U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
DISTRIBUTION OF PHYTOPLANKTON
IN WEST VIRGINIA LAKES
WORKING PAPER NO. 693
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
-------
DISTRIBUTION OF PHYTOPLANKTON
IN WEST VIRGINIA LAKES
WORKING PAPER NO. 693
-------
DISTRIBUTION OF PHYTOPLANKTON IN WEST VIRGINIA LAKES
by
1 ? 1 2
Victor W. Lambou1, F. A. Morris , R. W. Thomas , M. K. Morris ,
L. R. Williams1, W. D. Taylor1, F. A. Hiatt2,
S. C. Hern1, and J. W. Hilgert2.
Water and Land Quality Branch
Monitoring Operations Division
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
Department of Biological Sciences
The University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nevada 89154
Working Paper No. 693
National Eutrophication Survey
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
March 1977
-------
11
Table of Contents
\
Foreword 111
Introduction 1
Materials and Methods 3
Lake and Site Selection 3
Sample Preparation 4
Exami nati on 5
Quality Control 5
Results 6
Nygaard's Trophic State Indices 6
Palmer's Organic Pollution Indices 8
Species Diversity and Abundance Indices 9
Species Occurrence and Abundance 10
Literature Cited 11
Appendix: Summary of Phytoplankton Data 12
-------
111
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophication Survey was initiated in 1972 in
response to an Administration commitment to investigate the nationwide
threat of accelerated eutrophication to freshwater lakes and reservoirs.
The Survey was designed to develop, in conjunction with State environmental
agencies, information on nutrient sources, concentrations, and
impact on selected freshwater lakes as a basis for formulating
comprehensive and coordinated national, regional, and State management
practices relating to point source discharge reduction and nonpoint
source pollution abatement in lake watersheds.
The Survey collected physical, chemical, and biological data
from 815 lakes and reservoirs throughout the contiguous United
States. To date, the Survey has yielded more than two million
data points. In-depth analyses are being made to advance the rationale
and data base for refinement of nutrient water quality criteria
for the Nation's freshwater lakes.
-------
INTRODUCTION
The collection and analysis of phytoplankton data were Included
in the National Eutrophlcation Survey in an effort to determine
relationships between algal characteristics and trophic status
of Individual lakes.
During spring, summer, and fall of 1973, the Survey sampled
250 lakes in 17 states. Over 700 algal species and varieties
were identified and enumerated from the 743 water samples examined.
This report presents the species and abundance of phytoplankton
in the 4 lakes sampled in the State of West Virginia (Table 1).
The Nygaard's Trophic State (Nygaard 1949), Palmer's Organic Pollution
(Palmer 1969), and species diversity and abundance indices are
also included.
-------
Table 1. Lakes Sampled 1n the State of West Virginia
STORE! I LAKE NAME COUNTY
5401 Bluestone Reservoir Summers
5402 Lake Lynn Reservoir Monongalla
(Cheat Lake)
5403 Summersvllle Reservoir Nicholas
5404 Tygart Reservoir Taylor
-------
MATERIALS AND METHODS
LAKE AND SITE SELECTION
Lakes and reservoirs Included 1n the Survey were selected through
discussions with State water pollution agency personnel and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Regional Offices (U.S. EPA 1975).
Screening and selection strongly emphasized lakes with actual or
potential accelerated eutrophlcation problems. As a result, the
selection was United to lakes:
(1) Impacted by one or more municipal sewage treatment plant
outfalls either directly Into the lake or by discharge to an
Inlet tributary within approximately 40 kilometers of the
lake;
(2) 40 hectares or larger 1n size; and
(3) With a mean hydraulic retention time of at least 30 days.
Specific selection criteria were waived for some lakes of particular
State interest.
Sampling sites for a lake were selected based on available
information on lake morphometry, potential major sources of nutrient
input, and on-site judgment of the field Hmnologlst (U.S. EPA 1975).
Primary sampling sites were chosen to reflect the deepest portion of
each major basin in a test lake. Where many basins were present,
selection was guided by nutrient source information on hand. At each
sampling site, a depth-Integrated phytoplankton sample was taken.
Depth-integrated samples were a uniform mixture of water from the
surface to a depth of 15 feet (4.6 meters) or from the surface to the
lower limit of the photic zone representing 1 percent of the incident
light, whichever was greater. If the depth at the sampling site was
less than 15 feet (4.6 meters), the sample was taken from just off the
bottom to the surface. Normally, a lake was sampled three times 1n 1
year, providing information on spring, summer, and fall conditions.
