Development and Use of a Percent Model Affinity for Assessment of Puerto Rico Streams Report prepared by: *V*V'5^ James Kurtenbach, Aquatic Biologist Monitoring Operations Section Approved by: JoMnfKushwara, Chief Monitoring and Assessment Branch ------- TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ii List of Tables iii List of Acronyms iv Executive Summary v Introduction 1 Methods 1 Results and Discussion 6 Literature Cited 9 i ------- LIST OF FIGURES 1. Map of stream sites in Puerto Rico 2 2. Map of stream sites in Puerto Rico. Green squares: Sampled in both 2013 and 2009. Blue circles: Sampled in 2013only. Red diamonds: Sampled in 2009 only 3 3. PMA score thresholds for biological condition categories (good, fair, poor) 5 4. Box and whisker plots of the PMA and Mil for two different levels of forest cover 7 5. Mil and PMA scores for the Rio Piedras sites 7 6. Change in PMA scores at six Puerto Rico stream sites during the study period 8 li ------- LIST OF TABLES 1. Example calculation of a PMA score 5 111 ------- LIST OF ACRONYMS CV Coefficient of Variation EPA Environmental Protection Agency EPT Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera HBI Hillsenhoff Biotic Index Mil Macroinvertebrate Integrity Index PMA Percent Model Affinity iv ------- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Puerto Rico currently lacks a stream monitoring program with direct assessment and reporting on biological conditions and protocols for the biological assessment of Caribbean streams are generally unavailable. Measures of macroinvertebrate community composition including percent model affinity (PMA) have been developed and successfully applied in temperate North America. The PMA was originally developed for use on New York State streams and measures the similarity of a collected sample to that of an expected macroinvertebrate sample collected from riffle habitat at minimally disturbed sites. High percent similarity is indicative of least disturbed conditions and low similarity generally reflects poor habitat and/or water quality. Original authors of the PMA suggested it could potentially be applied in other geographical regions with some modifications. This report describes the results of the development and testing of the PMA for its effectiveness on wadeable streams with riffle habitat located in Puerto Rico. Data used in the development and testing of the PMA were collected from sampling conducted over the survey years (1994, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2013), at a total of 260 stream sites located in the eastern, central and western mountain drainages of Puerto Rico. All stream sites varied in their level of disturbance based on specific landscape features and human activities. A set of 42 reference sites were used to establish a model community and is represented by eight major organism groups. Mean average percent of each major aquatic group at these sites were trichoptera (16%), lepidoptera (2%), ephemeroptera (31%), coleoptera (18%), diptera (22%), odonata (4%), Crustacea (4%), and other (2%). The proposed PMA was tested for its accuracy and variability (sampling and seasonal) with independent data collected over the period 1994 to 2013. Accuracy of the PMA was evaluated against two land use gradients and compared to the response of a macroinvertebrate integrity index (Mil) already developed for use in Puerto Rico. The first evaluation assessed a group of reference quality versus highly deforested stream sites. The PMA did not distinguish this gradient with the same degree of separation as did the Mil, however, the PMA response was still moderately sensitive. The second land use gradient assessed was in a small urban watershed. Both the PMA and Mil tracked change of declining water quality from moderately developed headwaters to the highly urban downstream reach. Sampling and seasonal variability of the index was examined. Sampling and seasonal variability was similar or lower when compared to other common community measures and indices used in the determination of water quality. Results of this study will be used to make recommendations to the Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board (PREQB) for their stream monitoring and assessment program. Advantages of the application of the PMA in Puerto Rico include, ease in which biological conditions can be assessed without the need for extensive information and training on invertebrate taxonomy, and the index is relatively easy to compute as compared to other indices. v ------- Introduction Puerto Rico currently lacks a stream monitoring program with