Laserfiche WebLink
C. Laboratory experiments with <200 replications, or limited <br />range of hydraulic conditions. <br />D. X2 test of optimum showing 0.10<P<0.25 of significant differ- <br />ence of frequencies within optimum. <br />III. Fair <br />A. Frequency analysis with <50 measurements and limited range of <br />hydraulic conditions. <br />B. Parameter overlap analysis using a mix of measured and cal- <br />culated hydraulic conditions. <br />C. Laboratory experiments with three or fewer optional hydraulic <br />conditions. <br />D. X2 test shows significant variance within optimum, regardless <br />of number of observations. <br />IV. Reconnaissance Grade <br />A. Parameter overlap analysis in which some or all hydraulic <br />parameters were calculated from stream descriptions. <br />B. Parameter overlap analysis using measured, or mixed measured <br />and calculated parameters, with a restricted range of hydraulic <br />conditions. <br />These curves have been carefully constructed, using the best infor- <br />mation available. However, the type of data available for each species <br />and life history phase has dictated the analysis procedures. The prin- <br />cipal difference between a rating of excellent, good, and fair is one of <br />degree of reproducibility. Because field measured data was used in all <br />three cases, there is relatively little subjectivity involved in obtain- <br />ing the hydraulic parameters. However, reproducibility within the field <br />measured parameters would be affected most by sample size, number of <br />measurements, and the range of conditions tested. <br />For those curves rated as reconnaissance grade, there may be some <br />question related to the accuracy of the physical parameters, since these <br />were essentially best estimates of those parameters using various <br />hydraulic equations and fairly subjective descriptions of the stream <br />20 <br />