-------
SAMPLE PREPARATION
Four mllHHters (ml) of Acld-LugoVs solution (Prescott 1970)
were added to each 130-ml sample from each site at the time of
collection for preservation. The samples were shipped to the
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada,
where equal volumes from each site were mixed to form two 130-ml
composite samples for a given lake. One composite sample was put Into
storage and the other was used for the examination.
Prior to examination, the composite samples were concentrated by
the settling method. Solids were allowed to settle for at least 24
hours prior to siphoning off the supernatant. The volume of the
removed supernatant and the volume of the remaining concentrate were
measured and concentrations determined. A small (8 ml) library
subsample of the concentrate was then taken. The remaining
concentrate was gently agitated to resuspend the plankton and poured
Into a capped, graduated test tube. If a preliminary examination of a
sample Indicated the need for a more concentrated sample, the contents
of the test tube were further concentrated by repeating the settling
method. Final concentrations varied from 15 to 40 times the original.
Permanent slides were prepared from concentrated samples after
analysis was complete. A drop of superconcentrate from the bottom of
the test tube was placed 1n a ring of clear Karo Corn Syrup with
phenol (a few crystals of phenol were added to each 100 ml of syrup)
on a glass slide, thoroughly mixed, and topped with a coverglass.
After the syrup at the edges of the coverglass had hardened, the
excess was scraped away and the mount was sealed with clear fingernail
polish. Permanent diatom slides were prepared by drying sample
material on a coverglass, heating 1n a muffle furnace at 400 C for 45
minutes, and mounting 1n Hyrax. Finally, the mounts were sealed with
clear fingernail polish.
Backup samples, library samples, permanent sample slides, and
Hyrax-mounted diatom slides are being stored and maintained at the
U.S. EPA's Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory-Las Vegas.
-------
EXAMINATION
The phytoplankton samples were examined with the aid of binocular
compound microscopes. A preliminary examination was performed to
precisely Identify and 11st all forms encountered. The length of this
examination varied depending on the complexity of the sample. An
attempt was made to find and Identify all of the forms present 1n each
sample. Often forms were observed which could not be Identified to
species or to genus. Abbreviated descriptions were used to keep a
record of these forms (e.g., lunate cell, blue-green filament,
Navicula #1). Diatom slides were examined using a standard light
microscope. If greater resolution was essential to accurately
identify the diatoms, a phase-contrast microscope was used.
After the species list was compiled, phytoplankton were
enumerated using a Neubauer Counting Chamber with a 40x objective lens
and a lOx ocular lens. All forms within each field were counted. The
count was continued until a minimum of 100 fields had been viewed, or
until the dominant form had been observed a minimum of 100 times.
QUALITY CONTROL
Internal quality control checks on species Identifications and
counts were performed on a regular basis between project phycologlsts
at the rate of 7 percent. Although an Individual had primary
responsibility for analyzing a sample, taxonomic problems were
discussed among the phycologlsts.
Additional quality control checks were performed on the Survey
samples by Dr. G. W. Prescott of the University of Montana at the rate
of 5 percent. Quality control checks were made on 75 percent of these
samples to verify species identifications while checks were made on
the remaining 25 percent of the samples to verify genus counts.
Presently, the agreement between quality control checks for species
Identification and genus enumerations is satisfactory.
-------
RESULTS
The Appendix summarizes all of the phytopiankton data collected
from the State by the Survey. It 1s organized by lake, Including an
alphabetical phytopiankton species 11st with concentrations for
individual species given by sampling date. Results from the
application of several indices are presented (Nygaard's Trophic State,
Palmer's Organic Pollution, and species diversity and abundance).
Each lake has been assigned a four-digit STORET number. [STORET
(STOrage and RETrieval) is the U.S. EPA's computer system which
processes and maintains water quality data.] The first two digits of
the STORET number identify the State; the last two digits Identify the
lake.
