INFORMATION TO USERS

This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document.
While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this
document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of
the original submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.
1.

The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the
missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with
adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and
duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity.

2.

When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black
mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the
copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred
image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.

3.

When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being
photographed the photographer followed a definite method in
"sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the
upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from
left to right In equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary,
sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and
continuing on until complete.

4.

The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest
value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be
made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the
dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at
additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog
number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced.

University Microfilms
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Mlchfoan 48106
A Xerox Education Company

I
I

73-12,833
SZLUHA, Adam T., 1938POTAMOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF FISH HATCHERY
DISCHARGE ON THE JORDAN RIVER, NORTHERN
LOWER MICHIGAN.
Michigan State University, Ph.D., 1972
Limnology
University Microfilms, A XEROX Com pany, Ann Arbor, Michigan

©

1973

ADAM T. SZLUHA
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

POTAMOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF FISH HATCHERY
DISCHARGE OH THE JORDAN RIVER,
NORTHERN LOWER MICHIGAN

By
Adam T. Szluha

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Fisheries and Wildlife

1972

PLEASE NOTE:
Some pages may have
in d is tin ct p rin t.
FIImed as r e c e i v e d .

U n i v e r s i t y M i c r o f i l m s , A Xerox Education Company

ABSTRACT
POTAMOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF FISH HATCHERY
DISCHARGE ON THE JORDAN RIVER,
NORTHERN LOWER MICHIGAN
By
Adam T. Szluha

The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife is operating
a lake trout

{Salvelinus namavcush) hatchery in the Jordan

River Valley utilizing two systems of springs for its water
supply.

Until the spring of 1972 the hatchery had been

discharging its wastes into the Jordan River without any
formal treatment.

During the winter of 1971 and 1972 two

settling basins were built to.remove 80-95% of settlable
solids from the wastewater.
In order to evaluate the ecological impacts of the
hatchery wastes on the receiving stream, periphytic production
rates and the oxygen balance were determined at locations
above and below the outfalls during March through June, 1971
and again in 1972.
Periphytic production rates increased exponentially
during the study periods.

Mean productivity rates were

seven times greater below the outfalls than at the control
station above the discharge in 1971, and five times greater
in 1972.

Adam T. Szluha

Diurnal oxygen concentrations and temperature curves were
obtained from sections above and below the hatchery discharges
in order to estimate gross primary productions and community
respirations.

However, undeterminable ground and surface

water accrual with oxygen concentrations usually lower than
in the Jordan River distorted rates of changes of oxygen con­
centrations which were necessary to calculate gross primary
production and community respiration.
A primary production index was calculated from the diurnal
oxygen curves.

These data indicated that the oxygen balance

in the Jordan River was not effected significantly by the
hatchery effluent either before or after installation of
settling basins.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

During my research connected with the preparation of this
dissertation,

I encountered a number of friends, associates

and professors without the help of whom my work would have
proved to be a much more difficult and time consuming effort.
I am naturally very grateful for the fact that these indi­
viduals were so ready to make themselves available to m e when
I needed their aid.

Their assistance has been undoubtedly of

the nature for which I can hardly expect to reciprocate by
writing these acknowledgements as a prelude to the rest of
this paper; however, it will have to suffice as the only method
of expressing gratitude available to me at this time.

(I do

not mean to imply that other forms of expression will come at
a later time.)
First of all,

I want to express my appreciation to

Dr. Dean Eyman for a friendship which has been invaluable to
m e since our undergraduate days, as well as his expert assis­
tance in sampling efforts in the Jordan River Valley.

Our

discussions dealing with ecological philosophy and research
have been meaningful and helpful to me.
Also, I wish to thank Dr. Clarence McNabb for the guidance
given to me whenever I seemed to be stumbling about in darkness
during my course work and/or research; his support and interest
toward my research has been much appreciated,
m e considerable encouragement.

ii

since it gave

Dr. Eugene Roelofs guidance through the enlightening
discussions we have had, has been invaluable to me in the
formulation of professional philosophy.
Dr. Karl Scholze has given me a great deal of guidance,
working with me in his sanitary engineering courses.

