^
o w'
w
p
!£.
Ss
^ i^
5
n
o
a
0
w
1
Sf
g.
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
CO
L1J
O
to
<
to
h-
1
\/~\
>\J
>c
L>
<-»
>U
e
o
O.
o Tippeca A Wabash O Eel + Mississi
A Salamon • White v Wildcat o St. Jos
i 1 i IT o CK
: . 1!
O
: 3 :
-y ^
WB% /\ A (^^ ^^j
M> * A * A ^Sr>
• • • ' rt Av • • If •frft fi^iK.f^, iTP J&^. Af^l^^Erf- •» '
1 1 1O 1OO 1OOO
1
DRAINAGE AREA
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Metric 10. Relative Number of Individuals (CPUE) (Headwater and Wadable
Sites)
Impetus
This metric evaluates population density
and is expressed as catch-per-umt-
effort. Effort is expressed by the
relative number of individuals per length
of reach sampled, per unit of area
sampled, or per unit time spent depending
on the gear used. Karr et al. (1986)
suggest that this metric is most sensitive
at intermediate to low ends of the
sensitivity continuum. When low numbers of
individuals are observed the normal
trophic relationships are generally
disturbed. Because of this effect, scoring
adjustments are encouraged for sites when
less than 50 individuals are collected
(see next section for details). As
integrity increases, total abundance
increases and becomes more variable only
depending on the level of energy and other
natural chemical factors limiting
production. Under certain circumstances,
e.g. channelization, increases in the
abundance of tolerant fishes can be
observed (Ohio EPA 1987). Lyons (1992)
found that abundance, excluding tolerant
species, was greatest at fair quality
sites in Wisconsin warmwater streams and
lower at sites classified as excellent. In
this study, catch-per-unit-effort was
determined based on the total number of
individuals collected per 15 times the
channel width without modification for
tolerant taxa. The level of effort
sampled within a reach was 50 m if the
stream was < 3.4 m wide or 100 m minimum
distance if the stream was > 3.4 m wide. A
maximum distance of 1000 m was sampled for
stream widths > 66.7 m. Each shocking run
was conducted with a standardized effort
of 30 minutes of sampling per shoreline in
1000 m sites and 15 minutes per shoreline
at 500 m sites including both shorelines.
Headwater and Wadable Streams and Rivers
A drainage area-dependent relationship was
observed for the Eastern Corn Belt Plain
(Fig. 17). Lyons (1992) found in small
streams in Wisconsin that excessive
nutrients could artifically stimulate
production in some degraded sites. In
order to account for sites with inflated
number of individuals, we adjusted scoring
criteria to reflect declining quality with
increasing numbers of individuals.
Based on our experience, if fewer than 50
fish are collected during a sampling
event, alternate scoring procedures are
required (see next section for details).
47
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
-ps.
CX>
O
100O
75O
50O
25O
Tippeca A Wabash O Eel + Mississi
Salamon • White v Wildcat o St. Jos
1 1O 1OO
DRAINAGE AREA (S3. Ml)
1OOO
Figure 17. Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in the
catch per unit effort with increasing drainage area for the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain.
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Metric 11. Proportion of Individuals as Simple Lithophilic Spawners
(Headwater and Wadable Rivers)
Impetus
Ohio EPA (1987) replaced the original
index metric, proportion of hybrids (Karr
et al. 1986), with this metric. The hybrid
metric was abandoned since the original
intent of the metric was to assess the
extent that degradation has altered
reproductive isolation among species.
Difficulties of identification, lack of
occurrence in headwater and impacted
streams, and presence in high quality
streams among certain taxa, e.g..
cyprinids and centrarchids. caused a lack
of sensitivity for the hybrid metric.
Spawning guilds have been shown to be
affected by habitat quality (Balon 1975;
Berkman and Rabem 1987) and have been
suggested as an alternative metric
(Angermeier and Karr 1986). Reproductive
attributes of simple spawning behavior
requires clean gravel or cobble for
success (i.e. lithophilous) and are the
most environmentally sensitive (Ohio EPA
1987). Simple lithophils broadcast eggs
that come into contact with the substrate.
Eggs develop in the interstitial spaces
between sand, gravel, and cobble
substrates without parental care. Berkman
and Rabeni (1987) observed an inverse
correlation between simple lithophilic
spawners and the proportion of silt in
streams. Historically, some simple
lithophilic spawners have experienced
significant range reductions due to
increased silt loads in streams. Some
simple lithophils do not require clean
substrates for reproduction. Larvae of
these species are buoyant, adhesive, or
possess fast developing eggs with
phototactic larvae that have minimal
contact with the substrate (Balon 1975)
and are not included in the above
designation. Simple lithophils are
sensitive to environmental disturbance.
particularly siltation. Designated
lithophilic species are included in Table
12 (see Appendix A for species-specific
ratings).
Headwater and Wadable Streams and Rivers
No relationship with drainage area was
observed at stream and river sites for the
proportion of lithophilic species in the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain (Fig. 18). Scoring
was completed using the trisection method
of Fausch et al. (1984). The lack of an
increasing percentage of simple lithophils
with increasing drainage area in the
largest drainage reaches was thought to be
a reflection of degraded conditions. Best
professional judgement was used in
evaluating this metric. Simple lithophils
are major components of fish communities
indicating the importance of clean gravel
and cobble substrates.
49
-------
1ndi ana EcoreQi on
Table 12. List of Indiana species considered to be simple lithophilic
spawners.
Simple Lithophils
Common Name Scientific name Common Name Scientific Name
Paddlefish
Lake sturgeon
Shovel nose sturgeon
Redslde dace
Lake chub
Streamline chub
Gravel chub
Cent silvery minnow
Miss, silvery minnow
Bigeye chub
Pallid shiner
Striped shiner
Common shiner
Rosefin shiner
Popeye shiner
River shiner
Bigeye shiner
Silver shiner
Rosyface shiner
Silverband shiner
Suckermouth minnow
Southn redbelly dace
Blacknose dace
Longnose dace
Blue sucker
Longnose sucker
White sucker
Northern hogsucker
Polvodon spatula
Acipenser fulvescens
Scaphlrhvnchus platorvnchus
Clinostomus elonaatus
Couesius piumbeus
Erimvstax dissimill's
£. x-punctata
Hvbognathus havi
H. nuchal is
Hvbopsis amblops
H. amnis
Luxi1 us chrvsocephalus
Luxi1 us cornutus
Lvthruriis ardens
N. ariommus
M- blennius
M. boops
M. photogenis
H. rubellus
M- shumardi
Phenacobius mirabilis
Phoxinus ervthroaaster
Rhinichthvs atratulus
B. cataractae
Cvcleptus elonoatus
Catostomus catostomus
£. commersoni
Hvoentilium niaricans
Spotted sucker
Silver redhorse
River redhorse
Black redhorse
Golden redhorse
Shorthead redhorse
Greater redhorse
Burbot
Western sand darter
Eastern sand darter
Rainbow darter
Bluebreast darter
Orangethroat darter
Tippecanoe darter
Variegate darter
Crystal darter
Logperch
Channel darter
Gilt darter
Blackside darter
Slenderhead darter
Dusky darter
River darter
Saddleback darter
Sauger
Walleye
Minvtrema melanops
Moxostoma anisurum
M. carinatum
M. duquesnei
M. ervthrurum
M. macrolepidatum
M. valenciennesi
Lota Iota
Ammocrvpta clara
A,, pellucida
Etheostoma caeruleum
£. camurum
£. spectabile
£. tippecanoe
£. variatum
Crystal 1 aria asprella
Percina caprodes
£. copelandi
£. evides
£. maculata
£. phoxocephala
£. sciera
P. shumardi
£. viail
Sti zostedi oncanadense
50
-------
a. 3
-s
QJ rt
O)
UD
ft>
19
PERCENT INDIVIDUALS AS SIMPLE LITHOPHILS
K)
O
0>
O
CD
O
O
O
c
•*
a>
CD
n> o x
£U T3 -"•
O
Oi in
in -"•
fl> x> -*•
3
o —•
~s <-i- m -*t
->• o
? £fr
en r*-
CU It)
tn ^
-1- O.
S
>
i
* 8
If.
O
90
O O
o
o <
en
0)
W
S
I
< o
0)
o +
8 g.
w
0
o
O
•n
CO
S.
B*
UJ63 UJSJ5B3
-------
Indiana Ecoreaion
Metric 12. Proportion of Individuals with Deformities, Eroded Fins,
Lesions,and Tumors (Headwater and Wadable Sites)
Impetus
This metric evaluates the individual
condition of fish based on the percent
occurrence of external anomalies. DELT
corresponds to the percent of diseased
fish in Karr's (1981) original index.
Studies of fish populations indicate that
anomalies are either absent or occur at
very low rates naturally, but reach higher
percentages at impacted sites (Mills et
al. 1966; Berra and Au 1981; Baumann et
al. 1987). Common causes for deformities,
eroded fins, lesions, and tumors are a
result of bacterial, fungal, viral, and
parasitic infections; neoplastic diseases;
and chemicals (Allison et al. 1977; Post
1983; Ohio EPA 1987). An increase in the
frequency of occurrence of these anomalies
is an indication of physical stress due to
environmental degradation, chemical
pollutants, overcrowding, improper diet,
excessive siltation, and other
perturbations. The presence of black spot
is not included in the above analyses
since infestation varies in degree and is
a function of the presence of snails, thus
it is not solely related to environmental
degradation (Allison et al. 1977; Berra
and Au 1981). Whittier et al. (1987)
showed no relationship between Ohio stream
quality and black spot. Other parasites
are also excluded due to the lack of a
consistent relationship with environmental
degradation.
In Ohio and in the current study, the
highest incidence of deformities, eroded
fins, lesions, and tumors occurred in fish
communities downstream from dischargers of
industrial and municipal wastewater. and
areas subjected to the intermittent
stresses from combined sewers and urban
runoff. Leonard and Orth (1986) found
this metric to correspond to increased
degradation in streams in West Virginia.
Karr et al. (1986) observed this metric to
be most sensitive at the lowest ranges of
the Index of Biotic Integrity.
Headwater and Wadable Streams and Rivers
The scoring criteria used for this metric
follows the more extensive dataset
developed by Ohio EPA (1987) that was
developed by analyzing wading data.
According to Ohio protocols, if a single
fish in a sample of less than 200 fish was
captured with anomalies this would have
been enough to exceed the established
criterion. Ohio EPA scoring modifications
enable a single diseased fish to be
present at a site to score a "5" and two
fish at a site to score a "3" when less
than 200 individuals are collected (Fig.
19).
52
-------
01
CO
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
15
I-
QJ 10
O
§
cr c
ff b
o
o
o Tippeca ^ Wabash o Eel + Mississi
A Salamon • White * Wildcat o St. Jos
1 1 — i i l i l if" > 1 1 1 l 1 1 l| r • ' • T~i i i| l I i • • i • PI
O
.
1 '
O
A
O t
.1 1 10 10O 1OOO
DRAINAGE AREA (SO. Ml)
Figure 19. Maximum species richness lines for determining trends in the
proportion of diseased, eroded fins, lesions, and tumors (DELT)
with increasing drainage area for the Eastern Corn Belt Plain.
3
»
.**
3
-------
Indiana Ecoreoion
Scoring Modifications
Samples with extremely low numbers in the
catch can present a scoring problem in
some of the proportional metrics unless
adjustments are made to reduce the
possibility of bias towards higher scoring
of degraded sites. Aquatic habitats
impacted by anthropogenic disturbances may
exhibit a disruption in the food base and
the sample will reflect very few
individuals. At such low population sizes
the normal structure of the community is
unpredictable (Ohio EPA 1987). Based on
Ohio EPA experiences, the proportion of
omnivores. insectivorous fishes, and
percent individuals affected by anomalies
do not always match expected trends at
these sample sizes. Although scores are
expected to deviate strongly from those of
high quality areas, this is not always
observed. Rather, at these times the
opposite deviation of metric score is
achieved due to low numbers of individuals
or absence of certain taxa.
