United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Monitoring
January 1983
P.O. Box 15027
Las Vegas NV 89114
TS-AMD-82049C
June 1982
Research and Development
&EPA
Site Specific Water
Quality Assessment:
Leon Creek, Texas
-------
TS-AMD-82049C
June 1982
SITE SPECIFIC WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT:
LEON CREEK, TEXAS
Susan M. S. Melancon and Jeffrey J. Janik
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nevada 89154
and
Theron G. Miller
Advanced Monitoring Systems Division
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
Cooperative Agreement No. CR805299
Project Officer
Wesley L. Kinney
Advanced Monitoring Systems Division
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SYSTEMS LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89114
-------
SITE SPECIFIC WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT
LEON CREEK, TEXAS
by
Susan M. S. Melancon and Jeffrey J. Janik
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Las Vegas, Nevada 89154
and
Theron G. Miller
Advanced Monitoring Systems Division
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SYSTEMS LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89114
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tables v
Figures v11
I Introduction 1
II Methods 7
Chemical 7
Water 7
Sediments 9
Biological 11
Macro invertebrates 12
Plants 14
Periphyton 14
Macrophyte Tissues 17
Fish 18
Community Census 18
Tissues 18
Bioassays . . . 19
/
III Results and Discussion 20
Chemical 20
Water Quality 20
Sediments 27
Biological 29
iii
-------
Macro invertebrates 29
Plants 41
Periphyton 41
Macrophyte Tissues 58
Fish 59
Community Census 59
Tissues 60
Bioassay 62
IV Conclusions 63
V Recommendations 64
VI Literature Cited 65
Appendix A. Water Chemistry Summary Data 75
Appendix B. Macroinvertebrate Census Data 97
Appendix C. Periphyton Census Data 106
Appendix D. Tissue Metal Analysis Summary Data 119
Appendix E. Summarized Bioassay Results:- Duluth 128
iv
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 1980 Study Locations, Types of Discharges and Metals Present
in Excess of EPA Recommended Aquatic Life Criteria 4
2 Laboratory Chemical Analysis of Stream Water Quality
Parameters 10
3 Summary of Biological Parameters Sampled in Leon Creek
and Associated Methods 13
4 Comparison of Mean Total Concentrations of Selected Metals
vs Calculated Acute Water Quality Criteria for Aquatic Life 21
5 Mean Concentrations of Selected Water Quality Parameters
and Present Oxygen Saturation at Each Station in Leon Creek,
Texas 22
6 Significance Levels of Bartlett's Test, ANOVA F-Ratios, and
Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA by Ranks for Test of Differences between
Stations for Ambient Total Metal Concentrations, Leon Creek,
Texas 24
7 Student-Newman-Keuls Stepwise Multiple Range Test of Ambient
Total Metal Concentrations, Leon Creek, Texas 25
-------
8 Mean Total and Dissolved Concentrations of Selected Metals
at Each Station in Leon Creek, Texas 26
9 Student-Newman-Keuls Stepwise Multiple Range Test of Mean
Total Concentrations of Selected Metals in Sediment Samples
Leon Creek, Texas 28
10 Distribution and Relative Abundance of Macroinvertebrate
Taxa, November 1980, Leon Creek, Texas 30
11 Student-Newman-Keuls Stepwise Multiple Range Test of
Macroinvertebrate Total Counts, Total Number of Taxa, and
Shannon-Wiener Diversity Indices at Each Station in Leon
Creek, Texas 35
12 List of Diatom Taxa and Relative Abundance in Leon Creek,
Texas 45
13 Reported Environmental Requirements, Including pH Range
and Heavy Metal Tolerance of the Important Diatom Taxa
Observed in Leon Creek, Texas 49
14 List of Algal Taxa (Exclusive of Diatoms) and Relative
Abundance in Leon Creek, Texas 51
15 Student-Newman-Keuls Stepwise Multiple Range Test of Total
Number of Diatom Taxa, Shannon-Wiener Diversity, and Total
Diatom Abundance in Leon Creek, Texas 56
vi
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Generalized diagram of field sampling approach 5
2 Station locations on Leon Creek, Texas 8
3 Percent composition of major macroinvertebrate groups at
stations in Leon Creek, Texas 33
4 Number of benthic taxa and mean count per replicate at all
stations, Leon Creek, Texas 36
5 Comparison of benthic species richness in Leon Creek, Texas, mean
concentrations of total silver and chromium, and calculated
silver and chromium water quality criteria 40
6 Periphyton cell abundance and algal group composition in Leon
Creek, Texas 44
7 Percent composition of diatom species contributing greater than
5 percent to total cell abundance in Leon Creek, Texas 53
8 Periphyton cell abundance in Leon Creek, Texas, mean concentrations
of total silver and chromium, and calculated silver and chromium
water quality criteria 54
vii
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
Increasing use of metals in manufacturing and chemical industries has
caused a measurable rise in ambient toxic metal concentrations in industrial
discharges (Spaulding and Ogden 1968). As a result, many of our nation's
receiving surface waters contain elevated levels of metals. Primary sources
of most toxic metals include industrial and municipal sewage treatment plant
(publicly owned treatment works) discharges, mine drainage, and atmospheric
precipitation (Spaulding and Ogden 1968; EPA 1979).
The effluent and sludge of many publicly owned treatment works (POP//s)
are known to contain high metal concentrations (Dewalle and Chian 1980).
This has been assumed to result from industrial wastewater discharges to POTWs,
However, high metal concentrations have also been found in POTWs which do not
receive industrial wastes.
Results from recent sampling of a wide spectrum of POTW effluents (U.S.
Geological survey data; Sverdrup and Parcel and Associates, Inc. 1977; Dewalle
and Chian 1980) showed that the concentration of several toxic metals in re-
ceiving streams exceeded freshwater aquatic life criteria recommended by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA 1976). In many cases, levels
were of sufficient magnitude to suggest that the biological communities of
many of the nation's surface waters could be experiencing severe impacts.
However, undocumented reports have claimed that substantial populations of
1
-------
aquatic life (fish, invertebrates, plants) exist in a healthy condition in
waters containing concentrations in excess of the recommended criteria.
Prompted by this apparent contradiction the EPA Office of Water Regula-
tions and Standards (OURS) issued a directive to document the water and bio-
logical quality that exist in selected streams receiving POTW discharges.
Later, as other important sources of metals were identified, the program was
expanded to include the investigation of mining and industrial discharges.
The toxic metals program was based on the following study objectives:
1. To document the concentration and distribution of toxic metals in
selected streams receiving discharges from publicly owned treatment
works (POTWs), mining, and industrial wastes.
2. To determine the biological state of receiving waters when the
aquatic life criteria for toxic metals are exceeded. This included
sampling and analyzing fish, benthic invertebrates, and periphyton
communities.
3. To report the extent to which criteria levels were observed to be
exceeded.
4. To develop explanatory hypotheses when healthy biota exist where
criteria are exceeded.
The project was undertaken as a cooperative effort by EPA's Environmental
Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada (EMSL-LV) and the Environ-
mental Research Laboratories at Corvallis, Oregon (ERL-Corvallis) and Duluth,
-------
Minnesota (ERL-Duluth). EMSL-LV designed the project and supervised the field
Investigation in cooperation with University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) per-
sonnel. Laboratories at ERL-Duluth and ERL-Corvallis performed static bioassay
tests to assess the toxicity of whole and filtered water samples from each
stream investigated.
From a list of approximately 200 candidate streams, 50 were selected for a
preliminary field survey. The list was then narrowed to 15 streams (Table 1)
which received mining, industrial, or municipal discharges. Streams were sel-
ected to provide broad geographical representation and a range of watershed
characteristics and uses, pollution sources, water quality characteristics,
biota, and habitats. Field sampling for biological, physical, and chemical
water quality information was conducted from July 28 to November 10, 1980.
Figure 1 illustrates the general approach to each study site. In each river,
a control site was sampled upstream from a discharge point, and transects
were established downstream from the discharge to define impact and subsequent
recovery zones.
Individual study sites were chosen according to the following criteria:
1. Toxic metal concentrations upstream from effluent discharges were
below current water quality criteria.
2. Metal concentrations in receiving waters after complete mixing with
effluent discharge were 5 to 10 times greater than the water quality
criteria.
Data from the 1980 toxic metals project will be presented in 15 separate
reports discussing each river system; a summary project report will follow the
3
-------
TABLE 1. 1980 STUDY LOCATIONS, TYPES OF DISCHARGES, AND METALS PRESENT
IN EXCESS OF EPA RECOMMENDED AQUATIC LIFE CRITERIA*
Pollution Source
Stream
Metal(s)
Mining
Prickly Pear Creek, Montana
Silver Bow Creek, Montana**
Slate River, Colorado
Tar Creek, Oklahoma
Red River, New Mexico
Industrial
Leon Creek, Texas
Little Mlsslsslnewa River, Indiana
Public Owned Treatment Works (POTW)
Bird Creek, Oklahoma
Cedar Creek, Georgia
Maple Creek, South Carolina
Irwln Creek, North Carolina
Blackstone River, Massachusetts
Mill River, Ohio
Cayadutta Creek, New York
White River, Indiana
Copper, Zinc, Cadmium
Copper, Cadmium, Z1nc
Copper, Z1nc, Silver, Cadmium
Z1nc, Cadmium, Silver, Lead
Copper, Cadmium
Chromium, Nickel
Lead, Chromium
Arsenic, Selenium
Chromium, Silver
Chromium
Chromium, Z1nc, Nickel, Lead
Cadmium, Lead
Nickel
Chromium, Cadmium
Copper
*In most cases the acute criteria were exceeded (U.S. EPA 1976); chronic
criteria were exceeded In all cases.
**Also receives POTW discharge.
-------
Typical Study Site
en
Direction
of FlowX/ J
^ / *
'Discharge Point
^ooo^r^
|600«*
Upstream
Control Zone
60-200r>x^
m '%
Impact Zone
6000m
Recovery Zone
Each transect consists of:
5 replicates for biological samples
Electrofishing 100 meters of stream reach
3 replicates for tissue, sediment and water samples
1 twenty-four hour composite water sample
8 three hour integrated water samples
Total number of samples per transect
= 37
+ 45 hydrolab measurements (9 parameters x 5 replicates)
Figure. 1. Generalized diagram of the field sampling approach.
-------
Individual basin studies. This report addresses data collected In Leon
Creek, Texas.
-------
11. METHODS
Five sampling stations were established in Leon Creek (Figure 2) and sam-
pled from November 5 to November 8, 1980. One station was sampled in the con-
trol zone (161), two stations (162 and 163) were located in the impacted zone,
and two stations (164 and 165) were located in the recovery zone. Detailed
discussions of the various sampling methodologies follow:
CHEMICAL
Water
Field Collection
To determine the water quality characteristics of Leon Creek, horizontal
and vertical profiles of pH, conductivity, temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO),
and reduction/oxidation (redox) potential were measured at each station with a
Hydrolab 4041 water quality measurement system. Other field measurements in-
cluded: turbidity with a Hach nephelometer, and chlorine with a Hach field
chlorine kit. Triplicate grab samples were collected at each site mid-depth
between surface and bottom, preserved appropriately for each analysis as
specified in U.S. EPA (1979b) and APHA (1980). and shipped to EMSL-LV for
analysis. Filtering of grab samples (0.45>cm filter) for total and dissolved
metal fractions analysis was completed on site within approximately three
hours of the time of collection. All samples were acidified with Ultrex nitric
-------
Leon Creek,
Texas
Induttricl
Oi«charg«.
Point Source
Uckl*nd
Air Fore* B«M
Mite*
Kltomotort
Figure 2. Station locations on Leon Creek, Texas.
8
-------
acid to a pH of <2.0, and shipped to UCLA's Laboratory of Biomedical and
Environmental Science for ICAP analysis. In addition to the manual grabs
an ISCO sampler collected 24-hour composite samples at one hour intervals
for metal analyses. Three one-hour samples of 100 ml each were composited
in a 450 ml sample vessel; thus, eight three-hour composite samples were
collected at each station. Samples were acidified with Ultrex nitric acid
and shipped to UCLA for ICAP analysis.
Laboratory Analysis
Table 2 lists the parameters and methods used for laboratory analyses of
water quality in Leon Creek.
Sediments
Field Collection
Streambed sediments were collected in Leon Creek to determine the extent
to which metals entering from the Kelly AFB industrial discharge accumulate
in sediments. Backwater pool areas, when available, were sampled at each
station. Sediment cores were collected with a WILDCO 2" (5 cm) brass core
sampler fitted with a plastic core liner and egg shell core catcher. A
series of shallow core samples were collected from the submerged root zone
along a stream bank. When necessary, several shallow core samples were col-
lected to fill one core tube replicate. Three replicate core samples were
collected from each of the five stations and shipped to EMSL-LV for ICAP
analyses.
Laboratory Analysis
It has long been known that different particle sizes have different
affinities for metals and other positive ions (Namminga and Wihlm 1977;
9
-------
TABLE 2. LABORATORY CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF STREAM WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS
A. Automated Analyses (Technlcon Auto Analyzer; all values in mg/1)
Parameter Reference
Total phosphate
Ortho phosphate
Hydrolysable phosphate
Kjeldahl nitrogen
Total Ammonia (NH.)
Nitrates + nitritis
Total alkalinity
B. Additional Parameters (mg/1)
Total Ca + Mg hardness*
Total organic carbon (carbon
analyzer)
Total residues
Suspended residues
Total sulfate
Total cyanide
U.S. EPA 1979b Method 365.1
U.S. EPA 1979b Method 365.1
U.S. EPA 1979b Method 365.1
U.S. EPA 1979b Method 351.1
U.S. EPA 1979b Method 350.1
U.S. EPA 1979b Method 353.1
U.S. EPA 1979b Method 310.2
Reference
APHA (1980) p. 195
U.S. EPA 1979b Method 415.1
U.S. EPA 1979b Method 160.3
U.S. EPA 1979b Method 160.1
U.S. EPA 1979b Method 375.1
U.S. EPA 1979b Method 335.2
Spectrum of selected total metals - ICAP**
Cu, Cd, Zn, As, Ni, Ag, Cr, Se,
Ca, Mg, Al, Pb (yg/l)
Total recoverable
Filtered through 0.45 vm
Alexander and McAnulty 1981
U.S. EPA 1979b
U.S. EPA 1979b
Composite samples from mixing zone (ISCO) Alexander and McAnulty 1981
(metal analyses: ICAP yg/1)
* Calculations from measured Ca and Mg concentrations.
** ICAP = Inductively Coupled Argon Plasma emission spectroscopy.
10
-------
McDuffie et al. 1976), and that the most important particle sizes known to
sorb positive ions range from fine sand down to clay. For this reason prelim-
inary tests were conducted in the laboratory prior to final sediment analyses
to determine the particle size range sorbing the most metals and expressing
the least among-replicate variability. Whole samples and 100, 250, and 400
mesh seived sub-samples from Prickly Pear Creek, Montana, sediments were
previously analyzed for total recoverable metal (EPA 1981). Based on this
experiment, 400 mesh (64 ym) particle sizes contained the most metal per
gram sample and exhibited the least replicate variation.
Replicate core samples from Leon Creek were shipped to EMSL-LV, oven dried
at 100°C to complete dryness, and sieved through a 400 mesh (64 ym) stainless
steel sieve. Each sample was then divided into four equal portions. A 1-gram
subsample was then used for the acid extraction. An extraction medium of 5 mis
of HC1 and 0.5 mis H^SO. in 50 mis of water was found to be the most effective
extraction solvent (EPA 1981). These solution subsamples were then placed in
20 dram scintillation vials and sent to UCLA for ICAP analyses (Alexander and
McAnulty 1981).
BIOLOGICAL
Biological monitoring in Leon Creek met three specific goals:
1. To identify and determine the background distribution of algal,
invertebrate, and fish species;
2. To determine if biological communities exhibit measurable changes
in relation to distance from point sources; and
11
-------
3. To determine metal concentrations in plant and fish tissues as an
indication of sub lethal and potentially lethal impacts to the biota,
and to provide insight into the fate of various metals.
Table 3 summarizes the biological parameters measured, collection techniques,
and analytical methods. A more detailed description of the methods used to
sample and analyze each parameter is discussed below.
Macroinvertebrates
Field Collection
The Standardized Traveling Kick Method (STKM) (Pollard and Kinney 1979) was
used to collect invertebrate samples in Leon Creek. Three replicates were col-
lected at each site using a 30-mesh triangular dip net with a mouth opening
of 25 cm x 25 cm x 25 cm and a length of 76 cm. Kick sampling was standard-
ized by the investigator holding a net in the water in front of him for 30
seconds while traveling approximately four meters downstream vigorously kick-
2
ing the substrate. This sampled an area approximately 0.75 x 4 meters (3 m ).
After collection, samples were washed through a 30 mesh sieve-bottom
bucket, placed in a white enamel pan, and field-sorted to major taxonomic
groups. Field extraction of animals from each sample was checked by another
field team member as a quality control measure. This QA check involved
scanning the sorting pan until no additional macroinvertebrates were observed
for two minutes of continuous scanning. Sorted invertebrates and any unsorted
samples were preserved in the field with approximately 10 percent formalin
and returned to EMSL-LV for final processing.
12
-------
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF BIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS SAMPLED IN LEON CREEK AND ASSOCIATED
METHODS
Tissue Concentrations of Toxic Metals Ecological Indicators
Aquatic Macrophytes (Representative Periphyton (Unit area periphyton scrape
species at each station, analyzed from natural rock substrate)
by DC arc spectroscopy)
Species identification
Root tissue Relative abundance counts
Leaves and stems
Invertebrates (Standardized Traveling
Fish (Seining, electrofishing, analyzed Kick Method)
By DC arc spectroscopy
Species identification
Gill Relative abundance counts
Muscle
Liver Fish (Seining, electrofishing)
Kidney
Gonad* Species identification
Brain* Relative abundance
Eye* Length/weight relationships
Whole body**
* Selected individuals from locations with extremely high metal concentra-
tions.
** Whole fish were analyzed in small specimens.
13
-------
Laboratory Analysis
Collected benthlc invertebrates were Identified to the lowest possible
taxonomic level and counted at UNLV. Laboratory quality assurance sorting
criteria were the same as for field sorting when additional sorting was
required. Some members of the order Diptera were only identified to the
sub-family level (e.g., Chironominae) and members of the Oligochaeta were
keyed only to class. A reference collection of identified specimens is
stored at the laboratory* and samples were submitted to the University of
Idaho for taxonomic verifications by C. E. Hornig.
Macroinvertebrate data were compiled and stored in a local POP 1170 com-
puter system where various mathematical and statistical computations were made.
Invertebrate data analyses for Leon Creek consisted of: 1) total number of
individuals (standing crop), 2) total number of taxa (species richness), and
3) relative species abundance.
Plants
Periphyton
Field Collection
Periphyton was collected from riffle zone rock substrates. Replicate
rocks from each station were selected in areas of uniform flow and velocity
within the riffle. Algae growing onto or attached to rocks (epilithlc) were
sampled within a circular area of 3772 mm, the boundaries delineated by a
flexible rubber ring. The rubber ring was placed on top of rocks which
had been removed from the river and placed into shallow enamel pans. The
area within the ring boundary was scraped with a razor blade and stiff nylon
14
-------
brush into a 500 ml glass jar. This procedure was repeated for each replicate
sample at each station. Each replicate volume was then adjusted to a standard
volume by adding distilled water. Acid-lugols preservative was added to each
sample to produce a final concentration of 1-5 percent (y/v) depending upon
algal biomass present.
Laboratory Analysis
Counting and identification procedures included two analysis steps: 1)
one subsample was acid-cleaned for diatom species identifications and propor-
tional counts, and b) the second subsample was examined with an inverted micro-
scope to count and identify non-diatoms and obtain a total count of all viable
diatom frustules to convert proportional diatom counts to cells/mm.
A. Diatom Proportional Count
One 10-20 ml sub-sample was removed with a wide-bore pipette and placed
into a 25 ml Erlenmeyer flask; five ml of concentrated nitric acid (HN03)
was then added. Flasks were placed on a heating plate inside a fume hood, and
samples were mildly boiled for approximately 5 minutes or until sample color
became clear. This procedure oxidized sample organic material and broke up
gelatinous material, leaving the silica diatom frustules. Each subsample was
then centrifuged for 5 minutes. The supernatent was decanted and the centri-
fuge tube refilled with distilled water. This procedure was repeated two add-
itional times to remove any remaining HNO.,. After final centrifugation, one
or two drops of concentrated sample were placed on a cover glass and mounted
with Hyrax" mounting media. The edge of the slide was sealed with clear fin-
gernail polish.
15
-------
Counting Procedure
Diatoms were Identified and counted at lOOOx magnification (oil emersion)
with an Olympus BHT phase contrast microscope. Long counts of 5000-10000
diatoms or more, such as are recommended by Patrick (1977), are far too time
consuming for most water quality studies; hence, we scanned random strips
until at least 300 diatom cells were counted and Identified (Weitzel 1979).
Counting fewer diatoms (300) provides reliable results (Weber 1973) and com-
pares well with longer counts of 1000 diatoms (Castenholtz 1960).
B. Non-Diatom Count
A 0.05 to 2.0 ml subsample was Introduced Into a Wild" plate chamber.
Strips were scanned across the entire counting chamber diameter under 100-400X
magnification using an Olympus IMT inverted microscope. All non-diatoms were
counted and Identified during this step as well as total viable diatom frustule
number. If excess clumping was evident, the sample was placed 1n a "sonifier"
unit to break up clumps and filaments.
