&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Freshwater Biological Traits Databas
National Center for Environmental Assessment
Office of Research and Development
-------
EPA/600/R-11/038F
June 2012
Freshwater Biological Traits Database
Global Change Research Program
National Center for Environmental Assessment
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
-------
DISCLAIMER
This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency policy and approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
ABSTRACT
The Freshwater Biological Traits Database (http://www.epa.gov/ncea/global/traits)
currently contains traits data for 3,857 North American macroinvertebrate taxa and includes
habitat, life history, mobility, morphology, and ecological trait data. Species traits are the
characteristics that explain an organisms' relationship to the surrounding environment, including
how it grows, feeds and moves. The traits data were compiled for a project on climate change
effects on river and stream ecosystems that was conducted by the Global Change Research
Program in the National Center for Environmental Assessment in the U.S. EPA Office of
Research and Development. The traits data were gathered from multiple sources. Data
gathering efforts focused on data that were published or well-documented, available, appropriate
for the regions being studied, in a standardized format that could be analyzed or easily converted
to a format that could be analyzed, and ecologically relevant to the gradients being considered.
The database has been posted online to facilitate further research. This is intended to be a
'living' database, and researchers are encouraged to contribute data and provide suggestions or
feedback on how the database can be expanded and improved upon in the future.
Preferred citation:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2012) Freshwater Traits Database. Global Change Research
Program, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC; EPA/600/R-11/038F. Available from
the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA, and online at http://www.epa.gov/ncea.
11
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE iv
AUTHORS, CONTRIBUTORS, AND REVIEWERS v
1. Introduction 1
2. Methods 1
3. Results 7
4. Future Directions 11
APPENDIX A: List of Cold-and Warm-Water Preference Taxa A-l
APPENDIX B: Data Integration Rules B-l
APPENDIX C: Traits Gap Analysis C-l
APPENDIX D: List of Traits and Associated Metadata D-l
APPENDIX E: Instructions for Using the Freshwater Biological Traits Database E-1
REFERENCES R-l
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Summary of the traits and trait states in the Maine, North Carolina, and Utah
climate change traits tables (modified from Poff et al., 2006) 5
in
-------
PREFACE
The report and database were prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc. and the Global Change
Research Program (GCRP) in the National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) of the
Office of Research and Development at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). They
are intended for resource managers and scientists working in freshwater ecosystems who are
interested in species traits, biological indicators, bioassessment, biomonitoring, and climate
change. The database is intended to be modified and augmented by scientists and resource
managers with data and research results.
IV
-------
AUTHORS, CONTRIBUTORS, AND REVIEWERS
The Global Change Research Program, within the National Center for Environmental
Assessment (NCEA), Office of Research and Development, is responsible for publishing this
report and the database. The report and database were prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc. under
Contract No. GS-10F-0268K, U.S. EPA Order No. 1107. Britta Bierwagen, PhD served as the
Technical Project Officer, provided overall direction and technical assistance, and contributed as
an author.
AUTHORS
Center for Ecological Sciences, Tetra Tech, Inc., Owings Mills, MD
Jen Stamp, MS, Anna Hamilton, MS, Liejun Wu, MS, Jeffrey White, MS
U.S. EPA
Britta G. Bierwagen, PhD
REVIEWERS
U.S. EPA Reviewers
Wayne Davis, MS (OEI), Lilian Herger, MS (RIO), Rachael Novak, MS (OW/OST), Lester
Yuan, PhD (ORD/NCEA, now OW/OST)
Other Reviewers
Daren Carlisle, PhD (USGS), M. Siobhan Fennessy, PhD (Kenyon College), Eric P. Smith, PhD
(Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University), R. Jan Stevenson, PhD (Michigan State
University), N. Scott Urquhart, PhD (Statistical Consultant)
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank staff in state offices who contributed data and assisted with the
development of the traits database. The authors EPA and outside reviewers for their input on the
database and comments that substantially improved this report.
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
The Freshwater Biological Traits Database (http://www.epa.gov/ncea/global/traits) was
compiled as part of a project conducted by the Global Change Research Program (GCRP) in the
National Center for Environmental Assessment in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Office of Research and Development on climate change effects on river and stream
ecosystems (U.S. EPA, 2011). For this project, long-term trend analyses were performed on
biomonitoring data from Maine, North Carolina, Ohio, and Utah to examine whether biological
responses to changes in temperature and hydrology could be detected. One component of these
analyses involved compiling and analyzing traits data for North American macroinvertebrate
taxa found in lotic systems. Species traits are the characteristics that explain an organisms'
relationship to the surrounding environment, including growth, feeding habits and dispersal.
Advantages of using traits data for these types of analyses are that they are less susceptible to
taxonomic ambiguities or inconsistencies in long-term data sets; they can detect changes in
functional community characteristics; and they vary less across geographical areas, which allows
for larger-scale trend analyses across regional species pools. Because it took substantial effort to
gather the traits data into one place, and because we would like to save other researchers from
having to undergo similar efforts, we have integrated the traits data that were gathered for this
project into one database and have made it available online.
2. METHODS
Data gathering efforts focused on data that were published or well-documented,
available, appropriate for the regions being studied, in a standardized format that could be
analyzed or easily converted to a format that could be analyzed, and ecologically relevant to the
gradients being considered. The data search revealed that traits data compilations in North
America have been at smaller scales and are less comprehensive than the European efforts (i.e.,
Euro-limpacs Consortium: www.freshwaterecology.info—The Taxa and Autecology Database
for Freshwater Organisms), but nevertheless show promise. In 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) published a database of lotic invertebrate traits for North America (Vieira et al., 2006).
This database represented the first comprehensive summary of traits for North American
invertebrate taxa and the first effort to compile this traits information in a Web-based database.
1
-------
The traits information was gathered from over 3,000 keys, texts, peer-reviewed publications, and
reports on North American aquatic invertebrates.
Another important source of traits information for North American lotic insect taxa is the
Traits Matrix that was published in Poff et al. (2006). The Traits Matrix provides information on
20 traits (in 59 trait states) that span four broad categories of trait groups (life history,
morphological, mobility, and ecological) for 311 taxa from 75 families. The traits information in
the Traits Matrix was cross-referenced with the USGS (i.e., Vieira et al., 2006) traits database
described above. An older series of publications was also included in the traits database: the
EPA series on environmental requirements and pollution tolerance of Ephemeroptera,
Plecoptera, Trichoptera, and Common Freshwater Chironomidae (Surdick et al., 1978; Beck
et al., 1977; Harris et al., 1978; Hubbard et al., 1978). Traits information in these publications
was compiled from general literature searches. The database created for this project contains
information on 362 Plecoptera taxa, 240 Trichoptera taxa, 218 Chironomidae taxa, and
396 Ephemeroptera taxa from this older series of EPA publications.
Also included in the database are thermal optima and tolerance data that were generated
from weighted average or generalized linear model calculations that were performed on
biomonitoring data from Maine, North Carolina, Ohio, and Utah (U.S. EPA, 2011), as well as
from Oregon (Yuan, 2006), Idaho (Brandt, 2001), and the Lahontan/Sierra Nevada region of
California (Herbst and Silldorff, 2007). Weighted-average inference is a simple, robust approach
for estimating the central tendencies of different taxa, for example, optima and tolerance values
(i.e., ter Braak and Looman, 1986). For the climate change pilot study analyses in Maine, North
Carolina, and Utah, the guidelines of Yuan (2006) were used to calculate optima values based on
instantaneous water-temperature measurements and occurrences of organisms. Optima values
for Maine and Utah were derived from weighted-average inferences. The lists for Utah were
supplemented with weighted-average inferences derived from data sets from Idaho (i.e., Brandt,
2001) and Oregon (i.e., Yuan, 2006). Maximum-likelihood inferences were used in North
Carolina because North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources abundance
data are categorical (1 = rare: 1-2 species; 3 = common: 3-9 species; 10 = abundant: >10
species). To improve model performance, optima values were calculated only for taxa occurring
in >9 sites or samples.
-------
These tolerance data were used to derive lists of cold- and warm-water-preference taxa in
Maine, North Carolina, and Utah. Because the methods used to derive the thermal optima values
and the specific characteristics of the data sets (e.g., range of collection dates, station locations,
elevation) varied, an arbitrary ranking scheme was developed to make results more comparable
across data sets. Taxa in each state were assigned rankings ranging from 1 to 7 based on
percentiles within each data set. Initially, taxa with rankings <3 (<40th percentile) were
designated as cold-water taxa and taxa with rankings >5 (>60t percentile) as warm-water taxa.
Thermal optima values were not available for all taxa, so literature—primarily the traits matrix in
Poff et al. (2006) and the USGS traits database (Vieira et al., 2006)—were used as a basis for
making some additional initial designations.
After making initial cold- and warm-water designations, the lists in each state were
refined based on case studies and best professional judgment from regional advisory groups.
Thermal tolerance values, which were calculated using the methods described above (i.e., Yuan,
2006), were also taken into consideration. We thought these additional considerations were
necessary because some taxa occurred with greater frequency in warm- or cold-water habitats
but were not present exclusively in one or the other. For example, some taxa initially designated
as cold-water taxa also were present at sites that had the hottest recorded water temperatures.
During the refinement process, these taxa were removed from the cold-water list. In some cases,
taxa were removed from the lists because regional taxonomists did not think that the
literature-based designations were appropriate for their region. The cold-water-preference lists
in Maine, North Carolina, and Utah consisted of 39, 32, and 33 taxa, respectively. The
warm-water-preference lists in Maine, North Carolina, and Utah consisted of 40, 27, and 16 taxa,
respectively. Lists of the cold and warm water taxa can be found in Appendix A. The relatively
low number of taxa on the Utah warm-water-preference list was partially a consequence of the
need to use a family-level operational taxonomic unit (OTU) for Chironomidae because of
inconsistencies in the long-term data set that arose from a change in taxonomic laboratories.
These lists of cold- and warm-water taxa are included in region-specific traits tables that
were compiled for the Maine, North Carolina, and Utah climate change pilot study analyses
(U.S. EPA, 2011). Also included in these tables are information on traits related to life-cycle
features (i.e., life-cycle duration, reproductive cycles per year, aquatic stages), resilience or
resistance potentials (i.e., dispersal, locomotion, resistance forms), physiology and morphology
3
-------
(i.e., respiration, maximum size), and reproduction and feeding behavior (i.e., reproduction,
food, and feeding habits). Table 1 contains a list of the traits that were included the climate
-------
Table 1. Summary of the traits and trait states in the Maine, North Carolina, and Utah climate change traits tables (modified
from Poff et al., 2006)
Trait Category
Life history
Mobility
Morphology
Resource
acqui siti on/preference
Trait
Voltinism
Development
Synchronization of emergence
Adult life span
Adult ability to exit
Ability to survive desiccation
Dispersal (adult)
Adult flying strength
Occurrence in drift
Maximum crawling rate
Swimming ability
Attachment
Armoring
Shape
Respiration
Size at maturity
Rheophily
Habit (primary)
Functional feeding group
(primary)
Trait States
Semivoltine (<1 generation/yr), univoltine (1 generation/yr),
bi- or multivoltine (>1 generation/yr)
Fast seasonal, slow seasonal, nonseasonal
Poorly synchronized (wk), well synchronized (d)
Very short (<1 wk), short (<1 mo), long (>1 mo)
Absent (not including emergence), present
Absent, present
Low (<1 km flight before laying eggs), high (>1 km flight
before laying eggs)
Weak (e.g., cannot fly into light breeze), strong
Rare (catastrophic only), common (typically observed),
abundant (dominant in drift samples)
Very low (<10 cm/h), low (<100 cm/h), high (>100 cm/h)
None, weak, strong
None (free-ranging), some (sessile, sedentary)
None (soft-bodied forms), poor (heavily or partly
sclerotized), good (i.e., some cased caddisflies, hard-shelled
organisms)
Streamlined (flat, fusiform), not streamlined (cylindrical,
round or bluff)
Tegument, gills, plastron or spiracle (aerial)
Small (<9 mm), medium (9-16 mm), large (>16 mm)
Depositional, depositional and erosional, erosional
Burrower, climber, sprawler, swimmer, clinger, diver, skater
Collector-filterer, collector-gatherer, predator, shredder,
scraper, piercer, herbivore, parasite
-------
Table 1. continued...
Trait Category
Temperature
Enrichment tolerance
Trait
Temperature optimum
Temperature tolerance
Rank of temperature optimum
Rank of temperature tolerance
Rank of temperature optimum-
tolerance
Temperature indicator
Tolerance
Trait States
Numeric value derived from weighted average calculation
Numeric value derived from weighted average calculation
Scores range from 1 (lowest optima values) to 7 (highest
optima values), based on percentile of optimum value
Scores range from 1 (narrowest tolerance ranges) to 7 (widest
temperature ranges), based on percentile of tolerance value
Combination of the optimum and tolerance ranks. Values
range from 1-1 to 7-7
Cold or warm. Designations were made by Jen Stamp of
Tetra Tech, Inc., based on weighted average or maximum
likelihood calculations, literature, best professional judgment,
and case studies
Values range from 0 (most intolerant) to 10 (most tolerant)
-------
change traits tables, which were modeled after the Poff et al. (2006) Traits Matrix. These traits
were selected for their relevance to the climate change pilot studies, which focused on biological
responses to changes in temperature and hydrology.
Data from multiple sources were incorporated into the Maine, North Carolina, and Utah
climate change traits tables. Main sources were the USGS traits database (Vieira et al., 2006)
and the Poff et al. trait matrix (2006), which were available in an electronic format and were
imported directly into the database. The EPA's 1970s publications had to be hand-entered.
Quality assurance procedures were performed on 10% of these entries, and the data entry error
rate was less than 5%. To maintain consistency and standardization across the multiple data
sources, data integration rules were developed. These rules are described in detail in the 'Data
Integration Rules' documents (see Appendix B). Efforts were also made to identify gaps in each
traits data set. Results of these 'traits gap' analyses can be found in the 'Traits Gap Analysis'
documents (see Appendix C).
Although species-level data were available in each of the state databases, genus-level or
higher OTUs were used in the Maine, North Carolina, and Utah climate change traits tables.
This was due to taxonomic ambiguities in the long-term data that had resulted from factors such
as changes in taxonomic keys and changes in taxonomic labs. Previous research has shown that
traits analyses utilizing genus and family levels have been successful at characterizing aquatic
communities for bioassessment purposes (i.e., Vieira et al. [2006] cites Doledec et al. [1998,
2000] and Gayraud et al. [2003]) and that congeneric species typically have similar functional
trait niches (Poff et al., 2006). Species-level identification is typically not necessary for
traits-based analytical approaches used in biomonitoring programs, is more costly and error
prone, and may result in taxonomic ambiguities because individuals are not identifiable to the
same taxonomic level (Vieira et al. [2006] who also cites Moulton et al. [2000]).
3. RESULTS
The Freshwater Biological Traits Database is available online at
http://www.epa.gov/ncea/global/traits. The database currently has 11,912 unique records for
3,857 different taxa and includes location, habitat, life history, mobility, morphology, and
ecological traits data, along with tolerance calculations for temperature and flow. A list of traits
7
-------
and metadata can be found in Appendix D. Levels of taxonomic resolution vary, as do data
types (i.e., binary, categorical, text notes entries). Instructions on how to conduct data searches
can be found in Appendix E.
Listed below are brief descriptions of the 14 data sources that have been integrated into
the database at this time. These data sources are available for download online on the Data
Source page.