NYGAARD'S TROPHIC STATE INDICES
Five indices devised by Nygaard (1949) were proposed under the
assumption that certain algal groups are indicative of levels of
nutrient enrichment. These indices were calculated in order to aid in
determining the surveyed lakes' trophic status. As a general rule,
Cyanophyta, Euglenophyta, centric diatoms, and members of the
Chlorococcales are found in waters that are eutrophic (rich 1n
nutrients), while desmids and many pennate diatoms generally cannot
tolerate high nutrient levels and so are found 1n oligotrophlc waters
(poor 1n nutrients).
In applying the indices to the Survey data, the number of taxa in
each major group was determined from the species 11st for each sample.
The ratios of these groups give numerical values which can be used as
a biological index of water richness. The five indices and the ranges
of values established for Danish lakes by Nygaard for each trophic
state are presented 1n Table 2. The appropriate symbol, (E) eutrophic
and (0) oligotrophlc, follows each calculated value in the tables in
the Appendix. A question mark (?) was entered in these tables when
the calculated value was within the range of both classifications.
-------
Table 2. Nygaard's Trophic State Indices
adapted from HutcMnson (1967)
Index Calculation OUgotropMc EutropMc
Myxophycean Myxophyceae
Desmldeae
Chlorophycean Chlorococcales
besmldeae
Diatom Centric Diatoms
Pennate Diatoms
Euglenophyte Euglenophyta
Myxophyceae + Cnlorococcales
Compound Myxophyceae + Chlorococcales +
Centric Diatoms + Euglenophyta
0.0-0.4
0.0-0.7
0.0-0.3
0.0-0.2
0.0-1.0
0.1-3.0
0.2-9.0
0.0-1.75
0.0-1.0
1.2-25
Desmldeae
-------
8
PALMER'S ORGANIC POLLUTION INDICES
Palmer (1969) analyzed reports from 165 authors and developed
algal pollution indices for use in rating water samples with high
organic pollution. Two lists of organic pollution-tolerant forms
were prepared, one containing 20 genera, the other, 20 species (Tables
3 and 4). Each form was assigned a pollution index number ranging
from 1 for moderately tolerant forms to 6 for extremely tolerant
forms. Palmer based the index numbers on occurrence, records and/or
where emphasized by the authors as being especially tolerant of
organic pollution.
Table 3. Algal Genus Pollution Index (Palmer 1969)
Anacyatia
Ankiatrodeemua
Chlamydomonaa
Chlorella
Cloaterium
Cyclotella
Euglena
Gomphonema
Lepocinclia
Meloaira
Pollution
Index
1
2
4
3
1
1
5
1
1
1
Micractinium
Navicula
Nitzachia
Oecillatoria
Pandorina
Phacua
Phormidium
Scenedeamua
Stigeocloniwn
Synedra
Pollution
Index
1
3
3
5
1
2
1
4
2
2
Table 4. Algal Species Pollution Index (Palmer 1969)
Ankiatrodeamua falcatue
Arthroapira jenneri
Chlorella vulgarie
Cyclotella meneghiniana
Euglena graoilia
Euglena viridia
Gomphonema parvulum
Meloaira variane
Navicula oryptooephala
Nitzaohia aoicularie
Pollution
Index
3
2
2
2
1
6
1
2
1
1
Pollution
Index
Nitzeohia palea 5
Oacillatoria ohlorina 2
Oacillatoria limoaa 4
Oecillatoria princepe 1
Oeoillatoria putrida 1
Oacillatoria tenuie 4
Pandorina morum 3
Saenedeamue quodricauda 4
Stigeoolonium tenue 3
Synedra ulna 3
-------
In analyzing a water sample, any of the 20 genera or species of
algae present 1n concentrations of 50 per ml or more are
recorded. The pollution Index numbers of the algae present are
totaled, providing a genus score and a species score. Palmer
determined that a score of 20 or more for either Index can be taken as
evidence of high organic pollution, while a score of 15 to 19 1s taken
as probable evidence of high organic pollution. Lower figures suggest
that the organic pollution of the sample 1s not high, that the sample
1s not representative, or that some substance or factor Interfering
with algal persistence 1s present and active.
SPECIES DIVERSITY AND ABUNDANCE INDICES
"Information content" of biological samples 1s being used
commonly by biologists as a measure of diversity. Diversity 1n this
connection means the degree of uncertainty attached to the specific
Identity of any randomly selected Individual. The greater the number
of taxa and the more equal their proportions, the greater the
uncertainty, and hence, the diversity (Plelou 1966). There are
several methods of measuring diversity, e.g., the formulas given by
BHTIouin (1962) and Shannon and Weaver (1962). The method which 1s
appropriate depends on the type of biological sample on hand.