direct assessment, and reporting on biological conditions and protocols for the biological assessment of Caribbean streams are generally not available. Measures of macroinvertebrate community composition, including percent model affinity (PMA), have been developed and successfully applied in temperate North America. The PMA developed for shallow New York State streams (Novak and Bode 1992), measures the similarity of a collected sample to that of an expected macroinvertebrate sample collected from riffle habitat at minimally disturbed sites. Conceptually the model is developed for an expected community and affinity to the model is measured using a percent similarity index. High percent similarity is indicative of least disturbed conditions and low similarity represents severe water quality degradation. Authors of the PMA suggested it could potentially be applied in other geographical regions with some modifications. Here the model was tested for its effectiveness on wadeable streams with riffle habitat located in Puerto Rico. The PMA developed and tested for Puerto Rico streams is meant to complement other community measures and provide additional water quality information not contributed by other measures. Methods Study area All benthic macroinvertebrate sampling was conducted in March-April over the survey years (1994, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2013), at a total of 260 stream sites located in the eastern, central and western mountain drainages of Puerto Rico (Figures 1 and 2). The area of study included three geographic regions, humid east central, rainy west central, and rainy Luquillo Mountains, all characterized by relatively heavy rainfall and steep topography. Stream size ranged from 1st to 4th order. Stream sites were exclusively high and moderate in gradient and dominated by riffle- run habitat. The bottom substrate at all sites was similar, consisting mostly of small boulder and cobble with lesser amounts of gravel, sand, and silt. The catchment area upstream of each site had varied land use. 1 ------- 1994, 2006, 2009, 2011 Puerto Rico Biological Stream Survey's • m « ^ « „ . • % V V* • •• ,»7 > • • • • • • ® V • - * 9 *1 • «• #• _ . * • • ®* # • •• I . »v • . . a * * %S ¦ »«§>•& «** a u >. «• « ® • a, \ * . , 1 mt m ® • SEPA A Stream Sites * 1994 Targeted n = 105 ¦ 2006 Probabilistic Reference n = 19 N Kilometers • 2009 Probabilistic n = 50 50 I * 2011 Probabilistic Reference n = 20 Figure 1. Map of stream sites in Puerto Rico. 2 ------- CamuQ - iMfla snMniiJIn vagt Alia VITT lljWC'OW t"Tj L'f 'j^jTC CnboRaio ,„GniMn Salvia ^nwv- Cilfrn II; Wilift'f'' ffrftmc i«^, Sao Juan G3 ftid PiwW. n J*. Carolina . H«o«rerik^ , « | Injj'tw W» «5r & r.uT>«iii . i h=m -y un) O ¦ ^ t> YlyflOlA?® ¦ -^Surrfag. cagfaw 7^5 J i. j^WflWiOh'' ¦ ¦ ¦ Y«£WCQSI -» 1 HOlJllBD HSU • Cu'frj-afT^ . s> Figure 2. Map of stream sites in Puerto Rico. Green squares: Sampled in both 2013 and 2009; Blue circles: Sampled in 2013 ONLY; Red Diamonds: Sampled in 2009 ONLY. Site selection Sites selected for the 1994 stream survey were easily accessed from road bridge crossings, while the total number of sites sampled was proportional to the size of the drainage area. Sampling locations selected for the 2006, 2009, 2011, and 2013 surveys used a probabilistic survey design (Olsen et al. 1999). Results from these surveys were used to develop and test the PMA index. Site selection did not include weighting in the number of stream sites from 1st through 4th order stream classes. A set of reserve sites was chosen and served as replacements when target sites were dry, inaccessible due to physical barriers or access was denied by the landowner. Macroinvertebrate collection and sample processing At each stream site a single riffle area was chosen for the collection of a benthic macroinvertebrate sample. Benthic macroinvertebrates were captured from rock substrates (cobble and small boulder) using a large frame rectangular kick net, constructed with an 800 x 900 mil mesh net (Bode 1991). Sample collection was accomplished by placing the kick net on the stream bottom, mid-river in the riffle, while gradually working the net downstream and laterally (approximately two net widths) for 5 minutes. Bottom substrate was vigorously disturbed by foot so that sufficient organisms would be dislodged and swept into the net. After the sample was collected, large debris were removed from the net, inspected for organisms, and discarded. Macroinvertebrates and debris retained in the kick net were removed and placed in a one liter container and preserved with 10% buffered formalin. Sample