• Vieira et al., 2006
Description: In 2006, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) published a database of lotic
invertebrate traits for North America. This was a collaborative effort between the USGS
National Water-Quality Assessment Program and Colorado State University. This
database represented the first comprehensive summary of traits for North American
invertebrate taxa and the first effort to compile this traits information in a Web-based
database. The traits information was gathered from over 3,000 keys, texts, peer-reviewed
publications, and reports on North American aquatic invertebrates. Traits were grouped
into four general categories: ecology, morphology, behavior, or physiology. Trait states
were established based on the types of information available in the literature and were
expressed in categorical, binary, and quantitative terms. The traits could be mutually
exclusive (only one or the other) or co-occurring (more than one trait state is appropriate
and is, therefore, listed). Species-level resolution was used, but the focus and quality
assurance efforts were concentrated on genus and family-level trait summaries.
• Poff et al., 2006
Description: The Traits Matrix in the Appendix of this journal article provides
information on 2 traits (in 59 trait states) that span four broad categories of trait groups
(i.e., life history, morphological, mobility, and ecological) for 311 taxa from 75 families.
Each trait has anywhere from 2 to 6 trait states. Each taxonomic unit is assigned to only
one trait state (based on literature information and expert opinion). The traits information
in the Traits Matrix was cross-referenced with the USGS (i.e., Vieira et al., 2006) traits
database. This database is in a format that can be readily analyzed.
-------
• U.S. EPA, 2011
Description: These tables were compiled for the Maine, North Carolina, and Utah
climate change pilot study analyses. The focus of these analyses was to look for
biological responses to changes in temperature and hydrology. Data from multiple
sources are incorporated into these data sets. Main sources include the USGS traits
database (2006) and the Poffet al. trait matrix (2006).
• Rankin and Yoder, 2009
Description: This report was prepared by the Midwest Biodiversity Institute for the
USEPA GCRP Climate Change Pilot Project (U.S. EPA, 2011). Appendix Table 2 of the
report contains thermal optima and current optima data (referred to as Weighted Stressor
Values [WSVs] in this document) for macroinvertebrates in headwater and wadeable
streams and were calculated using Ohio EPA data. In addition to weighted average
values, general tolerance and functional feeding group assignments specific to Ohio were
included in the database entries. Fish data are also available in Appendix Table 2 but
have not yet been incorporated into the Freshwater Biological Traits Database.
• Brandt, 2001
Description: Thermal optima and tolerance data for were obtained from Idaho
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Data were derived from Idaho DEQ
bioassessment program samples collected from water bodies throughout Idaho. Included
in this report is a list of cold water obligate taxa, which are based on Idaho's water
quality criterion for cold water taxa (which is not to exceed a daily average stream
temperature of 19°C).
• Herbst and Silldorff, 2007
Description: Thermal optima data for 99 taxa were provided by David Herbst and Erik
Silldorff of the Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Laboratory—University of California
(see pages 9-11 of report). Data were derived from summer sampling events in the
eastern Sierra Nevadas. Taxa were designated as 'thermal sensitive' if the optima values
were <13°C and 'thermal tolerant' if the optima values were >17°C.
9
-------
• Huff etal., 2008
Description: Thermal optima and tolerance data for 234 taxa were provided by Shannon
Hubler of Oregon DEQ. These data were derived from Oregon DEQ data from a wide
range of wadeable stream types and span all of the major ecoregions in Oregon.
• Yuan, 2006
Description: Thermal optima values from Table C-l in Appendix C of this report were
entered into the database. These data were derived from EMAP-West samples that were
collected in 2000-2001.
• EPA 1970s series on environmental requirements and pollution tolerance of aquatic
macroinvertebrates
Description: Traits information for this series was compiled from general literature
searches (it does not include exhaustive surveys of the literature, only major sources).
Data are grouped into broad categories such as general habitat, specific habitat, turbidity,
current, temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, seasonal distribution, timing of emergence,
and geographical distribution (by EPA region). Each page has a species profile that
summarizes the range of environmental conditions under which the species has been
found (values and ranges reflect the experimental and observational bias of each study),
along with the sources from which the information was gathered. These publications
were intended to provide a baseline to which further information could be added as
further research was conducted and more information became available. Some might
consider the information in these publications to be outdated. However, there have been
very few comprehensive efforts to gather this information (especially that compile and
publish it in one place and in a consistent format), and the comprehensive bibliographies
and documentation are very valuable. Electronic copies of this publication are not
available, and hard copies are difficult and expensive to obtain. To obtain lists of
citations for the primary literature that was reviewed for these publications, one needs to
reference the hard copies. This series is composed of four publications:
10
-------
- Beck, 1977
Description: Information on 216 Chironomidae taxa was taken from this
publication and included in the online database.
Harris and Lawrence, 1978
Description: Information on 240 Trichoptera taxa was taken from this publication
and included in the online database.
- Hubbard and Peters, 1978
Description: Information on 396 Ephemeroptera taxa was taken from this
publication and included in the online database.
- Surdick and Gaufin, 1978
Description: Information on 362 Plecoptera taxa was taken from this publication
and included in the online database.
4. FUTURE DIRECTIONS
Currently, there are no plans to further develop this database, although there are several
possible directions. Next steps could include adding fish and periphyton data, along with more
functionality (e.g., new queries, automated import function, interactive map). The automated
import function in particular is important because in order for this database to reach its full
potential, researchers will need to actively contribute to it. Further development of this database
would also benefit from collaborations with other agencies, institutions, and researchers,
domestically and internationally, interested in freshwater species traits.
11
-------
APPENDIX A
List of Cold- and Warm-Water Preference Taxa
A-l
-------
This appendix contains the lists of taxa that were included in the cold- and warm-water
preference trait groups in Utah, Maine, and North Carolina. Lists have been sorted first by state,
then by taxon. These lists were developed using thermal optima and tolerance values specific to
each state and/or region, literature, case studies, and best professional judgment (BPJ) from
regional advisory groups. These lists are meant as a first step—not a final product. They should
be further refined as more data become available. These lists have been developed for particular
regions, but there is some overlap (e.g., some taxa occur on the cold-water list in more than
one state).
Table A-l. Metadata
State
Order
Taxon
Percentage Abundance
Percentage Stations
Source
State that the list was developed for (ME
NC = North Carolina, UT = Utah)
= Maine,
Taxonomic level
Highest level of taxonomic resolution
Percentage of total individuals in the state database
composed of that taxon
Percentage of stations at which the taxon
documented to occur
has been
Source of data
A-2
-------
Table A-2. Maine—cold-water list
Order
Coleoptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Megaloptera
Odonata
Odonata
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Taxon
Oulimnius
Heterotrissocladius
Larsia
Macropelopia
Natarsia
Pagastia
Prodiamesa
Pseudodiamesa
Ameletus
Epeorus
Eurylophella
Rhithrogena
Nigronia
Boyeria
Lanthus
Capnia
Leuctra
Nemoura
Paracapnia
Paranemoura
Peltoperla
Perlodidae
Prostoia
Pteronarcys
Sweltsa
Tallaperla
Utacapnia
Utaperla
Zapada
Apatania
Diplectrona
Glossosoma
Hydatophylax
Limnephilus
Micrasema
Oligostomis
Palaeagapetus
Parapsyche
Psychoglypha
% Abundance
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
% Stations
4.4
8.6
6.8
5.1
7.7
11.3
3.3
1.4
3.1
20.3
20.0
2.7
20.0
37.8
1.3
0.6
16.7
0.5
2.0
0.4
0.5
25.0
0.1
9.4
7.8
1.4
0.4
0.2
0.1
2.7
5.5
14.0
5.8
7.3
10.3
10.3
0.1
3.2
4.4
Source Type
Literature
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Literature
Literature
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Literature
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Literature
Literature
Empirical — Maine
Literature
Literature
Literature
Literature
Empirical — Maine
Literature
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
BPJ Regional
Workgroup
Literature
Literature
Literature
Literature
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Literature
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Source Citation
Vieiraetal.,2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Beck, 1977
Poffetal.,2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Poffetal.,2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Poffetal.,2006
Poffetal.,2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
Poffetal.,2006
Poffetal.,2006
Poffetal.,2006
Surdick & Gaufin,
1978
U.S. EPA, 2011
Poffetal.,2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
2008-201 1
Poffetal.,2006
Poffetal.,2006
Poffetal.,2006
Poffetal.,2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Harris & Lawrence,
1978
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
A-3
-------
Table A-3. Maine—warm-water list
Order
Arhynchobdellida
Basommatophora
Basommatophora
Basommatophora
Basommatophora
Coleoptera
Decapoda
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Hoplonemertea
Hydroida
Neotaenioglossa
Odonata
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Tubificida
Taxon
Erpobdella
Ferrissia
Helisoma
Physa
Physella
Stenelmis
Orconectes
Cardiocladius
Dicrotendipes
Hemerodromia
Labrundinia
Nilotanypus
Parachironomus
Pentaneura
Psectrocladius
Rheopelopia
Tribelos
Caenis
Isonychia
Leucrocuta
Plauditus
Pseudocloeon
Serratella
Stenacron
Stenonema
Tricorythodes
Prostoma
Hydra
Amnicola
Argia
Acroneuria
Attaneuria
Paragnetina
Ceraclea
Helicopsyche
Hydroptila
Macro sternum
Neureclipsis
Oecetis
Chaetogaster
%
Abundance
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.0
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.9
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.4
1.1
5.2
0.5
0.0
0.1
0.8
0.2
0.8
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.8
2.6
0.6
0.1
%
Stations
7.7
12.0
7.8
13.6
18.3
33.0
11.7
6.1
19.9
30.6
16.1
15.7
9.8
16.4
19.0
17.0
9.2
19.9
26.5
24.5
14.7
13.3
22.5
23.1
63.1
24.2
7.2
13.3
18.9
16.1
39.0
4.2
12.1
17.9
12.3
22.3
19.8
37.7
36.0
8.2
Source Type
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Literature
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Empirical — Maine
Source Citation
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Poffetal.,2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
A-4
-------
Table A-4. North Carolina—cold-water list
Order
Coleoptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Odonata
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Taxon
Promoresia
Antocha
Atherix
Cardiocladius
Diamesa
Dicranota
Eukiefferiella
Heleniella
Pagastia
Potthastia
Rheopelopia
Acentrella
Cinygmula
Drunella
Epeorus
Nixe
Rhithrogena
Lanthus
Amphinemura
Clioperla
Cultus
Diploperla
Isoperla
Malirekus
Tallaperla
Zapada
Agapetus
Apatania
Arctopsyche
Dolophilodes
Glossosoma
Parapsyche
%
Abundance
0.4
0.6
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.6
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.5
0.1
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.2
0.0
%
Stations
11.8
25.3
8.5
13.4
6.6
10.1
19.0
1.8
5.6
10.4
2.3
15.2
1.4
7.8
14.3
0.6
5.4
10.7
10.0
5.5
2.5
4.3
17.7
4.7
13.4
0.1
1.9
1.7
1.4
11.2
11.0
1.9
Source Type
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Literature
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Literature
Literature
Literature
Empirical — North Carolina
Literature
Empirical — North Carolina
Literature
Literature
Literature
Literature
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Empirical — North Carolina
Source Citation
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Poffetal.,2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Poffetal.,2006
Poffetal.,2006
Poffetal.,2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
Poffetal.,2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
Poffetal.,2006
Poffetal.,2006
Poffetal.,2006
Poffetal.,2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
A-5
-------
Table A-5. North Carolina—warm-water list
Order
Basommatophora
Coleoptera
Coleoptera
Decapoda
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Ephemeroptera
Hemiptera
Isopoda
Odonata
Odonata
Odonata
Odonata
Odonata
Odonata
Odonata
Rhynchobdellida
Rhynchobdellida
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Unionoida
Taxon
Erpobdella/Mo oreobdella
Physella
Berosus
Lioporeus
Palaemonetes
Nilothauma
Parachironomus
Pentaneura
Procladius
Stenochironomus
Tricorythodes
Belostoma
Caecidotea
Epicordulia
Helocordulia
Hetaerina
Ischnura
Macromia
Neurocordulia
Tetragoneuria
Helobdella
Placobdella
Chimarra
Macro sternum
Neureclipsis
Phylocentropus
Elliptic
% Abundance
0.1
0.8
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.6
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.6
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.2
% Stations
7.5
30.4
9.9
3.0
9.6
4.4
4.6
5.5
25.1
26.7
12.9
3.5
19.4
2.8
3.4
5.4
3.6
28.9
9.9
7.2
8.0
12.1
19.7
4.8
8.6
7.2
6.7
Source Type
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Empirical —
NC
Source Citation
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
A-6
-------
Table A-6. Utah—cold-water list
Order
Coleoptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Diptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Plecoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Taxon
Nematoda
Heterlimnius
Bezzia
Bibiocephala
Chelifera
Dicranota
Oreogeton
Pericoma
Rhabdomastix
Wiedemarmia
Ameletus
Cinygma
Cinygmula
Ephemerella
Ironodes
Rhithrogena
Capniidae
Chloroperlidae
Cultus
Glutops
Kogotus
Leuctridae
Megarcys
Taenionema
Visoka
Yoraperla
Anagapetus
Apatania
Ecclisomyia
Lepidostoma
Neothremma
Oligophlebodes
Parapsyche
% Abundance
0.3
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
1.9
0.0
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.3
0.3
0.0
% Stations
39.2
7.9
36.5
2.4
41.1
34.7
2.1
33.1
0.2
2.1
21.6
0.9
43.8
46.0
0.9
38.3
35.9
48.7
15.3
0.6
2.2
16.7
10.2
13.7
0.2
0.8
0.3
6.1
2.2
37.8
15.8
15.9
6.3
Source Type
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Idaho
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Idaho
Empirical — Idaho
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Oregon
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Oregon
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Idaho
Empirical — Idaho
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Oregon
Empirical — Idaho
Empirical — Idaho
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Oregon
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Source Citation
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Brandt, 2001
U.S. EPA, 2011
Brandt, 2001
Brandt, 2001
U.S. EPA, 2011
Yuan, 2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Yuan, 2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Brandt, 2001
Brandt, 2001
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Yuan, 2006
Brandt, 2001
Brandt, 2001
U.S. EPA, 2011
Yuan, 2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
A-7
-------
Table A-7. Utah—warm-water list
Order
Coleoptera
Coleoptera
Coleoptera
Diptera
Diptera
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeroptera
Hemiptera
Isopoda
Odonata
Plecoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Trichoptera
Taxon
Microcylloepus
Ordobrevia
Psephenus
Caloparyphus
Maruina
Caenis
Leptohyphidae
Ambry sus
Asellidae
Coenagrionidae
Calineuria
Cheumatopsyche
Nectopsyche
Ochrotrichia
Oecetis
Tinodes
% Abundance
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.1
3.1
0.1
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
% Stations
7.9
0.8
0.6
4.1
2.5
1.7
31.0
6.1
12.8
18.4
1.4
16.5
5.5
4.6
14.2
5.4
Source Type
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Oregon
Empirical — Idaho
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Oregon
Empirical — Oregon
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Oregon
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Empirical — Utah
Source Citation
U.S. EPA, 2011
Yuan, 2006
Brandt, 2001
U.S. EPA, 2011
Yuan, 2006
Yuan, 2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Yuan, 2006
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
U.S. EPA, 2011
Note: The warm-water preference list for Utah was limited by the need to retain a family-level operational
taxonomic unit for Chironomidae in the long-term data set.
