Laserfiche WebLink
drainage specificity. The primary aspect of <br />concordance between fish faunal regions <br />and aquatic ecoregions in the upper Rio <br />Grande drainage appeared to be elevation. <br />The partial concordance between fish faunal <br />regions and ecoregions in the upper Rio <br />Grande drainage has been observed in other <br />states. Hughes et al. (1994) summarized <br />results • for --studies - in.. Missouri, -Kansas, - <br />Nebraska, Oregon, and Arkansas. In <br />Missouri, fish faunal regions (Pilieger, <br />1971; Pflieger et al., 1981) had <br />considerable correspondence to the <br />ecoregions of Omernik (1987). In contrast, <br />Hawkes et al. (1986) distinguished 6 major <br />fish regions delineated mostly by drainage <br />that bore no resemblance to the six <br />ecoregions of Omernik (1987). Five fish <br />faunal regions were found to be more <br />appropriate than the seven ecoregions of <br />Omernik (1987) for streams in Nebraska <br />(Bazata, 1991), although most of the fish <br />faunal region boundaries followed closely <br />the 7 ecoregion boundaries. In Oregon, <br />Hughes et al., (1987) found that statewide, <br />ecoregions offered the single most suitable <br />system to classify fish assemblages, but <br />alone they were insufficient. Matthews and <br />Robison (1988) described a large river <br />fauna in Arkansas that ecoregion and basin <br />classifications missed. <br />The examples above underscore potential <br />inadequacies with Omernik's ecoregions and <br />with river basins. Fish data offer more <br />detailed information about fish <br />presence/absence than ecoregions and they <br />should be considered when developing <br />regional expectations for fish assemblages <br />(Hughes et al., 1994). Hughes et al. (1994) <br />suggest that intermediate regions at the scale <br />of drainage units or ecoregion subregions <br />offer greater precision than basins or <br />ecoregions at far less expense than habitat <br />classification, but their usefulness is <br />untested. Our results indicate that aquatic <br />ecoregions have greater potential utility than <br />Hydrologic Units in the upper Rio Grande <br />drainage. When our analyses are expanded <br />-to -a -statewide- wale; --they should determine <br />if Aquatic Fmregions and/or Hydrologic <br />Units offer better stratification of sample <br />sites. <br />Taxonomic Associations <br />Chironomids <br />Presence/absence data for chironomids <br />indicate that widespread species may prove <br />useful in identifying chironomid species that <br />are indicative of degradation in the upper <br />Rio Grande drainage. The high degree of <br />specificity of chironomid species <br />associations to individual streams and <br />reaches within streams could prove useful in <br />fine-scale water resources management, <br />i.e., temporal monitoring of individual sites <br />and tracking presence/absence of unique or <br />rare species. <br />Three genera of Orthocladiinae are most <br />important in terms of chironomid species <br />diversity, i.e., Orthocladius, Cricotopus <br />and Eukiefferiella. Species of all three <br />genera are scraper-gatherers that feed in the <br />aufwuchs (periphyton) film on solid <br />substrata; many occur as components of the <br />madncolous7 assemblage. Moderate <br />anthropogenie organic enrichment would be <br />Madricolous organisms live in thin films of water on rubble, gravel, bedrock, plant surfaces <br />or at the margins of streams or in splash zones of riffle or cascades. <br /> <br />23