Scoring very degraded sites without
modifying scoring criteria for the
proportional metrics can overestimate the
total index score for these sites. The
following scoring modifications proposed
by Ohio EPA (1987) were adopted for
evaluating Indiana sites with low numbers
of individuals.
Proportion of omnivores for headwater
streams and wadable river sites a score of
"1" is assigned if less than 50 total
individuals are collected. When less than
150 individuals are collected, but are
dominated (>50£) by such species as creek
chub and blacknose dace, a "1" can be
assigned when dominated by generalist
feeders. This is left up to the biologists
best professional judgement.
Proportion of insectivores is scored a "1"
when a high proportion of insectivores are
observed and less than 50 individuals are
collected. At sites with less than 150
individuals, this metric can be scored "1"
if the community was dominated (>50£) by
either striped shiner, common shiner, or
spotfin shiner. These species can act as
functional omnivores under certain
conditions (Angermeier and Karr 1986).
Proportion of top carnivores metric should
be scored a "1" when dominated by high
numbers (> 50$) of grass pickerel in
impacted wading areas.
Proportion of simple lithophils always
scores a "1" at sites with less than 50
total individuals. Based on Ohio EPA data
(1987) this is rarely different from the
metric score without the adjustment.
Proportion of individuals with
deformities, erosion, lesions and tumor
anomalies is scored a "1" when less than
50 individuals are collected. A high
proportion of young fishes may also be
sufficient reason, to score a "1" since
they will not have had sufficient time to
develop anomalies from exposure to
chemical contaminants.
Proportion of pioneer species is scored a
"1" at headwater site if less than 50
individuals are collected at drainage
areas greater than 8 miles2 or 25
individuals at drainage areas less than 8
miles2.
No scoring adjustments are necessary for
proportion of tolerant species.
54
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Fast.ern Corn Belt Plain
Species Composition: A total of 130 sites
were sampled in the Eastern Corn Belt
Plain between 1991 and 1994. A total of 86
species were collected (Table 13) and were
numerically dominated by cypnmd.
centrarchid. and percid species.
The Eastern Corn Belt Plain possesses
several species unique to the State of
Indiana; river chub Nocomis micropogon.
streamline chub Erimvstax dissimilis.
banded sculpin Cottus carolinae:and gilt
darter Perclna evides. Of special interest
was the collection of the greater redhorse
Moxostoma vajenciennesi. largescale
stoneroller Campostoma oligolepis. and
gilt darter. Moxostoma valenciennesi is
considered state endangered. The capture
of Campostoma oliaolepis is the first
record for northcentral Indiana. Species
such as the river chub and streamline chub
are considered large river species.
Several gilt darters were collected from
the Tippecanoe River.
Species Trends: Round-bodied suckers.
minnows, and darters are good indicator
taxa revealing good to exceptional biotic
integrity. The Eastern Corn Belt Plain
possessed a high number of round-bodied
suckers, minnows, and darters.
Thirteen species of suckers were collected
from the Eastern Corn Belt Plain. Round-
bodied suckers are considered the most
sensitive of the Catostomidae species. A
total of 9 species, excluding the species
Catostomus commersoni. which tends to be a
ubiquitous species found in a variety of
habitats, represented round-bodied
suckers. Six species of redhorse and the
northern hogsucker are regularly
represented in catches from the ecoregion
and the larger tributaries. These species
are insectivores and are highly intolerant
to thermal pollution (Gammon 1976).
The minnows are a diverse group of North
American fish with close to 200 recognized
species. Twenty-seven species of the
family Cyprinidae were collected from the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain. Less than half
(45X) of the species are considered to
represent good-fair biotic integrity (Karr
et al. 1986). Many (40%) of the species
are representative of pioneering taxa that
colonize recently disturbed or water
limited stations (Ohio EPA 1989). The
trophic composition of the species showed
25$ of the species are omnivores.
Omnivores can utilize a greater proportion
of the resource, however, tend to dominate
when the habitat is degraded and resources
are unpredictable.
The darters are a group of small, benthic
insectivores that require high dissolved
oxygen conditions and clean substrates for
reproduction (Page 1983; Kuehne and
Barbour 1983). The darters have close to
150 recognized species. Many of the
species exhibit simple lithophilic modes
of reproduction, while a few species have
evolved more complex reproductive
behaviors. A total of 11 darter species
were collected from the Eastern Corn Belt
Plain. A few additional taxa were expected
based on historical data, however, not all
historical sites were visited.
Biocriteria Comparison of the Eastern Corn
Belt Plain
The States of Ohio and Michigan share the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain ecoregion with
Indiana. Ohio in an attempt to develop the
most stringent biological criteria
evaluated statewide biological criteria
for the ecoregions and sampled extensively
during the late 1980's in an attempt to
find additional reference sites or "least
55
-------
Indiana Ecoreqion
Table 13. Species list of taxa collected in the Eastern Corn Belt Plain,
Indiana, between 1991 to 1994.
Petrornvzontidae - lampreys
Lampetra appendix. American brook lamprey
Amlldae - bowfin
Ami a calva. bowfin
Clupeldae - herring
Dorosoma cepedlanum. gizzard shad
Esocldae - pikes
Esox americanus. grass pickerel
£. lucius. northern pike
Umbridae - mudminnows
Umbra limi. central mudminnow
Cvprinidae - carps and minnows
Campostoma anomulum. stoneroller
C. oliQolepis. largescale stoneroller
Cvprinella lutrensis. red shiner
£. spiloptera. spotfin shiner
£. whipplei. steelcolor shiner
Carassius auratus. goldfish
Cvprinus carpio. carp
Ericvmba buccata. silverjaw minnow
Erimvstax disslmilis. streamline chub
Hvbopsis amblops. bigeye chub
Luxilus chrvsocephalus. striped shiner
L. cornutus. common shiner
Lvthrurus umbrati1is. redfin shiner
Nocomis biauttatus. hornyhead chub
ft. micropoaon. river chub
Notemiaonus crysoleucus. golden shiner
Notropis atherinoides. emerald shiner
M. boops. bigeye shiner
M. ludibundus. sand shiner
M. rubellus. rosyface shiner
M. volucellus. mimic shiner
N. wickliffi. channel shiner
Phenacobius mirabilis. suckermouth minnow
Phoxinus ervthroaaster. southern redbelly
dace
Pimephales notatus. bluntnose minnow
P. promelas. fathead minnow
Rhinichthvs atratulus. blacknose dace
Semotilus atromaculatus. creek chub
Catostomldae - suckers and buffalo
Carpi odes carpio. river carpsucker
£. cvprinus. quillback
£. velifer. highfin carpsucker
Catostomus commersoni. white sucker
Erimvzon oblonaus. creek chubsucker
Hvpenteli urn niaricans. northern hogsucker
Mi nvtrema melanops. spotted sucker
Moxostoma anisurum. silver redhorse
M. carinatum. river redhorse
M. duquesnei. black redhorse
M,. ervthurum. golden redhorse
M. macrolepidotum. shorthead redhorse
M. valenciennesi. greater redhorse
Ictaluridae - bullhead and catfish
Ameiurus melas. black bullhead
A. natalis. yellow bullhead
A. nebulosus. brown bullhead
Ictalurus punctatus. channel catfish
Noturus flavus. stonecat
M. gyrinus. tadpole madtom
M. miurus. brindled madtom
Pvlodictis olivaris. flathead catfish
Fundulidae - topminnows
Fundulus notatus. blackstripe topminnow
Atherinidae - silversides
Labidesthes sicculus. brook silverside
Centrarchidae - black bass and sunfish
Ambloplites rupestris. rock bass
Lepomis cvanel1 us. green sunfish
L. aibbosus. pumpkinseed
L. Qulosus. warmouth
L. humi1i s. orangespotted sunfish
L. macrochirus. bluegill
L. megalotis. longear sunfish
L. microlophus. redear sunfish
Micropterus dolomieu. smallmouth bass
M. salmoides. largemouth bass
M. punctulatus. spotted bass
Pomoxis annularis. white crappie
£. niaromaculatus. black crappie
Moronidae - temperate basses
Horone saxatilis. striped bass
Percidae - perch and darters
Etheostoma blennioides. greenside darter
£. caeruleum. rainbow darter
£. camurum. bluebreast darter
£. flabellare. fantail darter
£. niorum. johnny darter
56
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
£. spectabile. orangethroat darter
Percina caprodes. logperch
£. evides. gilt darter
£. maculata. blackside darter
£. phoxocephala. slenderhead darter
£. sciera, dusky darter
Stizostedlon vitreum. walleye
Cottidae - sculpins
Cottus bairdi. mottled sculpin
£ carolinae. banded sculpin
Sciaemdae - drum
Aplodinotus orunniens. freshwater drum
Total Number of Species
86
impacted stations (Hughes 1995).
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Environmental Research Laboratory-
Corvallis and Ohio EPA collaborated on a
project to determine reference conditions
for the state. The Stream Regionalization
Project culminated in the development of
statewide reference condition expectations
for Ohio (Whittier et a/. 1987; Ohio EPA
1989). Within Ohio, only the Huron-Erie
Lake Plain was recognized as having
limitations for warmwater habitat
designations as defined by Ohio Water
Quality Standards (Ohio EPA 1989). Ohio
EPA biologists determined that none of the
wading and headwater sites sampled in this
ecoregion reflected "least impacted"
conditions relative to reference sites
from the remainder of the State. Intensive
rowcrop agriculture and drainage practices
(i.e. channel modifications to increase
subsurface drainage) have preserved few
headwater streams. As a result the IBI
reflects this lowered biological
integrity. In order to determine warmwater
habitat criteria for headwater and mid-
sized streams and rivers the Ohio EPA
examined results from all sites sampled
between 1979 and 1986. The criteria was
derived from metric values that delineated
the upper IQ% of all sites sampled. They
also reviewed historical literature to
determine expectations.
Ohio EPA developed a "modified warmwater
habitat" designation for streams in the
Huron-Erie Lake Plain and some streams in
the Eastern Corn Belt Plain in order to
properly characterize the extensive
landscape modifications, yet protect the
chemical, physical, and biological
integrity of these streams. The modified
designation is used to protect streams and
rivers that function as warmwater fish
communities but because of structural and
functional modifications of these
communities caused by human induced
practices the community cannot fully
attain warmwater status. The return of
biological integrity to sufficient levels
representative of "least impacted"
conditions are not expected in the near
future due to the physical modification of
the stream channel and substrate. Recovery
of such areas to "least impacted"
conditions is not possible without some
recovery of the stream channel and an
increase in gradient to a pre-modified
condition or extensive landuse changes
within the drainage.
Michigan Department of Environmental
Quality (MDEQ) has formulated biological
expectations for the Eastern Corn Belt
Plain ecoregion based on a state wide
database. It was a primary goal of this
study to determine if reference condition
expectations developed from the Indiana
portion of the ecoregion could advance
biological criteria expectations for this
region.
Michigan DEQ developed sampling protocols
and biological expectations for the state
as part of their Procedure 51 (Creal et
al. 1996). The Michigan procedure uses a
modified scoring expectation based on two
standard deviations from the mean. Thus,
scoring is either +1, 0, or -1 for sites
performing outside those found at
57
-------
Indiana Ecoreaion
excellent sites. Sites are calibrated
based on stream width, similar to
Wisconsin (Lyons 1992). Maximum Species
Richness (MSR) lines are developed using
two approaches. Several metrics, such as
the number of darter, sunfish, and
suckers, were not found to have
significant ranges in species richness and
were divided following the approach of
Karr (1981). The usual approach was to
evaluate expectations based on two
standard deviations from the mean. For
several of the percentile metrics,
modifications were made when two standard
deviations were outside of the 0-100$
range. The modification placed the
expectation at either 1 or 99% for the
percentage of piscivores, insectivores,
simple lithophilic spawners, and tolerant
species.