containers were labeled with the appropriate site information and delivered to the EPA Edison laboratory. Kick nets were thoroughly rinsed and cleaned between stream sites. At the laboratory a discrete 100- organism subsample was sorted out and individuals were identified to the genus level of taxonomy. Midges and worms were only identified to family level. ------- Index development PMA applied here is a measure of aquatic invertebrate composition among organism groups that comprise the macroinvertebrate community of Puerto Rico streams. These major groups are Trichoptera, Lepidoptera, Ephemeroptera, Coleoptera, Diptera, Odonata, Crustacea, and other. The "other" category includes all other invertebrates not fitting in the above groups, such things as worms and snails. Two hundred and sixty sites were used in the development of the model that spanned a range of biological conditions as measured with a macroinvertebrate integrity index (Mil), which scores sites in one of three biological condition categories (good, fair, poor). All 260 sites varied with minimally to highly disturbed conditions as the result of various landscape and site specific human disturbance. A set 42 reference sites were used to establish the model community. Mean average percent of each major aquatic group at these sites was as follows: Trichoptera 16.4%; Lepidoptera 1.75%, Ephemeroptera 31.10%; Coleoptera 17.89%; Diptera 22.35%; Odonata 3.72%, Crustacea 4.37%; Other 2.25%. All reference site PMA scores had a coefficient of variability that was approximately 17%. In general, the Trichoptera, Lepidoptera, Ephemeroptera, and Coleoptera represent groups that are intolerant of poor water quality, with Odonata and Crustacea having intermediate tolerance, while Diptera and other groups are considered more tolerant of pollution. These should be taken as broad generalizations since information on Puerto Rico invertebrate pollution tolerances is limited. Percent model affinity is usually determined by shifts in the dominance of intolerant or tolerant groups. As intolerant groups become less dominant and tolerant groups more dominant, affinity to the model decreases and reflects an increase of water pollution and/or habitat degradation. On occasion a stream site may have a dominance of one or two less tolerant groups which causes a departure from the model community and is not related to pollution. In such circumstances PMA scores should be carefully interpreted and combined with information from other measures. For example, some Puerto Rico stream sites have a high abundance of leptophlebiid mayflies. Affinity to the model community is determined using a percent similarity index (Novak and Bode 1992). The percentages of the major groups in the sample and should equal 100. Then the lessor of the two values (model community and sample) is selected for each group and summed to provide the PMA value (Table 1). 4 ------- Table 1. Example calculation of a PMA score. Order/Group Model Sample Lesser Value Trichoptera 17 8 8 Lepidoptera 2 0 0 Ephemeroptera 31 26 26 Coleoptera 18 30 18 Diptera 22 36 22 Odonata 4 0 0 Crustacea 4 0 0 Other 2 0 0 Total 100 100 74 Biological assessment categories for the PMA were selected using the percent range of deviation from a reference condition, as proposed by EPA's National Rivers and Streams and Lakes Assessments (USEPA 2006, USEPA 2010, USEPA 2013). Macroinvertebrate data collected from reference sites were considered representative of a range of expected values for least- disturbed by human activities and this distribution was used as the benchmark for setting thresholds. The thresholds indicate distinct condition classes (e.g., good, fair, poor) and are based on the degree of disturbance drawn from the reference condition (Figure 3). Biological Condition (PMA Score) 100 go - so - 40 - Goat? 0 1 2 ReFerence Data Figure 3. PMA score thresholds for biological condition categories (good, fair, poor). 