Plelou (1966) classifies the types of biological samples and
gives the measure of diversity appropriate for each type. The Survey
phytoplankton samples are what she classifies as larger samples
(collections 1n Plelou's terminology) from which random subsamples can
be drawn. According to Plelou (1966), the average diversity per
Individual for these types of samples can be estimated from the
Shannon-Wiener formula (Shannon and Weaver 1962):
S
H » -Z P, logx P.,
1=1 1 x 1
where P 1s the proportion of the 1th taxon 1n the sample, which 1s
calculated from n./N; n, 1s the number of Individuals per ml
of the ith taxon, N 1s the total number of Individuals per ml and S 1s
the total number of taxa.
However, Basharin (1959) and Plelou (1966) have pointed out that
H calculated from the subsample 1s a biased estimator of the sample H,
and if this bias 1s to be accounted for, we must know the total number
of taxa present 1n the sample since the magnitude of this bias depends
on 1t.
-------
10
Plelou (1966) suggests that if the number of taxa 1n the
subsample falls only slightly short of the number 1n the larger
sample, no appreciable error will result 1n considering S, estimated
from the subsample, as being equal to the sample value. Even though
considerable effort was made to find and Identify all taxa, the Survey
samples undoubtedly contain a fair number of rare phytoplankton taxa
which were not encountered.
In the Shannon-Wiener formula, an Increase In the number of taxa
and/or an Increase 1n the evenness of the distribution of Individuals
among taxa will Increase the average diversity per Individual from Its
minimal value of zero. Sager and Hasler (1969) found that the
richness of taxa was of minor Importance in determination of average
diversity per individual for phytoplankton and they concluded that
phytoplankton taxa in excess of the 10 to 15 most abundant ones have
little effect on H, which was verified by our own calculations. Our
counts are in number per ml and since logarithms to the base
2 were used in our calculations, H is expressed 1n units of bits per
individual. When individuals of a taxon were so rare that they were
not counted, a value of 1/130 per ml or 0.008 per ml was used 1n the
calculations since at least one individual of the taxon must have been
present in the collection.
A Survey sample for a given lake represents a composite of all
phytoplankton collected at different sampling sites on a lake during a
given sampling period. Since the number of samples (M) making up a
composite is a function of both the complexity of the lake sampled and
its size, it should affect the richness of taxa component of the
diversity of our phytoplankton collections. The maximum diversity
(MaxH) (i.e., when the Individuals are distributed among the taxa as
evenly as possible) was estimated from log* S, the total diversity (D)
was calculated from HN, and the evenness component of diversity (J)
was estimated from H/MaxH (Plelou 1966). Also given 1n the Appendix
are L (the mean number of individuals per taxa per ml) and K
(the number of Individuals per ml of the most abundant taxon in the
sample).
Zand (1976) suggests that diversity indices be expressed in units
of "sits", i.e., in logarithms to base S (where S is the total number
of taxa in the sample) instead of 1n "bits", I.e., in logarithms to
base 2. Zand points out that the diversity Index in sits per Individual
1s a normalized number ranging from 1 for the most evenly distributed
samples to 0 for the least evenly distributed samples. Also, 1t can
be used to compare different samples, Independent of the number of
-------
11
taxa 1n each. The diversity 1n bits per Individual should not be used
1n direct comparisons Involving various samples which have different
numbers of species. Since MaxH equals log S, the expression 1n sits
1s equal to logs S or 1. Therefore diversity 1n sits per Individual
1s numerically equivalent to J, the evenness component for the Shannon-
Wiener formula.
SPECIES OCCURRENCE AND ABUNDANCE
The alphabetic phytoplankton species 11st for each lake,
presented in the Appendix, gives the concentrations of Individual
species by sampling date. Concentrations are 1n cells, colonies, or
filaments (CEL, COL, FIL) per ml. An "X" after a species name
Indicates the presence of the species on that date 1n such a low
concentration that 1t did not show up 1n the count. A blank space
indicates that the organism was not found 1n the sample collected on
that date. Column S is used to designate the examiner's subjective
opinion of the five dominant taxa 1n a sample, based upon relative
size and concentration of the organism. The percent column (%C)
presents, by abundance, the percentage composition of each taxon.