IBI Scoring ranges for Michigan fish
assemblage procedures are between +10 and
-10, since procedure 51 is based on only
10 metrics. Scores greater than +5 are
considered excellent, while those less
than -5 are classified as poor. Scores
between ±4 are considered intermediate
with scores of 0 being neutral (Creal et
al. 1996)
Despite the widespread degradation found
in the headwater streams some of the
Eastern Corn Belt Plain qualify as "least
impacted" areas. Streams such as the
Tippecanoe River, portions of the upper
and middle East Fork White River,
Burnett's Creek, and portions of the South
Fork Wildcat Creek are typical reference
streams for the Eastern Corn Belt Plain.
This is undoubtably a function of
zoogeography. The reduction of available
dispersal routes post-glaciation required
many species to reinvade the area only
after the glaciers receeded some 10,000
years ago (Underhill 1986). Species
recolonization of the Till Plain was aided
by the glacial connection between the
Wabash and Maumee Rivers by the Little
Wabash River and by the Grand River
connection across Michigan. As the Saginaw
lobe retreated across Michigan a large
pool of water remained that was the
precursor of Lake Erie. Species capable of
tolerating lentic, turbid, cold water was
able to reinvade the system first. Many
species were unable to disperse into the
Great Lakes, thus, the Great Lakes as a
whole are biologically limited in
comparison to riverine systems such as the
Mississippi and Ohio River systems. A
study by Smith et al. (1981) in the Raisin
River system demonstrates this effect with
the headwaters of the system reflecting
more structural and functional attributes
of the Eastern Corn Belt Plain fish
community, while lower sections of the
river were dominated by the most tolerant
species. The Eastern Corn Belt Plain has
riffles and other macrohabitat features
but has lost much of the riverine wetland
habitat. The lack of wetlands, low-
gradient, seiche directed streams and
rivers of this region would have precluded
many of the sensitive species. Thus,
reference conditions need to reflect not
only high gradient "least impacted"
streams but also the typical low-gradient
types of habitats which occurred along the
Great Rivers.
In order to compare the criteria and
direction of the individual metrics to
determine if Ohio EPA and Michigan DEQ
biological criteria could benefit from the
effort conducted in Indiana it is
necessary to compare the associated
variance of the reference conditions. The
State of Michigan developed biological
criteria from the analysis of over 800
reference sites statewide. After careful
analysis of the results, the various
ecoregions are scored based on differences
in stream width while Ohio based their
expectations on drainage area. In order to
compare metric expectations, datasets from
58
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Table 14. Comparison of Michigan DEQ (1996) Procedure 51 and Ohio EPA
(1989) reference conditions with reference conditions
developed from Indiana's portion of the Eastern Corn Belt
Plain.
Reference Conditions
Michigan
Metric 10 ft'a> 20 ft(b)
1. Total Number of Species > 11 >11
2. Number of darter species > 4 >4
3. Number of Sunfish species > 2 >3
Proportion of Headwater Species --
Number of headwater Species
4. Number of Minnow species
Number of Sucker species > 2 > 2
5. Number of Sensitive species > 3 > 4
6. Proportion Tolerant species < 53% < 53*
7. Proportion of Omnivores < 36* < 36*
8. Proportion of Insectivores > 47% > 47%
9. Proportion Pioneer species
Proportion of Carnivores > 5* > 5%
10. Catch per unit of effort
11. % Simple Lithophils > 33* > 33*
12. Proportion of DELT
(3) Maximum value from 95th percentile of Maximum Species
20 mi2, while
Indiana
Head Wadable
12 18
4 4
>3 > 3
> 35* --
> 6
> 3 > 3
> 4 > 8
< 25* < 25*
< 25* < 25*
> 50* > 50*
< 25*
10*-25*
> 250 >375
> 40* > 40*
< 0.1* < 0.1*
Richness lines at
Richness lines at
sensitive taxa are
Ohio
Head
17
> 4
> 3
> 7
> 6
< 30*
< 18*
> 48*
< 34*
> 750
> 36*
< 0.1*
20 mi2;
300 mi2.
< 20mi2
Wadable
23
> 5
> 3
> 5
> 5(c)
< 20*
< 18*
> 53*
> 5*
> 750
> 36*
< 0.1*
each of the 10 metrics was compared from comparison are summarized in Table 14
Michigan DEQ (1996) and Ohio EPA to the between Michigan, Ohio EPA, and Indiana.
current metric criteria adjusted for
similar sized streams. The Indiana dataset Michigan IBI Comparison
is based on a 95th percentile of the
reference condition. Results of the In a comparison (student t-test, alpha =
59
-------
Indiana Ecoreqion
0.05) between the two reference
conditions, metrics that did not differ
statistically between Michigan criteria
and Indiana Eastern Corn Belt Plain
expectations include total number of
species at headwater sites, number of
sunfish species, number of sucker species,
number of sensitive species for headwater
sites, proportion of omnivores, proportion
of insectivores, and proportion of simple
lithophils. The proportion of pioneer
species, headwater species, catch-per-unit
effort, and proportion of deformities,
eroded fins, lesions, and tumors are not
used in the Michigan version of the IBI.
Metrics that exhibited a statistical
difference between Michigan criteria and
Indiana's expectations included total
number of species for wadable sites.
number of sensitive species at wadable
sites, and proportion of omnivores. Of the
three metrics that had significant
differences, all of the metrics were more
stringent when using Indiana's criteria.
The number of species metric showed
differences at both sites perhaps because
Michigan collects up to 100 specimens or
for 30 minutes. This may have
underestimated the species area curve for
this metric. This would have been
exaggerated at larger drainage areas where
more habitat complexity would have been
exhibited. The Michigan expectations for
the proportion of tolerant species
suggests that double the percentage of
tolerant species are expected in Michigan.
The number of sensitive species showed
similar trends with Michigan criteria at
headwater sites, however, differences in
species membership to the list are the
probable cause. For Indiana we used a
modified metric that includes intolerant,
as well as, sensitive species following
Ohio EPA (1989). Species such as longear
sunfish, northern hogsucker, and redhorse
species are taxa that did not appear on
the Michigan list that were commonly
collected in the Eastern Corn Belt Plain.
As stream size increases these additional
species are more commonly collected
increasing proportions.
The collection of data differently may
have prohibiting further comparison. The
catch-per-unit effort was expressed as the
number of fish per 15 x the stream width
or collected within the first 30 minutes
of electrofishing. Samples from this
collection included 15x the stream width
with a minimum of 50 m sampled and the
longest distance sampled was 500 m. The
number of sensitive species at wadable
sites also deviated in collection and
categorizing strategy. Michigan DEQ uses
the intolerant species designation even at
headwater sites. At larger wadable sites.
the Michigan IBI uses an intolerant
species metric that reduces the number of
recognized sensitive species from the
headwater category. This makes the
criteria inherently more stringent and
prohibits comparison of reference
conditions between the two datasets.
Ohio IBI Comparison
Metrics that had similar expectations
between the Ohio and Indiana IBI's
included number of darter species, number
of sunfish species, number of minnow
species, number of sensitive species at
headwater sites, proportion of tolerant
species, proportion of omnivores,
proportion of insectivores, proportion of
pioneer species, proportion of simple
lithophils, and proportion of deformities,
eroded fins, lesions and tumors.
Metrics that exhibited a statistical
difference between Ohio criteria and
Indiana's expectations included total
number of species,number of sucker
species, number of sensitive species at
60
-------
Corn Belt Plain
wadable sites, proportion of carnivores,
and catch per unit of effort. Of the five
metrics that had significant differences,
6Q% (3 of 5) of the metrics were more
stringent when using Ohio's criteria.
The number of species metric showed
differences at both sites perhaps because
Indiana collects for only 50 m minimum
distance while Ohio's minimum distance is
150 m, while in larger streams the minimum
Ohio distance is 300 m and 150 m for
Indiana. This may have slightly
underestimated the species area curve for
this metric. This would have been
exaggerated at larger drainage areas where
more habitat complexity would have been
exhibited. The Indiana expectations for
the number of sucker species are less than
Ohio expectations. There is no causal
explanation for this difference. The
abundance metric is approximately 3 times
more the Indiana expectation for headwater
sites and double the wadable sites. This
suggests that the difference in distance
sampled accounts for the difference in
number of fish.
The number of sensitive species showed
similar trends with Ohio criteria at
headwater sites, however, differences in
species membership to the list are the
probable cause for differences in wadable
sites. For Indiana we used a modified
metric that includes intolerant, as well
as, sensitive species following Ohio EPA
headwater criterion (1989). Species such
as longear sunfish, northern hogsucker,
and redhorse species are taxa that did not
appear on the intolerant list that are
used in wadable rivers in Ohio.
The proportion of carnivores for Indiana
were double the proportion expected for
Ohio. There is no explanation for this
di fference.
The result of this comparison suggests
that the Eastern Corn Belt Plain criteria
developed during this study is directly
comparable between Michigan and Ohio. For
a few metrics, more stringent criteria
resulted in the protection of surface
waters using Ohio criteria. It must be
mentioned that differences in regional
framework approaches may be the difference
between these three State strategies. In
the case of every significant difference,
the Indiana metrics provide more stringent
expectations than what was observed from
Michigan, while 6Q% of the differences in
Ohio metrics were more stringent than
Indianain expectations. Sixteen metrics
are not significantly different in
expectations between Indiana and Ohio or
Michigan. Biological expectations within
the same ecoregion and across political
boundaries are similar for 66.7$ of the
metrics incorporated into the different
State IBI's. Similar metrics and
expectations suggest that the three states
have adequately addressed differences in
expectations and that "least impacted"
conditions have been estimated for the
ecoregion based on reference conditions
developed across political boundaries.
5.0 LITERATURE CITED
Alderkas E. and H:E. McReynolds. (undated
- assumed 1962). Upper Wabash River stream
survey. Indiana Dept. Consv., Division of
Fish and Game. Indianapolis, IN. 7 pp.
Allison, L.N.. J.G. Hnath, and W.G. Yoder.
1977. Manual of common diseases,
parasites, and anomalies of Michigan
fishes. Michigan Department of Natural
Resources. Lansing. Fisheries Management
Report No. 8. 132 pp.
Angermeier, P.L. and J.R. Karr. 1986.
Applying an index of biotic integrity
based on stream fish communities:
considerations in sampling and
interpretation. N. Am. J. Fish. Man. 6:
418-429.
61
-------
Indiana Ecoreaion
Arvin, D.V. 1989. Statistical summary of
streamflow data for Indiana. U.S.
Geological Survey. Indianapolis. IN. Open
File Report 89-62. 964 pp.
Bailey, Z.C., T.K. Greeman. and E.J.
Crompton. 1985. Hydro!ogic effects of
ground- and surface-water withdrawals in
the Howe area, LaGrange County. U.S.
Geological Survey Water Resources
Investigations Report 85-4163
Balon, E.K. 1975. Reproductive guilds of
fishes: a proposal and definition. J.
Fish. Res. Board Can. 32: 821-864.
Bauman, P.C., W.D. Smith, and W.K.
Parland. 1987. Tumor frequencies and
contaminant concentrations in brown
bullhead from an industrialized river and
a recreational lake. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.
116: 79-86.
Becker, G.C. 1983. Fishes of Wisconsin.
University of Wisconsin Press: Madison.
1052 p.
Berkman. H.E. and C.F. Rabeni. 1987.
Effect of siltation on stream fish
communities. Env. Biol. Fishes 18: 285-
294.
Berra, T.M. and R. Au. 1981. Incidence of
teratological fishes from Cedar Fork
Creek, Ohio. Ohio J. Sci . 81: 225.
Braun, E.R. 1982. The walleye population
in the Wabash River (Huntington. Wabash,
Miami, Cass Counties). Indiana Department
of Natural Resources, Fisheries Section,
Division of Fish and Wildlife,
Indianapolis, IN. 68 pp.
Braun, E.R. 1990. A survey of Upper Wabash
River fishes. Indiana Department of
Natural Resources, Fisheries Section,
Division of Fish and Wildlife.