A-8
-------
Table A-8. Additional notes—cold-water taxa
The following genera were excluded from the cold-water lists in the designated states because
of variation in thermal preference at the species level:
Brachycentrus (UT)
Prunella (UT)
Epeorus (UT)
Ephemerella (NC)
Eukiefferiella (ME)
Eurylophella (NC)
Goera (NC)
Neophylax (NC)
Paragnetina (NC)
Rhyacophila (UT, ME, NC)
Zapada (UT)
Table A-9. Additional notes—warm-water taxa
The following genera were excluded from the warm-water lists
of variation in thermal preference at the species-level:
in the designated states because
Brachycentrus (ME)
Ceratopsyche (ME)
Hydropsyche (ME)
Hydropsyche (NC)
Oecetis (NC)
Polypedilum (NC)
A-9
-------
Table A-10. Sources
Study Name
Study Type
Full Citation
Beck, 1977
Literature
Beck, WM Jr. (1977) Environmental
requirements and pollution tolerance of
common freshwater chironomidae.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH; EPA/600/4-
77/024
Harris and Lawrence, 1978
Literature
Harris, TL; Lawrence, TM. (1978)
Environmental requirements and pollution
tolerance of trichoptera. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Research and Development,
Washington, DC; EPA/600/4-78/063.
Poffetal.,2006
Literature
Poff, NL; Olden, JD, Vieira, NKM, et al.
(2006) Functional trait niches of North
American lotic insects: traits-based
ecological applications in light of
phylogenetic relationships. N Am
Benthol Soc 25(4):730-755.
Surdick and Gaufm, 1978
Literature
Surdick, RF; Gaufin, AR. (1978)
Environmental Requirements and
Pollution Tolerance of Plecoptera. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC; EPA-600/4-78/062.
423 p.
Vieira etal., 2006
Literature
Vieira, NKM; Poff, NL; Carlisle, DM; et
al. (2006). A database of lotic invertebrate
traits for North America. U.S. Geological
Survey Data Series 187.
U.S. EPA, 2011
Empirical—North
Carolina
U.S. EPA. (2011) Implications of climate
change for state bioassessment programs
and approaches to account for effects.
External Review Draft. Global Change
Research Program, National Center for
Environmental Assessment, Washington,
DC: EPA/600/R-11/036A. Maximum
likelihood inferences were based on a
subset of the NC bio monitoring database
comprised of standard
qualitative/full-scale collection method
samples only. Maximum likelihood
calculations were used instead of
weighted-average inference because
abundance data in the NC biomonitoring
database are categorical (1 = rare (1-2
specimens), 3 = common (3-9 species)
and 10 = abundant (10 or more species).
Calculations were based on instantaneous
water-temperature measurements and
occurrences of organisms using the
guidelines described by Yuan (2006).
A-10
-------
Table A-10. continued.
Study Name
Study Type
Full Citation
U.S. EPA, 2011
Empirical—Maine
U.S. EPA. (2011) Implications of climate
change for bioassessment programs and
approaches to account for effects. Global
Change Research Program, National
Center for Environmental Assessment,
Washington, DC: EPA/600/R-11/036F.
Weighted average inferences are based on
a subset of the Maine biomonitoring data.
Average July, August, and September
temperature values from 616 sites were
used in this analysis. Calculations were
based on instantaneous-water temperature
measurements and occurrences of
organisms using the guidelines described
by Yuan (2006). For more information,
contact Lei Zheng
(Lei.Zheng@tetratech.com).
Yuan, 2006
Empirical—Oregon
Yuan, LL. (2006). Estimation and
application of macroinvertebrate tolerance
values. National Center for
Environmental Assessment, Office of
Research and Development, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC.
U.S. EPA, 2011
Empirical—Utah
U.S. EPA. (2011) Implications of climate
change for bioassessment programs and
approaches to account for effects. Global
Change Research Program, National
Center for Environmental Assessment,
Washington, DC: EPA/600/R-11/036F.
Weighted average inferences are based on
a subset of the UT biomonitoring data
comprised of 572 fall samples.
Calculations were based on instantaneous-
water temperature measurements and
occurrences of organisms using the
guidelines described by Yuan (2006). For
more information, contact Lei Zheng
(Lei.Zheng@tetratech.com).
Brandt, 2001
Empirical—Idaho
Brandt, D. (2001) Temperature
preferences and tolerances for 137
common ID macroinvertebrate taxa.
Idaho Department of Environmental
Quality. Coeur d'Alene, ID.
2008-2011
BPJ Regional
Workgroup
Best professional judgment of regional
workgroup.
A-ll
-------
APPENDIX B
Data Integration Rules
B-l
-------
Maine—Data Integration Rules
Three key questions arose during the data compilation process:
1. If traits data for taxa are available from multiple sources, which source should we use?
What if they differ?
2. How do we assign genus-level traits information if only species-level information is
available? What if trait states vary among species within the genera?
3. What if traits are co-occurring (more than one trait state is appropriate and is, therefore,
listed)? This was particularly relevant for functional feeding group (FFG) and habit
traits.
Integration rules were developed to maintain consistency when addressing these issues.
For most of the traits, the Poff et al. (2006) Traits Matrix was given top priority. If the Traits
Matrix lacked information for certain taxa, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) traits database
(i.e., Vieira et al., 2006) received next highest priority, followed by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPAs) 1970s publications. Weighted-average- and maximum-likelihood
calculations received top priority for the temperature preference and tolerance trait assignments.
All operational taxonomic units (OTUs) in the state biomonitoring databases, including rare taxa,
were included in the Maine traits table. This is because the database is meant to be a living
document reflecting user-generated content: individuals using the database can fill in or update
information as it becomes available. People using the database are encouraged to check the traits
information and customize it as necessary so that the information is more accurate for taxa
occurring in their region (in FFG and habit, for which only primary trait state assignments were
made).
The traits information that was entered into the Maine traits table came from a number of
different sources. Sometimes the sources had slight differences in how traits were categorized
and in some of the thresholds that were used when assigning trait states. Another issue was that
traits information for certain taxa was available from several different sources, so a decision had
to be made about which source to use (sources were generally in agreement, but sometimes slight
differences existed). Because of these issues, decisions had to be made during the entry process.
One involved interpreting literature in order to get the trait state information into a standardized
and usable format for analyses. The other involved deciding which source to use. Rules were
B-2
-------
developed for the following trait state entries: voltinism, development, life span, dispersal,
armoring, size, rheophily, functional feeding group, habit, tolerance values and thermal
preference, and tolerance. They are summarized in Tables B-l through B-l 1.
Table B-l. Maine—integration rules that were used when assigning voltinism trait states to taxa
Trait
Voltinism
Voltinism
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al.
(2006)
Original Trait States
Semivoltine
Univoltine
Bi- or multivoltine
<1 Generation per year
1 Generation per year
>1 Generation per year
Assigned Trait States
Semivoltine
Univoltine
Bi- or multivoltine
Semivoltine
Univoltine
Bi- or multivoltine
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
Many of the Vieira et al., 2006 entries went to species-level. If trait states varied among species
within a genus,
a. The trait state that was most frequently recorded was used (= majority rules).
b. If different trait states occurred with the same frequency, the Volt_Comments field was
referenced.
If it mentioned that one state was more typical than another, the more typical state was used.
c. If Volt_ Comments was not helpful, the trait state with the higher number of generations was
chosen.
For example, if there was one 'univoltine' entry and one 'semivoltine' entry, the 'univoltine'
entry was chosen.
Table B-2. Maine—integration rules that were used when assigning development trait states to
taxa
Trait
Development
Dev Speed
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
Fast seasonal
Slow seasonal
Nonseasonal
Fast seasonal
Slow seasonal
Nonseasonal
Assigned Trait States
Fast
Slow
Non
Fast
Slow
Non
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
B-3
-------
Table B-3. Maine—integration rules that were used when assigning life span trait states to taxa
Trait
Adult Life Span
Adult_lifespan
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
Very short
Short
Long
Hours
Days
Weeks
Months
Assigned Trait States
Very short
Short
Long
Very short
Very short
Short
Long
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries (reference Adult lifespan comments if
necessary).
Table B-4. Maine—integration rules that were used when assigning dispersal trait states to taxa
Trait
Female Dispersal
Adult Dispersal
Rules
Notes
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
Low (<1 km flight before laying eggs)
High (>1 km flight before laying eggs)
1 km or less
10 km or less
10 m or less
100 km or less
Assigned Trait States
Low
High
Low
High
NA
High
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
In the Poff et al. (2006) table, it specifies 'female dispersal.'
In the Vieira et al. (2006) traits database, it specifies 'Adult dispersal.'
It was assumed that the information was compatible between sources.
In Vieira et al. (2006), there is an entry '10 m or less.'
It appears that this was a typo (it likely should have been '10 km or less'). Therefore, this
category was excluded.
B-4
-------
Table B-5. Maine—integration rules that were used when assigning armoring trait states to taxa
Trait
Armoring
Armor
Rules
Notes
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
None (soft-bodied forms)
Poor (heavily sclerotized)
Good (e.g., some cased caddisflies)
Soft
All sclerotized
Partly sclerotized
Hard shelled
Assigned Trait States
None
Poor
Good
None
Poor
Poor
Good
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
In the Poff et al. (2006) table, it does not mention 'partly sclerotized.'
In the Vieira et al. (2006) table, 'partly sclerotized' and 'all sclerotized' were assigned to the 'poor'
category.
Table B-6 Maine
to taxa
-integration rules that were used when assigning size (at maturity) trait states
Trait
Size at maturity
Max Body Size
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
Large (length >16 mm)
Medium (length 9-16 mm)
Small (length <9 mm)
Large (length >16 mm)
Medium (length 9-16 mm)
Small (length <9 mm)
Assigned Trait States
Large
Medium
Small
Large
Medium
Small
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
If more than one trait state was assigned (i.e., there was variation among species within a
genus):
a. The category that was most frequently recorded was used (majority rules).
b. If different categories were recorded the same number of times, the 'medium' entry
was used (i.e., if there was one 'small' entry and one 'medium' entry, the medium
entry was used).
B-5
-------
Table B-7. Maine—integration rules that were used when assigning rheophily trait states to taxa
Trait
Rheophily
Rheophily
Flow_pref
Rules:
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
EPA 1970s
Original Trait States
Depositional only
Depositional and erosional
Erosional
Current_quiet
Current_slow
Current_fast_lam
Current_fast_turb
More than one
Quiet and slow
Quiet and/or slow and fast (either laminar
or turbid)
Standing
Slight
Standing-slight
Standing and flowing
Moderate
Moderate-fast
Fast
Assigned Trait States
Depo
Depo_eros
Eros
Depo
Depo
Eros
Eros
If both quiet and slow, depo
Depo
Depo_eros
Depo
Depo
Depo
Depo_eros
Eros
Eros
Eros
More than one:
Some combination of standing and/or
slight and moderate and/or fast
Depo_eros
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
3. Use the EPA 1970s entries.
4. If more than one trait state was assigned (i.e., there was variation among species within a
genus), the category that was most frequently recorded was used (majority rules).
Table B-8. Maine—integration rules that were used when assigning (primary) functional
feeding group trait states to taxa
Integration Rules for FFG:
Only one FFG category was assigned to each taxa. The following rules were used:
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entry (Feed_mode_prim).
3. Use the WSA entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
4. Use the RBP2 1999 entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
5. Use the U.S. EPA (1990) Draft entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
If more than one category was assigned within a genus, the one that occurred most frequently was entered
(= majority rules).
If different states were recorded the same number of times, the next source was used as a 'tie-breaker' (i.e., if
Vieira et al. [2006] had two species listed as clinger [CN] and two as sprawler [SP], and the WSA entry
was SP, SP was used).
If unable to resolve based on these sources, one was randomly selected.
WSA = wadeable Streams Assessment.
-------
Table B-9. Maine—integration rules that were used when assigning (primary) habit trait states
to taxa
Integration Rules for Habit:
Only one habit category was assigned to each taxa. The following rules were used:
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entry (Habit_prim).
3. Use the WSA entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
Use the RBP2 1999 entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
Use the U.S. EPA (1990) Draft entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
If more than one category was assigned within a genus, the one that occurred most frequently was entered
(= majority rules).
If different states were recorded the same number of times, the next source was used as a 'tie-breaker' (i.e., if
Vieira et al. [2006] had two species listed as CN and two as SP, and the WSA entry was SP, SP was
used).
If unable to resolve based on these sources, one was randomly selected.
Table B-10. Maine—integration rules that were used when assigning tolerance values to taxa
Integration Rules for Tolerance:
Only one tolerance value was assigned to each taxa. The following rules were used:
1. Use the WSA entry.
2. Use the RBP2 1999 entry.
3. Use the U.S. EPA (1990) Draft entry.
If there were more than two values from a source, the median value was used.
If there were two entries, the higher value was used (i.e., if assigned values were 2 and 3, the 3 was
used).
NOTE: If state-specific tolerance values were provided, those were also incorporated into the traits
table.
B-7
-------
Table B-ll. Maine—integration rules that were used when assigning thermal preference and
tolerance values to taxa
Traits
Thermal
preference
Thermal_pref
Thermal
preference
Temp_Opt_Rank
Temp Tol Rank
Rules
Source
Poffetal.
(2006)
Vieira et al.
(2006)
EPA 1970s
EPA 1970s
EPA 1970s
Original Trait States
Cold_cool
Cool_warm
Warm
Cold stenothermal (<5°C)
Cold-cool eurythermal (0-15°C)
Hot euthermal (>30°C)
No strong preference
Warm eurythermal (15-30°C)
Assigned Trait States
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 4
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 4
More than one:
Combination of colder and warmer
categories
Eurythermal (>15°C)
Euthermal (>30°C)
Mesothermal (15-30°C)
Metathermal (5-15°C)
Oligothermal (<15°C)
Stenothermal (<5°C)
Wide range — no apparent preference
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 4
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 4
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 4
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
More than one:
Combination of colder and warmer
categories
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
1 . Use the values generated by U. S. EPA (20 1 1) (or from other databases, like Brandt,
200 land Yuan, 2006).
2. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
3 . Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
4. Use the EPA 1970s entries.
If more than one trait state was assigned (i.e., there was variation among species within a
genus), the category that was most frequently recorded was used (majority rules).
-------
North Carolina—Data Integration Rules
Three key questions arose during the data compilation process:
1. If traits data for taxa are available from multiple sources, which source should we use?
What if they differ?
2. How do we assign genus-level traits information if only species-level information is
available? What if trait states vary among species within the genera?
3. What if traits are co-occurring (more than one trait state is appropriate and is, therefore,
listed)? This was particularly relevant for functional feeding group and habit traits.
Integration rules were developed to maintain consistency when addressing these issues.
For most of the traits, the Poff et al. (2006) Traits Matrix was given top priority. If the Traits
Matrix lacked information for certain taxa, the USGS traits database (i.e., Vieira et al., 2006)
received next highest priority, followed by the EPA's 1970s publications. Weighted-average-
and maximum-likelihood calculations received top priority for the temperature preference and
tolerance trait assignments. All OTUs in the state biomonitoring databases, including rare taxa,
were included in the North Carolina traits table. This is because the database is meant to be a
living document; the intent is that people using the database can fill in or update information as it
becomes available. People using the database are encouraged to check the traits information and
customize it as necessary so that the information is more accurate for taxa occurring in their
region (in particular FFG and habit, for which only primary trait state assignments were made).
The traits information that was entered into the North Carolina traits table came from a
number of different sources. Sometimes the sources had slight differences in how traits were
categorized and in some of the thresholds that were used when assigning trait states. Another
issue was that traits information for certain taxa was available from several different sources, so
a decision had to be made about which source to use (sources were generally in agreement, but
sometimes slight differences existed). Because of these issues, decisions had to be made during
the entry process. One involved interpreting literature in order to get the trait state information
into a standardized and usable format for analyses. The other involved deciding which source to
use. Rules were developed for the following trait state entries: voltinism, development, life span,
dispersal, armoring, size, rheophily, functional feeding group, habit, tolerance values and thermal
preference, and tolerance. They are summarized in Tables B-12 through B-22.
B-9
-------
Table B-12. North Carolina—integration rules that were used when assigning voltinism trait
states to taxa
Trait
Voltinism
Voltinism
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al.