Calculations
(1) Counting accuracy = 2 . •= (Lund et al. 1958)
fn
(Ac) (Vs) (X1
(2) Cell abundance (cells mm"2) = (L J (WJ (NJ (VJ
where
2
A = area of counting plate chamber (510 mm )
Vg = volume of sample (ml)
X.j a counts of non-diatom species
16
-------
X_ = total count of viable diatom frustules
L = length of strip counted (25 mm)
W = width of str1p(s) counted (mm)
N = number of stn'p(s) counted (1,2,3,4)
V = volume of subsample (0.05-2.0 ml)
a
2
A = area of rock scraped as delineated by rubber ring (3772 mm )
n = number of diatom frustules counted
Total diatom abundance was converted to relative abundance of each species
N..
by [formul a 2] x TP-
where
N. = number of occurrences of each species in the proportional count
N- * total number of diatom frustules counted in the proportional count
Macrophyte Tissues
Field Collection
Macrophytes from the family Graminacea were collected for tissue analysis
from banks where the root zone was in contact with stream water. Random sam-
ples from the whole plant (leaves, stems, and roots) were collected in tripli-
cate from each station. These samples were frozen and shipped to EMSL-LV with
dry 1ce.
Laboratory Analysis
Macrophyte samples were thawed, roots and stems were separated at the soil
surface level, and each of the parts was washed three times in distilled water.
17
-------
Each washing consisted of placing the sample in a 16 oz Nalgene bottle, filling
to 1/3 volume, and agitating for one minute. All plant samples were oven dried
at 80°C to complete dryness, placed in plastic 20 dram vials, and homogenized
with a Model 8000 Mixer Mill (Spex Industries Inc.). Approximately 1 gm sam-
ples were then placed in 20 dram scintillation vials and sent to UCLA for
analysis by DC Arc Spectrometry (Alexander and McAnulty 1981).
Fish
Community Census
Fish samples taken in this study were qualitative collections with emphasis
placed on presence or absence of various fish species upstream and downstream
from the primary discharge. Sampling was conducted by electrofishing with a
backpack shocker. All fish were identified, weighed, and measured in the field.
Tissues
Field Collection
Mature fish from a variety of families were collected from each station
where available; each was frozen, and shipped with dry ice to EMSL-LV. The
fish were later thawed; liver, gill, muscle, and kidney tissues were dissected
from each fish. Brain, gonad, and eye tissues were also extracted to compare
metal accumulation in various tissues.
Laboratory Analysis
Triplicate samples of approximately 1 gm from each tissue type were
freeze dried and sent to UCLA's Laboratory of Biomedical and Environmental
13
-------
Science for DC Arc Spectrometry analysis (Alexander and McAnulty 1981). At UCLA
each of 3 subsamples was individually weighed and analyzed for metal content.
Bioassays
Field Collection
Water samples from stations 161 and 162 were collected in 5 gallon cubi-
tainers, packed in ice, and shipped to ERL-Duluth for bioassay.
Laboratory Analysis
Bioassays were conducted on whole water samples. The Duluth work consisted
of experiments on: 1) an activity index of bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macro-
chirus); 2) acute toxicity to Daphm'a magna; 3) immobilized enzymes; and 4)
chlorophyll Ł fluorescence.
19
-------
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
CHEMICAL
Water Quality
Several publications have Identified some water quality parameters which
may alter metal toxidty 1n controlled laboratory bioassays (Lloyd and Herbert
1962; Nishikowa and Tabata 1969; Brown et al. 1974; Shaw and Brown 1974;
Waiwood and Beamish 1978; Howarth and Sprague 1979; Miller and Mackay 1980).
These factors include hardness, alkalinity, pH, temperature, and turbidity
from dissolved or particulate matter. An attempt was made to accurately char-
acterize water quality in Leon Creek by identifying and quantifying as many
parameters as feasible (Appendix A). Metal data both from mid-depth grab
samples and ISCO 24-hour automatic collections (to provide information on
diel changes) are included in Appendix A.
Water samples were analyzed for total and dissolved metal concentrations
and compared to EPA (1980) recommended acute criteria for aquatic life based
upon water hardness (Table 4). Total silver, cadmium, and chromium concentra-
tions exceeded recommended criteria in the impact zone downstream from station
161, presumably due to the discharge from Kelly Air Force Base. Increased
nutrient concentrations and decreased dissolved oxygen levels and percent
saturation were also evident immediately downstream from the discharge (Table 5),
indicating substantial quantities of organic materials are entering Leon Creek.
20
-------
TABLE 4. COMPARISON OF MEAN TOTAL CONCENTRATIONS OF SELECTED METALS VERSUS
CALCULATED ACUTE WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR AQUATIC LIFE. Mean
values based on grab and ISCO samples combined.
Hardness (mg/1)
Metal (vg/l)
Total Cadmium
Actual (7)*
Criterion
Total Lead
Actual (7)
Criterion
Total Silver
Actual (7)
Criterion
Total Arsemc
Actual (x)
Criterion
Total Copper
Actual (7)
Criterion
Total Chromium
Actual (7)
Criterion
Control
161
383
6.8
12
157.6
885
46.0
41
85.4
440
14.7
78
4.6
19
Stations
Impact
162
247
22.7
8
239.6
519
79.9
19
311.7
440
49.9
52
31.7
12
163
253
23.1
8
193.1
535
77.9
20
276.4
440
48.5
53
54.0
12
Recovery
164
300
6.2
10
136.0
658
16.0
27
145.6
440
3.0
62
3.2
15
165
410
5.0
13
127.1
962
15.5
46
112.0
440
3.4
83
2.4
20
* Means represent three or more analytical replicates unless otherwise
Indicated.
21
-------
TABLE 5. MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF SELECTED WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS (mg/1) AND
PERCENT OXYGEN SATURATION AT EACH STATION IN LEON CREEK, TEXAS.
x Dissolved Oxygen*
% 02 Saturation
7 Ortho Phosphorus
7 Total Phosphorus
7 Kjeldahl Nitrogen
7 Total Organic Carbon
Control
161
6.43
70.0
0.050
0.020
0.262
3.65
Stations
Impact
162
5.43
65.0
0.150
0.135
0.490
7.25
163
3.79
43.0
0.360
0.322
0.675
13.90
Recovery
164
8.06
89.0
0.217
0.193
0.448
3.20
165
6.73
72.0
0.070
0.057
0.297
9.45
*Means represent three or more analytical replicates unless otherwise indicated.
22
-------
Ambient metal concentrations were highest in the impact zone (Station
163), then decreased in the two downstream recovery zone sites (164 and 165),
often to lower concentrations than were found in the upstream control. In
some cases ambient metal concentrations apparently declined between the con-
trol and first impact zone stations. The reason for the anomaly is not known.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Bartlett's test for homogeneity of var-
iances were performed to test for significant differences between stations for
six ambient total metals in Leon Creek. In the case of chromium, ANOVA param-
etric assumptions for normality and heterogeneity of variances were unable to
be met (indicated by Bartlett's test), so a Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA by ranks
(Siegel 1956) was used to test for significant differences (Table 6). When
ANOVA f-ratios indicated significant differences (p=0.05) in metal concentra-
tions, the Student-Newman-Keuls (SNK) stepwise multiple range test was calcul-
ated (Sokal and Rohlf 1981) to determine between which of the six stations
differences occurred. For all six metals examined, station 163 contained sig-
nificantly (p=0.05) greater ambient concentrations than any other site (Table 7).
The dissolved fraction of metals has long been implicated as being the
most toxic form to aquatic life. This has been demonstrated by toxicity tests
(Shaw and Brown 1974; Howorth and Sprague 1978; Carlson unpublished data) and
several treatments of species equilibrium models (Pagenhopf et al. 1974; Andrew
et al. 1977; McCrady and Chapman 1979; Chapman unpublished data). These models
correlate metal toxicity with the free ion concentrations as well as the pres-
ence of carbonate (C0l~) or hydroxide (OH~) molecular forms.
Ambient total and dissolved metal concentrations were compared for key
metals at all stations in Leon Creek (Table 8). A sizable percentage (84-100%)
23
-------
TABLE 6. SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS OF BARTLETT'S TEST, ANOVA F-RATIOS, AND KRUSKAL-
WALLIS ANOVA BY RANKS FOR TEST OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN STATIONS FOR
AMBIENT TOTAL METAL CONCENTRATIONS, LEON CREEK, TEXAS.
Total Metal
Cadmium
Chromium
Arsenic
Copper
Lead
Silver
Bartlett's ANOVA Kruskal-Wallis
NS ***
* **
NS ***
NS ***
NS ***
NS ***
* p=0.05
** p=0.01
*** p=0.001
of total metal concentrations occurred in the dissolved fraction at all stations
except 164, with a much smaller fraction sorbed or chelated by suspended par-
ticulate matter. At Station 164, the dissolved metal fraction was much lower
for all metals examined except copper, ranging from 0-64% of the total. In-
creased mean concentrations of nonfilterable residues (from 40 mg/1 at Station
161 to 130 mg/1 at station 163) and suspended particulate matter in the dis-
charge probably account for lower dissolved metal concentrations in the water
column at this point.
It should be noted that in some cases, mean dissolved metal concentrations
apparently exceed mean total metals (Table 8). This anomaly generally occurs
1) when metal concentrations such as cadmium and lead, are near or below
instrument detection limits, or 2) when confidence intervals around the
dissolved and total metal means are overlapping, indicating there is no
24
-------
TABLE 7. STUDENT-NEWMAN-KEULS STEPWISE MULTIPLE RANGE TEST (SNK) OF AMBIENT
TOTAL METAL CONCENTRATIONS, LEON CREEK, TEXAS. Nonsignificant
(p*0.05) subsets of group means are indicated by horizontal lines.
Metal
Arsenic
x (ug/D
SNK
Cadmi urn
x (ug/1)
SNK
Chromium
x (yg/1)
SNK
Copper
x (yg/1)
SNK
Lead
x (vg/D
SNK
Silver
x (ug/1)
Stations
Control Impact Recovery
161 162 163 164 165
85.4 65.7 363.2 145.6 129.5
• i
6.8 4.2 28.3 6.2 4.0
4.7 13.5 63.8 3.2 *
14.7 28.2 57.8 3.0 2.0
157.7 45.3 262.2 136.0 96.0
46.0 34.5 102.8 16.0 7.5
*Total chromium ambient data missing at this site.
25
-------
TABLE 8. MEAN TOTAL AND DISSOLVED CONCENTRATIONS OF SELECTED METALS tog/1) (grab samples only) AT
EACH STATION IN LEON CREEK, TEXAS. Numbers enclosed In parentheses are 95% confidence
intervals.*
ro
en
161
Hardness (mg/1)
Total
Dissolved
% Dissolved
Total
Dissolved
% Dissolved
383
46.
48.
6.
8.
0 (18
2 (17
100
8 (1.
3 (2.
100
.8)
.0)
9)
0)
34.
40.
4.
12.
162
247
Silver
5 (27.7)
2 (10.5)
100
Cadmium
2 (4.2)
5 (2.0)
100
Station
163
253
(Detection Limit
102.8 (32.6)
106.2 (18.3)
100
(Detection Limit
28.3 (2.9)
34.7 (4.1)
100
Lead (Detection Limit =
Total
Dissolved
% Dissolved
Total
Dissolved
% Dissolved
157.
163.
85.
83.
7 (37
0 (39
100
4 (38
0 (77
97
.5)
.2)
.0)
.3)
45.
111.
65.
127.
3 (21.4)
3 (38.9)
100
Arsenic
7 (143.1)
6 (93.0)
100
262.2 (52.9)
323.5 (40.6)
100
(Detection Limit
363.2 (144.8)
443.0 (93.6)
100
Chromium (Detection Limi
Total
Dissolved
% Dissolved
Total
Dissolved
% Dissolved
4.
6.
14.
19.
7 (1.
2 (1.
100
7 (4.
8 (4.
100
6)
7)
4)
7)
13.
11.
28.
32.
5 (4.5)
3 (1.6)
84
Copper
2 (3.0)
0 (3.8)
100
63.8 (3.4)
56.8 (3.5)
89
(Detection Limit
57.8 (3.9)
66.5 (7.0)
100
= 12)
16.
7.
= 7.5)
6.
2.
120)
136.
87.
= 110)
145.
77.
t = 5)
164
300
0 (7.
0 (17
44
2 (2.
5 (2.
40
0 (42
6 (53
64
6 (76
4 (36
53
3.2 (0.
0**
0
= ID
3.
3.
0 (5.
2 (1.
100
7)
•9)
ii
.7)
.6)
•6)
.2)
5)
0)
6)
165
410
7.5 (18.9)
10.0 (0)**
100
4.0 (0)
4.2 (1.6)
100
96.0 (46.
135.7 (32.
100
129.5 (175
118.5 (71.
92
NS
NS
2.0 (8.7)
5.0 (4.2)
100
0)
0)
.0)
0)
Confidence intervals that overlap indicate total and dissolved metal mean concentrations are not
significantly (p=0.05) different.
on* only two data nnints. All other means based on three or more analytical replicates.
-------
significant (p=0.05) difference between them.
Except for chlorine, the remaining general water quality parameters (e.g.,
pH, conductivity) were at levels within the expected range for natural south-
western streams (Appendix A). Reported chlorine values, however, are high,
ranging from 30-80 times above the EPA recommended criterion. These high
values are even reported for the control zone which receives minimal pollution
impact and contains aquatic biota representative of a diverse and healthy com-
munity. This apparent anomaly may be attributable to field measurement tech-
niques rather than actual elevated chlorine values in the area. This method-
ology is currently being reevaluated at EMSL-LV by comparisons of data from a
Hach chlorine kit and standard EPA chemical analysis procedures (U.S. EPA 1979b).
Sediments
Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance by ranks was performed to
test differences between stations for 10 metals in sediment samples, when
ANOVA f-ratios indicated significant differences (p=0.05) in metal concen-
trations, the SNK multiple range test was calculated to determine between
which of the five stations differences occurred (Table 9).
ANOVA f-ratios indicated significant differences (p = 0.05) between sta-
tions based upon mean sediment (lead, silver, aluminum, and selenium) concen-
trations. The data indicated no significant differences between stations in
mean sediment concentrations of cadmium, copper, nickel, zinc, chromium, and
arsenic.
The SNK tests for lead, silver, aluminum, and selenium in the sediments
27
-------
TABLE 9. STUDENT-NEWMAN-KEULS STEPWISE RANGE TEST (SNK) OF MEAN TOTAL CONCEN-
TRATIONS OF SELECTED METALS IN SEDIMENT SAMPLES, LEON CREEK, TEXAS.
Statistically nonsignificant (p»0.05) subsets of group nr»ans arc
indicated by horizontal lines.
Metal
Stations
Control
161
Impact
162
163
Recovery
164
165
Lead
x (mg/kg)
SNK
Aluminum
x (mg/kg)
SNK
237.6 663.0 1057.1 910.4 155.9
13942.2 12152.8 6896.3 8982.5 6531.1
Sejenium
x (mg/kg)
SNK
11.7
17.8
44.1
0.3
0.3
Sij_ver
x (mg/kg)
SNK
1.9
28.7
122.2
33.4
2.1
28
-------
did not reveal consistent up- to downstream patterns of distribution, although
Station 163 sediments tended to contain significantly higher metal concentra-
tions than did the control site. A possible explanation for the inconsistency
observed is that metal concentrations in the sediments of Leon Creek are of
sufficient magnitude to have saturated the sediments. A steady-state system
may exist which is not affected by the relatively small additional input of
metals from Kelly AFB. Metal saturation could result from continuous nonpoint
discharges into Leon Creek upstream from the control site (161), including
possible runoff from a hazardous waste disposal site, and from storm drains
near roads and freeways.
BIOLOGICAL
Macroinvertebrates
There were 49 macroinvertebrate taxa collected in Leon Creek during the
1980 fall sampling effort (Table 10). Benthic populations were compared at all
stations (Appendix B) throughout the river to assess the impact of elevated
metal concentrations and organic pollutants on biological communities in
Leon Creek below Kelly AFB.
Upstream Control Station (161)
Aproximately 60% (28 taxa) of the total taxa found in Leon Creek were
collected at the control site (Table 10). Specimens from the six mayfly genera
found in the river were reported at this station, including one mayfly,
Isonychia sp., not found at any other site. Three other genera (Rhagovelia
sp., Hyalella azteca, and Cheumatopsyche sp.) were also only collected at this
site. Macroinvertebrate populations at the control site (Figure 3) were
29
-------
TABLE 10. DISTRIBUTION AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE OF MACROINVERTEBRATE TAXA,
NOVEMBER 1980, LEON CREEK, TEXAS. A=Abundant (61-100%), VC=Very
Common (31-60%), C=Common (6-30%), 0=0ccasional (1-5%), R=Rare
Taxa
Ephemeroptera
Siphlonuridae
Isonychia sp.
Leptophl ebiidae
Paraleptophlebia sp.
. Baetidae
Baetis sp.
Tricorythidae
Tricorythodes sp.
Leptohyphes sp.
Caenidae
Caenis sp.
Odonata
Gomphidae
Ophiogomphus sp.
Libel lulidae
Brechmorhoga mendax
Calopterygidae
Hetaerina sp.
Coenagrionidae
Argia sp.
161
R
R
C
R
R
0
R
0
Stations
162 163 164 165
R
0
0
R
R
R 0
R
R
0 C
Megaloptera
Corydalidae
Corydalus sp.
Hemiptera
Gerridae
Gerris sp.
Veliidae
Rhagovelia sp.
Tn'choptera
Hydropsychidae
Hydropsyche sp.
Cheumatopsyche sp.
Smlcridea fasciatella
Hydroptil idae
Hydroptila sp.
Leucotrichia sp.
A1 isotrichia sp.
Helicopsychidae
Helicopsyche sp.
0
R
R
0
R
C
R
R
R
continued
30
-------
TABLE 10. Continued
Taxa
Diptera
Chironomidae
Tanypodinae
Chironominae
Orthocladiinae
Simuliidae
SimuTiiuro sp.
Ceratopogonidae
Palpomyia sp.
Atrichopogon sp.
Empididae
161 162
0 R
C R
C 0
R
Stations
163 164
R 0
R C
0 C
R
R
R
R
165
0
C
C
R
Lepidoptera
Pyralidae
Parargyractis sp. 0
Coleoptera
Elmidae
Microcyl loepus pusillus
lodingi R
Heterelmis vul nerata R
Stene1mi~sp. C
StenelmiT crenata
Elsianus texanus
Dryopidae
Helichus sp.
Psephenidae
Psephenus sp. R
Hydracarina
Sperchonidae
Sperchon sp.
Hydrobatidae
Atractides sp.
Amphipoda
Talitridae
Hyalel la azteca 0
Nephropsidea
Astacidae R
Turbellaria R
R
R
R
R
R
R
C
R
R
R
0
C
0
R
R
R
R
R
Nematoda R
continued
31
-------
TABLE 10. Continued
Taxa
Stations
161
162
163
164
165
Oligochaeta
Hirudinea
0
0
A
A
C
0
0
Gastropoda
Planorbidae
Ferrissla sp.
Helisoma/Gyraulus complex
Physidae
Physa sp.
Pelecypoda
Sphaeriidae
Sphaerium sp.
Corbicul idae
Corbicula fluninea
R
R
0
R
R
0
32
-------
CO
t—t
I
o
CO
(A)
o:
LU
D-
100 (x=2340) (x=4056) (x=2101) (x=1488) (x=628)
80-
60-
40-
20 _
Mayflies
Caddisflies
Dipterans
(4 taxa)
Beetles
Udonata
Amphlpods
beg. Worms
Other
Dipterans
Segmented
Worms
mpr.pran?;
Segmented
Worms
Caddisflies
Dipterans
(7 taxa)
Beetles
Udonata
Segmented
Worms
Snails
Other
Mayflies
Caddisflies
Dipterans
(4 taxa)
Beetles
Odonata
Other
161
Control
162
163
164
165
Impact
Recovery
STATIONS
Figure 3. Percent composition of major macroinvertebrate groups at stations in Leon Creek,
Texas. (Numbers at the top of each station indicate mean number of organisms per
replicate sample.)
-------
numerically dominated by dipterans, primarily chironomid midges.
A one-way ANOVA was used to test differences between stations using macro-
invertebrate standing crop, species richness, and Shannon-Wiener diversity
(Southwood 1978). Patterns of differences between stations were tested using
SNK multiple range procedure (Sokal and Rohlf 1981). The control zone station
was significantly different (p=0.05) with respect to total number of taxa and
diversity among the two impact zone sites (162 and 163) and the furthest down-
stream recovery zone station (165), but not significantly different from the
first recovery zone station (164) (Table 11). Standing crop was not signif-
icantly different among stations except for the first impact zone site (162),
which had significantly (p=0.05) higher counts than the other sampling loca-
tions. It should be noted that diversities used in calculating the ANOVAs
and SNKs were based upon midge taxonomy only to the subfamily level.
Impact Zone (Stations 162 and 163)
Total invertebrate numbers at the first impact site were almost double
those in the control zone (Table 11 and Figure 4). However, species richness
at both impact stations decreased to one-thirds of the control. Further, more
than 95 percent of the total number were oligochaetes. Oligochaetes were not
identified below class level. Nevertheless, cursory examination of the samples
from the impact zone revealed the vast majority of the oligochaete population
to be Tubificidae. There were no mayfly or dragonfly/damselfly species col-
lected in the impact zone. No caddisflies or aquatic beetles were found at
the upstream impact station (162), and, in fact, Station 162 was the only site
in the river where two species of elmid beetles (Microcylloepus pus ill us
lodingi and Stenelmis sp.) and one caddisfly species (Hydropti1 a sp.) were
not collected. The few dipterans collected in the impact zone were primarily
orthoclad midges.