Indianapolis, IN. 18 pp.
Brown, H.W. 1976. Handbook of the effects
of temperature on some North American
fishes. American Electric Power
Corporation, Canton, OH. 524 pp +
appendices.
Brungs, W.A. and B.R. Jones. 1977.
Temperature criteria for freshwater fish:
protocol and procedures. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Env. Res.
Lab.-Duluth, MN. EPA 600/3-77/061. 130 pp.
Burr, B.M. and M.L. Warren, Jr. 1986. A
distributional atlas of Kentucky fishes.
Kentucky Nature Preserves Commission
Scientific and Technical Series No. 4.
Frankfort.
Creal, W., S. Hanshue, S. Kosek, M. Oemke,
and M. Walterhouse. 1996. Update of GLEAS
Procedure 51 metric scoring and
interpretation. Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality, Lansing.
MI/DEQ/SWQ-96/068.
Davis, W.S. (ed.) 1990. Proceedings of the
1990 Midwest Pollution Control Biologists
Meeting. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region V, Environmental Sciences
Division, Chicago, IL. EPA 905/9-90/005.
Davis, W.S. and A. Lubin. 1989.
Statistical validation of Ohio EPA's
invertebrate community index, p. 23-32. In
W.S. Davis and T.P. Simon (eds).
Proceedings of the 1989 Midwest Pollution
Control Biologists Meeting, Chicago,
Illinois. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region V. Chicago, IL. EPA 905/9-
89-007.
EA Engineering, Science, and Technology.
1992. Fish studies of the White River in
Indiana near the Frank E. Ratts Power
Plant, September 1991. EA Engineering,
Science, and Technology, Deerfield, IL. EA
Report 60307.
62
-------
Eastern Corn Bett Plain
Environmental Science and Engineering.
1987. 1986 Survey of the communities and
water quality of the lower 200 miles of
the West Fork and main stem White River.
ESE, Inc. St. Louis, MO. 90 pp. +
appendices.
Fatout, P. 1985. Indiana Canals. Purdue
University Press: West Lafayette, Indiana.
216 p.
Fausch. K.D., J.R. Karr, and P.R. Yant.
1984. Regional application of an index of
biotic integrity based on stream-fish
communities. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 113:
39-55.
Fausch, K.D., J. Lyons, J.R. Karr, and
P.L. Angermeier. 1990. Fish communities as
indicators of environmental degradation.
Am Fish. Soc. Symposium 8: 123-144.
Fenneman, N.M. 1946. Physical division of
the United States: Washington D.C., U.S.
Geological Survey Special Map.
Forbes, S.A and R.E. Richardson. 1920. The
fishes of Illinois. (2nd edition). State
Natural History Survey of Illinois 3: 1-
357.
Gammon, J.R. 1973. The effects of thermal
input on the populations of fish and
macroinvertebrates in the Wabash River.
Purdue University Water Resources Research
Center Tech. Rept. 32. 106 pp.
Gammon, J.R. 1976. The fish populations of
the middle 340 km of the Wabash River.
Purdue Univ. Water Resources Research
Center Technical Report 86. 73 pp.
Gammon. J.R. 1983. Changes in the fish
community of the Wabash River following
power plant start-up: projected and
observed, pp. 350-366. in W.E. Bishop,
R.D. Cardwell. and B.B. Heidolph (eds).
Aquatic Toxicology and Hazard Assessment:
Sixth Symposium. ASTM STP 802.
Gammon, J.R. 1991. The Environment and
Fish Communities of the Middle Wabash
River. DePauw University, Department of
Biological Sciences, Greencastle, IN. 129
pp. + appendices.
Gammon, J.R.. A. Spacie, J.L. Hamelink,
and R.L. Kaesler. 1981. Role of
electrofishing in assessing environmental
quality of the Wabash River, p. 307-324.
la J.M. Bates and C.I. Weber (eds.).
Ecological Assessments of Effluent Impacts
on Conmunities of Indigenous Aquatic
Organisms. Am. Soc. Test. Materials, STP
730, Phil., PA.
Gerking. S.D. 1945. Distribution of the
fishes of Indiana. Inv. Ind. Lakes and
Streams 3: 1-137.
Gerking. S.D. 1955. Key to the fishes of
Indiana. Inv. Ind. Lakes and Streams t
49-86.
Glatfelter, D.R. 1984. Techniques for
estimating magnitude and frequency of
floods on streams in Indiana. U.S.
Geological Survey water Resources
Investigations Report 84-4134.
Gooding, A.M. 1973. Characteristics of
late Wisconisan Tills in eastern Indiana.
Geological Survey Bull. 49: 1-28.
Gray.M. in preparation. Quarternary
geologic map of Indiana. Indiana
Geological Surv. Misc. Map.
Hocutt, C.H. and E.O. Wiley. 1986.
Zoogeography of North American freshwater
fishes. John Wiley and Sons Press: New
York.
Hoggatt, R.E. 1975. Drainage Areas of
Indiana Streams. U.S. Geological Survey.
Indianapolis, IN. 231 pp.
63
-------
Indiana Ecoreoion
Hokanson, K.E.F. and K.E. Biesinger. 1980.
A national compendium of freshwater fish
and water temperature requirements. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Env. Res.
Lab.. Duluth. MN. 142 pp.
Homoya, M.A., D.B. Abrell. J.R. Aldrich.
and T.W. Post. 1985. The natural regions
of Indiana. Proc. Indiana Acad. Sci. 94:
245-268.
Hughes, R.M., J.H. Gakstatter, M.A.
Shirazi, and J.M. Omermk. 1982. An
approach for determining biological
integrity in flowing waters, pp. 877-888.
In T.B. Braun (ed.). Inplace resource
inventories: principles and practices, a
National Workshop. Soc. Am. Foresters,
Bethesda, MD.
Hughes, R.M.. D.P. Larsen, and J.M.
Omernik. 1986. Regional reference sites: a
method for assessing stream pollution.
Env. Mgmt. 10: 629-635.
Indiana Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM). 1994. Indiana 305(b)
report 1990-92. Indiana Department of
Environmental Management. Indianapolis.
Indiana Department of Natural Resources
(IDNR). 1980. The Indiana water resource:
availability, uses, and needs. Indiana
Department of Natural Resources,
Indianapolis. 508 pp.
Jordan, D.S. 1890. Report of explorations
made during the summer and autumn of 1888,
in the Allegheny region of Virginia, North
Carolina, and Tennessee, and in western
Indiana, with an account of the fishes
found in each of the river basins of those
regions. Bull. U.S. Fish. Comm. 1888,
8:97-173.
Jung, C.O. and J. Libovarsky. 1965. Effect
of size selectivity on population
estimates based on successive removals
with electrofishing gear. Zoologicke Listy
14: 171-178.
Karr, J.R. 1981. Assessment of biotic
integrity using fish communities.
Fisheries 6:21-27.
Karr, J.R. 1991. Biological integrity: a
long-neglected aspect of water resource
management. Ecological Applications 1: 66-
84.
Karr, J.R. and D.R. Dudley. 1981.
Ecological perspective on water quality
goals. Env. Mgmt. 5: 55-68.
Karr, J.R., K.D. Fausch. P.L. Angermeier,
P.R. Yant. and I.J. Schlosser. 1986.
Assessing biological integrity in running
waters: a method and its rationale. 111.
Nat. Hist. Surv. Sp. Publ. 5. 28 pp.
Krumholz, L.A. 1946. Repopulation of the
West Fork. Outdoor Indiana 13(2): 12.
Kuehne, R.A. and R.W. Barbour. 1983. The
American darters. University of Kentucky
Press: Lexington.
Lanmore, R.W. and P.W. Smith. 1963. The
fishes of Champaign County, Illinois, as
affected by 60 years of stream changes.
177. Nat. Hist. Surv. Bull. 28: 299-382.
Larsen, D.P., J.M. Omernik. R.M. Hughes,
C.M. Rohm, T.R. Whittier, A.J. Kinney,
A.L. Gallant, and D.R. Dudley. 1986.
Correspondence between spatial patterns in
fish assemblages in Ohio streams and
aquatic ecoregions. Env. Man. 10: 815-828.
64
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Leonard. P.M. and D.J. Orth. 1986.
Application and testing of an Index of
Biotic Integrity in small, cool water
streams. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 115: 401-
414.
Leopold, L.B., M.G. Woolman, and J.P.
Miller. 1964. Fluvial processes in
geomorphology. W.H. Freeman, San
Francisco, CA.
Lewis, R.B.. R.K. Cox, and J.E. Bonnell.
1989. Fish community analysis near the
Wabash River generating station: May-
November 1988. Public Service of Indiana,
Environmental Programs, Plainsfield,
Indiana EPW-033. 37 pp + appendices.
Limnotech, Inc. 1979. Model of Wabash
River dissolved oxygen concentrations
downstream of the Cayuga Generating
Station. Public Service of Indiana,
Plainfield, IN.
Lyons, J. 1992. Using the Index of Biotic
Integrity (IBI) to measure environmental
quality in warmwater streams of Wisconsin.
U.S. Dept. Agriculture, Forest Service,
General Technical Report NC-149.
Mayden, R.L. 1989. Phylogenetic studies of
North American minnows, with emphasis on
the genus Cvprinella (Teleostei:
Cyprimformes). Misc. Publ. Univ. Kans.
Mus. Nat. Hist. No. 80. 189 pp.
McCormick. J.H., M.J. Ross, and D.B.
Siniff. 1981. Where do yellow perch (Perca
flavescens) go in winter when given the
option between ice covered waters or a
heated discharge. Can. Tech. Rept. Fish.
Aquat. Sci. 990: 33-45.
Mills, H.B., W.C. Starrett, and F.C.
Bell rose. 1966. Man's effect on the fish
and wildlife of the Illinois River. 111.
Nat. Hist. Surv. Biol. Notes 57. 27 pp.
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA). 1987. Water Quality implementation
manual. QA Manual (3rd update). Fish. Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency, Columbus.
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA). 1987. Biological criteria for the
protection of aquatic life. Volume II.
Users Manual for Biological field
assessment of Ohio surface waters. Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency, Columbus.
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA). 1989. Biological criteria for the
protection of aquatic life: Volume III.
Standardized biological field sampling and
laboratory methods for assessing fish and
macroinvertebrate communities. Ohio
Environmental Protection Awgncy, Columbus.
Omernik, J.M. 1987. Ecoregions of the
conterminous United States. Ann. Ass. Am.
Geo. 77:118-125.
Omernik, J.M. and A.L. Gallant. 1988.
Ecoregions of the upper Midwest States.
USEPA, ERL. Corvallis, OR. EPA/600/3-
88/037.
Page, L.M. 1983. Handbook of Darters. TFH
Publications, Neptune, NJ.
Pearson, J. 1975. Age, growth and
condition of dominant fish species in the
Upper Wabash River. Indiana Dept. Nat.
Resources, Fisheries Section, Div. Fish
andWildl., Indianapolis, IN. 21 pp.
Pearson, J. 1975a. Upper Wabash River
access survey report: supplement to the
Upper Wabash River Fisheries Survey
Report). Indiana Dept. Nat. Resources,
Fisheries Section, Div. Fish and Wildlife,
Indianapolis, IN. Unnumbered report.
Pflieger. W.L. 1975. The Fishes of
Missouri. Mo. Dept. Conserv.: Columbia.
343 pp.
65
-------
Indiana Ecoreaion
Phillips. G.L. and J.C. Underbill. 1971.
Distribution and variation of the
Catostomidae of Minnesota. Bell Mus. Nat.
Hist. Univ. Minn., Occ. Pap. Ho. 10. 45
pp.
Plafkin, J.L., M.T. Barbour, K.D. Porter,
S.K. Gross, and R.M. Hughes. 1989. Rapid
bioassessment protocols for use in streams
and rivers: benthic macroinvertebrates.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Monitoring and Data Support Division,
Washington. D.C. EPA 444/4-89-001.
Post. G. 1983. Textbook of fish health.