(2006)
Original Trait States
Semivoltine
Univoltine
Bi- or multivoltine
<1 Generation per year
1 Generation per year
>1 Generation per year
Assigned Trait States
Semivoltine
Univoltine
Bi- or multivoltine
Semivoltine
Univoltine
Bi- or multivoltine
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
Many of the Vieira entries went to species-level. If trait states varied among species within a genus:
a. The trait state that was most frequently recorded was used (= majority rules).
b. If different trait states occurred with the same frequency, the Volt_Comments field was
referenced.
If it mentioned that one state was more typical than another, the more typical state was used.
c. If Volt_ comments was not helpful, the trait state with the higher number of generations was
chosen.
For example, if there was one 'univoltine' entry and one 'semivoltine' entry, the 'univoltine'
entry was chosen.
Table B-13. North Carolina—integration rules that were used when assigning development trait
states to taxa
Trait
Development
Dev Speed
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
Fast seasonal
Slow seasonal
Nonseasonal
Fast seasonal
Slow seasonal
Nonseasonal
Assigned Trait States
Fast
Slow
Non
Fast
Slow
Non
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
B-10
-------
Table B-14. North Carolina—integration rules that were used when assigning life span trait
states to taxa
Trait
Adult Life Span
Adult_lifespan
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
Very short
Short
Long
Hours
Days
Weeks
Months
Assigned Trait States
Very short
Short
Long
Very short
Very short
Short
Long
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries (reference Adult lifespan comments if
necessary).
Table B-15. North Carolina—integration rules that were used when assigning dispersal trait
states to taxa
Trait
Female dispersal
Adult dispersal
Rules
Notes
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
Low (<1 km flight before laying eggs)
High (>1 km flight before laying eggs)
1 km or less
10 km or less
10 m or less
100 km or less
Assigned Trait States
Low
High
Low
High
NA
High
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
In the Poff et al. (2006) table, it specifies 'female dispersal.'
In the Vieira et al. (2006) traits database, it specifies 'Adult dispersal.'
It was assumed that the information was compatible between sources.
In Vieira et al. (2006), there is an entry '10 m or less.'
It appears that this was a typo (it likely should have been '10 km or less'). Therefore, this
category was excluded.
B-ll
-------
Table B-16. North Carolina—integration rules that were used when assigning armoring trait
states to taxa
Trait
Armoring
Armor
Rules
Notes
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
None (soft-bodied forms)
Poor (heavily sclerotized)
Good (e.g., some cased caddisflies)
Soft
All sclerotized
Partly sclerotized
Hard shelled
Assigned Trait States
None
Poor
Good
None
Poor
Poor
Good
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
In the Poff et al. (2006) table, it does not mention 'partly sclerotized.'
In the Vieira et al. (2006) table, 'partly sclerotized' and 'all sclerotized' were assigned to the 'poor'
category.
Table B-17. North Carolina—integration rules that were used when assigning size (at maturity)
trait states to taxa
Trait
Size at maturity
Max Body Size
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
Large (length >16 mm)
Medium (length 9-16 mm)
Small (length <9 mm)
Large (length >16 mm)
Medium (length 9-16 mm)
Small (length <9 mm)
Assigned Trait States
Large
Medium
Small
Large
Medium
Small
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
If more than one trait state was assigned (i.e., there was variation among species within a
genus):
a. The category that was most frequently recorded was used (majority rules).
b. If different categories were recorded the same number of times, the 'medium' entry was
used
(i.e., if there was one 'small' entry and one 'medium' entry, the medium entry was used).
B-12
-------
Table B-18. North Carolina-
states to taxa
-integration rules that were used when assigning rheophily trait
Trait
Rheophily
Rheophily
Flow_pref
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
EPA 1970s
Original Trait States
Depositional only
Depositional and erosional
Erosional
Current_quiet
Current_slow
Current_fast_lam
Current_fast_turb
More than one:
Quiet and slow
Quiet and/or slow and fast (either lam or
turb)
Standing
Slight
Standing-slight
Standing and flowing
Moderate
Moderate-fast
Fast
Assigned Trait States
Depo
Depo_eros
Eros
Depo
Depo
Eros
Eros
If both quiet and slow, depo
Depo
Depo_eros
Depo
Depo
Depo
Depo_eros
Eros
Eros
Eros
More than one:
Some combination of standing and/or
slight and moderate and/or fast
Depo_eros
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
3. Use the EPA 1970s entries.
If more than one trait state was assigned (i.e., there was variation among species within a genus),
the category that was most frequently recorded was used (majority rules).
B-13
-------
Table B-19. North Carolina—integration rules that were used when assigning (primary)
functional feeding group trait states to taxa
Integration Rules for FFG:
Only one FFG category was assigned to each taxa. The following rules were used:
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entry (Feed_mode_prim).
3. Use the WSA entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
4. Use the RBP2 1999 entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
5. Use the U.S. EPA (1990) Draft entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
If more than one category was assigned within a genus, the one that occurred most frequently was entered
(= majority rules).
If different states were recorded the same number of times, the next source was used as a 'tie-breaker' (i.e., if
Vieira et al. (2006) had two species listed as CN and two as SP, and the WSA entry was SP, SP was used).
If unable to resolve based on these sources, one was randomly selected.
Table B-20. North Carolina—integration rules that were used when assigning (primary) habit
trait states to taxa
Integration Rules for Habit:
Only one habit category was assigned to each taxa. The following rules were used:
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entry (Habit_prim).
3. Use the WSA entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
4. Use the RBP2 1999 entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
5. Use the U.S. EPA (1990) Draft entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
If more than one category was assigned within a genus, the one that occurred most frequently was entered
(= majority rules).
If different states were recorded the same number of times, the next source was used as a 'tie-breaker' (i.e., if
Vieira et al. (2006) had two species listed as CN and two as SP, and the WSA entry was SP, SP was used).
If unable to resolve based on these sources, one was randomly selected.
Table B-21. North Carolina—integration rules that were used when assigning tolerance values
to taxa
Integration Rules for Tolerance:
Only one tolerance value was assigned to each taxa. The following rules were used:
1. Use the WSA entry.
1. Use the RBP2 1999 entry.
2. Use the U.S. EPA (1990) Draft entry.
If there were more than two values from a source, the median value was used.
If there were two entries, the higher value was used (i.e., if assigned values were 2 and 3, the 3 was
used).
NOTE: if state-specific tolerance values were provided, those were also incorporated into the traits
table.
B-14
-------
Table B-22. North Carolina—integration rules that were used when assigning thermal
preference and tolerance values to taxa
Traits
Thermal
preference
Thermal_pref
Thermal
preference
Temp_Opt_Rank
Temp Tol Rank
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
EPA 1970s
EPA 1970s
EPA 1970s
Original Trait States
Cold_cool
Cool_warm
Warm
Cold stenothermal (<5°C)
Cold-cool eurythermal (0-15°C)
Hot euthermal (>30°C)
No strong preference
Warm eurythermal (15-30°C)
Assigned Trait States
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 4
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 4
More than one:
Combination of colder and warmer
categories
Eurythermal (>15°C)
Euthermal (>30°C)
Mesothermal (15-30°C)
Metathermal (5-15°C)
Oligothermal (<15°C)
Stenothermal (<5°C)
Wide range — no apparent preference
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 4
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 4
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 4
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
More than one:
Combination of colder and warmer
categories
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
1 . Use the values generated by U. S. EPA (20 1 1) (or from other databases, like Brandt,
200 land Yuan, 2006).
2. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
3 . Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
4. Use the EPA 1970s entries.
If more than one trait state was assigned (i.e., there was variation among species within a
genus), the category that was most frequently recorded was used (majority rules).
B-15
-------
Utah—Data Integration Rules
Three key questions arose during the data compilation process:
1. If traits data for taxa are available from multiple sources, which source should we use?
What if they differ?
2. How do we assign genus-level traits information if only species-level information is
available? What if trait states vary among species within the genera?
3. What if traits are co-occurring (more than one trait state is appropriate and is, therefore,
listed)? This was particularly relevant for functional feeding group and habit traits.
Integration rules were developed to maintain consistency when addressing these issues.
For most of the traits, the Poff et al. (2006) Traits Matrix was given top priority. If the Traits
Matrix lacked information for certain taxa, the USGS traits database (i.e., Vieira et al., 2006)
received next highest priority, followed by the EPA's 1970s publications. Weighted-average-
and maximum-likelihood calculations received top priority for the temperature preference and
tolerance trait assignments. All OTUs in the state biomonitoring databases, including rare taxa,
were included in the Utah traits table. This is because the database is meant to be a living
document; the intent is that people using the database can fill in or update information as it
becomes available. People using the database are encouraged to check the traits information and
customize it as necessary so that the information is more accurate for taxa occurring in their
region (in particular FFG and habit, for which only primary trait state assignments were made).
The traits information that was entered into the Utah traits table came from a number of
different sources. Sometimes the sources had slight differences in how traits were categorized
and in some of the thresholds that were used when assigning trait states. Another issue was that
traits information for certain taxa was available from several different sources, so a decision had
to be made about which source to use (sources were generally in agreement, but sometimes slight
differences existed). Because of these issues, decisions had to be made during the entry process.
One involved interpreting literature in order to get the trait state information into a standardized
and usable format for analyses. The other involved deciding which source to use. Rules were
developed for the following trait state entries: voltinism, development, life span, dispersal,
B-16
-------
armoring, size, rheophily, functional feeding group, habit, tolerance values and thermal
preference, and tolerance. They are summarized in Tables B-23 through B-33.
Table B-23. Utah—integration rules that were used when assigning voltinism trait states to taxa
Trait
Voltinism
Voltinism
Rules:
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al.
(2006)
Original Trait States
Semivoltine
Univoltine
Bi- or multivoltine
<1 Generation per year
1 Generation per year
>1 Generation per year
Assigned Trait States
Semivoltine
Univoltine
Bi- or multivoltine
Semivoltine
Univoltine
Bi- or multivoltine
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
Many of the Vieira entries went to species-level. If trait states varied among species within a genus,
a. The trait state that was most frequently recorded was used (= majority rules).
b. If different trait states occurred with the same frequency, the Volt_Comments field was
referenced.
If it mentioned that one state was more typical than another, the more typical state was used.
c. If Volt_ comments was not helpful, the trait state with the higher number of generations was
chosen
For example, if there was one 'univoltine' entry and one 'semivoltine' entry, the 'univoltine'
entry was chosen.
Table B-24. Utah—integration rules that were used when assigning development trait states to
taxa
Trait
Development
Dev Speed
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
Fast seasonal
Slow seasonal
Nonseasonal
Fast seasonal
Slow seasonal
Nonseasonal
Assigned Trait States
Fast
Slow
Non
Fast
Slow
Non
1 . Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
B-17
-------
Table B-25. Utah—integration rules that were used when assigning life span trait states to taxa
Trait
Adult Life Span
Adult_lifespan
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
Very short
Short
Long
Hours
Days
Weeks
Months
Assigned Trait States
Very short
Short
Long
Very short
Very short
Short
Long
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries (reference Adult lifespan comments if
necessary).
Table B-26. Utah—integration rules that were used when assigning dispersal trait states to taxa
Trait
Female dispersal
Adult dispersal
Rules
Notes
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
Low (<1 km flight before laying eggs)
High (>1 km flight before laying eggs)
1 km or less
10 km or less
10 m or less
100 km or less
Assigned Trait States
Low
High
Low
High
NA
High
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
In the Poff et al. (2006) table, it specifies 'female dispersal.'
In the Vieira et al. (2006) traits database, it specifies 'Adult dispersal.'
It was assumed that the information was compatible between sources.
In Vieira et al. (2006) there is an entry '10 m or less.'
It appears that this was a typo (it likely should have been '10 km or less'). Therefore, this
category was excluded.
B-18
-------
Table B-27. Utah—integration rules that were used when assigning armoring trait states to taxa
Trait
Armoring
Armor
Rules
Notes
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al.
(2006)
Original Trait States
None (soft-bodied forms)
Poor (heavily sclerotized)
Good (e.g., some cased caddisflies)
Soft
All sclerotized
Partly sclerotized
Hard shelled
Assigned Trait States
None
Poor
Good
None
Poor
Poor
Good
1 . Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
In the Poff et al. (2006) table, it does not mention 'partly sclerotized.'
In the Vieira et al. (2006) table, 'partly sclerotized' and 'all sclerotized' were assigned to the 'poor'
category.
Table B-28. Utah
to taxa
-integration rules that were used when assigning size (at maturity) trait states
Trait
Size at maturity
Max Body Size
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
Original Trait States
Large (length >16 mm)
Medium (length 9-16 mm)
Small (length <9 mm)
Large (length >16 mm)
Medium (length 9-16 mm)
Small (length <9 mm)
Assigned Trait States
Large
Medium
Small
Large
Medium
Small
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
If more than one trait state was assigned (i.e., there was variation among species within a
genus):
a. The category that was most frequently recorded was used (majority rules).
b. If different categories were recorded the same number of times, the 'medium' entry
was used (i.e., if there was one 'small' entry and one 'medium' entry, the medium
entry was used).
B-19
-------
Table B-29. Utah—integration rules that were used when assigning rheophily trait states to taxa
Trait
Rheophily
Rheophily
Flow_pref
Rules
Source
Poffetal. (2006)
Vieira et al. (2006)
EPA 1970s
Original Trait States
Depositional only
Depositional and erosional
Erosional
Current_quiet
Current_slow
Current_fast_lam
Current_fast_turb
More than one:
Quiet and slow
Quiet and/or slow and fast (either lam or
turb)
Standing
Slight
Standing-slight
Standing and flowing
Moderate
Moderate-fast
Fast
Assigned Trait States
Depo
Depo_eros
Eros
Depo
Depo
Eros
Eros
If both quiet and slow, depo
Depo
Depo_eros
Depo
Depo
Depo
Depo_eros
Eros
Eros
Eros
More than one:
Some combination of standing and/or
slight and moderate and/or fast
Depo_eros
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
3. Use the EPA 1970s entries.
If more than one trait state was assigned (i.e., there was variation among species within a genus),
the category that was most frequently recorded was used (majority rules).
B-20
-------
Table B-30. Utah—integration rules that were used when assigning (primary) functional feeding
group trait states to taxa.
Integration Rules for FFG:
Only one FFG category was assigned to each taxa. The following rules were used:
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entry (Feed_mode_prim).
3. Use the WSA entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
Use the RBP2 1999 entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
Use the U.S. EPA (1990) Draft entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
If more than one category was assigned within a genus, the one that occurred most frequently was entered
(= majority rules).
If different states were recorded the same number of times, the next source was used as a 'tie-breaker' (i.e.,
if Vieira et al. [2006] had two species listed as CN and two as SP, and the WSA entry was SP, SP was
used)
If unable to resolve based on these sources, one was randomly selected.
Table B-31. Utah—integration rules that were used when assigning (primary) habit trait states
to taxa.
Integration Rules for Habit:
Only one habit category was assigned to each taxa. The following rules were used:
1. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
2. Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entry (Habit_prim).
3. Use the WSA entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
4. Use the RBP2 1999 entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
5. Use the U.S. EPA (1990) Draft entry from the Benthics_Master_Taxa table.
If more than one category was assigned within a genus, the one that occurred most frequently was entered
(= majority rules).
If different states were recorded the same number of times, the next source was used as a 'tie-breaker' (i.e.,
if Vieira et al. (2006) had two species listed as CN and two as SP, and the WSA entry was SP, SP was
used).
If unable to resolve based on these sources, one was randomly selected.
Table B-32. Utah—integration rules that were used when assigning tolerance values to taxa.