34
-------
TABLE 11. STUDENT-NEWMAN-KEULS STEPWISE MULTIPLE RANGE TEST (SNK) OF MACRO-
INVERTEBRATE MEAN TOTAL COUNTS (STANDING CPOP), MEAN UUMRFR OF TAXA
(SPECIES RICHNESS), AND SHANNON-WIENER DIVERSITY INDICES AT EACH
STATION IN LEON CREEK, TEXAS. Nonsignificant (p=0.05) subsets of
group means are indicated by vertical lines.
Mean Total Count Mean # of Taxa
Station
SNK
SNK
Diversity
SNK
Upstream
Control Zone
Impact Zone
Recovery Zone
161
162
163
164
165
2340.0 \]
4056.0
2101.3
1488.0
628.0
23.0
7.3
7.3
21.0
28.7
3.2193
0.3390
0.2653
3.0577
3.5383
35
-------
rSOOO
to
en
CO
u_
o
at
Ui
co
Control
Impact
Recovery
STATIONS
Figure 4. Mean number of benthic taxa and mean count per replicate at all stations, Leon
Creek, Texas.
-------
Both stations in the impact zone were significantly (p=0.05) different
with respect to total number of taxa and species diversity than any other site
in the river, but not significantly different from one another (Table 11).
Recovery Zone (Stations 164 and 165)
Mayflies did not reappear at the first recovery zone station (164) and
oligochaetes were still common (18% of total counts); in other respects, the
taxonomic distribution of macroinvertebrates greatly resembled that found in
the upstream control site. Midges remained numerically dominant. Several
additional dipteran species were found at Station 164 that had not been col-
lected upstream, including the biting fly, Atrichopogon sp., and members of
the family Empididae, which were not found at any other site in the river.
The clam, Corbicula fluminea, was also collected only at this site.
Station 165, located nine miles downstream from the Kelly AFB discharge,
was more diverse than the control site. There were 34 taxa here, 10 of which
were not collected at any other site. Five of the six mayfly genera collected
upstream were found. Mean organism counts per replicate were only one-quarter
those of the control. Turbellarians were collected at every station in the
river except for Station 165.
Chironomid midges (all three subfamilies), crawfish (Astacidae), and
oligochaetes were the only taxa collected at every station in Leon Creek.
A number of taxa, including Ophiogomphus sp., Argia sp., Smicridae fasciatella,
Helicopsyche sp., Paragyractis sp., and Psephenus sp., reappeared at both re-
covery zone stations after disappearing in the impact zone. Leeches (Hirudinea)
were found both in the control and upstream recovery zone sites, but were
absent in the impact zone and downstream recovery stations.
37
-------
Caution must be used, however, in interpreting these distributions since
they only represent a single sampling round. For example, preliminary data
(Miller and Melancon, unpublished data) from macroinvertebrate samples collec-
ted during September 1981 in Leon Creek showed a much higher species diversity
in the impact zone (Station 162) than was observed during 1980. Furthermore,
these 1981 samples at Station 162 were numerically dominated by orthoclad
midges and Physa snails, not by oligochaetes as was so striking during 1980.
These differences are not necessarily surprising considering such factors as
seasonality, changing physical/chemical and discharge conditions, and the
spatial patchiness of macroinvertebrates. They do illustrate, however, the
need to establish baseline data, with at least seasonal macroinvertebrate
collections, when using biological parameters for impact monitoring.
Changes in the 1980 benthic species composition were also compared to mean
concentrations of trace metals in Leon Creek. The literature describes a num-
ber of environmental factors which influence trace metal toxicity to aquatic
organisms (Tabata 1969; Karbe et al. 1975; LaBounty et al. 1975; Luoma and
Bryan 1978). Included among those factors are: the concentration, valence,
and form in which metals exist in the water column; exposure duration of the
animal; stream discharge and flow velocity; chemical characteristics of the
water, especially hardness, pH, and dissolved oxygen; and the nature, con-
dition, and life stage of the organism. Some organisms are especially sensi-
tive to elevated concentrations of metals, for example, oligochaetes, leeches,
crustaceans, and mollusks (Brinkhurst 1965; Hynes 1965; LaBounty et al. 1975)
while others are more tolerant, although relative toxicity of metals to aquatic
insects varies widely with differing taxa (Warnick and Bell 1969; Phillips and
Russo 1973).
38
-------
In Leon Creek, the impact zone silver, cadmium, and chromium concentrations
increased to several times above EPA acute water quality criteria recommended
for local aquatic life based upon water hardness (Table 4). These increases
correlate (Spearman-Rank r =0.87; Siege! 1956) to the decrease in mean number
of benthic taxa (Figure 5), although because of small sample size the correla-
tion is not statistically significant. Increased metal concentrations also
correlate (r =0.7-0.9) with increased total invertebrate counts. This is of
particular importance considering that elevated invertebrate numbers in the
1980 impact zone samples are primarily due to tubificid oligochaetes. The
literature contains many examples of oligochaetes found in abundance below
sources of organic pollution (Brinkhurst 1964; Brinkhurst 1965; Brinkhurst
and Kennedy 1965; Aston 1973). Tubificid worms contain red blood pigments and
can survive and reproduce in very low oxygen tensions for considerable periods
of time, while predators (e.g., leeches, bottom-dwelling fish) and competitors
may be eliminated. Goodnight and Whitely, working in midwestern streams,
have built a pollution index system based on the percentage of tubificids in
a total population (in Aston 1973). In their system, benthic communities with
more than 80 percent tubificids indicated a high degree of organic enrichment
or industrial pollution. Oligochaetes are typically highly sensitive, however,
to poisonous metals (Brinkhurst 1965). These data, when analyzed with respect
to ambient oxygen and nutrient levels in Leon Creek, suggest that during 1980,
metals may have affected the aquatic biota less than organic pollutants. How-
ever, there are some anomalies. For example, the common caddisflies Hydropsyche
sp. and Cheumatopsyche sp. have been reported to be tolerant to low dissolved
oxygen and elevated nutrient concentrations (Roback 1965; Klotz 1977). These
genera were collected in Leon Creek but were not found in the impact zone,
suggesting metal concentrations may be toxic to them. Field notes indicate a
similar substrate (cobble riffle) and flow for all stations; therefore, the
39
-------
50^
Control
Impact
Recovery
STATIONS
450
a:
o
LU
-100
•50
en
to
CD
>—i
I—
a:
o
o
Figure .5. Comparison of benthic species richness in Leon Creek, Texas, mean
5nHC!?^ftl0n! °f t0^! chromium dnd silver, and calculated chromium
and silver water quality criteria.
-------
absence of expected species may relate more to chemical characteristics than
to physical differences between stations. Some mayfly species are highly sen-
sitive to elevated silver concentrations (Nehring 1976: reported in Herricks
and Buikema 1977); this may partially account for the total absence of may-
flies.
Plants
Periphyton
The periphyton community is an important component of the biological
structure of a stream and has been isolated as one of the better monitors of
water quality and stream conditions (Weitzel 1979). Periphyton is defined as
the assemblage of plants attached to or found growing on a substrate (Weitzel
1979). Terms used to describe the type of substrate include:
Epilithic - growing on rocks
Epipelic - growing on mud or sediments
Epiphytic - growing on plants
Epizoic - growing on animals
Epidendric - growing on wood
Epipsammic - growing on sand surfaces
The periphyton community may contain a vast number of species including
diatoms, blue-greens, and green algae. A diatom community may consist of
three to four hundred species living together in a relatively small area at
any point in time in the benthos of unpolluted streams (Patrick 1978).
Healthy streams usually have high species numbers, each with relatively
41
-------
small populations. A stream perturbation, such as toxic metal pollution, may
alter community composition. Change may be expressed in several ways: species
richness, number of individuals, or kinds of species. Metal pollution may re-
duce species diversity and increase total algal abundance, with a few species
becoming extremely common (Miller et al 1982). Shifts in species composition
from diatoms to filamentous greens or unicellular greens and blue-green algae
have also been reported (Patrick 1949). The types of shifts are dependent
upon the effects of various kinds of pollution (Patrick 1977).
Diatom tolerance to heavy metals include strains ranging from sensitive
to very resistant. Metal resistance of only a few algae have been studied both
in the laboratory and in the field (Whitton and Say 1975). Results of these
studies have not been consistent. For example, a laboratory study of Nitzschia
palea (Steemann-Nielsen and Wiurn-Anderson 1970) indicated that this diatom is
very sensitive to soluble copper in the absence of any chelating agent. How-
ever, Palmer (1977) included it in a list of tolerant species 'indicative1 of
copper pollution. Since many environmental factors other than metal concentra-
tions may influence a given habitat, heavy metals could be considered to restrict
species distributions but not to define them (Foster 1982).
Diatoms are also useful indicators of water quality for the following
reasons:
1. With their secure means of attachment to substrates, diatoms may be
less subject to drift than invertebrates and are good indicators
of conditions at collection locations.
2. A short generation time allows diatoms to better reflect conditions
-------
immediately prior to sampling, instead of integrating long-term
effects.
3. Diatoms mounts may be stored for many years, permitting re-
examination at any later time.
4. Diatoms are ubiquitous on stream bottoms.
5. They are easy to collect in sufficient quantity to meet statistical
requirements.
6. Diatoms have a wide and well documented (Lowe 1974) range of environ-
mental requirements and pollution tolerances for many taxa.
Diatoms dominated the periphyton assemblage (Appendix C) in Leon Creek
both in number of taxa and cell abundance during the period sampled from
November 5-8, 1980 (Figure 6). One hundred and one diatom taxa (Bacillario-
phyceae) were identified (Table 12). The environmental requirements of the
important taxa are presented in Table 13. Greens (Chlorophyta) and blue-greens
(Cyanophyta) were less common, contributing ten and two taxa, respectively
(Table 14). Representatives of Euglenophyta (euglenoids), Pyrrhophyta (dino-
flagellates), and Cryptophyta (cryptomonads) were also observed in low numbers
and with few representatives. This assemblage, however, may not be indicative
of periphyton composition during other seasons since the algal community under-
goes seasonal change in composition and abundance.
A comparison of control, impact, and recovery zone stations follows:
43
-------
o
I—I
X
-------
TABLE 12.
LIST OF -DIATOM TAXA AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE IN LEON CREEK, TEXAS.
A=Abundant (61-100%), VC=Very Common (31-60%), C=Common (6-30%),
0=0ccasional (1-5%), and R=Rare
Stations
Control Impact
Taxa 161 162 163
Bacillariophycae
Central es
Biddulphia laevis
Cyclotella meneghiniana R R R
Cyclotella stelligera R R 0
Cyc 1 otel 1 a
pseudostelligera R 0
Melosira varians R R
Thai lassiosira
fluviatillis R
Terpsinoe americana R
Fragilariaceae
Fragilaria spp. 0
Fragilana brevi strata
Synedra rumpens R
Synedra ulna C
Synedra ulna var.
oxyrhynchus f. medio-
contracta R 0
Synedra" ulna var.
contracta R
Synedra cjallonii
Recovery
164 165
C 0
R R
R
0
0 0
0 VC
R
R
C C
0
Eunotiaceae
Eunotia
pectinalis
Eunotia naegeli i
Achnanthaceae
Achnanthes
lanceolate
Achnanthes minutissima
AchnantheT affinis
Cocconeis~p1 acentul a
Cocconeis" pi acentul a
var. euglypta
0
R
R
R
Cocconeis piacentul a
var. 1ineata
Naviculaceae
Amphipleura pellucida
Dip! oneis spp.
Pi pi oneiT elliptica
Pi pi onei? oblongelTa
R
0
0 C
R
45
continued
-------
TABLE 12. Continued
Stations
Control Impact
Taxa
Naviculaceae (Cont.)
Gyrosigtna spp.
Gyrosigma nodiferum
Gyros igma obscurum
Navlcula spp.
Navicula rhynchocephala
Navicula tripunctata
var. schizomoides
Navicula pupula
Navicula pupula var.
rectangular! s
Navicula cryptocephala
Navicula cryptocephala
var. veneta
Navicula minima
Navicula subminuscula
Navicula gastrum
Navicula graciloides
Navicula symmetrica
Navicul a mutica var.
tropica
Navicula confervacea
Navicula heufleri var.
leptocephala
Navicul a notha
Navicula pygnaea
Navicula secreta var.
apiculata
Navicula mutica var.
stigma
Navicula viridula var.
rostellata
Navicula sanctaecrucis
Navicula cuspidata
Navicul a tenera
Pinnularia spp.
Pinnularia abaujensis
Pinnularia biceps
Pleurosigma delicatulum
161 162
R
0
R
R R
R
R
R R
R
R
R
C
R
C R
0 C
0
R
R 0
R
0
R
R
R
163
0
R
R
0
0
R
R
R
R
0
C
0
R
R
R
Recovery
164
R
0
R
R
R
C
R
C
R
R
R
0
0
R
R
R
165
R
R
0
0
0
0
0
R
R
R
C
R
0
46
continued
-------
TABLE 12. Continued
Stations
Control Impact Recovery
Taxa
Gomphonemaceae
Gomphonema parvulum
Gomphonema subclavatum
var. mexicanum
Gomphonema subclavatum
Gomphonema brasillense
Gomphonema tenellum
Cymbellaceae
Amphora spp.
Amphora oval is
Amphora oval is var.
pediculus
Amphora coffeiformis
Cymbella spp.
Cymbella minuta
Cymbella minuta var.
pseudogracil is
Cymbella sinuata
161 162
C R
C
R
0
0
0 R
R
163 164
0
C
C 0
R
0
R
0
R
165
0
R
R
0
R
R
Nitzschiaceae
Bacillaria
paradoxa
Hantzschia amphioxys
Nitzschia spp. 0
Nitzschia" dissipata 0
Nitzschia frustulum var.
perpusilla
Nitzschia hantzschiana
Nitzschia palea R
Nitzschia fonticola
NitzschiT amphibia C
Nitzschia hunganca 0
Nitzschia" ignprata
Nitzschia' filiformis
Nitzschia faciculata R
Nitzschia tryblionella
var. levidensis R
Nitzschia tryblio'nella
var. debilis
Nitzschia elliptica
Nitzschia kutzingiana
R
R
R
0
R
VC
R
0
R
0
R
R
0
R
0
R
C
0
C
R
0
0
C
R
R
R
R
C
R
R
R
0
R
continued
47
-------
TABLE 12. Continued
Stations
Control Impact Recovery
Taxa
Nitzschiaceae (Cont.)
Nitzschia capitellata
Nitzschia accedens
Nitzschia obtusa var.
seal pel liformis
Nitzschia lorenziana
Nitzschia sigma
Nitzschia tryblionella
var. victoriae
Nitzschia ipicut ata
Nitzschia
gandersheimiensis
Nitzschia hybrida
161 162
R 0
R
R
0
R
R
163 164 165
C R R
R
0 R 0
R R 0
0
Surirellaceae
Cymatopleura solea
Surirella angustata
Surirel la" oval is
Surirella robusta
Surirella suecica
SurirellJ ovata var.
crumena
R
0
R
R
R
0
48
-------
TABLE 13. REPORTED ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING pH RANGE AND HEAVY
METAL TOLERANCE OF THE IMPORTANT DIATOM TAXA OBSERVED IN LEON
CREEK, TEXAS.
Taxa
Distribution and Environmental Requirements
Biddulphia laevis Ehr
Cocconeis placentula
Ehr.
Gomphonema brasiliense
Grun.
Gomphonema parvulum
Kfltz.
Navicula confervacea
(KUtz.) Grun.
Navicula graciloides
A. Mayer
Navicul a sanctaecrucis
Ostr.
Navicula mutica var.
stigma Patr.
Fresh to brackish water form (Lowe 1974); restricted
to waters of moderately high conductivity and alkalinity
(Czarnecki and Blinn 1978).
pH requirements: optimum over 8.5; occurring at pH
around 7 (Lowe 1974).
Cosmopolitan; calcium indifferent; characteristic
of waters that have not been exposed to pollutants to
zones where oxidation of organic load is proceeding
(Lowe 1974); tolerant to phenolic wastes (Palmer
1977); characteristic of slow moving water (Hostetter
and Stoermer 1968).
pH requirements: range 4.7-8.0 (Lowe 1974); optimum
8.0.
Seems to prefer warm water of moderate conductivity
(Patrick and Reimer 1975).
pH requirements: circumneutral.
Cosmopolitan; a facilitative nitrogen heterotroph;
calcium and iron indifferent (Lowe 1974); eutrophic
species (Symoens 1957); attains high abundances in
running waters below effluents of organic wastes
(Backhaus 1968); characteristic of excessively pol-
luted "polysaprobic" water (Lange-Bertalot 1979).
pH requirements: range 4.2-9.0 (Lowe 1974); optimum
7.8-8.2.
Seems to prefer soft to warm water (Patrick and
Reimer 1966).
pH requirements: range 5.0-8.4 (Lowe 1974); optimum
8.4.
Prefers fresh to slightly brackish water (Czarnecki
and Blinn 1978).
pH requirements: circumneutral (Patrick and Reimer
1966).
Slightly brackish water or fresh water with very
high mineral content (Patrick and Reimer 1966).
Temperate water form, usually occurring between 15°
and 30°C (Patrick and Reimer 1966).
continued
49
-------
TABLE 13. Continued.
Taxa
Distribution and Environmental Requirements
Nitzschia amphibia Grun. Facultative nitrogen heterotroph; tolerates small
amounts of salt; occurring over a temperature range
from 0° to 30°C (Lowe 1974); can exist with high
reproductive rates in heavily polluted "*alpha-
mesosaprobic" waters (Lange-Bertalot 1979).
pH requirements: range 4.0-9.3 (Lowe 1974); optimum
slightly greater than 8.5.
Nitzschia capitellata
Must.
Nitzschia kutzingianum
Hilse
Nitzschia palea (Kdtz)
W. Smith
Synedra ulna (Nitz.)
Ehr.
Synedra ulna var.
oxyrhnchus Kfltz.
Terpsinoe americana
(Bailey) Ralfs.
Fresh to brackish water form (Hustedt 1930); obligate
nitrogen heterotroph (Lowe 1974).
pH requirements: range 7.0-9.2 (Lowe 1974); optimum
7.3-7.8.
pH requirements: range 6.4-8.4 (Lowe 1974); optimum
7.5-7.8.
Cosmopolitan; a very good indicator of pollution, an
obligate nitrogen heterotroph; euryoxybiont, calcium
indifferent; tolerates a wide .span of ecological con-
ditions; occurring over a temperature range from 0°
to 30°C (Lowe 1974); tolerant of excessively polluted
"*polysaprobic" waters (Lange-Bertalot 1979).
pH requirements: range 4.2-9.0 (Lowe 1974); optimum
8.4.
Heavy metal tolerance: tolerates relatively large
amounts of copper (1.5 mg/1) and chromium (Schroder
1939 and Blum 1957).
Cosmopolitan; great ecological span; prefers dirty
water; calcium indifferent; unsuitable as an ecological
indicator (Lowe 1974).
pH requirements: range 5.7-9.0 (Lowe 1974); optimum
7-8 (Cholnoky 1968).
Heavy metal tolerance: Fairly resistant to 1 mg/1 Zn
but killed by 2 mg/1 Zn (Williams and Mount 1965).
pH requirements: range 6.6-7.9 (Lowe 1974).
Marine, brackish and fresh water form (Boyer 1927).
* alpha-mesosaprobic; BOD less than 13 mg/1 oxygen, and less than 75 percent
oxygen deficit.
polysaprobic; BOD greater than 22 mg/1 oxygen, and oxygen deficit greater
than 90 percent.
50
-------
TABLE 14. LIST OF ALGAL TAXA (EXCLUSIVE OF DIATOMS) AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE IN
LEON CREEK, TEXAS. A=Abundant (61-100%), VC=Very Common (31-60%),
C=Common (6-30%), Occasional (1-5%), and R=Rare
Stations
Control Impact Recovery
Taxa 161 162 163 164 165
Chlorophyta
Colonies C
Filaments VC VC A VC
Chlorococcales
Coelastrum microporum C
ScenedesmUs spp. 0
ScenedesimTs quadricauda 0
Scenedesmus abundans C
Scenedesmus dimorphu's C
Zygnematales
Hougeotia spp. C VC
Si phonocladal es
Cladophora spp. VC VC C VC
Zygnematales
Spirogyra spp. 0
Closterium spp. 0 00
Cosmarlum spp.' 0 R
Euglenophyta
Euglenales
Euglena spp. 0
Phacus spp. C
Pyrrhophyta
Dinokontae
Peridinium spp. 0
Cryptophyta
Cryptomonadaceae
Cryptomonas spp. 0
Cyanophyta
Oscillatoriales
Oscillatoria spp. R R C
Phormidium spp. C
51
-------
Upstream Control Station (161)
The diatoms Gomphonema parvulum, Navicula mutica var. stigma, Nitzschia
amphibia, and Navicula graciloides were common, each contributing more than 5
percent of total cell abundance (Figure 7). Cell abundances were not con-
verted to cell volume or biomass. Relative size differences between species
are, therefore, not reflected with these data, since each taxon receives
equal numerical representation, regardless of frustule size.
Total cell abundance for all observed algal groups at station 161 was
2
4969 cells/mm (Figure 8); diatoms contributed 85 percent of total abundance
(Figure 6). Green algae contributed 14 percent, with unidentified colonies
and filaments, Scenedesmus spp., Mougeotia sp., Cladophora sp., and Cosmarium
spp. present. Mean diatom species diversity of 4.17 and mean total diatom taxa
of 52.5 were higher here than in any other station (Table 14).