5 ------- Results and Discussion In general, for bioassessment measures to be useful, they must be able to make assessments of water quality with some degree of accuracy, minimum variability, and reasonable level of taxonomic effort (Barbour et al. 1992, Resh and Jackson 1993, Resh 1994, Hannaford and Resh 1995). In Puerto Rico, these issues are further compounded by the limited development of bioassessment protocols, lack of information on invertebrate taxonomy and functional feeding group classification, and limited knowledge about responses of aquatic invertebrates to water pollution. To test the accuracy of the PMA, this measure was evaluated against a land use gradient consisting of stream sites of reference quality (Stoddard et al. 2006) and those with high deforestation. In comparing the land use response of the Mil and PMA, the PMA did not distinguish reference from deforested sites with the same degree of separation (Figure 4). In another test of accuracy, the PMA was tested for its response to water pollution in a small urbanized watershed named the Rio Piedras. The Rio Piedras is known for water pollution typical of highly urban watersheds, including chemical contamination from stormwater runoff and raw sewage (Lugo et al. 2011, Potter et al. 2013, Ramirez et al. 2014). Both the PMA and Mil tracked the changes of water quality going from the less developed headwaters to the highly urban downstream reach (Figure 5). These findings are consistent with other studies of biological and chemical conditions in the Rio Piedras (de Jesus-Crespo and Ramirez 2011). Unlike the PMA developed for use in New York State (Novak and Bode 1992), the modified version for Puerto Rico could not be tested for its correlation with indexes commonly used in temperate North America, such as the Hillsenhoff biotic index and EPT index. First, the response of these indexes to water pollution is unknown for Puerto Rico macroinvertebrates. Second, pollution tolerance values have not been developed to use Puerto Rico taxa in a HBI. Lastly, plecopterans are not found in Puerto Rico, thus limiting the use of the typically pollution sensitive EPT index. 6 ------- PR PMA Distribution PR Mil Distribution 100 I Forest Cover 1- >85% Reference Data (2006, 3-2009, 2011) (n = 42) 2- <15% 1994 Sites (n = 26) I Forest Cover 1- >85% Reference Data (2006, 3-2009, 2011) (n = 42) 2-<15% 1994 Sites (n = 26) Figure 4: Box and whisker plots of the PMA and Mil for two different levels of forest cover Mil and PMA for the Rio Piedras Sites 60 20 8 9 10 Rio Piedras Sites Figure 5. Mil and PMA scores for the Rio Piedras sites. 7 ------- Sampling and seasonal variability of the index was examined. The sampling coefficient of variation (CV) for 42 reference sites was determined to be 17%. This was greater than the 5.3% for a set of twenty pristine sites, but similar to the CV of 16% using a raw data set of 50 sites (Novak and Bode 1992) and generally lower than commonly used macroinvertebrate community measures, such as, taxa richness (genus and species), Hillsenhoff biotic index, percent EPT, and EPT richness (Barbour et al. 1992) and (Szczytko 1989). Few examples of studies from the neotropics exist in the documented literature on the effects season change has on the composition of benthic macroinvertebrates. Unlike temperate North America where stream temperature and inputs of organic matter (e.g., leaves) respond abruptly to seasonal change, in Puerto Rico stream temperatures and inputs of organic matter are relatively uniform throughout the year. Bioassessment programs in temperate North America target a specific index period to avoid the intra annual variability known to occur with seasonal recruitment cycles of invertebrates. In Puerto Rico the climate is humid subtropical, with rainfall weakly related to season and amounts generally greater with tropical disturbances September through November. Seasonal variability was examined for six reference stream sites that were sampled three times (spring, summer, and fall) for one year. Individual sites displayed fluxuation in the index scores between seasons (Figure 6). Sites 6, 1, and 17 had more consistent scores between seasons, while sites 47 and 1152 had sharp drops in PMA values during the summer. Overall, PMA scores for site 7 were lower regardless of season, but increased slightly during the summer. The mean coefficient of variation calculated for the PMA was 18% and this compared favorably to the value of 14% obtained in New York State for a similar study of seasonal variability (Novak and Bode 1992). Nonetheless, it is not recommended here that biological conditions be compared from samples collected at different times of the year. Seasonality Study PMA Scores 100.00 90.00 80.00 70.00 k. o 60.00 o (~) 50.00 < 2 40.00 Q- 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 ¦47 ¦17 7 ¦6 ¦1152 •1 Spring Summer Fall Figure 6. Change in PMA scores at six Puerto Rico stream sites during the study period. 