Butternut Creek Biomonitoring Jim Peterson 2017 Research Intern SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station Symmetrical layouts are common and easy to follow. More unique designs are great, but the flow must be clear for the reader. Use guides to help align your content; they can be deleted afterwards Use headings to guide the reader through your poster from introduction through final conclusions. Headings don’t need to be “METHODS” or “CONCLUSION”; it may be better for the reader to make more effective use of space by including descriptive headings specific to your study. If your work was sponsored by a local organization or benefited from collaboration with other students, researchers or groups, include their logo or an acknowledgement of their support. Major results are often highlighted in the center panel, as this is where the eye is drawn to. Results Introduction Through biomonitoring, macroinvertebrates (aquatic insects, worms, mites, shellfish & crustaceans) are studied to assess stream water quality over long time periods. The objective of this study was to replicate a survey conducted in 2002 (Stensland 2005) in order to determine if there were changes in water quality over the 15 year time period. Study Area The Butternut Creek is located in the western portion of Otsego County, New York. It is approximately 69 km long and flows southwest from an elevation of 637m at its headwaters to 365m at its confluence with the Unadilla River. The Butternut Creek is the northernmost known habitat of the eastern hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleghaniensis), a New York State species of special concern. Discussion The survey returned mixed results when compared to the 2002 survey. The upper section (sites 1-5) registered significant (p < 0.05) increases in indicators of non-impacted water quality. This signifies an improvement in water quality in this reach since 2002. Even though there was 259% increase in the total number of organisms collected in 2017, sites 6 & 7 registered a 34% decrease from 2002 (Figure 2). Bode et al. (2004) also found an anomaly in this reach; however, the data collected in this study indicate a further deterioration of the water quality. The lower section (sites 8 & 9) demonstrated a loss in conformity to the Percent Model Affinity despite a significant increase in the total number of organisms collected. This was primarily due to a dramatic increase in pollution tolerant species. Conclusion This study revealed that water quality in the Butternut Creek is improving in the upper half of the watershed while declining in the lower half. There is a distinct decline in water quality indicators between the Town of New Lisbon and the Village of Morris. Further study is recommended to determine the source of this perturbation.. Table 1. Biomonitoring data, by site, from Butternut Creek during summer 2017. Figure 2. Comparison of the total number of macroinvertebrates collected by site from the 2002 and 2017 surveys of the Butternut Creek. Site 1 Methods Nine sites on the Butternut Creek were kick sampled during the summer of 2017 (Figure 1). Specimens collected were sorted to the family level and analyzed to assess water quality. Metrics used to analyze the data included; enumeration, percent Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT), Family Biotic Index (FBI), and Percent Model Affinity (PMA). Site 2 Site 6 Acknowledgements I thank the Otsego County Conservation Association for providing the financial support for this internship, and the faculty and staff at the Biological Field Station for their direction and support. Literature cited Bode, R.W., M.A. Novak, L.E. Abele, D.L. Heitzman, and A.J. Smith. 2004. Butternut Creek biological assessment: 2003 survey. Stream Biomonitoring Unit, Bureau of Water Assessment and Management, Division of Water, NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, New York, USA. Stensland. M.L. 2005. The benthic macroinvertebrates of Butternut Creek, Otsego County, New York. Occasional Paper No. 39. SUNY Oneonta Biological Field Station, Cooperstown, New York, USA. Figure 3. Comparison of the percent EPT of macroinvertebrates collected by site from the 2002 and 2017 surveys of the Butternut Creek. Figure 4. Comparison of the Percent Model Affinity values of macroinvertebrates collected by site from the 2002 and 2017 surveys of the Butternut Creek. Site 5 Figure 1. Sites sampled on the Butternut Creek during summer 2017.