Impact Zone (Stations 162 and 163)
Total cell abundance increased to 8338 and 9336 cells/mm at Stations 162
and 163, respectively. Mean concentrations of total silver and chromium also
increased to several times above the EPA acute water quality criteria recom-
mended for local aquatic life based on hardness (Figure 8).
Nitzschia palea was common at both stations and contributed 47 percent to
total cell abundance at Station 162 (Figure 7). _N. palea predominates in
"polysaprobic" waters with BOD5 greater than 22 mg CL/1 and an oxygen-satura-
tion deficit greater than 90 percent (Lange-Bartalot 1979). This taxon is also
a facultative nitrogen heterotroph (Table 13). Observed dissolved oxygen con-
centration in Leon Creek decreased from 6.43 mg 0^/1 at Station 161 to 5.43 and
3.79 mg 02/1 at Stations 162 and 163, respectively (Table 5). This observed
52
-------
100
80
60
CO
o
Q.
6
o
en
CO
,==, 40
QC
UJ
a.
20
OTHERS
Gomphonema
parvulum
Navicula
stigma
Nitzschia
t • i •
amphibia
Navicula
graci loides
OTHERS
Synedra ulna
confer vetoed
NitsB.ehia
palea
OTHERS
Nitzschia
kutzingiana
Gomphonema
brasiliense
Nitzs,ch.ia
amphibia
Nitzschia
capitellata
palea
Navicula
mutica var.
stigma
OTHERS
Synedra ulna
var. oxiir.
Navicula „
subminuscula
Gomphonema
t
Biddulphia
laevis
• •
Nitzschia
Otflph LuiCL
Navicula
graciloides
OTHERS
Cocconeis
placentula
Navicu la
sane taecrucis
Synedra ulna
var. oxyrhnchus
Tefpsinoe
americana
161
162
163
164
Control
165
Impact
Recovery
STATIONS
Figure 7. Percent composition of diatom species contributing greater than five
percent to total cell abundance in Leon Creek, Texas.
-------
10-
00
o
en
CD
O
CQ
Control
Impact
Recovery
150
O
UJ
CTi
co
o
IX
STATIONS
2 3
Figure 8. Periphyton cell abundance (cells/mm x 10 ) in Leon Creek, Texas, mean concentrations
of total silver and chromium, and calculated silver and chromium water quality criteria.
-------
oxygen concentration decrease suggests organics entering Leon River upstream
from Station 162 are creating an oxygen deficit. Mean number of diatom taxa
(28) and species diversity (2.66) were lowest at Station 162 (Table 15).
A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test differences at each
station with respect to total number of diatom taxa, total diatom abundance
2
(cells/mm ), and mean Shannon-Wiener diversity (Table 15). No significant dif-
ference (p=0.05) was observed in total diatom abundance between stations. Sig-
nificant differences (p=0.05) between stations were found with respect to
total number of taxa and species diversity. Patterns of difference between
stations were tested using SNK multiple range procedure. The total number of
diatom taxa at Station 162 and species diversity were significantly lower
(p=0.05) than the control zone station (161). However, no significant dif-
ference (p=0.05) was observed in the number of taxa or species diversity
between Station 163 and Station 161.
Nitzschia tryblionella var. debil is, _N._ ignorata, _N._ fonticola, H._
hantzschiana, Navicula pupula. and Cyclotella pseudostelligera were observed
only in this zone and were not present at any other station (Table 12). The
environmental requirements of these taxa are not completely known; however,
it appears that N. pupula and Ł. pseudostelligera are "indifferent" to most
chemical and physical parameters (Lowe 1974).
Recovery Zone (Stations 164 and 165)
2
Cell abundance decreased to 2365 and 4084 cells/mm at Stations 164 and
165, respectively (Figure 8). Mean silver and chromium concentrations de-
creased to below EPA acute water quality criteria recommended for local aquatic
life based on hardness (Figure 8).
55
-------
TABLE 15. STUDENT-NEWMAN-KEULS STEPWISE MULTIPLE RANGE TEST (SNK) OF TOTAL
NUMBER OF DIATOM TAXA, SHANNON-WIENER DIVERSITY AND TOTAL DIATOM
ABUNDANCE (cells/mm^) IN LEON CREEK, TEXAS. Nonsignificant (p=0.05)
subsets of group means are indicated by vertical lines.
Station
Total j of Taxa
7 SNK
Total Abundance
I SNK
Diversity
SNK
Control
Impact
Recovery
161
162
163
164
165
52.5 (•
28.0
40.5
36.0
35.5
4206
6769
8981
2335
3128
4.1649 |
2.6647
3.9780
4.2275
3.4624
1
56
-------
Species composition changed somewhat: Nitzschia spp. were less abundant
here than in the impact zone. Terpsinoe americana and Biddulphia laevis
appeared either as common or very common components and were not abundant at
other stations (Table 12). Both species have been reported from brackish
water, while EL laevis is restricted to waters of moderately high conductivity
and alkalinity (Table 13). Cocconeis placentula and Synedra ulna var.
oxyrhynchus f. medio-contracta were more abundant than in the other stations.
Number of diatom taxa were not significantly different (p=0.05) at stations
downstream from Station 163 in the impact zone than at the control zone
(Station 161). Neither were species diversity differences found between the
two zones.
A summary of the Leon Creek periphyton data shows diatoms contributed
the greatest relative abundance at each station. No significant differences
were observed between impact, recovery or control zones. Total diatom cell
2
abundance (cells/mm ) was somewhat higher in the impact zone but differences
between stations were not statistically significant. Mean number of total
diatom taxa and mean species diversity were lowest at Station 162 where mean
total silver and chromium concentrations were several times greater than EPA
acute water quality criteria. Highest diversity and greatest mean number of
taxa were observed in the control zone but, again, were not significantly dif-
ferent from the impact zone. Analysis of individual species also did not
reveal any sharp contrasts. The diatoms Cyclotella meneghiniana and Nitzschia
obtusa var seal pell iformis were present at every station while Nitzschia
tryblionella var. debilis, ^l._ ignorata, ]L_ fonticola, ^ hantzschiana,
Navicula pupula, and Cyclotella pseudostelligera were observed only in the
impact zone. Nitzschia palea, a taxon characteristic of organically polluted
waters (Table 13), was common in the impact zone (Stations 162 and 163) where
57
-------
dissolved oxygen concentrations were lowest. This may suggest the influence
of both organics and metals to the periphyton in Leon Creek. However, long
term studies are necessary to evaluate changes over seasons for an annual
period. The use of artificial substrates would also eliminate some variability
resulting from differences in natural rock substrata. Further testing is
necessary to help understand the apparent complex relationships between metal
pollution and organics on species composition of the algal community in Leon
Creek.
Macrophyte Tissues
Copper concentrations in control zone roots and whole plant tissues were
consistently lower than those in the impact zone (Appendix E). Copper concen-
trations in leaf and stem tissues decrease in the recovery zone while root and
whole plant samples remained relatively high.
Similar trends were observed for chromium, with greatest metal accumula-
tion reported at Station 163. Lead data are missing for control zone samples
and data from the impact and recovery zones are so variable that no trends
could be detected. Silver concentrations showed very slight increase at
Station 163 but all values were consistently low.
All metals examined in plant tissues from Leon Creek were present in con-
centrations exceeding values generally reported in the open literature for
similar contaminated areas. For example, Mudrock and Capobianco (1979) found
El odea canadensis, Scirpus sp., and Typha sp. to contain 10-19 pg/g dry weight
copper, 14-40 pg/g zinc, and 5-17 pg/g lead. Grasses (Graminaceae) from Leon
Creek, however, contained root copper concentrations ranging from 1.1 pg/g in
the control zone to 255.4 pg/g at Station 163. In leaves and stems, copper
58
-------
concentrations ranged from 1.1 yg/g to 32.8 g/g; whole plant concentrations
ranged from 8.0 yg/g in the control zone to 77.3 yg/g in the impact zone.
White (1976) reported that ambient copper concentrations of 161 yg/1
and lead concentrations of 5 yg/1 resulted in 108 yg/g copper and 47.4 yg/g
lead in Equisetum roots, and 13 yg/g copper and 5.59 yg/g lead in above
ground parts.
Except for one sample, chromium concentrations in plant tissues were
similar to values reported in the literature. Above-ground parts from Leon
Creek had concentrations as high as 32.8 yg/g in the impact zone. Mudrock
and Capobianco (1979) reported above ground parts of Iridaceae sp., Scirpus
sp., and Typha sp. from a contaminated area to have chromium concentrations
of 6.9, 2.5, and 3.8 yg/g, respectively.
Fish
Community Census
Fish were primarily collected in this study to analyze tissue metal con-
centrations. However, the following species in Leon Creek were reported from
qualitative observations and fish collections during electroshocking: gizzard
shad (Dorosoma cepedianum), Mexican tetra (Astyanax fasciatus mexicanus),
carp (Cyprinus carpio), channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), sailfin molly
(Poecilia latipinna), bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), and Rio Grande perch
(Cichlasoma cyanoguttatum). No single species of fish was present at all
stations. Thus, these species represent a diverse and typical fish community
of small southern streams. This may be significant considering that acute
and chronic criteria values for several metals (Table 4) were exceeded within
every zone.
59
-------
Tissues
The distribution and relative abundance of the fish in Leon Creek were
highly variable. Tissues from several fish species were collected and analyzed
at each station; the species selection depended upon their presence and abundance
at each station.
The fact that acute and chronic criteria for several metals were exceeded
throughout the control, impact, and recovery zones (Table 4) suggests the presence
of nonpoint source metal contributions to Leon Creek. The indication of this
metal source is also reflected in the fish tissue samples (Appendix D) which
show little evidence of bioaccumulation of metals above control zone values.
Despite ambient concentrations in excess of recommended criteria cadmium
values in the fish tissues were generally non-detectable. Copper concentrations
were at or below values reported for gill, liver, kidney, and muscle tissues
in a laboratory exposure of 9.4 yg/1 (McKim and Bonoit 1974) and 49 yg/1
(Brungs et al. 1973).
Except for gill tissue, chromium concentrations were generally non-detec-
table. Gill concentrations were measurable but remained at relatively low
levels (0.8-9.9 ug/g). Knoll and Fromm (1960) reported accumulation of hexa-
valent chromium in trout livers and kidney to concentrations of 8 and 16 ug/g,
respectively, in 24 days of exposure to 2.5 mg/1 hexavalent chromium. Thus,
although ambient chromium concentrations in Leon Creek exceed recommended
criteria in the impact zone, they appear to be not high enough to cause fish
tissue accumulation.
Ambient silver concentrations in Leon Creek exceeded the recommended acute
60
-------
criteria, suggesting silver toxicity and accumulation could be occurring.
However, a paucity of data exists on silver concentrations in Leon Creek fish
tissues. This is probably due to analytical limitations. Ambient concentra-
tion of silver in Prickly Pear Creek, Montana, were found as high as 45 yg/1,
but no appreciable accumulation occurred in various trout tissues (Miller et al.
1982), with trout gill tissue ranging only up to 0.45 yg/g silver, and liver
tissues containing as much as 7.5 yg/g. Ambient silver concentrations in
Leon Creek were measured at nearly two times those in Prickly Pear Creek yet
gill concentration ranged up to only 0.8 yg/g, and liver concentration ranged
up to 1.8 yg/g. Coleman and Cearley (1974) reported similar tissue values in
largemouth bass and bluegills.
It is possible that silver is extremely toxic at very low tissue concen-
trations. This is supported by the low LC50 values reported in the literature
(Davies et al. 1978). Furthermore, the relatively low tissue values reported
for Leon Creek may be related to bioavailability of silver. The LC50 values
reported by Davies et al. (1978) were much lower than concentrations found in
Leon Creek, yet several species were reported at each station. Davies et al.
(1978) reported that the various inorganic compounds of silver have varying
toxicity. Furthermore, a comparison of total and 0.45 y filtrate of Leon Creek
water revealed that up to 50 percent of the ambient silver in Leon Creek may
be sorbed to paniculate.
The chemical speciation and partitioning of the metals in Leon Creek may
reduce the bioavailability uptake and toxicity of metals, and thus may be
responsible for the presence of fish where seemingly toxic concentrations of
metals exist. Physiological acclimation to metals may also be partially res-
ponsible for this discrepency. Additional work is warrented to identify the
61
-------
importance of metal speciation and acclimation in reducing metal toxicity.
Bloassay
The ambient total metal concentrations for silver, cadmium, and chromium
in water samples from the Leon Creek impact zone (162 and 163) were in excess
of the acute maximum criteria for aquatic life (Table 4), suggesting that water
from the station would be acutely lethal to sensitive aquatic organisms.
Bioassays conducted at Duluth on whole water samples from the control (161)
and impact zone (162) stations, however, did not yield any results indicative
of toxicity except for the enzyme inhibition test conducted on water from
Station 161 (Appendix E). These results further suggest that metal toxicity
is not the major pollution problem in Leon Creek.
62
-------
IV. CONCLUSIONS
1. Concentrations of silver, cadmium, and chromium exceeded EPA recommended
acute criteria in the impact zone downstream from the Kelly Air Force Base.
Increased nutrient concentrations, and decreased dissolved oxygen levels and
percent saturation were also observed, indicating substantial quantities of
organic materials were entering Leon Creek.
2. The data indicate no significant differences (p=0.05) between stations in
mean sediment concentrations of most metals examined in Leon Creek. It is
suggested that metal concentrations in the sediments are sufficiently high to
have reached a steady-state saturation point that is not affected by the
relatively small additional input of metals from Kelly AFB. This saturation
could be a result of continuous nonpoint discharges into Leon Creek upstream
of the control site.
3. Macroinvertebrate and periphyton data from the impact zone suggest that,
during 1980 sampling, ambient metal concentrations may have affected the
aquatic biota less than the organic pollutants from Kelly AFB.
4. Improvement of various indices (species richness, diversity) of macro-
Invertebrate community health was observed in the recovery zone as compared
to the impact zone. However, caution should be used in interpreting these
distributions since they only represent a single sampling round; preliminary
data from 1981 indicate substantially different macroinvertebrate populations
than were observed during 1980 sampling.
63
-------
V. RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Additional monitoring to identify organic components in discharges to
Leon Creek, and to quantify the fate, persistence, and biological effects
of organic toxicants, is recommended.
2. A site-specific study to examine the relationship between biological
communities (macroinvertebrates, periphyton) and the combined metal/organic
pollution in Leon Creek is needed. The protocol, "Field Testing of Measure-
ment Methods for Stream Surveys" (EPA 1982) could be used in this evaluation.
3. Additional work is recommended to identify the role of metal speciation
and acclimation in reducing metal toxicity to fish populations in Leon Creek.
64
-------
VI. LITERATURE CITED
Alexander, G. V. and L. T. McAnulty. 1981. Multielement analysis of plant
related tissues and fluid by optical emission spectrometry. Ł. Plant Nut.
3(l-4):51-59.
Andrew, R. W., K. E. Biesinger, and G. E. Glass. 1977. Efforts of inorganic
complexing on the toxicity of copper to Daphnia magna. Wat. Res. 11:SOS-
SIB.
APHA. 1980. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater.
15th Edition. APHA/AWWA/WPCF. Washington, D.C. 1134 pp.
Aston, R. J. 1973. Tubificids and water quality: A Review. Environ. Pollut.
5:1-10.
Backhaus, D. 1968. Die algenverteilung und ihre beziehungen zur milieuofferte.
Arch. Hydrobiol. 34:24-73.
Blum, J. L. 1957. An ecological study of the algae of the Saline River,
Michigan. Hydrobiologia 9(4)-.361-407.
Boyer, C. S. 1927. Synopsis of North American Diatomaceae. Proceedings of
the Academy of Natural Sciences. Philadelphia.
65
-------
Brinkhurst, R. 0. 1964. Observations on the recovery of a British river from
gross organic pollution. Hydrobiologia 25:9-51.
Brinkhurst, R. 0. 1965. The Biology of the Tubificidae with Special Reference
to Pollution. In: Biological Problems in Water Pollution, 3rd Seminar,
August 13-17, 1962. #999-WP-25. U.S. HEW, Public Health Service,
Cincinnati, OH. 424 pp.
Brinkhurst, R. 0. and C. R. Kennedy. 1965. Studies on the biology of the
Tubificidae (Annelida, Oligochaeta) in a polluted stream. J. Anim.
Ecol. 34:429-443.
Brown, V. M., T. L. Shaw, and D. 6. Shurber. 1974. Aspects of water quality
and the toxicity of copper to rainbow trout. Wat. Res. 8:797-803.
Brungs, W. A., E. N. Leonard, and J. M. McKim. 1973. Acute and long-term
accumulation of copper by the brown bullhead Ictalurus nebulosis. Ł.
Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 30:583-586.
Castenholtz, R. 1960. Seasonal changes in the attached algae of freshwater
and saline lakes in the Lower Grand Coulee, Washington. Limnol . Oceanogr.
Coleman, R. and J. Cearley. 1974. Silver toxicity and accumulation in large-
mouth bass and bluegill. Bui 1. Env. Contam. Tox. 12:53-61.
Cholnoky, B. J. 1968. The Ecology of Diatoms from Inland Waters. J. Cramer,
Lehre. 699 pp.
»
66
-------
Czarnecki, D. B. and D. W. Blinn. 1978. Diatoms of the Colorado River in
Grand Canyon National Park and Vicinity. Bibliotheca Phycologica. 38.
J. Cramer. 181 pp.
Davies, P. H., J. P. Goettl, and J. R. Sinley. 1978. Toxicity of silver to
rainbow trout. Wat. Res. 12:113-117.
Dewalle, F. and E. Chian. 1980. Presence of Priority Pollutants and their
Removal in Sewage Treatment Plants. First Annual Report to U.S. EPA
Cincinnati, OH. 375 pp.
Foster, P. L. 1982. Species associations and metal contents of algae from
rivers polluted by heavy metals. Freshwat. Bio!. 12:17-39.
Herrick, E. E. and A. S. Buikema. 1977. Effects of pollution on freshwater
invertebrates. J.. Wat- Po1 • Cont. Fed. 49(6): 1493-1506.
Hostetter, H. P. and E. F. Stoermer. 1968. A Study of vertical distribution
of periphyton diatoms in Lake West Okoboji, Iowa. Proc. Iowa Acad. Sci.
15:42-47.
Howarth, R. S. and J. B. Sprague. 1978. Copper lethality to rainbow trout
in waters of various hardness and pH. Wat. Res. 12:455-462.
Hustedt, F. 1930. Bacillariophyta. In: A Pascher's Die Susswasser-Flora
Mittleuropas. Vol. 10:1-466. Jena.
67
-------
Hynes, H. B. N. 1965. The Significance of Macro-Invertebrates in the Study
of Mild River Pollution. In: Biological Problems in Water Pollution,
3rd seminar, August 13-17, 1962. #999-WP-25. U.S. HEW, Public Health
Service, Cincinnati, OH. 424 pp.
Karbe, L., N. Antonacopoulos, and C. Schnier. 1975. The influence of water
quality on accumulation of heavy metals in aquatic organisms. Verh.
Internat. Verein Limnol. 19:2094-2101.
Klotz, L. 1977. The Effects of Secondarily Treated Sewage Effluent on the
Willimantic/Shetuclcet River. Report #27. Institute of Water Resources,
University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT. 95 pp.
Knoll, J. and P. Fromm. 1960. Accumulation and elimination of hexavalent
chromium in rainbow trout. Physio!. Zoo. 33(1):1-8.
Lange-Bertalot, H. 1979. Pollution tolerance of diatoms as a criterion for
water quality estimation. Nova Hedwigia. Beiheif. 64:285-304.
Lloyd, R. and D. W. W. Herbert. 1962. The effect of the environment on the
toxicity of poisons to fish. Instn. Publ. Hlth. Engr. J^. 61:132-145.
Lowe, R. L. 1974. Environmental Requirements and Pollution Tolerance of
Freshwater Diatoms. #EPA-670/4-74-005. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Cincinnati, OH. 340 pp.
68
-------
Lund, J. W..G., C. Kipling, and E. D. LeCren. 1958. The inverted microscope
method of estimating algal numbers and the statistical basis for estima-
tions by counting. Hydrobiologia 11:143-170.
Luoma, S. and G. Bryan. 1978. Factors controlling the availability of sedi-
ment-bound lead to the estuarine bivalve Scrobicularia pi ana. J_. ^ar«
Biol. Assoc. U. K. 58:793-802.
McCrady, J. K. and G. E. Chapnan. 1979. Determination of copper complexing
capacity of natural river water, well water, and artificially reconsti-
tuted water. Water Res. 13:143-150.
McDuffie, B., I. Al-Barbary, G. J. Hollod, and R. Tiberio. 1976. Trace
metals in rivers - speciation, transport and fate of sediments. Trace
Subst. Envir. Health 10:85.
McKim, J. M. and D. A. Benoit. 1974. Duration of toxicity tests for
establishing "no effect" concentrations for copper with brook trout
(Salvelinus fontinalis). J. Fish Res. Bd. Can. 31:447-452.
Miller, T. G. and W. C. Mackay. 1980. The effect of hardness, alkalinity
and pH of test water on the toxicity of copper to rainbow trout. Wat.
Res. 14:129-133.
Miller, T. G., S. M. Melancon, and J. J. Janik. 1982. An Evaluation of the
Effect of Toxic Metals on the Aquatic Biota in Receiving Streams: Prickly
Pear Creek, Montana. Draft report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Las Vegas, NV. 148 pp.
69
-------
Mudrock, A. and J. A. Capobianco. 1979. Effects of mine effluent on uptake
of Co, Ni, Cu, As, Zn, Cd, Cr, and Pb by aquatic macrophytes. Hydro-
biologla 64(3):223-231.