-------
12
LITERATURE CITED
Basharin, 6. P. 1959. On a statistical estimate for the entrophy of a
sequence of Independent random variables, pp. 333-336. In N.
Artln (ed.), Theory of Probability and Its Applications
(translation of "Teorlya Veroyatnosel 1 ee Premenenlya") 4.
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia.
Br1llou1n, L. 1962. Science and Information Theory (2nd ed.).
Academic Press, New York. 351 pp.
Hutchinson, G. E. 1967. A Treatise on Limnology. II. Introduction
to Lake Biology and the Llmnoplankton. John Wiley and Sons,
Inc., New York. 1,115 pp.
Nygaard, G. 1949. Hydrob1olog1cal studies of some Danish ponds and
lakes. II. (K danske Vldensk. Selsk.) B1ol. Sc1. 7:293.
Palmer, C. M. 1969. A composite rating of algae tolerating organic
pollution. J. Phycol. 5:78-82.
Plelou, E. C. 1966. The measurement of diversity 1n different types
of biological collections. J. Theor. B1ol. 13:131-144.
Prescott, G. W. 1970. How to Know the Freshwater Algae. William C.
Brown Company, Dubuque. 348 pp.
Sager, P. E. and A. D. Hasler. 1969. Species diversity 1n laucustrlne
phytoplankton. I. The components of the Index of diversity from
Shannon's formula. Amer. Natur. 103(929): 51-59
Shannon, C. E. and W. Weaver. 1962. The Mathematical Theory of
Communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. 117 pp.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1975. National Eutroph1cat1on
Survey Methods 1973-1976. Working Paper No. 175. Environmental
Monitoring and Support Laboratory. Las Vegas, Nevada, and
CorvalUs Environmental Research Laboratory, CorvalUs, Oregon.
91 pp.
Zand, S. M. 1976. Indexes associated with Information theory 1n water
quality. Journal WPCF. 48(8): 2026-2031.
-------
13
APPENDIX
SUMMARY OF PHYTOPLANKTON DATA
The Appendix format was computer generated. Because 1t was only
possible to use upper case letters 1n the printout, all scientific
names are printed 1n upper case and are not Italicized.
The alphabetic phytoplankton lists Include taxa without species
names (e.g., EUNOTIA, EUNOTIA #1, EUNOTIA ?, FLAGELLATE, FLAGELLATES,
MICROSYSTIS INCERTA ?, CHLOROPHYTAN COCCOID CELLED COLONY). When
species determinations were not possible, symbols or descriptive
phrases were used to separate taxa for enumeration purposes. Each
name on a 11st, however, represents a unique species different from
any other name on the same 11st, unless otherwise noted, for counting
purposes.
Numbers were used to separate unidentified species of the same
genus. A generic name listed alone 1s also a unique species. A
question mark (?) 1s placed Immediately after the portion of a name
which was assigned with uncertainty. Numbered, questioned, or
otherwise designated taxa were established on a lake-by-lake basis;
therefore NAVICULA #2 from lake A cannot be compared to NAVICULA #2
from lake B. Plurallzed categories (e.g., FLAGELLATES, CENTRIC
DIATOMS, SPP.) were used for counting purposes when taxa could not be
properly differentiated on the counting chamber.
-------
LAKE NAME: BLUESTGNE RES.
STDRET NUMBER: 5401
NYGAARD TROPHIC STATE INDICES
DATE 07 18 73 09 26 73
MYXOPHYCEAN
CHLOROPHYCEAN
EUGLENOPHYTE
DIATOM
COMPOUND
01/0 E
04/0 E
0.20 ?
0.37 E
09/0 £
2.00 E
6.00 E
0/24 ?
0.62 E
9.67 E
PALMER'S ORGANIC POLLUTION INDICES
DATE 07 18 73 09 26 73
GENUS
SPECIES
05
00
19
02
SPECIES DIVERSITY AND ABUNDANCE INDICES
DATE
AVERAGE DIVERSITY
NUMBER OF TAXA
NUMBER OF SAMPLES COMPOSITED
MAXIMUM DIVERSITY
TOTAL DIVERSITY
TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS/ML
EVENESS COMPONENT
MEAN NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS/TAXA
NUMBER/ML OF MOST ABUNDANT TAXON
07 18 73 09 26 73
H
S
M
MAXH
D
N
J
L
K
2.30
18.00
2.00
4.17
1957.30
851.00
0.55
47.28
409.00
3.33
43.00
4.00
5.43
24375.60
7320.00
0.61
170.23
1851.00
-------
LAKE NAME: BLUESTONE RES.