TFH Publications, Neptune, NJ.
Raney, E.G. and B.W. Menzel. 1969. Heated
effluents and effects on aquatic life with
emphasis on fishes. Ichthyological
Associates Bulletin 2.. 468 pp.
Rankin, E.T. 1989. The use of the
qualitative habitat evaluation index for
use attainability studies in streams and
rivers in Ohio. Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency, Division of Water
Quality Planning and Assessments,
Columbus, Ohio.
Robertson, R. 1975. Middle Wabash River
Stream survey report: Cass, Carroll,
Tippecanoe. Warren, and Fountain Counties.
Indiana Dept. Nat. Resources, Fisheries
Section. Indianapolis. IN.. Unnumbered
report.
Schneider, A.F. 1966. Physiography, pp.
40-56, In A.A. Lindsey (ed). Natural
Features of Indiana. Univ. Notre Dame
Press: Notre Dame. IN.
Seaber, P.R.. S.P. Kapinost, and G.L.
Knapp. 1984. State hydrologic unit maps.
U.S. Geol. Survey Open-file report. 84-
708. 198 pp.
Simon. T.P. 1989. Rationale for a family-
level ichthyoplankton index for use in
evaluating water quality, pp. 41-65 +
appendix. In Davis, W.S. and T.P. Simon.
Proceedings of the 1989 Midwest Pollution
Control Biologists Meeting, Chicago,
Illinois. February 14-17. 1989. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Chicago,
IL. EPA 905/9-89-007.
Simon, T.P. 1991. Development of Index of
Biotic Integrity expectations for the
ecoregions of Indiana. I. Central Corn
Belt Plain. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region V, Chicago, IL. EPA 905/9-
91/025.
Simon, T.P. 1994. Development of Index of
Biotic Integrity expectations for the
ecoregions of Indiana. II. Huron-Erie Lake
Plain. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. Region V, Chicago. IL. EPA 905/R-
92/006.
Simon. T.P. 1997. Development of Index of
Biotic Integrity expectations for the
ecoregions of Indiana. III. Northern
Indiana Till Plain. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region V, Chicago, IL.
EPA 905/R-96/002.
Simon, T.P., L.L. Hoist, and L.J. Shepard.
1988. Proceedings of the First National
Workshop on Biological Criteria,
Lincolnwood. Illinois. December 2-4, 1987.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region V. Chicago. EPA 905/9-89/003.
Smith, G.R., J.N. Taylor, and T.W.
Grimshaw. 1981. Ecological survey of
fishes in the Raisin River drainage,
Michigan. Michigan Academician 13: 275-
305.
Smith. P.W. 1979. The Fishes of Illinois.
University of Illinois Press: Champaign,
IL.
66
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Smith, P.M. 1971. Illinois streams: a
classification based on their fishes and
an analysis of factors responsible for the
disappearance of native species. 777. Nat.
Hist. Surv. Biol. Notes 76.
Steedman, R.J. 1988. Modification and
assessment of an Index of Biotic Integrity
to quantify stream quality in southern
Ontario. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and
Aquatic Sciences 45: 492-501.
Stewart, J.A. 1983. Low-flow
characteristics of Indiana streams. U.S.
Geological Survey Open File Report 82-
1007.
Trautman, M.B. 1981. The Fishes of Ohio.
Tne Ohio State University Press: Columbus,
OH. 782 pp.
UnderlTill. J.C. 1986. The fish fauna of
the laurentian Great Lakes, the St.
Lawrence lowlands, a Newfoundland and
Labrador, p. 105-136 In C.H. Hocutt and
E.O. Wiley (eds.). The Zoogeography of
North American Freshwater Fishes. John
Wiley & Sons, Interscience, New York.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). undated.
Indiana State 208 Water Quality Management
Planning Maps. Region IB. U.S. Geological
Survey, Indianapolis, IN.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 1990.
National Water Summary. U.S. Geological
Survey, Resnick, VA.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA). 1980. Spatial distribution and
temperature selection of fish near the
thermal outfall of a power plant during
fall, winter, and spring. USEPA, Env. Res.
Lab.-Duluth, MM. EA 600/3-80/009.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA). 1988. Standard Operating
Procedures for conducting rapid assessment
of ambient surface water quality using
fish. USEPA, Region V. Central Regional
Laboratory, Chicago, IL.
Wallus, R., T.P. Simon, and B.L. Yeager.
1990. Reproductive Biology and Early Life
History Stages of fishes from the Ohio
River drainage. Tennessee Valley
Authority, Chattanooga, Tennessee.
Walterhouse, M.B., 1988. A fisheries
survey of the Upper Wabash River
reservoir's tributaries. Indiana
Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries
Section, Indianapolis, IN. 47 pp.
WAPORA. 1976. The effect of the H.T.
Prichard generating station thermal
effluent on the biota of the West Fork of
the White River. Report to Indianapolis
Power and Light, Indianapolis, IN. Proj.
No. 183E. 312 pp.
Whittier. T.R.. D.P. Larsen. R.M. Hughes,
C.M. Rohm, A.L. Gallant, and J.M. Omernik.
1987. The Ohio Stream Regionalization
Project: A compendium of results. USEPA,
Environmental Research Laboratory,
Corvallis, OR. -
67
-------
Indiana Ecoreoion
APPENDICES
A. Tolerance, trophic, and reproductive guilds classification for computing the Index of
Biotic Integrity for Indiana taxa.
B. Site classification percentages based on individual metric attributes.
C. Fish nomenclature changes for the species of fish occurring within the political
boundaries of Indiana.
68
-------
APPENDIX A. Tolerance, trophic, and reproductive guild classifications for computing the Index of
Biotic Integrity for Indiana taxa.
Page 1
VOUCHERCD
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
17.00
18.00
19.00
20.00
21.00
22.00
23.00
24.00
25.00
26.00
27.00
28.00
29.00
30.00
31.00
32.00
33.00
34.00
35.00
36.00
37.00
38.00
39.00
40.00
41.00
42.00
43.00
44.00
46.00
47.00
48.00
49.00
50.00
51.00
GENUS
Lampetra
Lampetra
Petromyzon
Ichthyomyzon
Ichthyomyzon
Ichthyomyzon
Ichthyomyzon
Acipenser
Scaphirhynchus
Polyodon
Lepisosteus
Lepisosteus
Lepisosteus
Atractosteus
Amia
Anguilla
Alosa
Alosa
Dorosoma
Alosa
Dorosoma
Hiodon
Hiodon
Coregonus
Coregonus
Coregonus
Coregonus
Coregonus
Coregonus
Oncorhynchus
Oncorhynchus
Oncorhynchus
Salmo
Salmo
Salvelinus
Salvelinus
Osmerus
Esox
Esox
Esox
Esox
Umbra
Cyprinus
Carassius
Hybognathus
Hybognathus
Hybognathus
Notemigonus
Clinostomus
Semotilus
SPECIES
aepyptera
appendix
marinus
bdellium
castaneus
fossor
unicuspis
fulvescens
platorynchus
spathula
osseus
oculatus
platostomus
spatula
calva
rostrata
alabamae
pseudoharengus
cepedianum
chrysochloris
petenense
alosoides
tergisus
clupeaformis
artedi
hoyi
nigripinnis
reighardi
zenithicus
kisutch
tshawytscha
mykiss
salar
trutta
namaycush
fontinalis
mordax
lucius
americanus
ohioensis
masquinongy
mm m *
limi
carpio
auratus
nuchalis
hankinsoni
hayi
crysoleucus
elongatus
atromaculatus
COMMON NAM
LEAST BROOK LAMPREY
AMERICAN BROOK LAMPR
SEA LAMPREY
OHIO LAMPREY
CHESTNUT LAMPREY
NORTHERN BROOK LAMP
SILVER LAMPREY
LAKE STURGEON
SHOVELNOSE STURGEON
PADDLEFISH
LONGNOSE GAR
SPOTTED GAR
SHORTNOSE GAR
ALLIGATOR GAR
BOWFIN
AMERICAN EEL
ALABAMA SHAD
ALEWIFE
GIZZARD SHAD
SKIPJACK HERRING
THREADFIN SHAD
GOLDEYE
MOONEYE
LAKE WHITEFISH
CISCO OR LAKE HERRING
BLOATER
BLACKFIN CISCO
SHORTNOSE CISCO
SHORTJAW CISCO
COHO SALMON
CHINOOK SALMON
RAINBOW TROUT
ATLANTIC SALMON
BROWN TROUT
LAKE TROUT
BROOK TROUT
RAINBOW SMELT
NORTHERN PIKE
GRASS PICKEREL
MUSKELLUNGE
GREAT LAKES MUSKELLU
CENTRAL MUDMINNOW
CARP
GOLDFISH
MISSISSIPPI SILVERY MINN
BRASSY MINNOW
CYPRESS MINNOW
GOLDEN SHINER
REDSIDE DACE
CREEK r 'B
FEED GUILD
F
F
P
P
P
F
P
V
I
F
P
P
P
P
P
C
-
F
0
P
O
I
I
V
F
-
-
-
.
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
V
P
P
P
P
O
o
o
o
o
o
I
I
G
REPR GUILD
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
S
S
S
M
M
M
M
C
-
N
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
N
N
M
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
M
M
M
M
M
C
M
M
S
.
M
M
S
N
TOLERANCE
R
R
-
S
-
S
-
-
-
S
-
-
-
-
-
T
.
-
-
-
.
R
R
.
.
.
-
.
.
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
.
.
P
.
.
T
T
T
_
_
_
T
R
T
-------
CM
0)
O)
03
0.
o
til
p
HO: a._ , , _5o:_cow ,_ , ozcoo: . _o: , , , 1-1- , , H- ,
, , 0:2
oca: ,
0
Q.
UJ
£K
CD
Q
UJ
UJ
o.
.HOOO — OlOO.
CO
UJ
o
UJ
a.
at
(A
CO
UJ
o
(O (O
It
,2.2 w to M
E E V" _
Q o g g g
ooS
(0 OB
LUOO
O
cr:
UJ
o
§0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
qqoqooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
I
- CO OO OO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO) O> O> O> OT O> O> O) O> O) O O
-------
roio_A.—k.~^._L.U.—&.—x_k..o.«xOO O O O O O O
^5SS^poi^wK5^pNJ
8888888SS8888§§§8ggggg§§ggggg§8ggggg§ggggggg§gg§§g
588igaSSsS53P 385SpPE3ogH|KB8S83gipSB|§g6SKS:
2
z *£ yoz±s xi , w te
5 S^g z ° S m
^ i u z
•oo1 ooo
m
o
O
OOOOOOSZS2SS2W22OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
n
i i t I
1 ' 2 ' 3D ' /D ' ' ' ' ' COCOT3TJH ' ' JOTO — TJTJ'Xt ' ' ' CO ' ' ' ' ^JS^JS^^SS ' ' CO
n
T3
0)
(Q
(D
CO
-------
0)
O)
to
a.
Q.Q.
, coo:, , 0:0:5
, coo:
QL
JU
a:
O555OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO5ZCOO55COC05O5COZOCOC055COCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO
cs
o
uu
UJ
u.
Q.Q.Q.O O OOO ,
.0.0..
LJ<^i_O m "3
si
&5>
' jJIfg§.§!..!
illllllilllllllllSillli^lllliyiS
E o>jz EEo.co'ocao.rocuo>coc=ro^}oocuc!=JcEEca^>N >
03 _
CO CD CO
o oT3
CO
UJ
o
ro
o.
CD
o <
CO
co
, 3
•
co co co
2SE
ro ro
EE
ro
•II
roro
ro
ro ro
EE
ro
c c 2
.2.9 o.
I
o
O
tt
UJ
n:
o
i
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
pppoooooooooopppppppppppoopooooppppppppppppppppppp
> 00 CO CD 00 GO C3) O> O) O) OT C3> O> O) O> O) O O O
-------
APPENDIX A.