Namminga, H. and J. Wihlm. 1977. Heavy metals in water sediments and chiron-
omids. J. Wat. Pol. Cont. Fed. 49:1725.
Nishikawa, K. and K. Tabata. 1968. The toxicity of heavy metals to aquatic
animals and factors which decrease their toxicity-III: the low toxicity
of some heavy metal complexes to aquatic animals. Bull. Takai. Reg. Fish
Res. Lab. 58. 233-241.
Pagenkopf, 6. K., R. L. Russo, and R. V. Thurston. 1974. Effect of complex-
ation on toxicity of copper to fishes. J^ Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 31:462-465.
Palmer, C. M. 1977. Algae and Water Pollution. #EPA-600/9-77-036. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Cincinnati, OH. 132 pp.
Patrick, R. 1949. A Proposed Biological Measure of Stream Conditions, Based
on a Survey of the Conestoga Basin, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.
Notul. Nat. 101. 227.
Patrick, R. 1977. Ecology of Diatoms-Diatom Communities. In: The Biology
of Diatoms, pp. 284-332. D. Werner, ed. University of California Press,
Berkeley.
Patrick, R. 1978. Effects of trace metals in the aquatic ecosystem. Amer.
Sci. 66(2):185-191.
70
-------
Patrick, R. and C. W. Reimer. 1966. The Diatoms of the United States.
Vol. I. Philadelphia Academy of Sciences, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
688 pp.
Patrick, R. and C. W. Reimer. 1975. The Diatoms of the United States. Vol. 2.
Part 1. Monographs of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.
No. 13. 213 pp.
Phillips, G. and R. Russo. 1978. Metal Bioaccumulation in Fishes and Aquatic
Invertebrates. #EPA-600/3-78-103. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Duluth, MN. 121 pp.
Pollard, J. and W. Kinney. 1979. Assessment of Macroinvertebrate Monitoring
Techniques in an Energy Development Area. IEPA-600/7-79-163. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas, NV 26 pp.
Roback, S. S. 1965. Environmental Requirements of Trichoptera. In: Bio-
logical Problems in Water Pollution, 3rd Seminar, August 13-17, 1962,
pp. 118-126. #999-WP-255. U.S. Public Health Service, Cincinnati, OH.
ii
Schroeder, H. 1939. Die Algenflora der MulderEin Beitrug zur B.Iologies
Saprober Flusse. In: Pflanzenforschung, 21 R. Kolkwitz (Ed.) 88 pp.
Shannon, C. E. and W. Weaver. 1963. The Mathematical Theory of Communication.
University of Illinois Press, Urbana. 117 pp.
Siegel, S. 1956. Nonparametric Statistics. McGraw-Hill Book Company. 312 pp.
71
-------
Shaw, T. L. and V. M. Brown. 1974. The toxicity of some forms of copper to
rainbow trout. Wat. Res. 8:377-382.
Sokal, R. F. and F. J. Rohlf. 1981. Biometry. W. H. Freeman and Co., San
Francisco. 2nd edition. 859 pp.
Southwood, T. R. E. 1978. Ecological Methods. 2nd edition. John Wiley and
Sons, New York. 524 pp.
Spaulding, W. M. and R. D. Ogden. 1968. Effects of Surface Mining on the
Fish and Wildlife Resources of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Sport Fishery and Wildlife Resource Publ. #68.
Steemann-Nielsen, E. and S. Wiurn-Anderson. 1970. Copper ions as poison in
the sea and in freshwater. Mar. Biol. 6:93-97.
Sverdrup and Parcel and Associates, Inc. 1977. Study of Selected Pollutant
Parameters in Publicly Owned Treatment Works. Draft Report to U.S. EPA.
Contract #68-01-3287.
Symoens, J. J. 1957. Les eaux Douces de 1'Ardenne et des Regions Voisines:
les millieux et leur vegetation. Algalj. Bull. Soc. Roy. Bot. Belgique.
89:111-134.
Tabata, K. 1969. Studies on the toxicity of heavy metals to aquatic animals
and the factors to decrease the toxicity. Bui 1. Tokai. Reg. Fi sh. Res.
Lab. 58:215-232.
72
-------
U.S. EPA. 1976. Quality Criteria for Water. #EPA-440/9-76-023. Washington,
D.C. 501 pp.
U.S. EPA. 1979a. Lead - Ambient Water Quality Criteria. Criteria and Stand-
ards Division, Office of Water Planning and Standards. Washington, D.C.
U.S. EPA. 19795. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes. #EPA-
600/4-79-020. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH. 440 pp,
U.S. EPA. 1980. Water quality criteria documents: availability. Federal
Register. Nov. 28, 1980, Vol. 45, No. 231.
U.S. EPA. 1981. Interim Methods for Sampling and Analysis of Priority Pollu-
tants in Sediments and Fish Tissue. #EPA-600/4-81-055. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH. 460 pp.
U.S. EPA. 1982. Field Testing of Measurement Methods for Stream Surveys.
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, NV. 23 pp.
Waiwood, K. G. and F. H. Beamish. 1978. The effect of copper, hardness, and
pH on growth of rainbow trout, Salmo gairdneri. Ł. Fish. Biol. 13:591-598.
Warnick, S. and H. Bell. 1969. The acute toxicity of some heavy metals to
different species of aquatic Insects. J^ Wat. Pol. Cont. Fed.
41(2):280-284.
73
-------
Weber, C. I. (Ed). 1973. Biological Field and Laboratory Methods for Measuring
the Quality of Surface Waters and Effluents. #EPA-670/4-73-001. Cincinnati,
OH. 156 pp.
Weitzel, R. L. 1979. Periphyton Measurements and Applications. In; Methods
and Measurements of Periphyton Communities: A Review, pp. 3-33, Chapter 1.
R. L. Weitzel, ed. ASTM STP 690, American Society for Testing and Materials.
White, S. R. 1976. Selected aquatic plants as indicator species for heavy
metal pollution. J^. Environ. Sci. Health. All(12):717-725.
Whitton, 8. and P. Say. 1975. Heavy Metals. In: River Ecology: Studies in
Ecology, Vol. 2. pp. 286-311, Chapter 13. B. A. Whitton, ed. University
of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.
Williams, L. 6. and D. I. Mount. 1965. Influence of zinc on periphytic
communities. Amer. Jour. Bpt. 52(1):26-34.
74
-------
APPENDIX A
WATER CHEMISTRY SUMMARY DATA
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/03/01
a\
/TYPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
01025
DATE TIME DEPTH CADMIUM
FROM OF Cl
TO DAY FEET UG/L
60/11/07 09 00 0000
09 02 0000
09 04 0000
09 06 0000
09 08 0000
09 10 0000
16161231
29 23 30.0 098 36 30.0 5
SAM ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
48029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUADELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
11EPATM 810124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574621-0084104
5
M
SS
10
11
8
6
7
8
01027
CADMIUM
CD, TOT
UG/L
5
7
9
5
9
6
01049
LEAD
PB.OISS
UG/L
166
232
149
141
124
166
01051
LEAD
FB.TOT
UG/L
121
213
141
179
168
124
01075
SILVER
AG.OIS5
UG/L
59.0
76.0
40.0
35.0
36.0
43.0
01077
SILVER
AG.TOT
UG/L
18.0
36.0
67.0
41.0
55.0
59.0
01000
ARSENIC
AS.DISS
UG/L
85
59
38
150
01002
ARSENIC
AS, TOT
UG/L
58
54
83
108
124
01030
CHROMIUM
CR.OISS
UG/L
6
9
6
4
6
6
01034
CHROMIUM
CR.TOT
UG/L
4
6
6
3
6
3
01040 01042
DATE TIME DEPTH COPPER COPPER
FROM OF CU.DISS CU.TOT
TO DAY FEET UG/L UG/L
80/11/07 09 00 0000 25
09 02 0000 18
09 04 COOO 21
09 06 0000 20
09 08 0000 23
09 10 0000 12
17
8
19
14
18
12
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/03/01
/TYPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
16162231
29 21 30.0 098 34 30.0 4
SAN ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
48029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUADELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
11EPATN 810124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574622-0084106
01025
DATE TIME DEPTH CADMIUM
FROM OF CD.OISS
TO DAY FEET UG/L
80/11/06 13 30 0000 IS
13 32 0000 13
13 34 0000 14
13 36 0000 12
13 38 0000 10
13 40 0000 11
13 31
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 15 31
14 31
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 16 31
15 31
CP(T)-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 17 31
16 31
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 18 31
17 31
CPfTI-03 AVE 0000
60/11/06 19 31
18 31
CPCTI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 20 31
22 31
CPCTI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/07 00 31
80/11/06 23 31
CPm-03 AVE 0000
80/11/07 01 31
00 31
CP«TI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/07 02 31
01 31
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/07 03 31
01027 01049
CADMIUM LEAD
CO. TOT PB.OISS
UG/L UG/L
5 85
5 121
1 102
1 98
181
9 81
14
13
13
12
34
24
26
24
25
21
01051 01075
LEAD SILVER
PB.TOT AG.DISS
UG/L UG/L
47 33.0
53 38.0
38.0
36 30.0
44.0
58.0
75
49
9
28
379
211
315
313
202
211
01077
SILVER
AG.TOT
UG/L
62.0
72.0
25.0
7.0
14.0
27.0
46.0
39.0
43.0
21.0
107.0
78.0
74.0
77.0
80.0
69.0
01000 01002
ARSENIC ARSENIC
AS.DISS AS. TOT
UG/L UG/L
124 131
71
202 44
38
203 22
38
16
71
624
242
343
189
419
239
01030 01034
CHROMIUM CHROMIUM
CR.DISS CR.TOT
UG/L UG/L
10 10
10 18
13 9
10 10
13 10
12 16
47
51
41
43
51
43
37
32
34
31
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 02/03/01
/TYPA/AHBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
00
01040 01042
DATE TIME DEPTH COPPER COPPER
FROM OF CU.DISS CU.TOT
TO DAY FEET UG/L UG/L
00/11/06 13 30
13 32
13 34
13 36
13 38
13 40
13 31
CPITJ-03 AVE
00/11/06 15 31
14 31
CPCTI-03 AVE
00/11/06 16 31
15 31
CPm-03 AVE
00/11/06 17 31
16 31
CPtTl-03 AVE
80/11/06 18 31
17 31
CPITI-03 AVE
00/11/06 19 31
10 31
CP(T)-03 AVE
00/11/06 20 31
22 31
CP(TI-03 AVE
00/11/07 00 31
60/11/06 23 31
CP(T»-03 AVE
80/11/07 01 31
00 31
CP
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/03/01
10
/TYPA/AMBNT/FISH/5TREAM/TISSUE
01035
DATE TIME DEPTH CADMIUM
FROM OF CO.OISS
TO DAY FEET UG/L
80/11/07
CPJTI-03
80/11/07
CPCTI-03
80/11/07
CP(T)-03
80/11/07
CPCTI-03
80/11/07
CPCTI-03
80/11/07
CPCTI-03
80/11/07
CP
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 62/03/01
/TYPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
01040 01042
DATE TIME DEPTH COPPER COPPER
FROM OF CU.DISS CU.TOT
TO DAY FEET UG/L UG/L
00
O
60/11/07 02 31
CPCTI-03 AVE
60/11/07 04 31
03 31
CP(T)-03 AVE
80/11/07 05 31
04 31
CPm-03 AVE
80/11/07 06 31
05 31
CP
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/03/01
00
/TTPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
01025
DATE TIME DEPTH CADMIUM
FROM OF CD.DISS
TO DAY FEET UG/L
80/11/07
CP(TI-03
80/11/07
CPITI-03
80/11/07
cpm-03
80/11/07
cpm-03
60/11/07
80/11/08
cpm-03
80/11/08
CPITI-03
80/11/08
CPITI-03
80/11/08
CP1TJ-03
60/11/08
CP
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/03/01
/TYPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
01040 01042
DATE TIME DEPTH COPPER COPPER
FROM OF CU.DISS CU.TOT
TO DAY FEET U6/L UG/L
CD
ro
80/11/07 14 31
CPITI-03 AVE
80/11/07 16 31
15 31
CP(T>-03 AVE
80/11/07 17 31
16 31
CP(T)-03 AVE
80/11/07 18 31
17 31
CPCTt-03 AVE
80/11/07 19 31
80/11/03 04
CPITI-03
0000
0000
0000
0000
31
AVE 0000
80/11/08 06 31
05 31
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/08 07 31
06 31
CP(T)-03 AVE 0000
80/11/08 08 31
07 31
CPm-03 AVE 0000
80/11/08 09 31
08 31
CPITI-OJ AVE 0000
80/11/08 10 31
09 31
CPITI-OJ AVE 0000
80/11/08 11 31
10 31
CPITI-OJ AVE 0000
80/11/08 12 31
11 31
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
eo/n/oa 13 3i
54
52
58
50
59
61
66
61
61
57
57
66
16162231
29 21 30.0 098 34 30.0 4
SAN ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
48029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUADELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
llEPATh 810124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574622-0084106
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/03/01
CO
/TYPA/AMBHT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
16163231
29 21 00.0 090 34 30.0 5
SAM ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
46029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUAOELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
11EPATM 810124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSH-RSP 0574623-0084111
01025
DATE TIME DEPTH CADMIUM
FROM OF CD.DISS
TO DAY FEET UG/L
80/11/06 09 00 0000 27
09 02 0000 35
09 04 0000 36
09 06 0000 35
09 08 0000 37
09 10 0000 38
09 01
CP(T)-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 11 01
10 01
CP(T)-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 12 01
11 01
CP(T>-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 13 01
12 01
CP(T)-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 14 01
13 01
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 15 01
14 01
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 16 01
15 01
CP(T>-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 17 01
16 01
CPIT1-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 18 01
17 01
CPITJ-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 19 01
18 01
CP(T)-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 20 01
01027
CADMIUM
CD, TOT
UG/L
33
30
27
25
27
20
38
35
42
33
36
36
32
34
24
33
01049 01051
LEAD LEAD
PB.OISS PB.TOT
UG/L UG/L
264 339
330 311
303 217
381 224
326 239
337 243
326
264
290
275
251
262
202
207
64
164
01075 01077
SILVER SILVER
AG.DISS AG.TOT
UG/L UG/L
85.0 121.0
125.0 134.0
97.0 127.0
110.0 106.0
93.0 66.0
127.0 63.0
109.0
101.0
109.0
86.0
70.0
74.0
83.0
95.0
45.0
76.0
01000 01002 01030
ARSENIC ARSENIC CHROMIUM
AS.DISS AS, TOT CR.DISS
UG/L UG/L UG/L
368 501 53
426 331 57
606 461 62
414 59
475 307 54
369 216 56
554
256
391
208
369
325
332
222
285
227
01034
CHROMIUM
CR.TOT
UG/L
63
66
69
63
62
60
66
67
78
75
85
84
79
81
57
63
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 62/03/01
/TYPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
00
01040 01042
DATE TIME DEPTH COPPER COPPER
FROM OF CU.DISS CU.TOT
TO DAY FEET UG/L U6/L
60/11/06 09 00 0000 59
09 02 0000 61
09 04 0000 64
09 06 0000 66
09 06 0000 73
09 10 0000 76
09 01
CPm-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 11 01
10 01
CPCTI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 12 01
11 01
CPIT>-03 AVE 0000
60/11/06 13 01
12 01
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
60/11/06 14 01
13 01
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 15 01
14 01
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
60/11/06 16 01
15 01
CP1TI-03 AVE 0000
60/11/06 17 01
16 01
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
60/11/06 18 01
17 01
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
60/11/06 19 01
16 01
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
60/11/06 20 01
53
61
59
54
62
58
61
71
78
78
78
75
83
80
64
67
16163231
29 21 00.0 090 34 30.0 5
SAN ANTOUIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
46029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUADELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
IIEPATH 610124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574623-0084111
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/03/01
CD
in
/TYPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
16163231
29 21 00.0 098 34 30.0 5
SAN ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
48029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUAOELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
11EPATM 810124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574623-0084111
01025
DATE TIME DEPTH CADMIUM
FROM OF CD.DISS
TO DAY FEET U6/L
80/11/06
CPITI-03
80/11/06
CP1TI-03
80/11/06
CPCT)-03
80/11/06
CP(TI-03
80/11/07
80/11/06
CPITI-OJ
80/11/07
CPITt-03
80/11/07
CPITI-03
80/11/07
CP(T)-03
80/11/07
CPITJ-03
80/11/07
CPITI-03
80/11/07
19 01
AVE 0000
21 01
20 01
AVE 0000
22 01
21 01
AVE 0000
23 01
22 01
AVE 0000
00 01
23 01
AVE 0000
01 01
00 01
AVE 0000
02 01
01 01
AVE 0000
03 01
02 01
AVE 0000
04 01
03 01
AVE 0000
05 01
04 01
AVE 0000
06 01
01027 01049
CADMIUM LEAD
CD,TOT PB.DISS
UG/L UG/L
11
01051 01075
LEAD SILVER
PB.TOT AG.DISS
UG/L UG/L
55
85
96
55
58
21
01077
SILVER
A6.TOT
UG/L
24.0
37.0
22.0
10.0
01000
ARSENIC
AS.DISS
UG/L
01002
ARSENIC
AS,TOT
UG/L
159
147
94
77
66
01030 01034
CHROMIUM CHROMIUM
CR.DISS CR.TOT
UG/L UG/L
41
43
32
34
24
24
12
12
31
35
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 62/03/01
/TTPA/AMBMT/FISH/STREAtl/TISSUE
00
01040 01042
DATE TIME DEPTH COPPER COPPER
FROM OF CU.OISS CU.TOT
TO DAY FEET UG/L UG/L
60/11/06 19 01
CP(TI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 21 01
20 01
CPCT)-03 AVE 0000
60/11/06 22 01
21 01
CP(T)-03 AVE 0000
60/11/06 23 01
22 01
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
60/11/07 00 01
60/11/06 23 01
CPIT)-03 AVE 0000
60/11/07 01 01
00 01
CPCTI-03
0000
AVE
60/11/07 02 01
03 01
CP(T)-03 AVE 0000
80/11/07 05 01
04 01
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/07 06 01
22
7
10
9
13
3
10
16163231
29 21 00.0 098 34 30.0 S
SAN ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
46029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUAOELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
11EPATM 610124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574623-0084111
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/03/01
00
/TYPA/AMBMT/FI5H/STREAM/TISSUE
01025
DATE TIME DEPTH CADMIUM
FROM OF CO.OISS
TO DAY FEET UG/L
60/11/05 12 00 0000
12 02 0000
12 04 0000
12 06 0000
12 08 0000
12 10 0000
16164231
29 20 00.0 098 35 00.0 5
SAN AHTOMIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
48029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GU&DELUPE LAVACA AND SAM ANTONIO BASIN