STORET NUMBER: 5401
CONTINUED
07 18 73
09 26 73
TAXA
HANTZSCHII
ACTINASTRUM
ANABAENA
APHANI20MENGN ?
CLOSTERIOPSIS
CLOSTERIUM ?
COCCCNEIS PLACENTULA
V. EUGLYPTA
COELASTRUM MICROPORUM
CRUCIGENIA AFICULATA
CYCLOTELLA MENEGHINIANA
DACTYL OCOCCOPSIS
DICTYOSPHAERIUM PULCHELLUM
DINOFLAGELLATE
EUGLENA
FLAGELLATES
FRAGILARIA
FRAGILARIA CRCTONENSIS
FRANCEIA
GYROSIGMA SFENCERII
MELOSIRA DISTANS
MELOSIRA GRANULATA
V. ANGUSTISSIMA
MELOSIRA VARIANS
MICROCYSTIS AERUGINOSA
MICROCYSTIS INCERTA
NAVICULA
NAVICULA #1
NAVICULA #2
NAVICULA #3
NITZSCHIA
OSCILLATORIA LIMNETICA
PANDORINA MCRUM
FORM
s
4
2
1
5
%C
4.0
4.0
20.0
48.1
4.0
8.0
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
34
34
X
X
170
X
409
X
X
X
X
34
68
S
1
3
5
*C
0.4
0.4
25.3
1.6
8.7
4.3
0.4
15.8
.
0.4
2.0
0.8
3.2
1.2
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
29
29
1851
X
X
116
X
636
318
29
X
1157
X
X
29
X
145
X
X
X
58
X
231
87
X
-------
LAKE NAME: BLUESTONE RES
STORET NUMBER: 5401
CONTINUED
07 18 73
09 26 73
BIJUGA
DENTICULATUS
CIMORPHUS
INTERMEDIUS
TAXA
PEDIASTRUM DUPLEX
V. CLATHRATUM
PEDIASTRUM SIMPLEX
V. DUODENARIUM
PEDIASTRUM TETRAS
\l . TcTRAODCN
SCENEDESMUS #1
SCENEDESMUS #2
SCENEDESMUS #3
SCENEDESMUS
SCENEDESMUS
SCENEDESMUS
SCENEDESMUS
V. BICAUCATtS
SCENEDESMUS OPOLIENSIS
STAURASTRUM #1
STAURASTRUM #2
STEPHANODISCtS
SURIRELLA
SYNEDRA #1
SYNEDRA DELICATISSIMA
SYNEORA ULNA
V. RAMESI
TETRAEDRON MINIMUM
TETRAEDRON MINIMUM
V. SCROBICULATUM
TREUBARIA
TOTAL
FORM
COL
COL
COL
COL
COL
COL
COL
COL
COL
COL
COL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
ALGAL
UNITS
S ?C PER ML
8.0
68
X
4.0
34
851
s
2
4
«C
1.6
2.0
0.4
0.4
1.2
0.4
2.4
21.3
4.3
1.2
0.4|
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
1
1 X
X
1
X
1 116
1 145
29
29
87
X
29
174
X
X
1562
X
318
87
29
7320
-------
LAKE NAME: LAKE LYNN RES.
STORE! NUMBER: 5402
NYGAARD TROPHIC STATE INDICES
DATE 04 24 73 07 28 73 10 05 73
MYXOPHYCEAN
CHLOROPHYCEAN
EUGLENQPHYTE
DIATOM
COMPOUND
0/01 0
0/01 0
01/0 E
0/04 ?
1.00 0
0/0 0
0/0 0
0/0 ?
0/01 ?
0/0 0
0/02 0
1.00 E
0/02 ?
0/01 ?