Continued
VOUCHERCD
203.00
204.00
205.00
206.00
207.00
208.00
209.00
210.00
211.00
212.00
213.00
214.00
215.00
216.00
217.00
218.00
219.00
220.00
GENUS
Ammocrypta
Crystallana
Aplodinotus
Elassoma
Notropis
Esox
Morone
Stizostedion
Lepomis
Gymnocephalus
Mylopharyngodon
Hypophthalmichthys
Neogobius
Proterorhinus
Morone
Moxostoma
Menidia
Gasterosteus
SPECIES
pellucida
asprella
grunniens
zonatum
wickliffi
lucius x maspuinongy
chrysops x saxatilis
canadense x vitreum
x-hybrid
cernuus
piceus
noblis
malanostomus
marmoratus
americana
m. breviceps
beryllina
aculeatus
COMMON NAM
EASTERN SAND DARTER
CRYSTAL DARTER
FRESHWATER DRUM
BANDED PYGMY SUNFISH
CHANNEL SHINER
TIGER MUSKIE
WIPER
SAUGEYE
SUNFISH HYBRID
RUFFE
BLACK CARP
BIGHEAD CARP
ROUND GOBY
TUBE NOSE GOBY
WHITE PERCH
OHIO REDHORSE
INLAND SILVERSIDE
THREESPINE STICKLEBAC
FEED GUILD
I
I
-
I
I
P
P
P
C
O
H
I
P
I
I
I
REPR GUILD
S
S
M
C
M
M
M
S
S
M
M
C
M
S
M
C
TOLERANCE
R
S
P
-
I
-
-
M
-
T
T
M
.
M
P
PageS
Feeding Guild: C - carnivore; F - filter feeder; G - generalist feeder; H - herbivore; I -
insectivore; O = omnivore; P - piscivore; Pa - Parasite; V = invertivore; - = feeding guild
behaviorally plastic.
Reproductive Guild: C = complex with parental care; M = simple, miscellaneous; N - complex, no
parental care; S = simple lithophil.
Tolerance/Sensitivity: I - common intolerant; M = moderately intolerant; P - moderately tolerant-
R - rare intolerant; S - special intolerant; T = highly tolerant; - - tolerance classification
moderate.
-------
classification percentages based on individual metric attributes.
APPENDIX B. Site
\
Eastern Corn Belt Plains
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample Number 94,001.00
Site: STONEY CREEK
County: HAMILTON
Location 166th Street & Cumberland
Drainage 21.50 (sq. mi)
Actual
INDEX METRICS Observation
1. Total number of species 18.00
2. Percent Round-bodied Suckers 0.35
Number of Minnow Species 6.00
3. Number of Darter Species 2.00
Number of Darter, Madtom, Sculpin 4.00
4. Number of Sunfish 3.00
Percent Pioneer Species 31.47
5. Number of Sensitive Species: 6.00
6. Percent Tolerant Species 11.89
7. Percent Omnivores 6.99
8. Percent Insectivores 62.24
9. Percent Carnivores 5.24
Percent Headwater Species 22.73
10. Number of individuals 286.00
11. Percent Simple Lithophils 10.49
12. Percent DELT Anomalies 0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,002.00
HINKLE CREEK
HAMILTON
216 street
19.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
13.00
4.00
3.00
30.92
3.00
4.00
1.00
4.00
30.92
21.05
61.84
30.26
3.95
29.61
152.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,003.00
LICK CREEK
MADISON
S.R. 13
21.50 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/ssp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
21.00
7.00
5.00
42.19
2.00
7.00
3.00
10.00
22.27
12.70
70.70
27.15
1.17
29.69
512.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,004.00
FALL CREEK
MADISON
Fall Creek Pk
121.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
30.00
7.00
4.00
5.14
4.00
11.00
3.00.
10.00
12.16
3,78
59.73
42.43
0.54
26.76
370.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,005.00
MISSISSINEWA RIVER
RANDOLPH
S.R. 1
191.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunflshsp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
28.00
6.00
6.00
0.00
4.00
9.00
6.00
11.00
61.33
57.40
40.03
43.66
0.60
31.27
662.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,006.00
STONEY CREEK
RANDOLPH
Windson Pike Road
48.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. N umer of species:
2. Number of d/m/ssp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
18.00
5.00
4.00
28.41
1.00
8.00
3.00
9.00
7.58
4.17
67.80
26.89
3.41
35.23
264.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,006.00
STONEY CREEK
RANDOLPH
Windson Pike Road
48.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/ssp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfishsp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
18.00
5.00
4.00
28.41
1.00
8.00
3.00
9.00
7.58
4.17
67.80
26.89
3.41
35.23
264.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,007.00
CABIN CREEK
RANDOLPH
Windsor Pike Road
18.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
18.00
6.00
5.00
19.50
3.00
6.00
2.00
9.00
18.87
12.58
57.86
30.50
3.46
44.03
318.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,008.00
SPARROW CREEK
RANDOLPH
Baseline Road
6.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
11.00
4.00
3.00
7.48
1.00
4.00
1.00
2.00
77.57
2.80
23.36
78.50
0.00
3.74
107.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,009.00
MISSISSINEWA RIVER
RANDOLPH
C.R.300E
90.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt
27.00
6.00
5.00
5.85
4.00
10.00
4.00
8.00
64.04
41.81
42.69
46.20
0.88
29.82
342.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,010.00
DEER CREEK
HENRY
Mechanicsburg Road
7.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. N umber of d/m/ssp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. N umber of minnow sp:
N umber of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
11.00
3.00
2.00
28.87
2.00
4.00
1.00
3.00
25.35
2.11
34.51
60.56
0.70
11.97
142.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,011.00
FALL CREEK
HENRY
Mechanicsburg Road
5.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
12.00
3.00
2.00
27.66
2.00
4.00
2.00
6.00
8.51
7.09
83.69
6.38
2.84
58.16
141.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,012.00
HONEY CREEK
HENRY
C.R.SOON
7.40 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
9.00
4.00
3.00
50.00
0.00
5.00
0.00
2.00
14.80
1.53
82.14
21.43
0.00
44.90
196.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,013.00
BELL CR
DELEWARE
CR 350 S
33.10 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
11.00
3.00
2.00
72.95
3.00
4.00
1.00
4.00
9.02
0.00
90.16
7.38
2.46
18.03
122.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,014.00
CAMPBELL CREEK
DELEWARE
C.R.500E
10.20 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
15.00
5.00
4.00
0.61
3.00
6.00
1.00
3.00
83.30
29.12
30.14
87.17
0.81
7.13
491.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,015.00
MISSISSINEWA RIVER
DELEWARE
W/S TOON Bridge
300.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
28.00
7.00
5.00
0.87
3.00
11.00
4.00
11.00
33.86
27.64
64.83
34.73
1.01
32.56
691.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,016.00
MISSISSINEWA RIVER
DELEWARE
Granville Bridge
347.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
27.00
7.00
5.00
0.00
4.00
9.00
6.00
10.00
39.96
33.90
«9.62
34.47
15.91
13.07
528.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,017.00
MISSISSINEWA RIVER
GRANT
C.R. 900 S.Bridge,3.5mi Upland
465.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
27.00
7.00
6.00
8.89
3.00
11.00
4.00
9.00
30.19
20.74
64.26
44.44
0.56
28.70
540.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,017.10
PIKE CREEK
DELEWARE
Wheeling, IN
21.40 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
12.00
3.00
2.00
5.31
1.00
5.00
2.00
1.00
44.41
24.30
24.02
79.61
0.00
14.80
358.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,018.00
MISSISSINEWA RIVER
GRANT
S.R. 22 Bridge, Jonesboro
521.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt
27.00
6.00
6.00
0.24
4.00
11.00
4.00
11.00
29.93
22.38
70.80
39.90
0.97
24.82
411.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Beit Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,019.00
MISSISSINEWA RIVER
GRANT
S.R. 15 Bridge
695.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
22.00
6.00
5.00
0.00
4.00
9.00
1.00
10.00
18.70
0.27
61.79
40.92
0.27
38.21
369.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,020.00
MISSISSINEWA RIVER
GRANT
C.R. SOON Bridge
682.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
10.00
3.00
2.00
0.00
1.00
4.00
1.00
0.00
84.62
30.77
15.38
87.69
0.00
10.77
65.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,021.00
ROCK CREEK
WELLS
C.R. 200N Bridge
74.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
Actual
Observation
16.00
4.00
3.00
1.68
3.00
6.00
2.00
6.00
47.06
8.40
47.90
57.98
3.36
16.81
119.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,022.00
SALAMONIE RIVER
WELLS
Willow Road
256.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
21.00
5.00
4.00
0.00
2.00
9.00
2.00
6.00
61.97
53.46
34.84
62.50
3.46
14.36
376.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,023.00
SALAMONIE RIVER
WELLS
C.R. 1100S. Bridge
327.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. N umber of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
21.00
3.00
2.00
0.00
4.00
9.00
2.00
5.00
50.74
39.41
47.78
35.96
2.96
20.20
203.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,024.00
SALAMONIE RIVER
HUNTINGTON
S.R. 5 Bridge, Warren
409.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunflsh sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
30.00
6.00
5.00
0.00
5.00
11.00
4.00
7.00
50.42
45.98
50.74
50.11
0.32
5.39
946.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,025.00
LITTLE WABASH RIVER
HUNTINGTON
N. Broadway, 1 1/4mi East
271.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/ssp:
N umber of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
N umber of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
24.00
8.00
6.00
9.81
4.00
8.00
2.00
8.00
32.56
26.59
31.34
46.01
0.81
31.75
989.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number.
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,026.00
SALAMONIE RIVER
WABASH
Durnbaugh Rd.
560.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
20.00
7.00
4.00
12.12
3.00
5.00
2.00
7.00
12.73
4.85
86.06
3.64
2.42
37.58
165.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,027.00
TREATY CREEK
WABASH
Water Works Dr.
30.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
12.00
4.00
3.00
7.33
2.00
4.00
1.00
5.00
70.69
67.13
7.33
16.63
6.93
70.10
505.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,028.00
BEARGRASS CREEK
WABASH
Reahard Rd, C.R. 800 N
23.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
12.00
3.00
3.00
9.22
1.00
7.00
1.00
1.00
82.98
41.13
15.60
39.72
0.00
54.61
141.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,029.00
PIPE CREEK
MIAMI
C.R. 300E Road Bridge
141.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/ssp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfishsp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
1.00
25.00
10.00
75.00
15.00
0.00
85.00
20.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,030.00
MISSISSINEWA RIVER
MIAMI
S.R. 124 Bridge
822.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
38.71
19.35
58.06
0.00
3.20
3.23
31.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,031.00
WEESAU CREEK
MIAMI
S.R. 16 Bridge
21.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/ssp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,033.00
PAW PAW CREEK
MIAMI
C.R. 580E Bridge
55.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
0.00
3.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,034.00
EEL RIVER
MIAMI
C.R. 700E Bridge
570.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
12.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
24.69
7.41
74.07
17.28
13.58
53.09
81.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,035.00
TIPPECANOE RIVER
FULTON
C.R. 375W Bridge
636.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
7.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
3.00
0.00
3.00
6.00
73.08
0.00
90.38
73.08
9.62
15.38
52.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,036.00
TIPPECANOE RIVER
FULTON
C.R. 900W Bridge
776.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
6,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
0.00
3.00
4.00
50.00
18.75
75.00
31.25
6.25
43.75
16.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,037.00
MINNOW CREEK
CASS
near mouth
7.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
0.00
5.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,038.00
PIPE CREEK
CASS
C.R.250S
190.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/ssp:
Number of darter spr
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfishsp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
9.00
2.00
0.00
3.70
2.00
2.00
2.00
4.00
13.58
11.11
83.95
2.47
4.94
34.57
81.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,039.00
TWELVE MILE CREEK
CASS
C.R. SOON
53.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
5.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
0.00
1.00
27.27
0.00
81.82
36.36
18.18
18.18
11.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,040.00
TICK CREEK
CASS
Bridge nearest mouth
8.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
31.00
5.00
5.00
1.15
7.00
13.00
3.00
8.00
24.48
17.09
7252
28.18
1.85
22.86
433.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,041.00
CROOKED CREEK
CASS
C.R. 150S Bridge
59.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt
6.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.00
0.00
2.00
4.00
11.76
5.88
82.35
5.88
11.76
76.47
17.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,042.00
SUGAR CREEK
TIPPECANOE
C.R. 775
25.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
15.00
2.00
0.00
28.67
2.00
8.00
2.00
5.00
47.55
12.59
37.06
51.75
0.70
20.28
143.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,043.00
BUCK CREEK
TIPPECANOE
C.R. 600E Bridge
12.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
6.00
0.00
0.00
73.86
0.00
6.00
0.00
0.00
89.77
4.55
1.14
26.14
0.00
73.86
88.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,044.00
NORTH FORK WILDCAT CREEK
TIPPECANOE
C.R. 900E Bridge
412.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
N umber of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
19.00
3.00
3.00
0.00
1.00
10.00
3.00
11.00
7.18
6.67
89.23
7.69
2.05
25.64
195.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,045.00
SOUTH FORK WILCAT CREEK
TIPPECANOE
C.R. 100 N Bridge
368.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
22.00
3.00
3.00
0.00
2.00
11.00
3.00
12.00
7.14
4.29
90.71
14.29
2.14
28.57
140.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,046.00
WILCAT CREEK
TIPPECANOE
Eisenhower Road
794.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
15.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
8.00
4.00
8.00
3.95
4.80
90.68
7.91
0.56
55.08
354.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,047.00
BIGWEA
TIPPECANOE
S.R. 25
160.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
19.00
7.00
5.00
7.87
1.00
6.00
2.00
10.00
5.51
0.79
78.74
13.39
3.94
42.52
127.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,048.00
SOUTH FORK WILDCAT CREEK
TIPPECANOE
C.R. 900E Bridge
197.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
16.00
2.00
2.00
0.00
1.00
7.00
5.00
10.00
15.89
15.89
51.40
34.58
2.80
40.19
107.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,049.00
SOUTH FORK WILDCAT CREEK
TIPPECANOE
C.R. 200S Bridge
237.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer.