8 ------- The utility of the PMA index for application in Puerto Rico is the ease in which biological conditions could be determined without the need for extensive information on invertebrate taxonomy. Currently there is a lack of broad taxonomic keys and skills required by water quality professionals to identify macroinvertebrates below the family-level of taxonomy. Some taxa are well documented and others are less understood (Gutierrez-Fonseca et al 2013). Use of the PMA index is not meant to discourage or substitute the development of low-level invertebrate taxonomy in Puerto Rico, but serve has an interim measure until the science catches up to the need. Genera and species-level taxonomy is necessary for the calculation of other community indices. Another advantage of the index is the computation of the index score is relatively easy. Most multimetric indices require more extensive data management programs to calculate index scores. With some modification of the PMA, this measure has potential for use throughout the Caribbean and other regions of the Neotropical zone. The original community composition model on which the PMA index was developed for streams in New York, was modified to take into account zoogeographical differences of aquatic fauna found in Puerto Rico. Likewise, if this model was developed for use in other islands of the Caribbean it would need to reflect any geographical or sampling method differences. Literature Cited Barbour, M. T., J. L. Plafkin, B. P. Bradley, C. G. Graves, and R. W. Wisseman. 1992. Evaluation of EPA's rapid bioassessment benthic metrics: metric redundancy and variability among reference stream sites. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 11:437-449. Bode, R.W., M. A. Novak, and L.E. Able. 1991. Methods for rapid bioassessment of streams. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Water, Albany, NY. de Jesus-Crespo, R. and A. Ramirez. 2011. Effects of urbanization on stream physiochemistry and macroinvertebrate assemblages in a tropical urban watershed in Puerto Rico. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 30:739-750. Gutierrez-Fonesca, P.E, K.G. Rosas, and A. Ramirez. 2013. Aquatic Insects of Puerto Rico: a list of families. Dugesiana. 20(2):215-219. Hannaford, M. J. and V. H. Resh. 1995. Variability in macroinvertebrate rapid-bioassessment surveys and habitat assessments in a northern California stream. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 14:430-439. Lugo, A. E., Gonzales, O. M. R. and C. R. Pedraza. 2011. The Rio Piedras watershed and its surrounding environment. Vol FS-980. US Department of Agriculture, Rio Piedras. Novak M. A. and R. W. Bode. 1992. Percent model affinity: a new measure of macroinvertebrate community composition. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 11:80-85. Olsen, A.R. and D.V. Peck. 2008. Survey design and extent estimates for the Wadeable Streams 9 ------- Assessment. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 27:822-836. Potter, J. D., W. H. McDowell, A. M. Helton, and M. L. Daley. 2013. Incorporating urban infrastructure into biochemical assessment of urban tropical streams in Puerto Rico. Biochemistry. Ramirez, A., K. G. Rosas, A. E. Lugo, and O. M. Ramos-Gonzalez. 2014. Spatio-temporal variation in stream water chemistry in a tropical urban watershed. Ecology and Society 19:45. Resh, V. H. and J. K. Jackson. 1993. Rapid assessment approaches to biomonitoring using benthic macroinvertebrates. Pages 195-233 in D. M. Rosenberg and V. H. Resh (editors). Freshwater biomonitoring and benthic macroinvertebrates. Chapman and Hall, New York. Resh, V. H. 1994. Variability, accuracy, and taxonomic costs of rapid bioassessment approaches in benthic macroinvertebrate biomonitoring. Bollettino di Zoologia 61:375-383. Stoddard, J. L., D. P. Larsen, C. P. Hawkins, R. K. Johnson, and R. H. Norris. 2006. Setting expectations for the ecological condition of streams: the concept of reference condition. Ecological Applications 16:1267-1276. Szczytko. S. W. 1989. Variability of commonly used macroinvertebrate community metrics for assessing biomonitoring data and water quality in Wisconsin streams. Pages 12-22 in W. S. Davis and T. P. Simon (editors). Proceedings of the 1989 Midwest Pollution Control Biologists Meeting. EPA-905/9-89-007. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Environmental Services Division, Chicago, Illinois. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. Wadeable streams assessment: a collaborative survey of the nation's streams. EPA 841/B-06/002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010. National lakes assessment: a collaborative survey of the nation's lakes. EPA 841-R-09-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2013. National rivers and streams assessment 2008- 2009: a collaborative survey. EPA/841/D-13/001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. 10 ------- |