Integration Rules for Tolerance:
Only one tolerance value was assigned to each taxa. The following rules were used:
1. Use the WSA entry.
2. Use the RBP2 1999 entry.
3. Use the U.S. EPA (1990) Draft entry.
If there were more than two values from a source, the median value was used.
If there were two entries, the higher value was used (i.e., if assigned values were 2 and 3, the
3 was used).
NOTE: If state-specific tolerance values were provided, those were also incorporated into the
traits table.
B-21
-------
Table B-33. Utah—integration rules that were used when assigning thermal preference and
tolerance values to taxa.
Traits
Thermal
preference
Thermal_pref
Thermal
preference
Temp_Opt_Rank
Temp_Tol_Rank
Rules
Source
Poffetal.
(2006)
Vieira et al.
(2006)
EPA 1970s
EPA 1970s
EPA 1970s
Original Trait States
Cold_cool
Cool_warm
Warm
Cold stenothermal (<5°C)
Cold-cool eurythermal (0-15°C)
Hot euthermal (>30°C)
No strong preference
Warm eurythermal (15-30°C)
Assigned Trait States
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 4
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 3
Rank opt = 4, Rank tol = 5
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 4
More than one:
Combination of colder and warmer
categories
Eurythermal (>15°C)
Euthermal (>30°C)
Mesothermal (15-30°C)
Metathermal (5-15°C)
Oligothermal (<15°C)
Stenothermal (<5°C)
Wide range — no apparent preference
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 4
Rank_opt = 5, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 5,
Rank tol = 4
Rank_opt= 3,
Rank tol = 3
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 4
Rank_opt = 3, Rankjol = 3
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
More than one:
Combination of colder and warmer
categories
Rank_opt = 4, Rankjol = 5
1. Use the values generated by U.S. EPA (201 1) (or from other databases, like Brandt,2001
and Yuan, 2006).
2. Use the Poff et al. (2006) entries (for genus-level matches).
3 . Use the Vieira et al. (2006) entries.
4. Use the EPA 1970s entries.
If more than one trait state was assigned (i.e., there was variation among species within a
genus), the category that was most frequently recorded was used (majority rules).
B-22
-------
APPENDIX C
Traits Gap Analysis
C-l
-------
Maine—Traits Gap Analysis
The Maine traits table contains information for 548 operational taxonomic units (OTUs).
The majority of the OTUs were at the genera-, genera-group level (94%), or 4% family-level,
and the remaining were order-level or higher. One hundred thirty-nine families and 39 higher
taxonomic groups (generally order-level) are represented in the Maine data set. The source of
most of the nontemperature traits information was the Traits Matrix (Poff et al., 2006) (see Table
C-l). This was mainly supplemented by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) traits database
(Vieira et al., 2006). Most of the temperature traits information was derived from weighted-
average calculations that were performed on a subset of the Maine data. Gaps in temperature
traits information were mainly filled using the Poff et al. (2006) Traits Matrix, the USGS traits
database (Vieira et al., 2006), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPAs) 1970s
publications. EPA's 1970s publications were also an important supplemental source of
information for rheophily. Most of the habit and functional feeding group (FFG) information
was taken from the Traits Matrix (Poff et al., 2006) and was supplemented mostly by data from
the Wadeable Streams Assessment (WSA; U.S. EPA, 2006), Rapid Bioassessment Protocol
(RBP2; Barbour et al., 1999), and the USGS traits database (Vieira et al., 2006).
Traits information was available for approximately 35-50% of the OTUs (see Table C-
2). Exceptions were the habit and functional feeding group traits, for which 83 and 92% of the
OTUs had information, respectively. Numerical temperature traits information was available for
about 30% of the taxa, and categorical temperature traits information (based on rankings and
literature) was available for 58% of the taxa.
Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) taxa generally had more traits
information than other taxa (see Table C-3). Habit and FFG is available for over 90% of the
EPT taxa, categorical temperature traits information is available for 89-94% of the EPT taxa,
and other traits information is available for about 70-80% of the EPT taxa. A large number of
taxa in the Maine data set are EPT taxa: 72 are Trichopterans, 45 are Ephemeropterans, and 34
are Plecopterans. Dipterans (193 taxa), Odonates (35 taxa), and Coleopterans (53 taxa) are also
well-represented in the data set. For the Dipterans and Coleopterans, habit and FFG information
is available for 87-96% of the taxa and temperature traits information for 40-45%. Other traits
information is available for 23% of the Dipterans and 38% of the Coleopterans. Habit and FFG
information is available for 89-97% of the Odonates, while other traits information is available
C-2
-------
for 71-74% of the taxa. There are a number of orders (or higher level OTUs) that only have
FFG information (i.e., Pharyngobdellida, Tubificida, Acariformes, Collembola, Copepoda); most
of these OTUs occur in low abundances and are represented by few taxa. In terms of overall
abundance in the Maine database, the largest number of individuals in the Maine database are
Trichopterans (overall abundance equals 42%), Dipterans (34%), and then Ephemeropterans
(12%). Amphipods, Plecopterans, Isopods, Coleopterans, and Haplotaxida have overall
abundances of 1-2%. The remaining 540 OTUs have overall abundances of less than 1%.
C-3
-------
Table C-l. Summary of the sources that were used to derive traits information for the Maine traits table. The values equal the number of taxa
that the source provided information on. NA equals the number of taxa for which no traits information was available
Traits
Life History
Voltinism
Development
Synchronization of emergence
Adult life span
Adult ability to exit
Ability to survive desiccation
Sources
Poff
et al.,
2006
190
200
200
198
200
200
Vieira
et al.,
2006
80
9
27
U.S. EPA
(ME), 2011
EPA
1970s3
VT
DEC,
2008
U.S. EPA,
2006
Barbour et
al., 1999
U.S. EPA,
1990
NA
278
339
348
323
348
348
Mobility
Dispersal (adult)
Adult flying strength
Occurrence in drift
Maximum crawling rate
Swimming ability
194
200
200
200
200
27
327
348
348
348
348
Morphology
Attachment
Armoring
Shape
Respiration
Size at maturity
200
192
200
200
192
80
92
348
276
348
348
264
Resource acquisition/preference
Rheophily
Habit
Functional feeding group
194
154
161
54
166
145
67
4
127
159
5
24
13
229
96
46
Temperature
Temperature optimum
Temperature tolerance
Rank of temperature optimum
Rank of temperature tolerance
Rank of temperature optimum-tolerance
Tolerance
95
95
95
17
17
17
161
161
161
161
161
45
45
45
390
8
27
387
387
230
230
230
123
o
"Beck ,1977; Harris and Lawrence, 1978; Hubbard and Peters, 1978; Surdick and Gaufin, 1978.
-------
Table C-2. Numbers and percentages of the 548 total taxa (at the established OTU level) in the
Maine database that have traits information
Traits
Number of Taxa With
Traits information
Percentage of Taxa With Traits
information
Life history
Voltinism
Development
Synchronization of emergence
Adult life span
Adult ability to exit
Ability to survive desiccation
270
209
200
225
200
200
49.3
38.1
36.5
41.1
36.5
36.5
Mobility
Dispersal (adult)
Adult flying strength
Occurrence in drift
Maximum crawling rate
Swimming ability
Morphology
Attachment
Armoring
Shape
Respiration
Size at maturity
221
200
200
200
200
200
272
200
200
284
40.3
36.5
36.5
36.5
36.5
36.5
49.6
36.5
36.5
51.8
Resource acquisition/preference
Rheophily
Habit
Functional feeding group
319
452
502
58.2
82.5
91.6
Temperature
Temperature optimum
Temperature tolerance
Rank of temperature optimum
Rank of temperature tolerance
Rank of temperature
optimum-tolerance
Tolerance
161
161
318
318
318
425
29.4
29.4
58
58
58
77.6
C-5
-------
Table C-3. Percentage of taxa within each order (or, in some cases,
traits table contained within the Freshwater Species Traits Database
higher taxonomic level) that have life history traits information in the Maine
Order
Trichoptera
Diptera
Ephemeroptera
Amphipoda
Plecoptera
Isopoda
Coleoptera
Haplotaxida
B asommatophora
Odonata
Mesogastropoda
Rhynchobdellida
Veneroida
Tricladida
Megaloptera
Trombidiformes
Lumbriculida
Hydroida
Arhynchobdellida
Heterostropha
Decapoda
Pharyngobdellida
Hoplonemertea
Cladocera
Tubificida
Nemata (phylum)
Hemiptera
Number of Taxa
Within Each
Order
72
193
45
4
34
1
53
20
15
35
7
7
4
4
5
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
14
Abundance
(Percentage of Total)
42.3
34.2
12.4
1.9
1.7
1.6
1.4
1.1
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other Traits
(Average)
71.8
23.4
80.1
26.5
80.1
29.4
37.5
0
2.7
74.3
1.7
14.3
10.3
0
82.4
0
0
17.6
15.7
0
29.4
0
0
0
0
0
52.5
Temperature
90.3
45.1
88.9
100
94.1
100
39.6
30
33.3
71.4
14.3
57.1
75
75
80
100
66.7
100
66.7
100
33.3
0
100
0
0
0
42.9
Habit
93.1
87
93.3
100
91.2
100
96.2
40
73.3
88.6
42.9
28.6
75
50
100
0
0
0
66.7
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
100
FFG
97.2
91.7
95.6
100
91.2
100
90.6
90
86.7
97.1
57.1
85.7
100
50
100
0
33.3
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
66.7
100
100
Tolerance
83.3
82.9
84.4
100
70.6
100
73.6
80
86.7
82.9
57.1
28.6
100
50
80
0
66.7
100
33.3
0
100
0
100
100
0
100
64.3
-------
Table C-3. continued.
Order
Lepidoptera
Veneroidea
Acariformes
Collembola
Aeolosomatida
Branchiobdellida
Neuroptera
Copepoda
Nematomorpha
(phylum)
Neotaenioglossa
Unionoida
Ectoprocta (phylum)
Number of Taxa
Within Each
Order
1
1
1
4
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Abundance
(Percentage of Total)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other Traits
(Avg)
0
0
0
0
23.5
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
Temp Rank
0
0
0
0
100
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
Habit
100
0
0
0
0
50
100
0
100
0
100
0
FFG
100
100
100
100
0
50
100
100
100
100
100
0
Tolerance
100
100
0
0
0
50
100
0
100
100
100
0
-------
North Carolina—Traits Gap Analysis
The North Carolina traits table contains information for 797 OTUs. The majority of the
OTUs were at the genera-, genera-group level (97%), or 2% family-level, and the remaining
were order-level or higher. Two hundred sixty-three families and 72 higher taxonomic groups
(generally order-level) are represented in the North Carolina data set. The source of the majority
of nontemperature traits information was the Poff et al. (2006) Traits Matrix (see Table C-4).
This was mainly supplemented by the USGS traits database (Vieira et al., 2006). Most of the
temperature traits information was derived from the maximum likelihood calculations on a
subset of North Carolina data. Gaps in temperature traits information were mainly filled using
the Traits Matrix (Poff et al., 2006), the USGS traits database (Vieira et al., 2006), and the EPA's
1970s publications. EPA's 1970s publications were also an important supplemental source of
information for rheophily. Most of the habit and functional feeding group information was taken
from the Poff et al. (2006) Traits Matrix and was supplemented mostly by WSA (U.S. EPA,
2006), RBP2 (Barbour et al., 1999), and the USGS traits database (Vieira et al., 2006).
Traits information was available for approximately 25-40% of the OTUs (see Table C-
5). Exceptions were the habit and functional feeding group traits, for which 61 and 68% of the
OTUs had information, respectively. Numerical temperature optima information was available
for about 30% of the taxa, and categorical temperature optima information (based on rankings
and literature) was available for 44% of the taxa. Because of the type of data that was available
for the maximum likelihood analysis (categorical abundance data), less temperature tolerance
information could be generated. Accordingly, there were fewer numerical temperature tolerance
values, and 36% of the taxa had categorical temperature tolerance (ranking) information.
EPT taxa generally had more traits information than other taxa (see Table C-6). Habit
and FFG is available for over 90% of the EPT taxa, categorical temperature traits information is
available for about 93% of the EPT taxa, and other traits information is available for 79-88% of
the EPT taxa. A large number of taxa in the North Carolina data set are EPT taxa: 62 are
Trichopterans, 57 are Ephemeropterans, and 41 are Plecopterans. Dipterans (197 taxa),
Odonates (46 taxa), and Coleopterans (67 taxa) are also well represented in the data set. For the
Dipterans, habit and FFG information is available for 80-85% of the taxa, temperature traits
information, 43%, and other traits information, 20%. For the Coleopterans, habit and FFG
information is available for 91-94% of the taxa, temperature traits information, 49%, and other
-------
traits information, 29%. Habit and FFG information is available for 89-96% of the Odonates,
while other traits information is available for 65-72% of the taxa. No traits information is
available for 37 taxa; most of these OTUs occur in low abundances and are represented by few
taxa. In terms of overall abundance in the North Carolina database, the largest number of
individuals are Dipterans (overall abundance equals 29%), followed by Ephemeropterans (20%),
then Trichopterans (16%), then Coleopterans (8%), then Odonates, (7%) and then Plecopterans
(6%). Bassomatophora, Megaloptera, Haplotaxida, Veneroida, Lumbriculida, Amphipoda, and
Decapoda have overall abundances of 1-2%. The remaining 784 OTUs have overall abundances
of less than 1%.
C-9
-------
Table C-4. Summary of the sources that were used to derive traits information for the North Carolina traits table. The values equal the number of
taxa that the source provided information on. NA equals the number of taxa for which no traits information was available
Traits
Life History
Voltinism
Development
Synchronization of emergence
Adult life span
Adult ability to exit
Ability to survive desiccation
Sources
Poffetal.,
2006
205
214
214
212
214
214
Vieira
et al., 2006
85
11
36
U.S. EPA
(NC), 2011
EPA
1970s3
VT DEC,
2008
U.S. EPA,
2006
Barbour et
al., 1999
U.S. EPA,
1990
NA
507
572
583
549
583
583
Mobility
Dispersal (adult)
Adult flying strength
Occurrence in drift
Maximum crawling rate
Swimming ability
208
214
214
214
214
28
561
583
583
583
583
Morphology
Attachment
Armoring
Shape
Respiration
Size at maturity
214
203
214
214
203
104
114
583
490
583
583
480
Resource acquisition/preference
Rheophily
Habit
Functional feeding group
208
179
184
63
173
169
65
4
127
151
4
23
15
457
314
255
Temperature
Temperature optimum
Temperature tolerance
Rank of temperature optimum
Rank of temperature tolerance
Rank of temp optimum-tolerance
Tolerance
93
93
93
20
20
20
233
0
233
166
166
8
8
8
410
9
18
564
797
443
510
510
360
o
I
o
aBeck ,1977; Harris and Lawrence, 1978; Hubbard and Peters, 1978; Surdick and Gaufin, 1978.