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
23.00
4.00
3.00
0.41
4.00
9.00
4.00
13.00
9.39
8.98
72.24
17.55
1.63
29.39
245.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,052.00
BIG CREEK
WHITE
Springboro Road
57.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
9.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.00
1.00
3.00
7.00
2.91
0.00
79.61
1.94
19.40
16.50
103.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,053.00
PIKE CREEK
WHITE
S.R. 39 Bridge
30.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
2.00
1.00
0.00
50.00
0.00
0.00
100
1.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
0.00
0.00
50.00.
14.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,054.00
INDIAN CREEK
PULASKI
S.R. 119 Bridge
110.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
6.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
1.00
3.00
4.00
20.00
20.00
70.00
0.00
10.00
70.00
10.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,055.00
TIPPECANOE RIVER
PULASKI
C.R. 575 S. Bridge
1,089.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
6.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
3.00
5.00
15.79
15.79
63.16
0.00
21.05
63.16
19.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,056.00
MILL CREEK
PULASKI
S.R. 35
90.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
3.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
1.00
2.00
25.00
0.00
50.00
25.00
25.00
50.00
4.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,057.00
DILTS-ANSTIS DITCH
PULASKI
Winomac Fish&Wildlife Preserve
7.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,058.00
ROCK CREEK
CARROLL
C.R. 850N/250W Bridge
85.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
6.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.00
2.00
3.00
1.09
1.09
65.22
32.61
1.09
20.65
92.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,059.00
BURNETTS CREEK
CARROLL
Towpath Road
21.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,060.00
RATTLESNAKE CREEK
CARROLL
C.R. 100 N Bridge
7.20 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
4.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.00
0.00
0.00
36.67
5.00
65.00
35.00
0.00
63.33
60.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,061.00
RATTLESNAKE CREEK
CARROLL
C.R. 950N Bridge
8.40 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer.
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
14.00
2.00
1.00
36.29
2.00
7.00
2.00
3.00
36.29
13.71
60.48
37.10
0.00
26.61
124.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,062.00
DEER CREEK
CARROLL
S.R. 18/39/421 .Riley Park
299.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
21.00
4.00
4.00
0.00
2.00
8.00
4.00
11.00
37.33
34.56
55.30
32.72
5.07
19.35
217.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,063.00
DEER CREEK
CARROLL
C.R. SOON Bridge
274.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
22.00
2.00
1.00
0.54
1.00
11.00
5.00
11.00
23.66
22.58
61.83
33.33
1.08
36.02
186.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,064.00
BATCHELORS CREEK
CARROLL
C.R. 300 N Bridge
36.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfishsp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
16.00
3.00
2.00
2.65
2.00
9.00
2.00
4.00
21.19
17.22
30.46
58.28
0.00
23.84
151.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,065.00
LITTLE DEER CREEK
CARROLL
C.R. SOON Bridge
54.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
20.00
3.00
3.00
1.43
3.00
8.00
3.00
9.00
5.71
0.71
76.43
27.14
2.86
19.29
140.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,066.00
WILDCAT CREEK
CARROLL
C.R. 50 E Bridge
375.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
23.00
3.00
3.00
0.00
3.00
11.00
5.00
10.00
9.04
6.91
85.64
9.57
2.13
15.96
188.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,067.00
WILDCAT CREEK
CARROLL
S.R. 39 Bridge
396.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
7.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
4.00
5.00
20.41
2.04
73.47
0.00
6.10
73.47
49.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,069.00
SPRING CREEK
CLINTON
C.R. 200 N Bridge
16.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
100.00
100.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
1.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,070.00
SOUTH FORK WILDCAT CREEK
CLINTON
Hamilton Road
80.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer-
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
6.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
0.00
3.00
5.00
5.41
5.41
81.08
0.00
13.51
56.76
37.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,071.00
KILMORE CREEK
CLINTON
N. Hamilton Road
73.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/ssp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
N umber of sucker sp:
5. N umber of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
22.00
5.00
4.00
1.95
2.00
9.00
5.00
10.00
59.51
50.98
27.80
41.95
3.90
40.73
410.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,072.00
MIDDLE FK WILDCAT CREEK
CLINTON
C.R. 680 W Bridge
57.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
13.00
4.00
4.00
0.00
0.00
6.00
1.00
6.00
24.19
21.83
73.16
53.10
2.65
5.60
339.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,073.00
EAGLE CREEK
BOONE
S.R. 32 Bridge
26.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
19.00
5.00
4.00
0.55
2.00
8.00
2.00
4.00
15.30
13.39
22.13
71.58
0.00
15.57
366.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number-
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,074.00
MOUNTS RUN
BOONE
C.R. 950 E Bridge
15.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
17.00
5.00
4.00
2.57
2.00
7.00
1.00
4.00
25.00
15.07
25.74
75.00
0.37
19.49
272.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,075.00
FISHBACK CREEK
BOONE
S.R. 334 Bridge
13.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
N umber of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
12.00
2.00
2.00
0.00
3.00
6.00
1.00
1.00
57.73
28.87
21.02
81.44
1.37
26.46
291.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,076.00
WHITE LICK CREEK
HENDRICKS
S.R. 267 Bridge
22.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
7.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
2.00
31.53
2.70
86.49
28.83
7.21
1.80
111.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,077.00
BIG WALNUT CREEK
HENDRICKS
C.R. 900 N Bridge
41.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
6.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
3.00
3.00
30.43
26.09
65.22
0.00
4.35
86.96
23.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,078.00
NW FK WHITLICK CREEK
HENDRICKS
C.R. 100S. Bridge
29.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
22.00
5.00
3.00
1.88
4.00
8.00
3.00
7.00
36.88
23.96
35.00
46.88
2.92
47.92
480.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,083.00
HONEY CREEK
JOHNSON
CR 550 W
14.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
13.00
3.00
2.00
2.69
1.00
6.00
2.00
1.00
33.87
13.44
20.43
78.49
1.61
20.43
186.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,084.00
CROOKED CREEK
MORGAN
S.R. 37 BRIDGE
15.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
19.00
4.00
4.00
1.56
1.00
10.00
3.00
5.00
28.05
15.58
16.62
75.58
0.52
23.38
385.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,085.00
STOUTS CREEK
MORGAN
CR 600 E
57.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
20.00
5.00
4.00
2.41
1.00
8.00
4.00
6.00
17.59
8.15
29.07
67.59
0.93
28.70
540.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,086.00
SOUTH PRONG STOTTS
MORGAN
CR 00 Bridge
19.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
16.00
3.00
3.00
0.00
2.00
9.00
2.00
4.00
32.72
22.16
59.19
76.53
0.00
15.65
767.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
94,087.00
SOUTH PRONG STOTTS
JOHNSON
Nast Chapel Road
30.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/ssp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
13.00
1.00
1.00
1.71
1.00
8.00
1.00
0.00
43.03
16.45
18.05
83.29
0.79
15.39
760.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,192.00
DEER CREEK
PUTNAM
C.R. 325 S.
21.70 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
Actual
Observation
20.00
5.00
5.00
11.17
4.00
5.00
4.00
9.00
4.47
0.56
59.78
36.87
12.29
24.58
179.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,194.00
BIG RACCOON CREEK
PUTNAM
S.R. 231
126.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfishsp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
22.00
4.00
3.00
0.00
3.00
9.00
3.00
10.00
24.31
22.35
47.84
49.41
2.35
27.84
255.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,195.00
NORTH RAMP CREEK
PUTNAM
C.R. 1000 N.
16.80 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
15.00
6.00
5.00
20.27
0.00
8.00
1.00
3.00
51.16
10.96
22.59
65.12
0.00
26.58
301.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,196.00
BIG WALNUT CREEK
PUTNAM
C.R. 1050 N.
131.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
19.00
4.00
3.00
1.00
3.00
7.00
4.00
10.00
10.50
7.50
52.50
58.50
2.00
21.00
200.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,197.00
PLUM CREEK
PUTNAM
C.R. 600 N.
3.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
14.00
4.00
3.00
20.56
1.00
6.00
2.00
2.00
52.80
14.02
39.25
62.15
0.00
51.87
214.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,203.00
LITTLE POTATO CREEK
MONTGOMERY
C.R. 700 E.
33.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
23.00
2.00
2.00
0.00
2.00
10.00
5.00
8.00
37.93
28.97
51.03
53.56
0.92
9.43
435.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,204.00
LYE CREEK
MONTGOMERY
C.R. 650 N.
74.60 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8, Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
15.00
3.00
3.00
1.98
3.00
3.00
4.00
7.00
13.86
8.91
81.19
3.96
9.90
18.81
101.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,205.00
LYE CREEK DRAIN
MONTGOMERY
C.R. 800 N.
13.80 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
N umber of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
8.00
2.00
2.00
0.00
0.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
25.17
3.50
«0.14
98.25
0.00
46.50
286.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,206.00
NORTH FORK COAL CREEK
MONTGOMERY
C.R. 575 W.
13.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
16.00
5.00
5.00
1.09
2.00
7.00
1.00
5.00
32.61
17.93
49.46
42.93
3.26
20.11
184.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,207.00
CLARKSON DITCH
MONTGOMERY
C.R. 500 N.
2.50 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
12.00
3.00
2.00
23.39
1.00
7.00
1.00
0.00
69.15
34.24
17.97
65.42
0.00
26.78
295.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,208.00
INDIAN CREEK
MONTGOMERY
S.R. 47
11.50 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfishsp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
16.00
5.00
5.00
18.78
2.00
9.00
0.00
6.00
7.76
1.22
44.90
58.78
1.22
21.63
245.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,209.00
OFFIELD CREEK
MONTGOMERY
C.R. 200 W.
17.10 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
20.00
7.00
5.00
24.35
2.00
7.00
3.00
9.00
12.61
5.22
58.70
42.61
3.48
20.87
230.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,210.00
HAW CREEK
MONTGOMERY
C.R. 550 E.