11EPATM 810124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574624-0084114
01030 01034
CHROMIUM CHROMIUM
CR.DISS CR.TOT
UG/L UG/L
1
IS
2
1
8
2
1
1
01027
CADMIUM
CD, TOT
UG/L
8
8
8
5
4
4
01049
LEAD
PB.DISS
UG/L
83
49
139
124
43
01051
LEAD
PB.TOT
UG/L
190
130
181
92
121
102
01075
SILVER
AG.DISS
UG/L
5.0
15.0
1.0
01077
SILVER
AG.TOT
UG/L
7.0
13.0
21.0
22.0
17.0
01000
ARSENIC
AS.DISS
UG/L
80
34
100
66
107
01002
ARSENIC
AS, TOT
UG/L
187
174
201
113
53
3
3
4
3
3
01040 01042
DATE TIME DEPTH COPPER COPPER
FROM OF CU.OISS CU.TOT
TO DAY FEET UG/L UG/L
80/11/05 12 00 0000 3
12 02 0000 4
12 04 0000
12 06 0000 2
12 08 0000 4
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 62/03/01
00
00
/TVPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
01025
DATE TIME DEPTH CADMIUM
FROM OF CO.DISS
TO DAY FEET UG/L
16165231
29 17 00.0 098 34 00.0 5
SAM ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
48029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUADELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
11EPATM 610124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSH-RSP 0574625-0084116
01030 01034
CHROMIUM CHROMIUM
CR.DISS CR.TOT
UG/L UG/L
80/11/05
CPm-03
80/11/05
CPm-03
80/11/05
cpm-03
80/11/05
CPm-03
60/11/05
CPITI-03
80/11/05
CPCTI-03
60/11/05
CP(T»-03
80/11/05
CP(T)-03
60/11/05
CPtTI-03
80/11/05
CPITJ-OJ
80/11/05
10 40
10 42
10 44
10 46
10 48
10 50
10 41
AVE
12 41
11 41
AVE
13 41
12 41
AVE
14 41
13 41
AVE
15 41
14 41
AVE
16 41
15 41
AVE
17 41
16 41
AVE
18 41
17 41
AVE
19 41
18 41
AVE
20 41
20 41
AVE
22 41
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
6
5
4
2
5
3
1
iS
6
5
4
2
5
3
01027 01049 01051 01075
CADMIUM LEAD LEAD SILVER
CD, TOT PB.DISS PB.TOT AG.OISS
UG/L UG/L UG/L UG/L
149
115
124 72
192 70
4 113 121 10.0
4 121 121 10.0
9 175
5 179
6 262
4 102
3 134
2 147
5 205
34
30
19
01077
SILVER
AG.TOT
UG/L
6.0
9.0
11.0
11.0
32.0
39.0
10.0
12.0
2.0
1.0
01000 01002
ARSENIC ARSENIC
AS.DISS AS. TOT
UG/L UG/L
221
21
143 120
87 77
145 286
94 35
169
31
165
34
176
28
95
29
99
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/03/01
/TYPA/AMBMT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
01040 01042
DATE TIME DEPTH COPPER COPPER
FROM OF CU.DISS CU.TOT
TO DAY FEET UG/L UG/L
03
VO
60/11/05 10 44 0000
10 46 0000
10 48 0000
10 50 0000
11 41
CP(T)-03 AVE 0000
80/11/05 13 41
13 41
CP(T>-03 AVE 0000
80/11/05 15 41
14 41
CP(T)-03 AVE 0000
80/11/05 16 41
15 41
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/05 17 41
16 41
CP(T>-03 AVE 0000
80/11/05 18 41
19 41
CP(T)-03 AVE 0000
80/11/05 21 41
21 41
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/05 23 41
22 41
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 00 41
60/11/05 23 41
CPCTI-03 AVE 0000
60/11/06 01 41
00 41
CPCTI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 02 41
01 41
CPITI-03 AVE 0000
80/11/06 03 41
6
3
6
14
16165231
29 17 00.0 098 34 00.0 5
SAM ANTOMIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
48029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUADELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
1IEPATM 810124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574625-0084116
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/03/01
to
O
/TYPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
01025
DATE TIME DEPTH CADMIUM
FROM OF CO.DISS
TO DAY FEET UG/L
01027 01049
CADMIUM LEAD
CD,TOT PB.DISS
. UG/L UG/L
16165231
29 17 00.0 099 34 00.0 5
SAN ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
48029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUADELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
11EPATM 610124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574625-0064116
01030 01034
CHROMIUM CHROMIUM
CR.DISS CR.TOT
UG/L UG/L
60/11/05
CPITI-03
80/11/05
CPITI-03
60/11/06
80/11/05
CPITI-03
80/11/06
CPm-03
60/11/06
CPm-03
80/11/06
cpm-03
60/11/06
CPITI-03
80/11/06
cpm-03
60/11/06
CPCTI-03
80/11/06
21 41
AVE
23 41
22 41
AVE
00 41
23 41
AVE
01 41
00 41
AVE
02 41
01 41
AVE
03 41
02 41
AVE
04 41
03 41
AVE
05 41
04 41
AVE
06 41
05 41
AVE
07 41
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
6
5
5
01051 01075
LEAD SILVER
PB.TOT AG.DISS
UG/L UG/L
19
202
126
141
181
205
124
166
67
01077 01000
SILVER ARSENIC
AG.TOT AS.DISS
UG/L UG/L
6.0
12.0
37.0
26.0
14.0
29.0
6.0
01002
ARSENIC
AS, TOT
UG/L
204
236
101
146
32
174
3
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/03/01
/TYPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
01040 01042
DATE TIME DEPTH COPPER COPPER
FROM OF CU.OISS CU.TOT
TO DAT FEET UG/L UG/L
03 41
CPCTI-03 AVE 0000 1
80/11/06 05 41
04 41
CP(Tt-03 AVE 0000 7
SO/11/06 06 41
05 41
CPITI-03 AVE 0000 S
80/11/06 07 41
16165231
29 17 00.0 098 34 00.0 5
SAN ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
48029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUADELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
11EPATM 810124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574625-0084116
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/02/01
/TYPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
DATE TIME DEPTH MATER
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
80/11/07 09 00 0000
09 01 0000
09 02 0000
09 03 0000
09 04 0000
09 10 0000
09 Ł0 0000
09 30 0000
09 40 0000
16161231
29 23 30.0 098 36 30.0 5
SAN ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
46029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUADELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
11EPATM 810124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574621-0084104
010
ER
MP
NT
16.7
16.8
17.0
17.0
17.0
00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
MICROMHO
1190
1170
1120
1120
1090
00299
DO
PROBE
MG/L
7.4
6.5
6.1
6.1
6.0
00400
PH
SU
7.01
7.07
6.99
6.97
6.94
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
193
193
214
216
109
00500
RESIDUE
TOTAL
MG/L
600
587
610
593
589
00530
RESIDUE
TOT HFLT
MG/L
47
46
32
60
13
00612
UH-IONZD
NH3-N
MG/L
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
00623
KJELDL N
DISS
MG/L
0.300
0.260
0.270
0.280
0.200
00630
N02CN03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
3.10
3.10
3.40
3.30
3.10
00669
DATE TIME DEPTH PHOS-TOT T
FROM OF HYDRO
(0 TO DAY FEET
ro
80/11/07 09 00 0000
09 01 0000
09 02 0000
09 03 0000
09 04 0000
09 10 0000
MG/L P
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
0.020
00680 50060
ORG C CHLORINE
C TOT RESD
MG/L MG/L
2.7 0.60
4.6
0.70
50064 82078
CHLORINE TURBIDIT
FREE AVL Y FIELD
MG/L NTU
9.30
0.05
9.3
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/02/01
/TYPA/AtlBNT/FISH/STRE AM/TISSUE
16162231
29 21 30.0 098 34 30.0 4
SAN ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
48029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUADELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
HEP ATM 810124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574622-0084106
DATE
FROM
TO
80/11/06
vo
00
DATE
FROM
TO
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
13 10 0000
13 20 0000
13 30 0000
13 31 0000
13 32 0000
13 33 0000
13 34 0000
13 35 0000
13 40 0000
13 50 0000
14 00 0001
14 10 0000
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
13 10 0000
13 20 0000
13 30 0000
13 31 0000
00010
HATER
TEMP
CENT
22.0
22.5
22.6
22.0
21.7
21.7
22.4
00669
PHOS-TOT
HYDRO
KG/L P
0.130
0.120
00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
MICROMHO
1080
1130
1130
1080
1070
1070
1110
00680
T ORG C
C
MG/L
4.4
10.1
00299
00
PROBE
MG/L
4.8
5.6
5.7
5.5
5.4
5.6
5.4
50060
CHLORINE
TOT RESD
MG/L
0.80
0.80
00400
PH
SU
7.01
7.04
7.10
6.97
7.00
7.05
7.14
50064
CHLORINE
FREE AVL
MG/L
0.06
0.06
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
150
151
152
153
152
153
82078
TURBIDIT
Y FIELD
NTU
3.1
3.1
3.1
00500
RESIDUE
TOTAL
MG/L
390
409
406
395
407
399
00530
RESIDUE
TOT HFLT
MG/L
19
35
25
31
11
55
*
00612
UN-IONZO
NH3-N
MG/L
0.130
0.130
0.110
0.110
0.120
0.120
13 32 0000
13 33 0000
13 34 0000
13 35 0000
0.140
0.140
0.140
0.140
00623 00630
KJELDL N N02&N03
DISS N-TOTAL
MG/L MG/L
0.560
0.470
0.510
0.450
0.460
0.490
3.10
3.10
2.70
2.60
2.50
2.50
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/02/01
/TYPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
16163231
29 Ł1 00.0 099 34
SAM ANTOHIO TEXAS
48029 TEXAS
WESTERN GULF
GUAOELUPE
1IEPATM
30.0 5
BEXAR COUNTY
BEXAR
120600
LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
610124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574623-0084111
00623 00630
KJELDL N N024N03
DISS N-TOTAL
MG/L MG/L
DATE
FROM
TO
60/11/06
DATE
FROM
TO
80/11/06
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
09 00 0000
09 01 0000
09 02 0000
09 03 0000
09 04 0000
09 05 0000
09 10 0000
09 20 0000
09 30 0000
09 40 0000
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
09 00 0000
09 01 0000
09 02 0000
09 03 0000
09 04 0000
09 05 0000
09 10 0000
09 20 0000
00010
MATER
TEMP
CENT
19.4
19.4
19.4
19.4
19.5
00669
PHOS-TOT
HYDRO
MG/L P
0.340
0.330
0.330
0.320
0.280
0.330
00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
MICROMHO
920
900
910
910
910
00680
T ORG C
C
MG/L
16. a
11.6
00299
DO
PROBE
MG/L
4.0
3.6
3.6
3.8
3.6
50060
CHLORINE
TOT RESD
MG/L
0.40
0.40
00400
PH
SU
6.75
6.66
6.68
6.88
6.88
50064
CHLORINE
FREE AVL
MG/L
0.03
0.03
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
235
236
234
235
233
234
82078
TURBIDIT
Y FIELD
NTU
4.2
4.2
6.3
00500
RESIDUE
TOTAL
MG/L
424
479
492
481
487
491
00530
RESIDUE
TOT NFLT
MG/L
119
124
129
134
126
135
00612
UN-IONZO
NH3-N
MG/L
0.260
0.260
0.250
0.250
0.250
0.250
0.710
0.680
0.690
0.710
0.610
0.650
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.50
2.20
2.30
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 82/02/01
/TYPA/AMBNT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
16164231
29 20 00.0 098 35 00.0 5
SAM ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
48029 TEXAS BEXAR
WESTERN GULF 120600
GUADELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
HE PATH 810124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574624-0084114
00623 00630
KJELDL N N0241103
DISS N-TOTAL
MG/L MG/L
DATE TIME DEPTH
FROM OF
TO DAY FEET
80/11/05 12 00 0000
12 01 0000
12 02 0000
12 03 0000
12 04 0000
12 05 0000
12 10 0000
12 20 0000
12 30 0000
12 40 0000
DATE TIME DEPTH
vo FROM OF
01 TO DAY FEET
80/11/05 12 00 0000
12 01 0000
12 02 0000
12 03 0000
12 04 0000
12 05 0000
12 10 0000
12 20 0000
00010
MATER
TEMP
CENT
18.0
17.8
17.7
17.7
17.7
00669
PHOS-TOT
HYDRO
MG/L P
0.210
0.210
0.200
0.170
0.200
0.170
00094
CNDUCTVY
FIELD
HICROMHO
900
890
890
890
890
00680
T OR6 C
C
MG/L
4.5
1.9
00299
00
PROBE
MG/L
8.0
8.1
8.2
6.0
8.0
50060
CHLORINE
TOT RE SO
MG/L
0.30
0.30
00400
PH
SU
7.19
7.18
7.17
7.16
7.15
50064
CHLORINE
FREE AVL
MG/L
0.04
0.04
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
226
226
227
227
229
230
82078
TURBIOIT
Y FIELD
NTU
0.9
0.9
0.9
00500
RESIDUE
TOTAL
MG/L
448
469
475
466
485
457
00530
RESIDUE
TOT NFLT
MG/L
174
167
74
97
133
132
00612
UN-IONZD
NH3-N
MG/L
0.000
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.000
0.000
0.670
0.530
0.500
0.330
0.360
0.300
,20
.20
.90
.90
.60
2.60
-------
STORET RETRIEVAL DATE 62/02/01
/TYPA/AHBHT/FISH/STREAM/TISSUE
DATE TINE DEPTH MATER
FROM OF TEMP
TO DAY FEET CENT
80/11/05
10 00 0000
10 10 0000
10 20 0000
10 30 0000
10 40 0000
10 41 0000
10 42 0000
10 43 0000
10 44 0000
10 45 0000
16.2
16.2
16.1
16.1
16.1
1130
1130
1130
1130
1130
6.6
6.8
6.4
6.9
6.9
7.34
7.37
7.38
7.39
7.39
16165231
29 17 00.0 098 34 00.0 5
SAM ANTONIO TEXAS BEXAR COUNTY
48029 TEXAS BEXAR
MESTERN GULF 120600
GUADELUPE LAVACA AND SAN ANTONIO BASIN
11EPATM 810124
0001 FEET DEPTH CLASS 00 CSN-RSP 0574625-0084116
00623 00630
KJELOL N N02JN03
OISS N-TOTAL
M6/L HG/L
00400
PH
SU
7.34
7.37
7.38
7.39
7.39
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
248
250
246
246
186
183
00500
RESIDUE
TOTAL
MG/L
580
586
588
568
578
580
00530
RESIDUE
TOT NFLT
MG/L
29
83
70
80
90
103
00612
UN-IOMZO
NH3-N
MG/L
0.030
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.010
0.000
0.440
0.300
0.270
0.240
0.260
0.270
.50
.50
.50
.50
.70
.70
10
DATE
FROM
TO
80/11/05
TIME DEPTH
OF
DAY FEET
10 00 0000
10 10 0000
10 20 0000
10 40 0000
10 41 0000
10 42 0000
10 43 0000
10 44 0000
10 45 0000
PHOS-TOT
HYDRO
MG/L P
0.060
0.050
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.050
00669 00680
T ORG C
C
MG/L
11.6
7.3
50060 50064 82078
CHLORINE CHLORINE TURBIDIT
TOT RESO FREE AVL Y FIELD
MG/L MG/L NTU
0.30
0.30
0.04
0.04
5.6
5.6
5.6
-------
APPENDIX B
MACROINVERTEBRATE CENSUS DATA
-------
pftojccTi tone "BTkUB PROJECT CTHI kReti NIVKM BTOTKN «OT DCBKHUTCO toisi
BTkTIOHl LkCRbkHO MO RELIT IPO. 4 MI UPBTREkN INDUBT DIBCN. CUD
BkNPLER TfPBl 10 SECOND RICK • 10 NEBH TRIlMOULkR BET (•)
•UNRER Of RtPLICkTERI I MELD BIOLOOIBTI CNkRLIK RKHkM |S1)
ROTH HOT kPPblCkBLC (0)
DkTCl ROVENBER 1. 191*
BUBBTATIOMI III
Rk« DkTk TkBLBB
I«T bCVIL
JHD
(PHIMBMOPTtRk
•IPHLOHURIOkC
IIOHICHIk M. (S10)
RCPLICkTIB
COUHTB
vo
00
M. CIOIO)
BkCTIOkC
•ICTI* M. (1140)
THICORVTHtOkC
TRICOIIVTHODK1 iP, (1010)
LCPTOHIPHES «r. lailO)
CftEHfOkt
CtCNII tf. (>T|0)
000*kTk«»NI«OPTCKk
OOMPHIDAK
OPHIOOOMMUS IP. (4700) ,
ODONkTk>ITCOPT(*k
COIMOMONIDkt
kROtk IP. (S)IO)
HtNIPTKRk
ffCblTOkC
RHkCOVKLIk IP. t»ITO)
TRICHOPTCRk
HVOftOPMCHIOkt
CHCUMkTOPBfCMI BPP. (••10)
•HlCMIOCk PMClkTEblk (•••0)
HTDDOPTUIOkC
HVDHOPTILk IP. (1110)
HCbtCDPaTCHlDkC
HCLICOPBVCMC IP. (I>t0)
DTPTERk
CHIRONONIOkC
-»Lt,« (IOSIO)
CHlRONOMIOkK, 1-rkNlLV TkMTPOOINkC
«»Lf (10*10)
CHIHONOMIDK, l»P
-•LI,* (11110)
1 •
1 •
1 •
1 •
1 •
1 •
1 «
1 •
1 •
1 •
1 •
1 •
1 .
1 •
1 •
1 •
1
1
1
I
1
a
a
a
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
4.
ao1.
M4.
ia.
e.
a*.
0.
•a.
0.
14B.
44.
0.
IM.
01.
•ia.
o.
e.
1*0.
0.
4.
ia.
o.
04.
4.
14.
4.
ai.
o.
•o.
44.
BOO.
0.
o.
••.
0.
I*.
4.
44.
4.
ia.
0.
ao.
4.
ao.
J«.
400.
torn ro* IP,
4.
a*.
ion,
4.
MO.
I.
m.
4.
1M.
ata.
-------
MOJCCTI roue MT»L§ PROJECT ITMI ARCAI urn* IISTEM HOT OMT«IIATIO « IPrCICII 4*10.
-------
PMOJECTI tone NETkbi PROJECT ITNI »«•• MI»BM avare* NOT OEaioiuTco com
•TkTIOHI 90 IDS OnuNtTRKkH RCLtf kPM INOUITMkb OtacHkROE (1(1)
•AMPLE* tlUt 10 aeCONO RICK • 30 NEftN TMIkNQUbkM *BT (4)
•U«»Eft OP MEPblCATEBI I flELO BIOLnOUTl CHkMLIE RCEMKM (SI)
•OTCl MOT »PPbtC»Bbt (0)
DtTCl NOTCNK* t, |*IO
•UMTtTIOMl 111
M* O»T»
I at LKVCL RCPCMENCC
1HO LCfEb •CPtltCMCt
o
o
DIPTCMk
CHIPONOHIDkC
CHIKDNONIOIB PUPftC»*Ui (10910)
CNIROROMIOkB. ••FkNltT TkNfPODIHkB
•M.b» (10*10)
CNIKOHOMIDkB* ••PkHlLT-CHIMONONINkC
.»LL- (1)110)
CHIMONOMIDU, ••PAN OMTHOCttDIINftC
•»LL- (14110)
NCNktODA
•»tL« (49T10)
•kl.li- (90(10)
OLIQOCHkKTk
-ktb* (SfOlO)
OklTRQPOOk
PLkHOHBIOkl
PHTCtDkE
COMPLEX (*]t|0)
REPUCkTCI
eouwra
IP.
1 .
1 .
1 •
1 •
t •
1 •
1 •
t -
1 •
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
14.
ia.
ia.
in.
4.
t.
sooo.
0.
1.
I).
a.
a.
74.
0,
4.
1*14.
a.
a.
14.
4.
»4.
110.
0.
14.
I4*a.
4.
11.
tor«b POD M.
•t.
>4.
44,
41.
lltll.
«.
I*.
TOTkb POM • IPCCIE5 nr MEPb(C*TEi
rOTkb POM I MEPblCkTE*. •
• 1 9»«, 1044. )««•.
taut.
-------
tone NCUU MOJPCT it*) i«e«t »i»t« Mm* not oeitomtto torn
OTkttlMl OOttWktttT «MC", •.• HI ft.!. «fttf KM INBIMT 0IOC*. H41)
MNPbtH TĄP« I* iKCOHO RICH « 10 NCM f HlkNOtlbk* »M <•)
•UHOCM or MPttcmst > rieto •IOI.OOIBTI CH»MI.IK RCCWM »«»)
•OTCl NOT »P»LIC»BI.« (0)
•USStlTIONl HI
•« itit
MkK AkTk
IST
tl*>l> HCrtMCHCK
•». fill*)
tltl*tl
CHIROHOMlDkC. ••rkHtbt TkNT»OOIMkK
.««.« (IMIt)
CHlDONOMIDkCt i-P
«ktt- cunt)
»tt- (I 41 10)
RLNIItkC
MicKoeuboKpDi
•TKHBtHtt •». (I««t0)
MTkCIOAl
•ktli-
•rnkTOOk
•ktt* <90»IO)
otiaoenicTk
-ktt« 19*010)
OkSTKOPOOk
HfbllONk •». <«I010)
rcttcvpook
•PHkCMlOkC
•PHkCMtdN SP. 1*9010)
DRPLICkTRO
I - > 4.
1*1 II.
1-1 4.
1*1 II.
1*1 44.
COOUTI
0.
0.
0.
4.
I.
t • I 4. 0. 0.
I • I II. 0. 0.
I • 1
0.
I • I
I • 1
u.
0.
0.
tOtkl POO. O.
4.
lit
4.
II.
14.
I*.
• III.
fOTkt PON II SPP.Cir.i «T HRPItlCkTRt I • 1 >040. 1444. 1*00.
tOTkt POD I HCPLtCkTRO. II SPP.CIRSl 4104.
-------
MOJCCTI tone nemo PKOJKCT (t«i «*c»i mm ototm oot DtotouTco .
0.
«.
11.
M.
1.
41.
a.
110.
10.
aio.
•ao.
10.
a.
0.
14.
0.
1.
I*.
1*4.
•«
U«,
It
410,
IM.
T44.
1114.
10.
1,
1.
14.
1.
o.
-------
TOXIC HBTUS Moject (TNI kH*ki MIVM tint* HOT DESIGNATCD
-------
PROJICTJ tone Menu PROJECT IT*) IRCM urn* OUTEN NOT DEIIQIUTED
•TkTIOII HUV It •» t NltKO OOMNSTRCkN HELlf in IHOUIT OtlCH fltS)
•AMPLER tfpn 10 SECOND men • 10 NMH TRIANQULAR BET in
RUNIC* or REPUCATEil } PItLO •lOLOQIITi CHARLIE KCtNkN <•!>
HOTKl HOT »PPLtC»BLC (0)
DkTKl "OfCMieU I, IMO
•uiirtTtom 111
H*H 0»T» TklLCI
Ut LtVCL MCPCftCNCC
1*0 LKfCb
RlPLtCkTca
COUNT!
TOTkt rON IP,
LEPTOPHLCBIIDAI
ptntLtPTopHtEiik ar. tteio)
•ABTID»E
•AtTIS «P. CII40) ,
TMICOMITHlDkl
TKICOMITMOOei «P. IJOIO)
LIPTOHIPHCt IP. (1110)
CkCNID»C
CUHIt §P. (1TIOI
OOON»T»*«NItOPT|R»
OOHPH1DAE
OPHIOOOMPHUI IP. (4T001
LltCLLULIOkt
IMCCHNODHOOk NIHOkl (4110)
OOONkTA'ITGOPTClU
CILOPTCKiaiOkt
HETftKHIHk IP. (10310)
1 •
1 -
1 •
1 •
1 •
1 •
t •
1 •
1 •
1 •
1 •
t •
1 »
1 -
1 •
1 •
1 .
»
I
1
i
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i.
i*.
o!
i.
•*.
o.
o.
1*.
0.
0
41
1
1
0
10.
10.
0.
11.
10.
o.
••
7.
0.
0.
00.
11.
1.
01.
7.
1.
o.
1.
«1.
«.