-------
Table C-5. Numbers and percentages of the 797 total taxa (at the established OTU level) in the
North Carolina database that have traits information
Traits
Number of Taxa With
Traits information
Percentage of Taxa With
Traits information
Life history
Voltinism
Development
Synchronization of emergence
Adult life span
Adult ability to exit
Ability to survive desiccation
290
225
214
248
214
214
36.4
28.2
26.9
31.1
26.9
26.9
Mobility
Dispersal (adult)
Adult flying strength
Occurrence in drift
Maximum crawling rate
Swimming ability
236
214
214
214
214
29.6
26.9
26.9
26.9
26.9
Morphology
Attachment
Armoring
Shape
Respiration
Size at maturity
214
307
214
214
317
26.9
38.5
26.9
26.9
39.8
Resource acquisition/preference
Rheophily
Habit
Functional feeding group
340
483
542
42.7
60.6
68
Temperature
Temperature optimum
Temperature tolerance
Rank of temperature optimum
Rank of temperature tolerance
Rank of temperature optimum-tolerance
Tolerance
233
0
354
287
287
437
29.2
0
44.4
36
36
54.8
C-ll
-------
Table C-6. Percentage of taxa within each order (or, in some cases, higher taxonomic level) that have life history traits information in the North
Carolina traits table
Order
Diptera
Ephemeroptera
Trichoptera
Plecoptera
Coleoptera
Odonata
Basommatophora
Megaloptera
Haplotaxida
Veneroida
Lumbriculida
Amphipoda
Decapoda
Neotaenioglossa
Isopoda
Mesogastropoda
Trombidiformes
Tricladida
Rhynchobdellida
Hemiptera
Unionoida
Branchiobdellida
Arhynchobdellida
Opisthopora
Hoplonemertea
Lepidoptera
Number of Taxa
Within Each Order
197
57
62
41
67
46
13
5
34
20
1
25
24
11
13
7
1
4
7
11
11
2
6
1
2
2
Abundance
(Percentage of
Total)
28.68
19.75
15.46
5.67
7.71
7.09
2.31
2.11
1.73
1.75
1.32
1.01
1.04
0.97
0.51
0.5
0.58
0.49
0.25
0.22
0.2
0.14
0.13
0.11
0.07
0.06
Other Traits
(Average)
20.08
79.17
78.53
87.96
29.1
64.81
2.4
81.25
0.37
2.5
0
3.5
3.13
0
5.77
6.25
0
0
8.93
44.89
0
3.13
19.79
0
0
50
Temp Optima
Rank
43.1
93
93.5
92.7
49.3
71.7
23.1
100
20.6
10
100
16
16.7
18.2
15.4
14.3
100
0
42.9
54.5
9.1
50
100
100
0
50
Habit
79.7
91.2
96.8
90.2
91
89.1
84.6
100
29.4
25
100
16
20.8
9.1
15.4
57.1
100
50
42.9
100
0
0
83.3
0
0
100
FFG
85.3
93
96.8
92.7
94
95.7
92.3
100
70.6
35
100
24
16.7
27.3
46.2
71.4
100
50
100
100
36.4
0
83.3
0
50
100
Tolerance
76.1
78.9
88.7
70.7
68.7
69.6
84.6
80
58.8
25
100
20
16.7
27.3
23.1
42.9
100
25
28.6
63.6
18.2
0
16.7
0
50
100
o
to
-------
Table C-6. continued.
Order
Polychaeta (class)
Neuroptera
Aciculata
Sessilia
Mytiloida
Mysida
Canalipalpata
Neogastropoda
Proseriata
Tanaidacea
Nematoda (phylum)
Porifera (phylum)
Ostreoida
Cheilostomata
Hydrobiidae
Heteronemertea
Heterostropha
Myoida
Ophiurida
Polycladida
Hydroida
Leptothecatae
Pleurogona
Cumacea
Gordiida
Heteroptera
Nudibranchia
Ctenostomata
Number of Taxa
Within Each Order
17
1
21
2
4
2
11
8
1
2
1
1
3
3
2
1
5
3
2
2
2
3
2
1
1
3
2
2
Abundance
(Percentage of
Total)
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other Traits
(Average)
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9.38
0
0
0
0
35.42
0
0
Temp Optima
Rank
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
66.7
0
0
Habit
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
66.7
0
0
FFG
0
100
0
50
0
0
0
0
0
50
100
100
0
0
0
0
20
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
0
100
0
0
Tolerance
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
-------
Table C6. continued..
Order
Pantopoda
Paleonemertea
Arcoida
Hymenoptera
Anthoathecatae
Cephalaspidea
Actiniaria
Apodida
Arbacioida
Cidaroida
Dendrochirotida
Echiurida (phylum)
Enteropneusta (class)
Neoloricata
Pholadomyoida
Pterioida
Temnopleuroida
Number of Taxa
Within Each Order
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Abundance
(Percentage of
Total)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other Traits
(Average)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Temp Optima
Rank
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Habit
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
FFG
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Tolerance
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
-------
Utah—Traits Gap Analysis
The Utah traits table contains information for 272 OTUs. The majority of the OTUs were
at the genera-, genera-group level (85%), or 12% family-level, and the remaining were
order-level or higher. One hundred seventeen families and 32 higher taxonomic groups
(generally order-level) are represented in the Utah data set. The source of the majority of
nontemperature traits information was the Poff et al. (2006) Traits Matrix (see Table C-7). This
was mainly supplemented by the USGS traits database (Vieira et al., 2006). Most of the
temperature traits information was derived from the weighted-average calculations that were
performed on a subset of the Utah data. Gaps in temperature traits information were mainly
filled using the Traits Matrix (i.e., Poff et al., 2006), the USGS traits database (Vieira et al.,
2006), and data from Brandt's (2001) and Yuan's (2006) weighted-average calculations. Most
of the habit and functional feeding group information was taken from the Poff et al. (2006) Traits
Matrix and was supplemented mainly by WSA (U.S. EPA, 2006), RBP2 (Barbour et al., 1999),
and the USGS traits database (Vieira et al., 2006).
Traits information was available for approximately 50-65% of the OTUs (see Table C-
8). Exceptions were the habit and functional feeding group traits, for which 85 and 92% of the
OTUs had information, respectively. Numerical temperature traits information was available for
about 50% of the taxa, and categorical temperature traits information (based on rankings and
literature) was available for 68% of the taxa.
EPT taxa generally had more traits information than other taxa (see Table C-9). When
tolerance values are excluded, about 80-100% of the EPT taxa have traits information. A large
number of taxa in the Utah data set are EPT taxa: 60 are Trichopterans, 26 are Ephemeropterans,
and 31 are Plecopterans. Dipterans (58 taxa), Odonates (17 taxa), and Coleopterans (30 taxa) are
also well represented in the data set. For the Dipterans and Coleopterans, habit and FFG
information is available for approximately 90% of the taxa, temperature traits information, 50%,
and other traits information is available for about 35-45% of the taxa. Habit and FFG
information is available for about 80-90% of the Odonates, while other traits information is
available for about 65% of the taxa. Some of the remaining orders (or higher levels) have traits
information for all taxa (i.e., Megaloptera, Isopoda, Amphipoda, Hirudinea), but these generally
have only one or two taxa in the data set. On the opposite end of the spectrum, no traits
information is available for some OTUs (i.e., Archaeogastropoda, Amphineura, Sepiolida,
C-15
-------
Unionoida), but these taxa are rare (they comprise less than 0.1% of the total number of
individuals in the data set), and each are only represented by one taxa in the data set. In terms of
overall abundance in the Utah database, the largest number of individuals are Dipterans (overall
abundance equals 36%), followed by Ephemeropterans (24%), then Trichopterans (12%), and
then Coleopterans (8%). Only 11 of the OTUs have overall abundances greater than 1%.
C-16
-------
Table C-7. Summary of the sources that were used to derive traits information for the Utah traits table. The values equal the number of taxa that
the source provided information on. NA equals the number of taxa for which no traits information was available
Traits
Life History
Voltinism
Development
Synchronization of
emergence
Adult life span
Adult ability to exit
Ability to survive
desiccation
Mobility
Dispersal (adult)
Adult flying strength
Occurrence in drift
Maximum crawling rate
Swimming ability
Morphology
Attachment
Armoring
Shape
Respiration
Size at maturity
Resource
acquisition/preference
Rheophily
Habit
Functional feeding group
Sources
Poff
et al.,
2006
141
146
146
144
146
146
142
146
146
146
146
146
142
146
146
142
144
125
128
Vieira
et al.,
2006
21
o
3
11
9
32
28
14
38
26
U.S. EPA
(UT),
2011
Brandt
(ID),
2001
Yuan,
2006
EPA
1970s3
1
VT
DEC,
2008
4
U.S.
EPA,
2006
64
70
Barbour et
al., 1999
4
20
U.S.
EPA,
1990
6
NA
110
123
126
117
126
126
272
121
126
126
126
126
272
126
98
126
126
102
272
109
41
22
o
-------
O
i
oo
Table C-7. continued...
Temperature
Temperature optimum
Temperature tolerance
Rank of temperature
optimum
Rank of temperature
tolerance
Rank of temperature
optimum-tolerance
Tolerance
48
48
48
2
2
2
104
104
104
104
104
19
19
19
19
19
10
10
10
10
3
3
3
173
2
5
272
139
139
86
86
86
92
aBeck ,1977; Harris and Lawrence, 1978; Hubbard and Peters, 1978; Surdick and Gaufin, 1978.
-------
Table C-8. Numbers and percentages of the 272 taxa (at the established OTU level) in the Utah
database that have traits information
Traits
Number of Taxa
With Traits
information
Percentage of Taxa
With Traits
information
Life history
Voltinism
Development
Synchronization of emergence
Adult life span
Adult ability to exit
Ability to survive desiccation
162
149
146
155
146
146
59.6
54.8
53.7
57
53.7
53.7
Mobility
Dispersal (adult)
Adult flying strength
Occurrence in drift
Maximum crawling rate
Swimming ability
151
146
146
146
146
55.5
53.7
53.7
53.7
53.7
Morphology
Attachment
Armoring
Shape
Respiration
Size at maturity
146
174
146
146
170
53.7
64
53.7
53.7
62.5
Resource acquisition/preference
Rheophily
Habit
Functional feeding group
163
231
250
59.9
84.6
91.9
Temperature
Temperature optimum
Temperature tolerance
Rank of temperature optimum
Rank of temperature tolerance
Rank of temperature
optimum-tolerance
Tolerance
133
133
186
186
186
180
48.9
48.9
68.4
68.4
68.4
66.2
C-19
-------
Table C-9. Percentage of taxa within each order (or, in some cases, higher taxonomic level) that have life history traits information in the Utah
traits table
Order
Diptera
Ephemeroptera
Trichoptera
Coleoptera
Isopoda
Trombidiformes
Haplotaxida
Plecoptera
Neotaenioglossa
Podocopida
Amphipoda
Tricladida
Basommatophora
Diplostraca
Copepoda (subclass)
Dorylaimida
Hirudinea (subclass)
Pelecypoda (class)
Odonata
Hemiptera
Lepidoptera
Veneroida
Megaloptera
Archaeogastropoda
Hydroida
Amphineura (class)
Number of Taxa
Within Each Order
58
26
60
30
1
1
o
J
31
5
1
2
2
9
1
1
1
1
1
17
5
2
o
3
2
1
1
1
Abundance
(Percentage of
Total)
35.7
24.2
12.4
7.7
3.1
3
3
2.5
2.2
1.8
1.4
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other Traits
(Average)
45.6
88.5
78.7
34.5
0
0
0
87.3
16.5
0
29.4
0
4.6
0
0
0
0
0
67.5
20
50
13.7
100
0
17.6
0
Temp Rank
50
88.5
91.7
50
100
100
33.3
100
0
100
100
50
44.4
0
100
100
100
100
64.7
40
50
33.3
100
0
0
0
Habit
87.9
92.3
88.3
93.3
100
0
66.7
96.8
60
0
100
50
77.8
0
0
0
100
0
82.4
100
100
66.7
100
0
0
0
FFG
91.4
96.2
90
90
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
50
100
100
100
100
100
100
88.2
100
100
100
100
0
100
0
Tolerance
69
69.2
56.7
73.3
100
100
100
54.8
20
0
100
50
100
0
0
100
100
0
76.5
100
100
100
100
0
100
0
o
I
to
o
-------
Table C-9. continued...
Order
Heterostropha
Decapoda
Sepiolida
Nematomorpha
(phylum)
Lumbriculida
Unionoida
Number of Taxa
Within Each Order
1
1
1
1
1
1
Abundance
(Percentage of
Total)
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other Traits
(Average)
0
0
0
0
0
0
•
Temp Rank
0
100
0
0
0
0
Habit
0
0
0
100
100
0
FFG
100
100
0
100
100
0
Tolerance
0
100
0
100
100
0
O
-------
APPENDIX D
List of Traits and Associated Metadata
D-l
-------
Table D-l. List of traits in alphabetical order included in the Freshwater Biological Traits Database.
Variable
Ability ToSurviveDesiccation_abbrev
Ability ToSurviveDesiccation comments
Adult
Adult disp
Adultjifespan
Adult_lifespan_abbrev
Adult lifespan comments
AdultFlying Strength abbrev
AdultFlying Strength comments
Armor
Armor abbrev
Armor comments
Attach_abbrev
Attach_comments
Body shape
Data Type
Text (categorical)
Text
Text (ADULT) or blank
Text (categorical)
Text (categorical)
Text (categorical)
Text
Text (categorical)
Text
Text
Text (categorical)
Text
Text (categorical)
Text
Text
Description
Abbreviated ability to survive desiccation entries: present,
absent
Description of abbreviated adult ability to survive desiccation
entries: present = able to survive desiccation; absent = not
able to survive desiccation
Identifies if traits were compiled for aquatic adults, otherwise
entries pertain to immature life stage
Adult dispersal distance. Entries = 1 km or less, 10 km or
less, 10 m or less, 100 km or less
Adult lifespan. Entries: days, hours, weeks, months
Abbreviated adult life span: very_short, short, long
Description of abbreviated adult life span entries: very
short = less than 1 week; short = less than 1 month;
long = greater than 1 month
Abbreviated flying strength entries: weak, strong
Description of abbreviated flying strength entries:
weak = e.g., cannot fly into light breeze
Degree of body armoring. Entries = all sclerotized, hard
shelled, partly sclerotized, soft
Abbreviated armoring entries = none, poor, good
Description of abbreviated armoring entries:
none = soft-bodied forms; poor = heavily sclerotized;
good = e.g., some cased caddisflies
Abbreviated attachment entries = none, some, both
Description of abbreviated attachment entries:
none = free-ranging; some = sessile, sedentary;
both = free-ranging and sessile, sedentary. Other
(nonabbreviated) entries include: normally free living and
capable of locomotion; both sessile and free living and
capable of locomotion; normally sessile
Body shape. Entries = bluff (blocky), dorsoventrally
flattened, round (humped), streamlined/fusiform, tubular
o
to
-------
o
oo
Variable
Body_shape_abbrev
Body_shape_case
Body_shape_comments
Current Comments
Current_fast_lam
Current fast turb
Current moderate
Current quiet
Current slow
CurrentOptima
CurrentOptima Rank
Data_entry
Data_entry_date
Dev_pattern
Dev speed
Dev_speed_abbrev
Diapause
Data Type
Text (categorical)
Text
Text
Text
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (decimals)
Number (integers)
Text
Date
Text
Text
Text (categorical)
Text (categorical)
Description
Abbreviated body shape entries = streamlined,
not streamlined
Body shape with case/retreat. Entries = bluff (blocky),
dorsoventrally flattened, round (humped),
streamlined/fusiform, tubular
Description of abbreviated body shape entries:
streamlined = flat, fusiform; not streamlined = cylindrical,
round, or bluff
Brief description of how CurrentOptima and
CurrentOptima Rank values were derived.
= current preference — fast laminar currents
= current preference — fast turbulent currents
= current preference — moderate
= current preference — quiet
= current preference — slow
Numerical optima values for current data that were derived
from weighted average or maximum likelihood calculations
Rank values were derived using a 1-7 scoring scheme based
on the following percentiles: 0, 0.1, 0.25, 0.4, 0.6, 0.75, 0.9,
1, such that low CurrentOptima_Rank scores = preference for
slower water and high CurrentOptima Rank
scores = preference for faster water. Rankings allow for
comparisons across data sets, because optima and tolerance
values will vary depending on the data set they were derived
from.