14.90 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
23.00
6.00
6.00
2.51
4.00
9.00
2.00
7.00
9.10
1.56
20.12
86.11
0.24
14.01
835.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,100.00
CEDAR CREEK
DEKALB
C.R. 27 (U/S)
24.80 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
17.00
4.00
4.00
0.00
5.00
3.00
2.00
4.00
44.58
6.02
83.13
37.35
10.84
28.92
83.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number.
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,101.00
MATSAN DITCH
DEKALB
S.R. 6 (D/S)
15.40 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
12.00
2.00
2.00
11.71
1.00
6.00
1.00
0.00
80.18
31.53
18.92
51.35
1.80
44.14
111.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,102.00
FISH CREEK
STEUBEN
CR 775 S
37.50 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
17.00
2.00
2.00
0.00
4.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
68.94
52.17
31.68
18.01
14.91
4.35
161.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,103.00
FISH CREEK
DEKALB
CR16
98.80 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
19.00
5.00
4.00
1.09
3.00
5.00
3.00
6.00
48.63
29.51
50.27
43.72
10.38
12.02
183.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,104.00
BIG RUN
DEKALB
C.R. 75 (U/S)
28.10 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
7.00
0.00
0.00
20.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
0.00
89.77
2.79
26.51
74.88
0.00
25.12
215.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,105.00
BUCK CREEK
DEKALB
C.R. 40(D/S)
13.20 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer-
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
8.00
2.00
2.00
1.21
2.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
95.97
42.74
30.24
54.03
Q.OO
12.10
248.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,106.00
SAL SHANK DITCH
DEKALB
C.R. 59 (U/S)
18.40 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
6.00
2.00
2.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
90.48
71.43
26.19
21.43
2.38
73.81
42.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,107.00
BEAR CREEK
DEKALB
C.R. 56 (U/S)
22.70 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/ssp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
10.00
3.00
2.00
20.13
1.00
4.00
0.00
0.00
81.21
19.46
31.54
75.84
0.00
17.45
149.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,108.00
WITZGALL DITCH
ALLEN
FEIGHNER RD. (D/S)
2.30 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number-
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,109.00
ROBINSON CREEK
ALLEN
COVERDALE RD. (U/S)
7.20 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
3.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
30.00
0.00
40.00
40.00
60.00
0.00
10.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,110.00
LITTLE RIVER
ALLEN
SMITH RD. (U/S)
2.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
10.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
4.00
1.00
0.00
49.12
12.28
22.81
71.93
1.75
1.75
57.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,111.00
GRAHAM MCCULLOCH DITCH 1
ALLEN
SOUTH BEND RD. (U/S)
10.40 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
10.00
2.00
1.00
17.06
0.00
6.00
1.00
0.00
44.71
6.48
18.09
61.77
0.00
37.54
293.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,112.00
JOHN DIEHL DITCH
DEKALB
S.R. 327 (U/S)
7.40 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
14.00
2.00
1.00
24.81
2.00
5.00
1.00
0.00
56.39
20.30
48.87
40.60
2.26
28.57
133.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,113.00
OBER DITCH
DEKALB
C.R. 19 (U/S) BRIDGE
7.40 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp'.
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
11.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
2.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
60.29
5.88
42.65
66.18
4.41
20.59
68.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,114.00
CEDAR CREEK
DEKALB
C.R. 35 (D/S)
74.40 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
15.00
2.00
1.00
5.88
2.00
7.00
1.00
1.00
77.01
8.02
31.02
77.54
0.53
8.02
187.00
0.53
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,115.00
CEDAR CREEK
DEKALB
S.R. 8 (U/S)
87.30 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
12.00
3.00
2.00
20.00
2.00
3.00
1.00
1.00
88.57
8.57
53.33
65.71
2.86
20.00
105.00
1.90
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,116.00
JOHN DIEHL DITCH
DEKALB
AUBURN DR. (C.R. 48) (D/S)
37.40 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
12.00
3.00
2.00
71.61
1.00
6.00
1.00
1.00
54.84
3.87
42.58
19.35
0.65
45.81
155.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,117.00
CEDAR CREEK
DEKALB
S.R. 427 (D/S)
133.60 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
14.00
4.00
3.00
4.90
2.00
5.00
2.00
1.00
84.31
17.65
44.12
76.47
0.00
13.73
102.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,118.00
LITTLE CEDAR CREEK
DEKALB
C.R. 64 (D/S)
45.80 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
16.00
5.00
4.00
9.57
1.00
6.00
2.00
3.00
53.04
26.96
35.65
41.74
1.74
29.57
115.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,119.00
CEDAR CREEK
DEKALB
C.R. 68 (D/S)
136.80 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
11.00
1.00
1.00
14.13
2.00
6.00
2.00
1.00
79.35
17.39
59.78
66.30
0.00
22.83
92.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,120.00
ST. JOSEPH RIVER
DEKALB
S.R. 8 (D/S)
641.00 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
18.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
5.00
7.00
2.00
5.00
75.77
69.62
23.21
10.24
6.48
6.83
293.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,121.00
ST. JOSEPH RIVER
DEKALB
C.R. 64 (U/S)
703.50 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
23.00
4.00
3.00
10.03
3.00
9.00
4.00
9.00
50.74
23.89
68.73
40.41
5.01
14.45
339.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,176.00
BRUSH CREEK
OWEN
C.R. 11 SON.
8.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
7.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
2.00
2.00
0.00
0.00
71.43
14.29
71.43
71.43
0.00
0.00
14.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
93,177.00
LIMESTONE CREEK
OWEN
C.R. 650 N.
8.10 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
14.00
5.00
3.00
3.51
2.00
4.00
1.00
1.00
46.33
36.10
22.04
92.01
0.32
7.03
313.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,013.00
GELLER DITCH
ALLEN
S.R. 3 BRIDGE (U/S)
9.40 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
100.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
29.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,016.00
CLEAR LAKE CREEK
STEUBEN
C.R. SOON BRIDGE (D/S)
4.80 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
100.00
100.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
33.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,019.00
FISH CREEK
STEUBEN
C.R.200 S Bridge (u/s)
29.60 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
12.00
2.00
1.00
1.02
4.00
3.00
2.00
2.00
86.73
19.39
67.35
68.37
1.02
21.43
98.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,020.00
UN-NAMED TRIB. W. BRANCH
STEUBEN
CR 200 S Bridge (d/s)
1.20 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
12.00
1.00
1.00
0.00
3.00
5.00
1.00
0.00
83.96
34.76
47.59
63.10
0.00
3.74
187.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,022.00
FISH CREEK
STEUBEN
BALL LAKE LANE BRIDGE (D/S)
11.60 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
15.00
3.00
3.00
0.00
5.00
2.00
1.00
5.00
12.71
1.69
45.76
16.95
49.15
1.69
118.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,023.00
BLACK CREEK
STEUBEN
C.R. 550E BRIDGE (U/S)
8.30 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
9.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
5.00
1.00
0.00
90.07
71.63
2.84
89.36
1.42
6.38
141.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Beit Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,024.00
FISH CREEK
STEUBEN
850E BRIDGE (U/S)
37.50 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfishsp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
14.00
4.00
3.00
11.27
2.00
6.00
2.00
5.00
29.58
11.27
78.87
28.17
1.41
53.52
71.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,040.00
EEL RIVER
ALLEN
S.R. 33 BRIDGE (D/S)
34.70 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,041.00
JOHNSON DITCH
ALLEN
S.R. 33 BRIDGE (D/S)
11.10 (sqmi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/ssp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,060.00
LITTLE CEDAR CREEK
NOBLE
1150E(D/S)
5.00 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
8.00
1.00
0.00
14.61
1.00
4.00
1.00
0.00
78.65
17.98
33.71
51.69
0.00
41.57
89.00
3.37
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,061.00
BLACK CREEK
NOBLE
C.R. 450S (U/S)
19.10 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
10.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
3.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
68.25
26.98
49.21
80.95
3.17
6.35
63.00
0.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number.
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,062.00
WILLOW CREEK
NOBLE
C.R. 1000N(D/S)
7.70 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
6.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
80.00
0.00
34.00
70.00
8.00
0.00
50.00
14.00
-------
Eastern Corn Belt Plain
Site Specific Index of Biotic Integrity Scores
Sample number:
Site:
County:
Location:
Drainage:
91,083.00
SNYDER DITCH
ALLEN
HESSEN CASSEL RD. (U/S)
6.70 (sq mi)
INDEX METRICS
Actual
Observation
1. Numer of species:
2. Number of d/m/s sp:
Number of darter sp:
3. Percent headwater sp:
Number of sunfish sp:
4. Number of minnow sp:
Number of sucker sp:
5. Number of sensitive sp:
6. Percent tolerants:
7. Percent omnivore:
8. Percent insectivore:
9. Percent pioneer:
Percent carnivore:
10. Percent lithophil:
11. CPUE (number individuals):
12. Percent delt:
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-------
Indiana Ecorecrion
APPENDIX C. Fish nomenclature changes for the species of fish occurring within the political
boundaries of Indiana.
Petromyzontiformes - lampreys
Petromyzontidae - lamprey
Lampetra appendix (DeKay), American brook lamprey
Lepisosteiformes - gars
Lepisosteidae - gars
Atractosteus spatula (Lacepede), alligator gar
Salmoniforntes - trout, salmon, whitefish
Salmonidae - trout, salmon, whitefish
Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum, rainbow trout
Cypriniformes - carps and minnows
Cyprinidae -carps and minnows
Campostoma oligolepis Hubbs and Greene, largescale stoneroller
Cyprinella lutrensis (Baird and Guard), red shiner
Cyprinella spiloptera Cope, spotfin shiner
Cyprinella whipplei (Girard), steelcolor shiner
Erimystax dissimilis Kirtland, streamline chub
Erimystax x-punctata Hubbs and Crowe, gravel chub
Extrahus aestivalis Girard, speckled chub
Hybopsis amnis Hubbs and Greene, pallid shiner
Luxilus chrysocephalus (Rafinesque), striped shiner
Luxilus cormtus (Mitchell), common shiner
Lythntnts ardens (Cope), rosefin shiner
Lythrurusfitmeus Evermann, ribbon shiner
Lythrurus umbratilis (Girard), redfin shiner
Macrhybopsis storeriana (Kirkland), silver chub
Notropis ludibuundus Cope, sand shiner
Opsopoeodus emiliae Hay, pugnose minnow
Silnriformes - bullhead and catfish
Ictaluridae - bullhead and catfish
Ameiurus catus (Linnaeus), white catfish
Ameiurus melas (Rafinesque), black bullhead
Ameiurus natalis (Lesueur), yellow bullhead
Ameiurus nebulosus (Lesueur), brown bullhead
Atheriniformes - topminnows, silversides
FunduUdae - topminnows
Perciformes - basses, sunfish, perch, darters
Moronidae - temperate basses
Morons chrysops (Rafinesque), white bass
Morone mississippiensis Jordan and Eigenmann, yellow bass
Morone saxatilis (Walbaum), striped bass
Elassomatidae - pygmy sunfish
Elassoma zonatum Jordan, banded pygmy sunfish
Percidae - perches and darters
Crystallaria asprella Jordan, crystal darter
Previous
Nomenclature
Lampetra lamottei
Lepisosteus spatula
Salmo gairdneri
previously considered
Campostoma anomalum pullum
Notropis lutrensis
Notropis spiloptera
Votropis whipplei
Hybopsis dissimilis
Hybopsis x-punctata
Hybopsis aestivalis
Notropis amnis
Notropis chrysocephalus
Notropis comutus
Notropis ardens
Notropis fumeus
Notropis umbratilis
Hybopsis storeriana
Notropis stramineus
Notropis emiliae
Ictalurus catus
Ictalurus melas
Ictalurus natalis
Ictalurus nebulosus
previously Cyprinodontidae
previously Percichtliyidae
previously Centrarchidae
Ammocrypta asprella
------- |