10.
t!
0.
1.
1.
1.
10.
10.
o.
0.
o.
0.
1.
as.
I.
II.
14.
It
• *
HI*
• i*
1.
aos.
10.
i.
it.
-------
rnojcen roue HCTILI PROJECT (TN> RP.EM MVEK BTBTEN MOT DE-ioRmo com
BTkTIOII NMT It B, I MILES OOMNSTREkN REtLT kPB INDUIT DIICH O»S)
ikNpLCR msi it KCONO RICK • to MESH THIKNOUUM NET m
NUMBER Or REPLICkTESI I flttD •IOLOGIBTI GHkRLIE RCENkN (SI)
NOTBl MOT kPPLICkBLC (0)
OkTEl NOVEMBER B, ItIO
•UtlTkTIOHl >l|
0»T» tftBLM
1ST LEVEL fterr»E*CE
3NO LEVEL RtrCMCNCE
REPLICkTEl
COONTI
TotkL ran IP,
CD
cn
OIPTEM
CHlMOHOHIOkEt
•ILL* (lOtIO)
CHIDONOMIDtEt ••rkNtLT'CNIMOKOMtlilkE
•kLL* (IlltO)
CHI'ONOHIDftC, |.r»N OMTHOCtkDttNKE
•»LL- (I4IIOI
•IMULIIDAE
•tMUbtlON •>. (ITSIO)
LtrtOOPTEMk
PTRkLIDkE
PHRkMOfRkCTtl M. |l«StO)
COLCOPTERk
ELNIDkE
MICMOCfLbOEPUa POSILLUI tODlMOI (ItTII)
HITMetHIl VOLHERkTk (l*tl|)
•TEWELNI8 IP, |ttt«0)
ELStkHUS TCIkHUI 110001)
OKVOPIOkE
HtLICHUf IP. C101IO)
PBEPHENIOkE
PSEPHENUt IP. (lOftl)
NTOPkCkMINk
SPEP-CHOMIDkC
•PERCNOH IP. (11810)
MIOMOBkTIDkt
kTMtCTlOEt iP. (1ITOO)
NCPHROPIIDC*
kBTHCIOkE
•kLL> (4STIO)
•EMktODk
•kLL* (SOtIO)
OLIOOCHkETk
-kLL* (««OIO)
OktT-OPODk
kHCTLIDkE
rEHRISlIk SP. (•1(10)
PHTSIOkE
PHVSk IP. («41|0)
1 •
1 •
1 •
1 •
1 •
t •
1 •
1 •
1 •
1 -
1 •
1 •
1 -
1 .
1 .
1 •
1 •
1 •
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
a.
lit.
101.
o.
4.
n.
it!
i.
o.
t.
t.
o.
1.
o.
••
1.
o.
14.
ais.
no.
o.
'.
"1:
i.
i.
a.
».
4.
0.
1*.
o.
o.
a.
•«.
it.
i.
i.
it.
ia.
i!
0.
a.
0.
o.
0.
1.
a.
o.
i.
•I.
ata.
4?
I.
4.
I.
I.
I.
34.
I.
t.
TOTkL rot II SPECIE! if NEPLtCkTEl
fOTkL POP. 1 MEPLtCkTEf. IB BPECIEBl
• I 811. «I8. 4IT.
1114.
-------
APPENDIX C
PERIPHYTON CENSUS DATA
-------
PROJECT} TOIIC NETAbB PROJECT |T«) ARCA| RIVER tVSTEN NOT DESIGNATED (Oil)
STATION! LACKLAND AND KELLT AfR, 4 NI UPSTREAN INDOST OIBCM. (Itl)
SANPLER TlPBl UNIT MCI PERIPHYTON SCRAPE (10)
NUNBER OF REPUCATESI I riELD RlOf.OCIBTi KEN MOO* (SO)
»OTeI HOT APPbtCABLE (0)
DATE! HVIRBER t. 1*10
SUBSTATIONI 111
•AM DATA TABLES
IBT LEVEL REFERENCE
JNO LEVEL
OENUS/SPCCIES
BACIbbARIOPNTCCAE
NAVICULACEAE
NAVICIILA MUTIC* VAR'. TROPTCA (TTMOt
NAVICUbA CONrERVACEA (7T«00)
NAVICObA NOTH» (TTtIO)
HAVICUbA BECRETA VAR. AMCUIATA |TT»70)
NAVICUbA NUTICA VAR. (TfONA (TTtIO)
NAVicubA VIRIDULA VAR. ROBTEM.ATA (T?*tO)
NAVICUbA BANTAECRUCIB (TIOOO)
riNNUbARIA BPf, (TtltO)
riNNUbARtA RICEM (Ti«»o)
rbEUROBIONA DEblCATULUN (TVIIO)
OONfHONrMCOE
60NPHONENA PARVULUN (10910)
OOMPHONENI BUBCbAVATUN VAR. NCIICANUN (BOSIO)
OONPHONENA BUBCbAVATUH C*OS*0)
OOHPHONENA BRASIblENSE (tflTIO)
CTMBCbbACEAE
AMPHORA OVAbIB (11040)
CTMMELbA NINIITA (BISIO)
cvNBELbA NINUTA VAR. PSCUDOORACILIS (ii»ioj
NITSBCHIACEAC
HACILLARIA PARAD01A (BI010)
NITfSCHIA BPP. (14000)
NITtBCHIA OtSSIPATA (44010)
NITtSCHIA PAbEA (B40SO)
NITZ9CHIA ANPHIRIA (440TO)
NITtBCNIA HUNCARICA (B4IOO)
NITtSCHIA TACICMbATA (S4ITO)
NITS8CHIA TRIRbTftNCLbA VAR. bFVIDENBIB ((4100)
NiTtscHiA OHTUSA VAN. scALprbbiPORMia (I4?*o)
NITtSCHIA IIO«» (14710)
NtTtSCHIA TRTRblONCbbA VAR, VICTORIAf (14190)
NITtSCHIA APICULATA (S4tOO)
NITtSCHIA ekNOeRSHEIKteNSIST (S4)IO)
REPLICATES
COONTS
TOTAb
SP,
9»t.
ita.
110.
it.
it!
t4.
II.
It.
194.
40t!
It.
tl.
I9T.
4T.
iat.
ISO.
»4.
4T.
481.
Ma.
it.
47.
t.
It.
11.
I4J.
11.
It).
IM.
I",
19.
It!
ta.
ii.
it.
149.
It!
tl.
191,
110,
«t.
m.
I4t.
ta,
44.
tit,
lit.
19.
44.
1.
It.
11.
lit.
H.
•t.
It.
•
t
1 .
t
•
It.
t!
7.
IT.
19.
9.
H.
IT,
10.
9.
Ta.
It.
a.
9.
i.
a.
i.
tt.
i.
1147.
>*•.
110.
11.
tt.
I*.
I".
••.
II.
ts.
TM.
111
an.
m.
I»T,
ts.
I1S1.
a*B.
ii.
tt.
it.
ii.
ts.
att.
tt.
-------
PROJECT! TOIIC NETkbO fROJCCT (TH) kREkl HIW SIOTEN HOT DESIGNATED (Oil)
STATION! tkCRLkNO kRO REbbT kfB, 4 Nt UMTREAM INDOST OUCH. (141)
SAMPLER WEI UNIT AREA «»I>HITOH icntre (ioi
NUMBCR OF MHiICtTMl I flCtD BIOLOCISTi Ren MOOR (40)
NOTCI MOT AVPIitCklbe 10)
OATBI •OVCHRCM I. I MO
SUMUTIOVl III
Rk» OAT* TtSLCS
IST ie*EL
1MD IKVCb
O
00
B*CILL»DIOI>HTCC»C
NITtSCNUCCkt
NfTSSCHIl NfBRfOk (04)10)
•URIRCLbkCCkC
lURIRCLtk kNOOOTkTk (OSIIO)
SUHIRCLbk OVkLIO (OBiaO)
CTANOrHTTk
OSCILtkTORfkbCO
OlCIbtkTOIItlt M». (tlOOO)
I • I
I •
I •
t - I
COUNTS
u.
0.
1.
• .
t.
lOTkfc FOR OP.
II.
H*
M.
TQTkb ro» so SPEC its at REPIICATO i . i T14T. 47TS.
rod ) MiFiickTCs. so OPCCICOI I400T.
-------
PROJECT! TOIIC NETkb* PROJECT ITH) k*Ck| M?E« 4WEN HOT OtOIONkTCD
•TkTIONI SO TO* DOMN9T*EkN RBbbT AP* INBOBTHIkb nt*CHkPOE I Mil
•kMPbER TTPCl OMIT AREA PCRIPH1TO* 4CMPC (101
NUMBER OP REPtlCATE*! I FIEbD BtOLOOISTt KEN HOOM 1*0)
NOTCI NOT APPLICABLE (0)
1019)
DATE I NOVEMBER •
•UBBTATIONi HI
IIM
RAM DATA TkBLCB
1ST LCftb HIPKRIHCC
IND urn RIPCMCNCC
COUNT*
CHIOMOPMTT*
rtLMurt c<»)
CHtOP-OCOCCkbtt
•ICHOPOBOH citoaoi
oa»Dnte»ao» (ini
•CENBOEINIM HtUHDiMf (|t«IO)
•CCNCDCSNUS DINOHPHU* (11*30)
O
IO
spinoomt iPP. (17I>0)
CLOITKMUM iPP. (]«000)
coanMton IPP. d*iio)
BKCIbUMIOPHTCCkC
CEHTP.ILM
HCbOIIMk fkKIAM («mo>
CTCtOTCLbt NtHCONIMIAM* (44110)
CTCl.OTII.Lk •TKUiIOCP.k (441)9)
(4«tso)
ITNCOMA ULII (TJl)O)
STMCDN* ULIU »»«. OXmHTHCHUI r. HCOtO.C fTHOO)
EUNOTtkCB*!
lUNOTt* PECTINkbia (TI490)
NftVICUbACCftE
DIPbOMEII MP. (T4T10)
HkVICOb* «PP. (TTSIO)
NkVICUbk PUPUbk (118*0)
RkVtCUbk CDIPTOCCPHkbk VkN. TENCTk (TT440)
MkVtCUbk illNlHk (11490)
NkflCUlk IDBNIWUaCUbk (TTUO)
NkVlCULk lUTICk VkM. THOPIC* (77440)
NkVICUbk CONPCRVkCEk (17900)
NkVICUbk NUTICk VkM. STIONk (11*40)
OONPHONENkCIkE
OONPHOREMk PkMVUbUN (40910)
CTMBKbbkCEkE
CINOEbbk NINUTk (41910)
1 » I
•
4*
*»
«•
4>
•
•
•
4B
•
•
4>
•
•
•
491
m
m
m
•
•
•
*
1 1710.
117*.
0.
179.
414.
0.
)4.
0.
41.
1*.
14.
44.
1179.
9J4.
14.
14.
7*.
44.
4).
14.
44.
44.
144*.
J«4.
104.
4.
*.
0.
0.
49.
4.
4.
11.
9.
9.
14.
471.
149,
9.
9.
jt.
14.
11.
9.
14.
14.
49).
1)4.
o.
0.
114.
0.
0.
10.
0.
14.
4.
4.
11.
141.
114.
4.
4.
10.
11.
14.
4.
11.
11.
41*.
*4.
I •
I •
14.
9.
14.
4.
Totkb rod M.
1914.
117*.
II*.
m.
1*4.
4*.
4.
141.
19.
19.
74.
1144,
• 99,
1*.
II*.
7*.
101.
19.
74.
74.
1940.
411.
191.
19.
-------
PROJCCTI tone NCTUS PROJCCT trm tmi «mn trite* MOT ottioiuTto (om
ITkTIOMI 90 IDS DOMRITftCkN KCLLV kPB IHOUITIIIIL DUCHkROC (!•>}
ikMPteR TWI QUIT km PCMPHTTON ICMPB iio>
•UMBBII or RCPLicmti i ricto itobooiiTi RCM NOOR <«o»
NOTCl HOT kPritCMLC (0)
0«T(I
•UMTkTIONI III
ISIO
RAN DATA T»BtM
1ST nvet
mo t«»et RcrcRtiicc
ccNiis/treetci
BkCILLkMIOPHTCMC
NITMCHttCCU
•kCILkkRIt >»R»OOI» (110101
H»NTUCH|« kHPNIOlTI (11410)
•iTtacHift M», (•4ooet
NITStCHU DIMtMTft (14010)
HITS9CHU H*NT(«CHIkMa (14040)
MITtlCNU P»LC» ((4010)
NITSSCHU rOMTICOIift (I40«0)
NITtaCHfk AHPNIltt (140101
HITMCHU NUM6»RIC» (14100)
•ITX4CHIA tONOHtTft (44110)
NITttCNI* TRf4btONCLLk f»R. LCVIOCMIS (14100)
NITUCHIk KUIPTICk (14110)
NXTMCHU RUTSIHatkHk (14110)
mttCHIk OtTUtk »kR. tCkLPCLLIPORNIS (14140)
tUHIRBLLkClkC
lURIRCLLk kNOUtTkTk (tSUO)
CTkNOPHTTk
OtCILkkTOMtkbll
OtCILLkTORIK tPP. («}000)
COUNTS
11.
•t.
ao»!
".
•040.
K.
l«l?
It.
141.
HI.
It.
117.
!•>.
II.
I.
aa.
ii.
at.
aot*.
s.
4»:
s.
««.
It.
s.
101.
4«.
t.
4.
Si!
ao.
ISOI.
4.
>s:
4.
»s.
at.
4.
1«.
is.
11.
14.
II.
t.
TOTkt ran tp.
so.
as.
Ml.
HI.
tat.
0410.
as.
»7.
as.
aai.
i".
as.
• 04.
an.
so.
TOTkt POM 41 tpeeiet BT RCPttcmi t • i noat. 4tsa. ins.
TOTkb POM 1 DCPLICkTES, 41 tPtCIEtl UOU.
-------
tone N«T»L§ PHOJECT (?«» m»i mw •KTKN NOT DMIOMTEO cots)
•TITIONI RomibbEY HMCN, i.g ni o.t. netbt API IHDUST one*. ci«i)
•kNPbEN mil OBIT k*Bk PEIIIPHY70N ICMPE (10)
•UNBEM or REPUCATEM i HELD aiobnoiari REN MOOR (*0)
NOTEI »OT ftPPUCMLC (0)
DITII
•OVIHKII •• Hi«
III
0»T» TKBLEI
1ST
INO
mremiiec
REPbtCkTM
COUNTI
TOTkb ran §P,
CU6LCMOPHTT*
Moaecom IM. (l«ieo>
|PP. (1TOOO)
CUOLCMK MP. (ITOOOt
PTRRHOPHTTK
DIMOKONTtC
MMIOIIIIU4 iff. (44100)
CTCLOTCtli* NCNeOHtNtAN* (Ml 10)
CrCLOTILb* aTBblilOCR* («4IIO)
CICLOTCLLft MKUDOCTCLLtOCRIk (84190)
TCMPIIHOE »HER1C»I«» (6T140)
PR»OtL>RI« IPf, (VOTtO)
•VNIDM UbN» »»«. CONTR«CT» (TS400)
•CHM»NTH«CE»e
kCHNANTHEl Lk*CEOLKT» (74940)
tCHNANTHEl NINUTIMtNft (t4fOO)
COCCOMEIf rbkCENTUbk (T4IIO)
NkflCULftCEftE
OIPLONEft ELLtrTICt (TI710)
NkVICUbt SPP. (7T»0)
NAVICObk MTHCHOCEPHkbk (TTS40)
MkVICObk TMirUNCTkTk VkM. •CHttONOtOEa (T79TO)0)
MM CUM PUPUbk (779«0)
NkftCllbk C«TPTOCEPHkbk (77*101
NkVfCllbk NIKIMk (77*10)
NkVICUbk •UIMINUSCUbk (777*0)
HkVtCUbk OMkClbOIDEI (77770)
HkriCHbk DIITICk »»•. TROPIC* (77I*0)
410.
0.
41.
0.
It.
I0ll
III.
II.
II.
*.
II.
II.
111.
4S.
H.
11.
H.
14.
o.
40.
104.
111.
II.
Itl.
H.
19.
104.
1*.
104.
1*.
19*.
7i.
0.
411.
0.
o.
40.
Ml.
»»!
411.
lit.
40.
• 0.
10.
111.
141.
40.
40.
401.
1*1.
40.
• 0.
111.
111.
41.
4*.
lot.
*«*.
• II.
111.
I9S.
1*.
tit.
I0t.
77,
77.
»7I.
lot.
11.
1*3.
III.
-------
PROJECT! TOIIC NCTkb* PROJECT fTH| (MEk| RI»ER BTBTKK HOT DBBIONkTCO (Oil)
•TkTIOMI ftOBIVkbbCt RMCH, O.S MI O.I. KfbbV kPB I"OUBT OUCH. CUD
SkNPbKR TfPCl OMIT kRKk PER1PHYTON BCR»PB (10)
MUMMER OP RKPblCkTKBl | PICLD BtObOOIBTl REN NO OR (»0)
NOTEI MOT APPLICABLE |0)
OkTEl MOVCNBC* S. 1*00
BUBBTkTIOIII III
PAN DATA Tk§t,C8
ro
I«T LI«Cb
1ND LKTCt MIPCHCMCC
OIIUI/IPICICI
BkClLLkHIOPHTCCtC
NAVICUtACUB
MktICULt PTONkBt (T1MO)
NkVICUbk NOTICk ffkM. •TIOMk (TTflOl
Mkvieubk ikNTkcenucia diooo)
NkVICUlik CUIPIOkTk (T««IO)
PINNULkMU iPP. (IliaOl
PINNULkP-U BlCCPt (1I««0|
OnNPHONCHkCtkC
OONPNONCMk •*kSII>iCNiC (10110)
CTNKtbkCCkl
IMPHORk OVkblt »k». PCOICULUI f«|0«0)
CTMtCblik HMUkTk (I1SIO)
•ITUCHIkClkC
• kCUtkMk rkMkOOIk («JOJO)
NITtSCHtk iPP. CMOOO)
NtTHCHIk NkHTtaCHIkHk (14040)
HITStCHIk MlCk (•40SO)
MITSSCHIk rONIICOlik (•40«0|
MITIICHtk kNPHiatk (14070)
HITtSCHIk IQNOHkTk (MHO)
NITIBCHtk fSLtPORHia (14140)
HITMCHIk THYBOIONElLk Ą»«. OCBILIB (14110)
NITCSCHIk RUTSIHOIkNk (14110)
MITCICHIk CkPITCLLktk (04140)
MITIBCMtk kCCCOBNB (14290)
MITCICHIk OBTUSk Vk*. BCkbPCLLIPOBNtB (141(0)
MITIBCHIk LOUCNIIkNk (14110)
BUMUClbkCetC
BURIRCLLk ROBUBTk (19140)
CTkMOPHTTk
OBCILbkTOMlkLCI
OBCIUkTOP.lt BPP. (91000)
TOTkL POP 4B BPCCICB BT MPLICkTII
•CPLICkTlB
114.
1101.
• ».
II.
It.
It.
II.
II.
11.
".
11.
in.
• 1.
49.
us!
l«.
11.
lit
II.
II.
4411.
COUNTS
III.
194*.
IS4.
14.
14.
14.
991.
14.
14.
SI.
110.
si.
•n.
is*.
441.
II.
104.
104.
S44.
004.
SI.
no.
14.
14.
441.
1*10.
141.
40.
40.
40.
044.
40.
40.
40.
101.
00.
I14B.
141.
1019.
10.
141.
141.
044.
1140.
40.
101.
40.
40.
0.
tool.
o.
14401.
ro* or.
•10.
1*94.
444.
".
11.
lit
1441.
11*
199.
Ml.
IS9.
1419.
444.
1*11.
10.
I0».
100.
1414.
11*1,
199.
MT.
11.
11,
II.
TOTkb POD 1 KIPLtCKTC*, 41 BPCCICII
1BOOI.
-------
MOJCCTI tone Nttkbo mojicr (fN> kRtkl »m» IYOTIN NOT DMIONKTBO cots)
•TkTIONI aUNHCROCt 110*0 »f !•!», 1.0 HI OONNOTRBIN OlfleNlftOC (104)
•kNPbBR TTMtl UHIt kRKk URIMITON OCR»Pt (10)
NUNOCR or Rcmekmi i nrto •totooiiTi KM NOON uo»
•OTtI NOT kFPbtCkBbC (0)
DkTBl NOfCNSIK |, ftl*
•UMTkTIONl 111
NkN OkTk tkitM
INO LCVIL
LO
lit
CNLONOrNTTk
ril«kN|NT0 (40)
• IPHONOCI.kDkLCS
CLkOOMONk W9, (1TOOO)
ITONINftTklM
CbOSTBMIUN IM. OtOOO)
(41*001
NtrttCkTC*
COUNT*
lOOLBNktBS
PHkCUt Mf. (11100)
CNirTOPHTTk
CnmONONftOkCBkC
CNTPTONONkl
•kCILLMIOPHVCCkl
CENTRUM
NBLOatM VkNIkNl («)ITO)
CTCtOTBblik NCNlQNINtkNk (94110)
TNkbLkMlOIINk rbUvlkTIbll (441tO)
•tooubOHtk bkirta (««I40)
TCRMMOC kNCNICkNk (OT140)
rNkOIbkNtkCKkK
• TNCOIIk UbNk fk*. OlfRNTNCHOI r. NCDIO.C (T»00)
•fNCONI OkbbONtt (T14IO)
kCNNkNTHkCCkB
kCHNkNfHM bMCCObkTk (T4940)
kCNVkNfNBI NINOTIMtNk (7*0001
COCCOMEI* PbACENTUbft »»". CUObTPTk (T4040)
N«V|CUb«CCkC
OTMOSTONk t**, MTIJ01
N»VICUbl NHrNCNOCEPHkbk (T1S40)
Nk'lCUbk T*l»U*CT*Tk fkN, •CMttONOIOCO (TISTO)O)
NkttCObk NINIHt (TTtSO)
NkVICUbk IVONtNUOCUbk (T7T»«)
NkflCUbk ONkClbOIOCI (7TTTO)
1 •
1 •
1 <
1 <
1 «
• 1
> 1
> 1
» 1
» 1
0
1 0
4
4
1 4
10
1
0
It
0
14
II
OS
. 10. 0.