Person who entered data
Date person entered data
Development pattern text notes
Development speed. Entries: fast seasonal, slow seasonal,
nonseasonal
Abbreviated development entries: fast, slow, non
Indicates whether diapause occurs. Entries: no, yes,
unknown, blank
-------
Variable
Drift_abbrev
Drift comments
Drift_early
Driftjate
Eggs Imass
Eggs_cement
Eggs multiple batch
Eggs_single
Emerge behav climb
Emerge behav comment
Emerge behav crawl
Emerge behav drift
Emerge_season_l
Emerge season 2
Emerge season all_year
Emerge season comments
Emerge synch
Emerge_synch_abbrev
Emerge synch comments
Data Type
Text (categorical)
Text
Text (categorical)
Text (categorical)
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text (categorical)
Text (categorical)
Text
Text
Text
Text (categorical)
Text
Description
Abbreviated occurrence in drift entries: rare, common,
abundant
Description of abbreviated occurrence in drift entries:
rare = catastrophic only; common = typically observed;
abundant = dominant in drift samples
Drift propensity of early instars. Entries = strong
(active/often), medium (mostly passive/occasional), weak
(catastrophic only)
Drift propensity of late instars. Entries = strong
(active/often), medium (mostly passive/occasional), weak
(catastrophic only)
1 = Egg type — one mass
Indicates whether eggs are cemented. Entries = no, yes,
unknown, blank
1 = Egg type — multiple batches
1 = Egg type — single
1 = emergence behavior — climbing
Emergence behavior text notes
1 = emergence behavior — crawling
1 = emergence behavior — drifting
Season that emergence begins. Entries = winter, spring,
summer, fall
Season that emergence ends. Entries = winter, spring,
summer, fall
Indicates whether emergence can occur all year. Entries = no,
yes, unknown, blank
Seasons during which sexually mature forms have been
reported. Entries = winter, spring, summer, fall
Indicates whether emergence is synchronous
Abbreviated synchronization of emergence entries = poorly,
well
Description of abbreviated synchronization of emergence
entries: poorly = week; well = days
-------
Variable
EnrichTol Score
EnrichTol Score comments
Exit_temporarily
Exit temporarily abbrev
Exit temporarily comments
Family
Fecundity
Feed mode comments
Feed_mode_prim
Feed_mode_sec
Feed_prim_abbrev
Female_disp_abbrev
Female disp comments
Genus
Habit comments
Habit_prim
Habit_prim abbrev
Data Type
Number (integer)
Text
Text
Text (categorical)
Text
Text
Text (categorical)
Text
Text
Text
Text (categorical)
Text (categorical)
Text
Text
Text
Text
Text (categorical)
Description
Numerical tolerance score ranging from 0 (most intolerant) to
10 (most tolerant). Typically based on tolerances to organic
enrichment.
Description of enrichment tolerance scores and sources
Indicates ability to temporarily exit water. Entries = no, yes,
unknown, blank
Abbreviated adult ability to exit entries: present, absent
Description of abbreviated adult ability to exit entries:
present = has ability to exit; absent = does NOT have ability
to exit. This does NOT include emergence.
Taxonomic level
Fecundity. Entries: <100 eggs, >10,000 eggs, 100 to
1,000 eggs, 1,000 to 10,000 eggs
Description of abbreviated primary functional feeding group
entries: CF, CG, HB, PA, PR, SH
Primary feeding mode based on mouthpart morphology
Secondary feeding mode based on mouthpart morphology
Abbreviated primary functional feeding group entries:
CF = collector-filterer; CG = collector-gatherer;
HB = herbivore (scraper); SH = shredder; PR = predator
(piercer, engulfer); PA = parasite. Other (nonabbreviated)
entries include text notes on food material consumed
Abbreviated female dispersal entries: low, high
Description of abbreviated female dispersal entries:
low = less than 1-km flight before laying eggs; high = greater
than 1-km flight before laying eggs
Taxonomic level
Description of abbreviated primary habit entries: BU, CB,
CN, SK, SP, SW
Primary habit
Abbreviated habit entries: BU = burrower; CB = climber;
CN = clinger; SK = skater; SP = sprawler; SW = swimmer.
Other (nonabbreviated) entries include text notes on habit
-------
Variable
Habit sec
Hatch_time
Hatch time comments
Larval disp
Lat comments
Lat hyporheic
Lat lentic shore
Lat lotic margin
Lat_pool
Lat_riffle
Low_lethal_DO
Max_body_size
Max_body_size_abbrev
Max lethal temp
Max temp reported
MaxCrawlRate_abbrev
MaxCrawlRate comments
Measured height
Measured length
Measured width
Mediate_drag
Microhab algae
Microhab boulder
Data Type
Text
Text (categorical)
Text
Text (categorical)
Text
Number (binary) — or blank
Number (binary) — or blank
Number (binary) — or blank
Number (binary) — or blank
Number (binary) — or blank
Number (integer)
Text
Text (categorical)
Number (decimals)
Number (decimals)
Text (categorical)
Text
Number (decimals)
Number (decimals)
Number (decimals)
Text
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Description
Secondary habit
Time required for eggs to hatch. Entries: hours, minutes,
days, months, weeks
Time required for eggs to hatch text notes
Larvel dispersal distance. Entries = 16 mm), Medium (length 9-16 mm), Small (length
<9mm)
Abbreviated maximal body size entries = small, medium,
large
Observed maximum lethal temperature
Maximum temperature reported
Abbreviated maximum crawling rate entries: very low, low,
high
Description of abbreviated maximum crawling rate entries:
very low = less than 10 cm per hour; low = less than 100 cm
per hour; high = greater than 100 cm per hour
Measured body height of immatures (mm)
Measured body length of immatures (mm)
Measured body width of immatures (mm)
Indication of whether shape mediates drag. Entries = no, yes,
unknown, blank
1 = Microhabitat substrate preference — algae
1 = Microhabitat substrate preference — boulder
-------
Variable
Microhab comments
Microhab detritus
Microhab_gravel
Microhab_LWD
Microhab_pelagic
Microhab_phyto
Microhab_plants
Microhab rocks
Microhab sand
Microhab silt
Min temp reported
Morph adapt ballast
Morph_adapt_friction
Morph adapt hairy
Morph adapt hooks
Morph adapt other
Morph adapt silk
Morph adapt suckers
NoAquatic stages
O2 comments
O2_high
O2_low
O2 normal
Order
Ovipos_behav_comments
Ovipos_behav_prim
Data Type
Text
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (decimals)
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text (categorical)
Text (categorical)
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text
Text
Text
Description
Microhabitat substrate preference text notes
1 = Microhabitat substrate preference — detritus
1 = Microhabitat substrate preference — gravel
1 = Microhabitat substrate preference — large woody debris
(LWD)
1 = Microhabitat substrate preference — pelagic
1 = Microhabitat substrate preference — macrophytes
1 = Microhabitat substrate preference — plants
1 = Microhabitat substrate preference — rocks
1 = Microhabitat substrate preference — sand
1 = Microhabitat substrate preference — silt
Minimum temperature reported
1 = taxon has ballast
1 = taxon has friction pads or other structures to reduce
friction coefficient with surface
1 = taxon has hair
1 = taxon has hooks
Text to further describe morphological adaptations
1 = taxon has silk
1 = taxon has suckers
Number of aquatic life stages
General oxygen tolerance categories: high, moderate,
moderate-high, low, low-moderate, anaerobic, low-anaerobic,
no strong preference
1 = Oxygen tolerance — high dissolved oxygen (DO) levels
1 = Oxygen tolerance — low DO levels
1 = Oxygen tolerance — normal (intermediate) DO levels
Taxonomic level
Oviposition behavior text notes
Primary oviposition behavior
-------
o
oo
Variable
Ovipos behav sec
Ovipos_duration
pH acidic
pH alkaline
pH comments
pH normal
Primary_WB_type
Published
Resp abbrev
Resp_adult
Resp_comments
Resp_early
Resp_late
Rheophily_abbrev
Rheophily comments
Salin_brackish
Salin fresh
Salin_salt
Study_Citation
Study_Citation_abbrev
Study dates
Study elevation max
Data Type
Text
Text
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text (categorical)
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text
Yes/no
Text (categorical)
Text
Text
Text
Text
Text (categorical)
Text
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text
Text
Format varies: e.g., Summer 1997,
May-87, 1981-1982
Number (integer)
Description
Secondary oviposition behavior
Duration of oviposition period. Entries = days, months,
weeks
1 = pH tolerance — acidic
1 = pH tolerance — alkaline
General pH tolerance categories: acidic, acid-neutral,
alkaline, alkaline-neutral, neutral, no strong preference
1 = pH tolerance — intermediate
Primary waterbody type where organism is found
Yes/no
Abbreviated respiration entries = tegument, gills,
plastron spiracle
Respiration mode of aquatic adults
Respiration text notes
Respiration mode of early instars
Respiration mode of late instars
Abbreviated rheophily entries: depo, depo_eros, eros
Description of abbreviated rheophily entries:
depo = depositional only, depo_eros = depositional and
erosional; eros: erosional only. Other (categorical) entries
include: fast, moderate, moderate-fast, standing and flowing,
standing-slight, slight
1 = salinity tolerance — brakish
1 = salinity tolerance — fresh
1 = salinity tolerance — saline
Citation
Abbreviated citation
Date of study
Upper elevation where taxon reported
(in meters above sea level)
-------
Variable
Study_elevation_min
Study latitude
Study_location_county
Study_location_region
Study_location_state
Study longitude
SwimmingAbility abbrev
Taxon
Thermal comments
Thermal eurythermal
Thermal euthermal
Thermal_Indicator
Thermal mesothermal
Thermal metathermal
Thermal oligothermal
Thermal_pref
Thermal_Source
Data Type
Number (integer)
Format varies: e.g., 34° 54 3.4" or 28°
48'32"N
Text
Text
Text
Format varies: 79° 20' 56.3" or 97°
01' 45: W
Text (categorical)
Text
Text
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text (categorical)
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text (categorical)
Text
Description
Lower elevation where taxon reported
(in meters above sea level)
Latitude, when reported in study
U.S. county in which study occurred
Region in which study occurred
U.S. state or Canadian province in which study occurred
Longitude, when reported in study
Abbreviated swimming ability entries: none, weak strong
Fiighest level of taxonomic resolution
Text notes pertaining to thermal entries. Where applicable,
includes brief descriptions of how the lists of cold and warm
preference taxa were derived.
1 = taxon documented in eurythermal (>15°C) temperature
range
1 = taxon documented in euthermal (>30°C) temperature
range
Cold and warm water preference taxa for particular states or
regions. NOTE: these lists are preliminary.
1 = taxon documented in mesothermal (15-30°C)
temperature range
1 = taxon documented in metathermal (5-15°C) temperature
range
1 = taxon documented in oligothermal (<15°C) temperature
range
General thermal preference categories: cold stenothermal
(<5°C), cold-cool eurythermal (0-15°C), warm eurythermal
(15-30°C), hot euthermal (>30°C), no strong preference
Brief description of how the Thermal Optima and
ThermalTolerance values were derived, and of the data sets
that were used in these calculations
-------
Variable
Thermal stenothermal
Thermal Optima
ThermalOptima Rank
ThermalRank comments
ThermalTolerance
ThermalTolerance Rank
TraitRecord ID
TSN
Turbidity
Vert_bed
Vert comments
Vert_hyporheic
Vert_pelagic
Data Type
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (decimals)
Number (integers)
Text
Number (decimals)
Number (integers)
Number (integer)
Number (integer)
Text (categorical)
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Description
1 = taxon documented in stenothermal (<5°C) temperature
range
Numerical optima values for temperature data that were
derived from weighted average or maximum likelihood
calculations
Rank optima value for temperature data
(based on a scoring scale of 1-7)
Description of how thermal rankings were derived. The 1-7
scoring scheme is based on the following percentiles: 0, 0. 1,
0.25, 0.4, 0.6, 0.75, 0.9, 1, such that low
ThermalOptima Rank scores = preference for colder water
and high ThermalOptima Rank scores = preference for
warmer water, and low ThermalTolerance Rank
scores = narrow temperature range and high
ThermalTolerance_Rank scores = wide temperature range.
Rankings allow for comparisons across data sets, because
optima and tolerance values will vary depending on the data
set they were derived from.
Numerical tolerance values for temperature data that were
derived from weighted average or maximum likelihood
calculations
Rank tolerance value for temperature data
(based on a scoring scale of 1-7)
This is a unique ID that came from the source documents. It
is being retained in case there is a need to link back to the
original source.
Taxonomic serial number (from itis.gov Web site)
General turbidity tolerance categories: clear water,
silted/murky water, no preference
1 = Vertical habitat position in water column — benthic
Vertical habitat position in water column text notes
1 = Vertical habitat position in water column — hyporheic
1 = Vertical habitat position in water column — pelagic
-------
Variable
Vert_phytes
Vert surface
Volt_Comments
Voltinism
Voltinism abbrev
WB_type_2-4_order
WB_type_brackish
WB_type_cold_sp
WB_type_eph_lotic
WB type headwater
WB type lake
WB type other
WB type other specify
WB type_pond
WB type river
WB type temp lentic
WB type warm sp
WB type wetland
Data Type
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text
Text
Text (categorical)
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Text
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Number (binary) — 1 or blank
Description
1 = Vertical habitat position in water column — macrophytes
1 = Vertical habitat position in water column — surface
Voltinism text comments (i.e., overwintering of eggs or
immature s)
Voltinism. Entries: >1 generation per year, 1 generation per
year, <1 generation per year
Abbreviated voltinism entries: semivoltine, univoltine,
bi multivoltine
1 = taxon is found in second-through-fourth- order streams
1 = taxon is found in brackish waters
1 = taxon is found in cold springs
1 = taxon is found in ephemeral lotic waters
1 = taxon is found in headwater streams
1 = taxon is found in lakes
1 = taxon is found in an unlisted waterbody type
Describes WB type other entry
1 = taxon is found in ponds
1 = taxon is found in rivers
1 = taxon is found in temporary lentic waters
1 = taxon is found in warm springs
1 = taxon is found in wetlands
-------
APPENDIX E
Instructions for Using the
Freshwater Biological Traits
Database
-------
Access the Traits Database at http://www.epa.ROv/ncea/Rlobal/traits.
There are several different options for downloading data.
Background
Database search
Import new data
Database search
Download all traits information
Download all traits information - transposed
(Transposed format takes traits data from the table and uses them as filed names in the new table. It should provide more user-
friendly interface.)
Please select one or more options to search.
(Note: when remove items, they will be appended at end of the orignal list.)
TaxaList:
Abedus
Abedus herberti
Abedus indentatus
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia annulata
Ablabesmyia asp era
Ablabesmyia cinctipes
Ablabesmyia hauberi
Ablabesmyia illinoensis
State: (Optional)
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Traits Group (Optional): Read mor
nformation about traits group.
Morphology
Life history
Resource Acquisition Preferenc
Mobility
Tolerance
V
Add »
« Remove
Add »
« Remove
=
Add »
« Remove
A
V
A
V
V
[Confirm] p e arc hj [Reset]
Please confirm your selection before search.
E-2
-------
OPTION 1: DOWNLOAD ALL DATA
Traits
GZlContact Us@Share
You are here: EPA Home » Traits » Database search
Database search
Download all traits information
Download all traits information - transposed
To download all traits
information, click on
this link
(Transposed format takes traits data from the table and uses them as filed names in the new table. It should provide more user-
friendly interface.)
Please select one or more options to search.
(Note: when remove items, they will be appended at end of the orignal list.)
TaxaList:
Abedus
Abedus herberti
Abedus indentatus
I Add »
« Remove
To download all the data (i.e. you do not want to select for taxa, state or trait
group), click on the 'Download all traits information' link.
A zipped Excel file titled 'FreshwaterBioTraits_20100927.zip' will automatically
download onto your computer.