1.00 0
PALMER'S ORGANIC POLLUTION INDICES
DATE 04 24 73 07 28 73 10 05 73
GENUS
SPECIES
00
00
00
00
00
00
SPECIES DIVERSITY AND ABUNDANCE INDICES
DATE
AVERAGE DIVERSITY
NUMBER OF TAXA
NUMBER OF SAMPLES COMPOSITED
MAXIMUM DIVERSITY
TOTAL DIVERSITY
TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS/ML
EVENESS COMPONENT
MEAN NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS/TAXA
NUMBER/ML OF MOST ABUNDANT TAXON
04 24 73 07 28 73 10 05 73
H
S
M
MAXH
D
N
J
L
K
1.92
9.00
3.00
3.17
97.92
51.00
0.61
5.67
21.00
0.00
2.00
3.00
1.00
0.00
657.00
0.00
328.50
657.00
1.47
7.00
3.00
2.81
1198.05
815.00
0.52
116.43
441.00
-------
LAKE NAME: LAKE LYNN RES
STORE! NUMBER: 5402
CONTINUED
TAXA
CLOSTERIUM
COSMARIUM
EUGLENA
EUNCTIA
FLAGELLATE
FLAGELLATES
GLENODINIUM ?
KIRCHNERIELLA
MOUGEOTIA
NAVICULA
PINNULARIA
SCENEDESMUS
STIGEOCLONIUM
SYNEDRA ULNA
XANTHIDIUM ?
04 24 73
07 28 73
10 05 73
FORM
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
FIL
CEL
CEL
COL
FIL
CEL
CEL
S
?C
19.6
19.6
41.2
19.6
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
10
10
X
21
X
X
10
X
X
S
?C
100.
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
657
X
S
3
1
2
4
5
«c
8.1
35.1
54.1
1.3
1.3
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
X
66
286
441
11
X
11
00
TOTAL
51
657
815
-------
LAKE NAME: SUMMERSVILLE RES.
STORET NUMBER: 5403
NYGAARD TROPHIC STATE INDICES
DATE 04 03 73 07 18 73 09 28 73
MYXOPHYCEAN
CHLOROPHYCEAN
EUGLENOPHYTE
DIATOM
COMPOUND
1.00 E
1.00 E
0.50 E
0.37 E
6.00 E
0/0 0
01/0 E
0/01 ?
1.00 E
03/0 E
01/0 E
02/0 E
0/03 ?
0.60 E
06/0 E
PAU4ER*S ORGANIC POLLUTION INDICES
DATE 04 03 73 07 18 73 09 28 73
GENUS
SPECIES
03
00
04
00
02
00
SPECIES DIVERSITY AND ABUNDANCE INDICES
DATE
AVERAGE DIVERSITY
NUMBER OF TAXA
NUMBER OF SAMPLES COMPOSITED
MAXIMUM DIVERSITY
TOTAL DIVERSITY
TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS/ML
EVENESS COMPONENT
MEAN NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS/TAXA
NUMBER/ML OF MOST ABJNDANT TAXON
04 03 73 07 18 73 09 28 73
H
S
M
MAXH
D
N
J
L
K
1.39
16.00
4.00
4.00
139.00
100.00
0.35
6.25
60.00
1.76
6.00
4.00
2.58
1293.60
735.00
0.68
122.50
317.00
2.37
20.00
4.00
4.32
4057.44
1712.00
0.55
85.60
579.00
-------
LAKE NAME: SUMMERSVILLE RES.
STORE! NUMBER: 5403
CONTINUED
04 03 73
07 18 73
09 28 73
TAXA
ACHNANTHES WICROCEPHALA ?
CENTRIC DIATCM
CENTRITFACTUS ?
CYANOPHYTAN COCCOID CELLED COLONY
CYCLCTELLA STELLIGEPA
CYMBELLA
DESMID
DINOBRYON BAVARICUM
DINGBRYON DIVERGENS
DINOBRYON SERTULARIA
DINOFLAGELLATE 01
DINOFLAGELLATE #2
EUNOTIA
FLAGELLATE
FLAGELLATES
GOMPHONEMA
GOMPHONEMA ?
MALLCMONAS
MELOSIRA #2
MELOSIRA DISTANS
MELOSIRA GRANULATA
V. ANGUSTISSIMA
NAVICULA SPP.