. o. o.
0. 0.
1. 0.
. 0. 0.
10. 194.
I. to.
to. *t.
at. 4M.
11. ll«.
11. HI.
11. 1*4.
11.
41.
1 . HI.
. to.
11.
. II.
11.
. II.
10.
It. til.
114. tm.
to.
4.
T.
4.
ioa.
tool
• 71.
140.
4ta.
IOS.
II.
of!
a4.
10.
ia.
14i,
14*S.
-------
MOJECTI TOItC NETklS PROJCCT ITN) AREA! »I»E« STSTM NOT DESIGNATED (013) DATEI NOVEMBER I, ItlO
STATIONI LACKLAND AND RCLLT ir«, 4 MI UPSTREAM INDIIST OISCM. mi) aussTmoNi lit
•AMPLER TTPEI UNIT AREA PERIPHVTON SCRAPE ()0)
•UMBER Of REPLICATES! I MELD BlOtOOISTl KCN NOON (40)
MOTE! NOT APPLICABLE 10)
MftN DftTk TktLM
IST LEveb nercnewcc
MD tEVEL DirERtNCe »EfHC»TE8 COUNT! TOT»t FOR iP.
ciNui/ircciei
CHLOKOrHVTk
COLONIES (10) I • I ». 0. It*. |««,
riLKMENTS (40) 1*1 I0Ȥ. 0. 0. |OM.
•CENCDCfMOl irr. (IIMO) 1*1 0. 14. 0. 74.
MOUCEOTU arr. iieioo) i • i in. o, o. us.
•IFHOMOCLAOtLES
CLkOOPHOMft SM. (ITOOO) I • I 0. 7T1. 0, 171.
ITCNCNftTftUES
COSNMIUN SM. (IVI101 1*1 0. 17. 0. 17.
CCNTNAI.es
NELOSIRk fk»IkN8 (S1I10) I • 1 14. If. I. 11.
CTCbOTELtk NCNCOHINIkNk (44110) I • I IS. IS. I. II.
CTCLOTEU.A STILtlCCNk (441)0) 1*1 IS. IS, ). It.
THkLLkSSIOSIR* rLUVIkTILIS (44110) 1*1 IS. IS. I. II.
PMkOILAMIkCCAC
4IMCDM RUNVENS (71120) 1*1 S. S. I. IS.
STNEDRk UbNk VkR. 01TRHVNCHUS f. NCOIO.C (71100) I • I 14. I). I. 4t.
EUHOTIACEkE
EUNOTIA NAECEbll (114SO) I • I IS. IS. 1. 11.
kCHNANTMACEAB
ACHNkNTHCI NINUTISaiNk (14*00) I « I 141. II*. IS. 1«S.
kCHNANTNCS APPINIS (74450) 1*1 14. 1). 1. 4*.
COCCONCIS PLACCMTULA VkR. CUCLTPTk (14140) I • 1 IS. 19. 1. II.
NkVICUbkCEAE
ANpHlPbEURk PELbUCIPA (TSSJO) 1 • I I*. IS. 1. II,
CVROSIGM* SPP. (11110) 1*1 14, IS. 1. II.
OfUDBKNU OSSCUNUN (171)0) I • I 1ST. 19). II. lit.
NAvicnik SPP. (iisio) 1-1 it. )i. i. s*.
NAVICULA CRVPTOCEPHAtk (11t)0) I • I I*. 19. 1. II.
NkVICUbA CRTPTOCIPHALA »AR. VENP.TA (11*40) 1*1 IS. 19. 1. II.
NAVICUbk ORACILOIOea OHIO) I « I |4«*. 149*. 144. 1111*
NAVICULA SINMCTRICA (17*90) I » I 41. 4*. S. tt.
-------
PROJECT! TOItC NETkbl PROJECT (TNI
kREkl »I»BR »1»1t* NOt DCaiONkTtn (OIS)
•TftTIOMI •OMNIMIT ROAD kT I»J9, l.S HI POWITREkN OIOCHkROB (114)
MHPbBR TTPEI UNIT kREk PCMPHYTON OCRkPB ($0)
NUMBER Of REPblCkTKBI
MOTE I HOT kPPblCkBbB
I
(0)
FIELD BiobooiBTt urn MOOR (oo)
Oft Til •OTKHtCD S, HIO
8UMMTIOHI 111
RkN OkTk T»ai>M
1ST LKTEI,
urn
OKNU(/IPtCICI
RCPblCkTM
COUNT!
ran «P,
HkTICULkCBkC
NkVICULk •VKNtTRfCk (1TISO)
HkVICUlk COMrCMfkCCk (TTtOO)
tt»«ICUbk HBUrbtRI »«R. LBPTOCRMklk (TT«IO>
HkVICULk NUTICk »»R. «TIOK» CT1MOJ
HlVICULk IkHTkBCKUCI* (11000)
NtVtCOLk CUIPIDkTk (TIOIO)
NkflCULk TBMERk (TiOJO)
MNNUbkRII kRkVJBMII (7lt40)
aOMPHO»EHkCBkB
OOMPHOHBNk PkRVQbOH (tOSlO)
CONrHONIKk •UBCbkfkTDN »kR. NBXfCkHON (•OSIO)
QONPHONBH* nRkSlblBHSK (iOT|0»
CTNKbbkCBkB
KNPHORk iPP'. (tlOaO)
• NPHORk OfkbM (110401
ANPHORk COrPBIPORNIS (11010)
•ITSICHlKCBkB
•KCIbbkMtk MDkOaik (tlOIO)
NlTIBCHIk tPP. (14000)
NITtSCHIk OIMIPkTk (04010)
HtTZSCHIk TRUBTUbUH VkR. PCRPUSfbLk (14010)
NITtSCHU P»bB* (I40SO)
RITtlCNIk kMPHtllk (14010)
HlTCSCHIk MUNOtRICk 104100)
N|Tt*CHIk TRTBblONBbbk »»R. LCVlOCWtlS (B4100)
NITCSCHtk BbblPTICk (14110)
•ITtSCHIk CkPlTBbbkTk (14140)
NITtSCHIk OtTUlk VkR. •CkbPEI.blPONNtt (I41«0)
•ITtSCHIk bORCftBIkNk (04110)
NITIICHIk kPlCUbkTk (04)00)
•UMIRCbbkCEkt
CTNkTOPbBORk SObEk (OSIIO)
•URIRCbbk kUCUSTkTk (09110)
10
IS
II
1
IS
II
II
1
1
IS
II
11
1
II
10
IT
S
1
41.
Ill
• 1.
104.
to.
41.
to.
I4S.
m.
too.
to.
111.
11*.
III.
to.
to.
to.
41.
901.
to.
91.
11.
II.
It.
to.
104.
to.
11.
4t.
»«.
M.
«.
IM.
U.
IT*.
4)1.
II.
H8.
II.
II.
II.
4».
•M.
I*.
• I.
M.
14.
>4,
tl.
II.
M.
-------
PROJECT! TOIIC NITkbl PROJCCT «T"J kRKkl • !•«• •TaTKM HOT DMIONkTCO CO!*)
•TkTIONl •UNNKRIIT ROkD »t !•!», l.t NI OOHNtTRIkN DlSCNkRQI (U4)
•kNPbCH tlPH UNIT MKk »f«IPH»tO« ICMPI C10I
•UMKCR or *BrLie«?i*i » PULD •IOLOOIITI KIN NOOK t»o>
NOTEI NOT »PPtIC»«L« <0)
DkTEl NOTCNMR I, |M0
•UMTkTIONl 111
•AN OATk
CT>
1ST LIVKL MtPCMCNCC
IND tcvK
QCNUI/IPCCIC*
•JtCIbtkHIOPHfCCkC
•URIRCLLICCkC
•UHIRCbLft ROBUST* 113140)
auRiRtbbk soecict (isato)
•URIRtbbl 0»»T» VkR. CRUMCNK (I51TOI
I • 1
I • I
I • I
I.
».
t.
COUNT*
a.
10.
TOTIb PO*
ai.
«>.
at.
lot.
TOTAL POP. || •PCCICI Bf RCPblCkTCi 1-1 411. TOJ, SITS.
TOTkb PO* I RIPbtCmi. SS •PCCICtl 10t4.
-------
PROJECTi roue HttkM PROJCCI trio MEM «»BR •MTBH NOT DESIGNATED
•TkTIORI HNT l« •• • HUM DOWNSTREAM REU.T kP« INBU8T OUCH (MS)
SkNPbER ttPBl Unit kREA PCRIPHTTON SCRAPS (10)
NUMBER OP REPfclCkTESI I FIELD HIOLClOlSTl KEN MOOR («0)
IIOTCI NOT APPbtCARLE (0)
HOTtMlf* t, Itlt
SUHtTtTIOMl III
Mk» OtTA TMLK*
1ST UVBL HEPCMCHCB
>HD IBVCb
RCPbtCkTCS
CRLOROPHTTk
PILAMCNT* (40)
•IPHONOCttDkLCI
CtkDOPHOMk OPP. (ItOOO)
CbOtTCRtUI iPP. 11*0001
•kCIbtk*IOPIITCCkC
CEHTRkbtf
CTCLOTIbbk HKHCaNIHIMk (•4110)
CYCbOTClLk •TBbtiaCDk (041 10)
THkbbklllOltMk PbOVIkTtbll (••JIO>
•IDOUbPHIk bftCVIO (••140)
TCMPflHOB kNRMCkNk (*1I40)
PMkOlbkMIkCCkE
rHkOlbkRIk MBVIHDkTk (70*00)
•INrORk UbMk (III 10)
•TNCDMk VbHk »»«. OITHNTNCHW8 P. NfOIO»C (T1IOO)
kCHMkNTHkCCkC
COCCONCia PbkCCNTUlik »»R. CUUbTPT* (T4040)
COCCONCTO PbkCCHTUbk VkM. blHCkTk (T4«SO)
MkVICUbkCBkt
OIPbOHCIt OlbONCCbbk (T»TTO)
Ntfieubk IPP. (Ttsao)
Nk*ICUbk RHTNCHOCCPHkbk (TTS40)
NkVICObk TMtPUMCTkTk VkH. SCNISOMQIOM (77970)0)
Mkvicubk POPUbk »kH. necTkttOUbkRia (77«ooi
NkVICUbk CUTPTOCCPHkbk (77*10)
NkVlCUbk lOONtNUSCUbk (77790)
NAVICllbk ORkCIbOIOCS (77770)
NkVICUbk •INNCTMCk (77190)
NkTICllbk NOTtCk »»R. TROPICk (77080)
NkflCUbk PTOtkCk (77»«0)
Rkvicobk skHTkecRuei
NkVtCUbk COSPIOkfk (70010)
Nk*IC»Lk TCNCRk (70020)
I •
I •
I •
o.
II.
0.
s
I
COUNTS
0.
soo.
11.
10.
•o.
at*.
1407.
II.
10.
101.
IS.
19.
• .
•o.
•0.
«o.
•o.
1*1.
I.
«S.
n.
1M.
10.
Ml.
1041.
•a*.
o.
tit.
nit.
o.
u.
Ml.
• .
4.
41.
11.
«7.
4.
ao*.
i*.
• i.
TOTkb POM SP.
1041.
III*.
II.
TO.
47.
141.
HI.
1074.
ai.
47.
lias.
ai.
ta.
141.
14.
141.
•4.
»•!.
ta.
»t.
ai,
• M.
4T.
ais.
-------
PROJECT* tone NETkLi PROJECT
-------
APPENDIX D
TISSUE METAL ANALYSIS SUMMARY DATA
-------
MEAN SILVER CONCENTRATIONS (ppm), LEON CREEK, TEXAS, IN VARIOUS PLANT TISSUES.
MEANS ARE BASED ON THREE ANALYTICAL REPLICATES UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
Station
Roots
Leaves and Stems
Whole Plant
161
162
163
164
165
0.2
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.4
1.7
1.7
1.2
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.7
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2K
0.2K
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.7
0.4
0.9
0.3
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.9
1.1
1.1
4.4
1.3
1.2
0.7
0.9
0.2
K = value known to be less than Indicated (one or more replicates less than
detection limits).
120
-------
MEAN LEAD CONCENTRATIONS (ppm), LEON CREEK, TEXAS, IN VARIOUS PLANT TISSUES.
MEANS ARE BASED ON THREE ANALYTICAL REPLICATES UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
Station
Roots
Leaves and Stems
Whole Plant
161
162
163
164
165
-
2.8
37.5
50.6
112.1
33.9
11.6
28.2
61.7
67.5
2.3K*
8.4
18.4
8.6
-
7.8
ND**
3.2
17.3
9.6
4.0*
4.9
4.3*
46.3
7.5*
5.2*
1.8*
-
12.0
18.0
7.8**
14.5
36.1
24.9
299.9
27.1
13.9
3.2
32.3
19.2
* =
** =
ND =
K =
2 replicates only.
1 replicate only.
not detectable.
value known to be less than indicated
detection limits).
(one or more
repl icates less than
121
-------
MEAN CHROMIUM CONCENTRATIONS (ppm), LEON CREEK, TEXAS, IN VARIOUS PLANT TISSUES,
MEANS ARE BASED ON THREE ANALYTICAL REPLICATES UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
Station
Roots
Leaves and Stems
Whole Plant
161
162
163
164
165
0.4K*
4.1
2.8
23.9
1.2
71.3
72.9
49.7
11.6
8.1
15.2
2.4
8.1
2.2
10.1
7.5
3.0
ND
1.7
2.4
121.7
6.8
9.3
1.8
0.4K
10.4
1.6
11.7
7.5
0.6K
ND*
0.8*
3.0
42.2
15.0
32.0
587.6
86.4
30.2
6.3
19.2
12.2
* = 2 replicates only.
ND = not detectable.
K = value known to be less than Indicated (one or more replicates less than
detection limits).
122
-------
MEAN COPPER CONCENTRATIONS (ppm), LEON CREEK, TEXAS, IN VARIOUS PLANT TISSUES,
MEANS ARE BASED ON THREE ANALYTICAL REPLICATES UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
Station
Roots
Leaves and Stems
Whole Plant
161
5.1
4.7
1.1
2.8
1.1
5.4
7.6
8.0
8.9
162
163
164
165
16.6
26.2
12.4
61.5
255.4
88.6
24.8
25.1
22.0
52.2
18.9
27.3
28.9
14.1
9.1
4.1
8.2
32.8
30.1
25.2
7.5
4.3
11.7
8.6
4.5
3.9
1.5
20.2
27.6
65.0
73.5
77.3
286.3
96.2
87.1
25.8
48.2
29.9
123
-------
MEAN CHROMIUM CONCENTRATIONS (ppm), LEON CREEK, TX, IN VARIOUS FISH TISSUES.
MEANS ARE BASED ON THREE REPLICATES UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
Station Eyes Brain
161 0.3K** -
162
163
164
165
Gill Muscle .Liver Heart
1.6 ND**
2.6
0.5**
1.1*
2.2*
0.8*
0.5 - 0.9* 0.6**
3.5
9.9
5.8 - - 1.4**
•
-
1.9* - ND**
1.2* 11. 6K*
1.6
2.8
Kidney Whole Fish
19.8
23.5
5.2
3.4
8.6
4.9*
5.3
0.5*
2. OK
5.4
3.7
5.1
7.9
0.5K* 54.5
0.5K 61.1
71.9
88.3
14.2
6.9
89.1
96.0
119.6
5.2
-
4.6
7.8
3.5
45.4
61.2
61.5
15.5
* = 2 replicates only.
** » 1 replicate only.
ND = not detectable.
K = value known to be less than indicated (one or more replicates below
detection limits).
124
-------
MEAN LEAD CONCENTRATIONS (ppcn), LEON CREEK, TX, IN VARIOUS FISH TISSUES.
ARE BASED ON THREE REPLICATES UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
MEANS
Station Eyes Brain Gill Muscle
161 8.1** 35.9** 6.6
55.1
34.7
25.1
27.2
3.3K*
162 - 13.6
18.8
39.1
163 - 11.4
164 - -
165 ND** 2.1**
7.0*
66.1
32.8
Liver Heart Kidney Whole Fish
4.1** - 11.0 56.9
19.1 66.7
84.0 12.4
15.4*
21.7
17.6K
16.8
3.7**
12. OK
21.2
13.1
6.2
7.4
4.4** 1.7-* 16.0
1.9** 32.2
17.9*
48.4
6.8
9.9
13.7** - 70.9
63.8
71.7
4.9
ND** 4.4 22.8 3.7**
4.8** 11.1* 2.2*
5.3*
13.4
16.7
21.5
2.6*
* » 2 replicates only.
** a I reolicate onlv.
ND * not detectable.
K * value known to be less than Indicated (one or more replicates below
dectecion limits).
125
-------
MEAN SILVER CONCENTRATIONS (ppm), LEON CREEK, TX, IN VARIOUS FISH TISSUES.
MEANS ARE BASED ON THREE REPLICATES UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
Station Eyes Brain
161 0.3K 0.9
0.9 0.8
0.7 1.1
0.6* 0.5
0.4 0.5
0.3
0.3
' 1.6*
162 0.9 0.7
0.6 0.9
0.6 0.7
163 0.4 0.4
164
165 0.2 0.3*
0.5 ND*
0.4 ND**
0.5 0.4
G111
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.7
0.1
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.7
0.3K
-
0.2K
0.2K
Muscle Liver
0.6K
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.8
0.6
0.6K
0.3*
-
0.2K
0.2K*
0.5K
0.3K
0.5
0.7
0.4
0.5
0.9
0.7
0.6
-
0.3
1.8
1.0
Heart
0.4K
0.8
0.9
0.8*
0.8
0.6
0.4**
0.8*
1.1
0.9*
1.4*
0.8
-
- 0.8*
0.4**
0.7
Kidney
0.2K*
0.4K
0.3
0.5
0.3K*
1.2
0.9
0.8
0.7
-
0.4
ND*
0.7
0.2
Whole Fish
0.5
0.4K
0.2*
3.5
3.6
3.0
2.4
1.0
0.5
3.4
3.3
3.6
0.6
-
ND**
3.0
2.9
3.3
0.8
*
**
ND
K
= 2 replicates only.
= 1 repl icate only.
= not detectable.
= value known to be 1
ess than
indicated
(one
or more re
splicates
below
detection limits).
126
-------
MEAN COPPER CONCENTRATIONS (ppm), LEON CREEK, TX, IN VARIOUS FISH TISSUES.
MEANS ARE BASED ON THREE REPLICATES UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
Station
161
162
163
164
165
Eyes
NO*
1.0
0.9
1.6
0.6
0.4K
0.4*
0.6
1.6
1.2
0.8
3.7
-
0.4K
1.1
4.6
0.5
Brain
0.8
4.6
6.7
5.7
9.9
12.4
1.2
3.6
ND*
2.0
9.0
2.1
-
1.5
4.0
20.6
6.5
Gill
0.4
11.2
2.6
4.3
1.9
0.4K
9.3
2.0
2.7
2.6
-
0.5K
0.9
3.8
4.1
Muscle
0.4**
0.5
0.4K*
ND
0.3K*
2.3K
ND
ND**
0.6K
-
ND**
0.9K
0.8K*
Liver
10.3
39.0
2.0
8.0
16.0
12.7
29.2
-
18.3
9.4
80.4
18.2
Heart
14.2
34.1
34.8
44.9*
32.4
22.6
15.1**
7.2*
34.2
20.8*
38.3*
37.3
-
13.1*
14.7*
8.1
9.6
Kidney
2.3
8.4
22.4
21.3
3.1
16.6
11.3
17.1
23.2
-
5.3
9.6
19.9
10.2
Whole Fish
18.9
13.7
6,3
2.6
22.1
5.8
2.4
4.7
27.5
116.7
6.8
13.2
79.3
154.4
168.5
135.8
26.9
18.6
5.3
225.6
226.6
264.8
15.8
-
3.6
22.9
30.8
171.9
123.4
161.0
12.3
* = 2 replicates only.
** * 1 replicate only.
ND = not detectable.
K = value known to be less than indicated (one or more replicates below
detection limits).
127
-------
APPENDIX E
SUMMARIZED BIOASSAY RESULTS: DULUTH
-------
COMPARISON OF FOUR TOXIC RESPONSES TO 30 AMBIENT WATER SAMPLES. Sample numbers
relate to stations from 15 rivers sampled during the 1980 toxic metals project.
Fish
Sample Daphnia Enzyme Ventilation Algal
Number Toxicity Inhibition Index Toxicity
Oil
013 + + + +
021 + + +
023 +
034
035 + + +
042 +
045 + +
051
054 +
061 +
066 + +
073 + ND* +
074 + ND
081 + +
082 + + + +
092 '+ +
094 + + + +
012 + +
103 •»- + +
111
114
121 +
122 + +
132
133 + + +
142 + ND** +
143 + ND** +
Leon 161 +
Creek 162
+
+ Positive response indicated.
* No data.
** Stress evident but unable to quantify.
129
------- |