E-3
-------
OPTION 2: DOWNLOAD ALL DATA-TRANSPOSED FORMAT
Background
Database search
Data source
Metadata
Import new data
E3Contact Us@Share
You are here: EPA Home » Traits » Database search
Database search
Download all traits information
Download all traits information - transposed ^
To download all
traits information,
click on this link
(Transposed format takes traits data from the table and uses them as filed names in the new table. It should provide more user-
friendly interface.)
Please select one or more options to search.
(Note: when remove items, they will be appended at end of the orignal list.)
TaxaList:
Abedus
Abedus herberti
Abedus indentatus
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia annulata
[ Add »
[ « Remove
A
To download all the data in a transposed format, click on the 'Download all traits
information -transposed' link.
A zipped Excel file titled 'FreshwaterBioTraits_Transposed_20100927.zip' will
automatically download onto your computer.
E-4
-------
Why the two formats?
Data is stored in the database in the format shown below because it is more efficient
than the transposed format (it eliminates all the blanks, of which there are many in
this database).
TAXON
J B_
CATEGORY NAME
TRAITS NAME
VALUE YN
VALUE NUMBER VALUE TEXT
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Waterbody Type
Morphology - Adaptation
Mobility
Tolerance
Tolerance
Tolerance
Tolerance
Resource Acquisition Preference
Resource Acquisition Preference
Life history - emergence
Second-fourth order streams
Suckers
Swimming ability
Thermal Indicator
Y
Y
Thermal optima rank
Thermal optima value
Thermal tolerance rank
Vertical habitat position benthic
Vertical habitat position
Voltinism
3
16.92
4
strong
cold
> 1 Generation per year
Although it may be more efficient at storing data, it is likely to be less user-friendly for
many of you, so we wanted to provide you with the option of downloading the data in a
transposed format, as shown below (trait names are column headings, etc.).
TS.X
100801
100S01
10 OS 01
100801
100S01
100801
609528
568571
568571
568571
609529
568572
Taxon
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
Acentrella
alachua
ampla
ampla
ampla
feropagus
Smdv Citation abbrev
Yuan (2006)
USGS (2006)
Poffetal. (2006)
USGS (2006)
USGS (2006)
USGS (2006)
USGS (2006)
USGS (2006)
\VB_type_heaehvater WB_type_2-4_order Max_body_size
Body_shape_abbrev ThennalOptima
orth Carolina (2010)
:aine (2010)
der (2009)
(6)
2008)
1
1
1
1
1
Small (length
Small (length
Small (length
Small (length
< 9 mm)
< 9 mm)
< 9 mm)
< 9 mm)
streamlined 16.93
streamlined 20.61
\__ 23.90
17.00
streamlined
streamlined
22.20
E-5
-------
OPTION 3: DOWNLOAD SELECTED DATA
You can select for taxa, state (optional) and/or trait group (optional)
Background
Database search
Database search
Download all traits information
Download ail traits information - transposed
(Transposed format takes traits data from the table and uses them as filed names in the new table. It should provide more user-
friendiy interface.)
Please select one or more options to search.
(Note: when remove items, they will be appended at end of the orignal list.)
TaxaList:
Abedus
Abedus herberti
Abedus ind rttatus
Ablabesrnyi
Ablabesrnyi annulata
Ablabesrnvi aspera
Ablabesrnyi cinctipes
Ablabesrnyi hauberi
Ablabesrnvi illinoensis
A
\f
« Remove J
State: (Optional)
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
A.
I
« Remove ]
Traits Group (Optional): Read r
information about traits group.
Morphology
Life history
Resource Acquisition Preferenc
Mobility
Tolerance
« Remove ]
fcearchj [Reset]
Please confirm your selection before search.
E-6
-------
SELECTING FOR A TAXON OR MULTIPLE TAXA -
Step 1: Highlight the taxa of interest
The taxa list is sorted alphabetically.
You can select a single taxon or
multiple taxa.
To select a single taxon, click on the
name of the taxon. The name will
then be highlighted.
To select multiple taxa, if sequential,
you can hold the shift key down
while left clicking on the taxa of
interest. If not sequential, use
Ctl+Shift to make your selections, or
select each taxa and click on
individually.
You will see the selected taxa
highlighted in blue.
Please select one or more options to search.
(Note: when remove items, they will be appended at end of the orignal list.)
TaxaList:
Abedus
Abedus herberti
Abedus indentatus
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia annulata
Ablabesmyia aspera
Ablabesmyia cinctipes
Ablabesmyia hauberi
Ablabesmyia illinoensis
Add » |
« Remove
State: (Optional)
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Add
« Remove
Traits Group (Optional): Read more
information about traits group.
Morphology
Life history
Resource Acquisition Preferenc
Mobility
Tolerance
Add
« Remove
E-7
-------
SELECTING FOR A TAXON OR MULTIPLE TAXA -
Step 2: Click 'Add7
After you click 'Add/ the names
of the highlighted taxa will
appear in the box to the right,
as shown.
If you would like to remove any
of these taxa from this list, click
'Remove/
The names of the removed taxa
will be appended to the
bottom of the taxa list. If you
want to resort the taxa list,
click the 'Reset' button at the
bottom of the page.
Please select one or more options to search.
(Note: when remove items, they will be appended at end of the orignal list.)
TaxaList:
Ablabesmvia aspera
Ablabesmvia cinctipes
Ablabesmvia hauberi
Ablabesmvia illinoensis
Ablabesmvia janta
Ablabesmvia rnallochi
Ablabesmvia rnonilis
Ablabesmvia ornata
Ablabesrn/ia parajanta
State: (Optional)
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
A
A
v
Traits Group (Optional): Read mor
information about traits group.
Morphology
Life historv
Resource Acquisition Preferenc
Mobility'
Add »
« Remove
Abedus
Abedus herberti
Abedus indentatus
Ablabesmvia
Ablabesmvia annulata
Add »
« Remove
Add »
Remove
E-8
-------
SELECTING FOR A STATE (OPTIONAL) -
TaxaList:
You have the option of
selecting a state or multiple
states.
You can do so by following the
same instructions as above.
If you do not select a state, all
records will be shown.
IMPORTANT NOTE: search on
this field with caution; this type
of geographical information
has not been entered for all of
the records.
Ablabesmyia aspera
Ablabesmyia cinctipes
Ablabesmyia hauberi
Ablabesmyia illinoensis
Ablabesmyia janta
Ablabesmyia mallochi
Ablabesmyia monilis
Ablabesmyia ornata
Ablabesmyia parajanta
State: (Optional)
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Add »
« Remove
Add » 1
« Remove
Traits Group (Optional): Read more
information about traits group.
Morphology
Life history
Resource Acquisition Preferenc
Mobility
Tolerance
Add »
« Remove
Abedus
Abedus herberti
Abedus indentatus
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia annulate
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Ponfirmj (Search) [Reset]
Please confirm your selection before search.
E-9
-------
SELECTING FOR A TRAIT GROUP (OPTIONAL) -
You have the option of
selecting one or multiple trait
groups.
You can do so by following the
same instructions as above.
If you do not select a trait
group, all records will be
shown.
To see which traits are included
in each trait group, click on the
'read more information about
traits group' link.
Please select one or more options to search.
(Note: when remove items, they will be appended at end of the orignal list.)
TaxaList:
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia
aspera
cinctipes
hauberi
illinoensis
A
Ablabesmyia janta
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia
mallochi
monilis
ornata
parajanta
-
State: (Optional)
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
-
v
Add »
« Remove
Add »
« Remove
Traits Group (Optional): Read i
information about traits group.
Life history
Mobility
Tolerance
Add»
« Remove
[Confirm] [Search] [Reset]
Please confirm your selection before search.
Abedus
Abedus herberti
Abedus indentatus
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia annulata
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Morphology
Resource Acquisition Preferenc
E-10
-------
4. CLICK'CONFIRM7
Important!
Do not forget to do this,
otherwise you will get an error
message when you try to do
the data download.
After you click 'confirm/the
selections you have made will
be highlighted in gray.
Please select one or more options to search.
(Note: when remove items, they will be appended at end of the orignal list.)
TaxaList:
Ablabesmyia aspera
Ablabesmyia cinctipes
Ablabesmyia hauberi
Ablabesmyia illinoensis
Ablabesmyia janta
Ablabesmvia mallochi
Ablabesmvia monilis
Ablabesmvia ornata
Ablabesmyia parajanta
Add
Remove
State: (Optional)
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Add »
« Remove
Traits Group (Optional): Read r
information about traits group.
Life history
Mobility
Tolerance
Add »
[ « Remove
Abedus
Abedus herberti
Abedus indentatus
Ablabesmvia
Ablabesmvia annulata
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Morphology
Resource Acquisition Preferenc
Click on this!
[Search] [Resetj
Please confirm your selection before search.
E-ll
-------
5. CLICK 'SEARCH'
Then click on this!
Please select one or more options to search.
(Note: when remove items, they will be appended at end of the orignal list.)
TaxaList:
Ablabesrnvia aspera
Ablabesmyia cinctipes
Ablabesmyia hauberi
Ablabesmyia illinoensis
Ablabesmyia janta
Ablabesmyia mallochi
Ablabesmyia monilis
Ablabesmyia ornata
Ablabesmyia parajanta
Add »
Remove
State: (Optional)
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Add »
« Remove
Traits Group (Optional): Read more
information about traits group.
Life history
Mobility
Tolerance
Add »
[ « Remove
Please confirm vour selection before search.
E-12
Abedus
Abedus herberti
Abedus indentatus
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia annulata
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Morphology
Resource Acquisition Preferenc
-------
6. SELECT CITATIONS
You are given a choice of citations.
To find out more about the
citations, click on the arrow next
to the Data Source column
heading, and you will be taken to
the Data Source page.
To select individual citations, click
on the check boxes.
Or to select all records, click 'select
all/
If, after doing so, you decide you
don't want to select them all, click
the 'uncheck all' button.
Database search
Here is your search critera:
Taxa List: ('Abedus','Abedus herberti','Abedus indentatus','Ablabesmyia','Ablabesmyia annulata','Ablabesmyia
aspera','Ablabesrnyia cinctipes','Ablabesmyia hauberi')
State
List: ('Arizona','Arkansas', 'California', 'Colorado', 'Connecticut', 'Delaware', 'Florida', 'Georgia', 'Hawaii', 'Idaho', 'Illinois', 'Indiana', 'Iowa
Traits Groups: ('Mobility';'Morphology','Resource Acquisition Preference')
1
?n to
click
'select
you
, click
Please select the items to download:
Delect All] [Uncheck All] \f
U
3654
U
3663
U
3666
E
3660
Taxon
Abedus
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia
Abedus
lerberti
TSN
103721
128079
128079
103731
Citation
Aquatic
nsects and
Oligochaetes
of North and
South
Carolina.
Secondary
^reduction of
Chironomidae
(Diptera)
rresh water
biological
Traits Table
:or Maine
An
ntroduction
Country
United
States
United
States
United
States
United
States
Region
Gulf
Coast /
Delta
Area
(TX-
FL)
State
Mississippi
ndiana
Maine
Arizona
Data Source "r
Vieira, N.K.M., N.L. Poff, D.M. Carlisle,
S.R. Moulton II, M.K. Koski, and
E.C.Kondratieff. 2006. A database of
otic invertebrate traits for North
America: U.S. Geological Survey Data
Series 1 87. Available at:
ittp://pubs. water.usgs.gov/dsl 87
Vieira, N.K.M., N.L. Poff, D.M. Carlisle,
S.R. Moulton II, M.K. Koski, and
E.C.Kondratieff. 2006. A database of
otic invertebrate traits for North
America: U.S. Geological Survey Data
Series 1 87. Available at:
ittp: //pubs. water. usgs.gov/dsl 87
EPA GCRP State Eiomonitoring Data
Climate Change Pilot Project 2010:
rreshwater Biological Traits Table for
Vlaine (traits data carne from several
different sources (main sources were
Vieira et al. 2006 and the Poff et al.
2006 trait matr x).
Vieira, N.K.M., N.L. Poff, D.M. Carlisle,
S.R. Moulton II, M.K. Koski, and
Whichever citations have checks in the checkboxes will be included in your data output file.
E-13
-------
Why are their multiple records for one taxon?
Data has been compiled from numerous different sources,
Traits information for a taxon can differ depending on the
source. That is why each taxon-citation combination has
been entered as a unique record.
E-14
-------
7. DOWN LOAD THE DATA
Click on the 'Download traits
information to Excel' button at
the bottom of the page.
Click on this!
Database search
Here is your search critera:
Taxa List: ('Abedus','Abedus herberti','Abedus indentatus1,'Ablabesmyia1,'Ablabesmyia annulata','.Ablabesmyia
aspera','Ablabesmyia cinctipes','Ablabesmyia hauberi')
State
List ('Arizona', 'Arkansas','California', 'Colorado','Connecticut','Delaware', 'Florida', 'Georgia', 'Hawaii', 'Idaho', 'Illinois', 'India:
Traits Groups: ('Mobility','Morphology'.'Resource Acquisition Preference')
Please select the items to download:
4
3654
3
3663
4
3666
1
3660
Taxon
Abedus
Ablabesmyia
Ablabesmyia
Abedus
nerberti
TSN
103721
128079
128079
103731
~ Station
Aquatic
nsects and
Oligochaetes
of North and
South
Carolina.
Secondary
production of
Chironomidae
(Diptera)
rreshwater
biological
Traits Table
for Maine
An
ntroduction
to the Aquatic
nsects of
North
America
Country
United
States
United
States
United
States
United
States
Region
Gulf
Coast /
Delta
Area
(TX-
FL)
State
Mississippi
ndiana
Maine
Arizona
Data Source *V
Vieira, N.K.M., N.L Poff, D.M. Carlisle,
S.R. Moulton II, M.K. Koski, and
B.C.Kondratieff. 2006. A database of
otic invertebrate traits for North
America: U.S. Geological Survey Data
Series 187. Available at:
ittp: //pubs, water, usgs.gov/dsl87
Vieira, N.K.M., N.L Poff, D.M. Carlisle,
S.R. Moulton II, M.K. Koski, and
B.C.Kondratieff. 2006. A database of
otic invertebrate traits for North
America: U.S. Geological Survey Data
Series 1 87. Available at:
ittp: //pubs, water, usgs.gov/dsl 87
EPA GCRP State Eiomonitoring Data
Climate Change Pilot Project 2010:
rreshwater Biological Traits Table for
Vlaine (traits data came from several
different sources (main sources were
Vieira et al. 2006 and the Poff et al.
2006 trait matrix).
Vieira, N.K.M., N.L Poff, D.M. Carlisle,
S.R. Moulton II, M.K. Koski, and
B.C.Kondratieff. 2006. A database of
otic invertebrate traits for North
America: U.S. Geological Survey Data
Series 187. Available at:
nttp : / / p u b s . wate r . usgs.gov/dsl87
Download Traits Information to Excel]
E-15
-------
8. RETRIEVE THE EXCEL FILE FROM YOUR DOWNLOAD FOLDER
The Excel file will be named TraitsReport/
When you go to open the file, you will most likely receive an error message like the one
shown below. Do not be alarmed. Just click 'Yes' and the file should open without a
problem.
Microsoft Office Excel
The file you are trying to operij 'TraitsReport (l),xls', is in a different format than specified by the file extension, Verify that the file is not corrupted
and is from a trusted source before opening the file, Do you want to open the file now?
Yes
No
Help
Congrats! You have completed your first successful download!
E-16
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
PRESORTED STANDARD
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT NO. G-35
National Center for Environmental Assessment
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
Printed with vegetable-based ink on paper that
contains a minimum of 50% post-consumer fiber
content and processed chlorine free.
------- |