OSCILLATORIA
PERIDINIUM WISCONSINENSE
SCFNEDESMUS DIMORPHUS
SCHROEDERIA SETIGERA
SPHAEROCYSTIS ? SCHROETERI
SYNEDRA #1
SYNEDRA #2
SYNEDRA ULNA
V. ?
FORM
CEL
CEL
CEL
COL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
FIL
CEL
COL
CEL
COL
CEL
CEL
CEL
S
*C
20.0
60.0
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
X
X
X
X
20
X
X
X
60
X
X
X
S
3
2
1
5
4
?C
6.8
43.1
38.6
2.3
9.1
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
50
317
284
17
67
X
S
5
3
2
4
1
*C
1
133.8
14.1
28.2
0.7
1.4
7.8
1.4
12.0
0.7
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
579
X
X
241
X
X
X
482
12
24
X
133
X
24
205
X
12
X
X
-------
LAKE NAME: SUMMERSVILLE RES.
STORET NUMBER: 5403
CONTINUED
04 03 73
07 18 73
TAXA
TABELLARIA
TETRAEDRON
V. INCUS
TRACHELOMONAS
ULOTHRIX ?
TOTAL
FLOCCULOSA
REGULARS
100
735
09 28 73
FORM
CEL
CEL
CEL
FIL
ALGAL
UNITS
S ZC PER ML
1 1 X
1 1
120.01 20
i 1 X
1 1 X
S ?C
1 1
1 i
1 i
1 1
1 1
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
S
1
1
1
1
I
?C
1
1
1
1
1
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
X
1712
ro
-------
LAKE NAME: TYGART RES.
STORET NUMBER: 5404
NYGAARO TROPHIC STATE INDICES
DATE 04 23 73 07 28 73 10 05 73
MYXOPHYCEAN
CHLOROPHYCEAN
EUGLENOPHYTE
DIATOM
COMPOUND
0/0 0
0/0 0
0/0 ?
0.20 ?
01/0 E
0/0 0
02/0 E
0/02 ?
01/0 E
03/0 E
03/0 E
03/0 E
0/06 ?
1.50 E
09/0 E
PALMER'S ORGANIC POLLUTION INDICES
DATE 04 23 73 07 28 73 10 05 73
GENUS
SPECIES
00
00
00
00
09
00
ro
ro
SPECIES DIVERSITY AND ABUNDANCE INDICES
DATE
AVERAGE DIVERSITY
NUMBER OF TAXA
NUMBER OF SAMPLES COMPOSITED
MAXIMUM DIVERSITY
TOTAL DIVERSITY
TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS/ML
EVENESS COMPONENT
MEAN NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS/TAXA
NUMBER/ML OF MOST ABUNDANT TAXON
04 23 73 07 28 73 10 05 73
H
S
M
MAXH
D
N
J
L
K
2.51
10.00
3.00
3.32
529.61
211.00
0.76
21.10
57.00
1.92
6.00
3.00
2.58
399.36
208.00
0.74
34.67
69.00
2.72
13.00
5.00
3.70
2662.88
979.00
0.74
75.31
287.00
-------
LAKE NAME: TYGART RES.
STORET NUMBER: 5404
CONTINUED
04 23 73
07 28 73
10 05 73
TAXA
ANKISTROOESMLS
CENTRIC OIATCM
CYCLOTELLA
CYMBELLA
DACTYLOCOCCOPSIS
OINOBRYON SERTULARIA
DINOFLAGELLATE
FLAGELLATE #1
FLAGELLATE #2
FLAGELLATES
GLENODINIUM
GLENCOINIUM #2
GOMPHONEMA
KIRCHNERIELLA
MELOSIRA OISTANS
MELOSIRA VARIANS
MICROCYSTIS AERUGINOSA
NAVICULA ?
NITZSCHIA
PENNATE DIATOM
PERIDINIUM
PHORMIDIUM MUCICOLA
SCENEDESMUS
SCENEDESMUS INTERMEDIUS
V. BICAUDATUS
SCHRCEDERIA SETIGERA
SURIRELLA ANGUSTATA
FORM
CEL"
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CEL
CZL
CEL
CEL
CEL
COL
CSL
CEL
CEL
CEL
COL
COL
COL
CEL
CEL
s
1
4
2
3
5
*C
1.4
27.0
23.7
25.6
3.3
4.7
6.2
8.1
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
3
57
50
54
7
X
X
10
13
17
S
*C
16.8
33.2
16.8
33.2
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
35
69
35
69
X
X
S
2
1
5
3
4
*C
3.5
3.5
5.2
12.1
29.3
6.8
17.3
20.6
1.7
ALGAL
UNITS
PER ML
34
X
34
51
118
X
X
287
67
169
202
17
X
ro
co
TOTAL
211
208
979
------- |