I am

also grateful for his patience and guidance during my research.
Dr. Frank D'Xtri's guidance has been helpful and appre­
ciated.
I am very grateful to Hiss Mary Patton and Mr. Robert
Will for their consistent and conscientious laboratory assis­
tance which has been invaluable to m e in accomplishing my
peace of mind as well as accurate data.
I want to thank Mr. Charles T. Hiltz, Manager of the
National Fish Hatchery,

and Mr. James M. Engel, Assistant

Manager, for their good-spirited cooperation during my
research when I was often at their mercy.
Let me express my appreciation to Dr. Charles Cress for
his assistance in statistics and computer programming, an area
in which I certainly could use this help.
To Mr. Douglas Bulthuis and Mr. John Craig, I want to
express thanks for their discussions in statistical designs
and interpretations.

Also, I would like to thank my other

fellow graduate students who have given me support b y partici­
pating in professional discussions.
This study was supported by funds from Grant 14-31-00013153, provided by the United States Department of Interior,
Office of Water Resources Research, as authorized under the

Water Resources Research Act of 1964, and administered by
the Institute of Water Research, Michigan State University;
equipment was provided by the Department of Fisheries and
Wildlife, Michigan State University.
Use of the Michigan State University computing facilities
was made possible through support,

in part,

from the National

Science Foundation.
Lastly,

I want to thank my wife, Kati, for her financial

contribution and her moral support to the project--roe.

Both

have been invaluable; the fact that she made excellent use of
her training in persuasive speaking by telling m e — and every­
one else who was interested in listening— that I would
certainly finish my degree this summer, has been a source of
real motivation for doing just that.

She has been instrumental

in accomplishing the goal not only by doing rereading and
typing for me, but also by reminding m e of it— daily.
I want to dedicate this dissertation to my father,
Dr. Stephan Szluha, who has at times expressed a doubt that
this Ph.D. would ever materialize,

and to my sons, Martin and

Christopher who have never stopped being amazed at the fact—
and found it somewhat embarrassing to explain to friends— that
Daddy is still in school.
all for them.

I want them to know that I did it

TABLE OP CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES..........................................

vi

LIST OF F I G U R E S .......................................

vii

INTRODUCTION............................................

1

GENERAL STREAM MORPHOLOGY .................

5

SCIENTIFIC APPROACH ...................................

9

Periphyton Collections ..........................
Stream Metabolism.................................

9
14

R E S U L T S ................................................

16

P e r i p h y t o n .......................................
Stream Metabolism.................................

20
31

DISCUSSION..............................

•

43

P e r i p h y t o n .......................................
Stream Metabolism.................................

45
50

S U M M A R Y ................................................

53

REFERENCES..............................................

55

APPENDIX................................................

58

T a b l e s ............................................

59

v

LIST OF TABLES
TABLE

Page

1. Mean discharge (m3/rain) and phosphorus and nitro­
gen budgets (kg/yr) of the Jordan River, Five
Tile Creek, Six Tile Creek and the hatchery
effluent in 1970-1971..............................

18

2. Analysis of variance of periphytic growth rates
in 1971 .............................................

26

3. Analysis of variance of periphytic growth rates
in 1972.............................................

26

4. Mean gross primary production estimates at
Station 1 and 3 in June, 1971 and 1972 ..........

42

5. Comparison of periphytic production rates in mg
organic matter per m per day measured by artifi­
cial substrate methods ............................

49

6. Some primary productivity estimates compiled from
the l i t e r a t u r e .....................................

51

A-l. Concentrations of phosphorus as P and nitrogen as
N expressed in mg/1 in Five Tile Creek (5TC), Six
Tile Creek (6TC), Jordan River above {JRA) and
Jordan River below (JRB) the hatchery's discharge.

59

A —2. Means (X), standard errors (S.E.), 95% confidence
limits about the means (S.E. x 1.96) and the
number of observations (n) on the periphytic pro­
duction rates in 1971..............................

60

A —3. Means (X), standard errors (S.E.), 95% confidence
limits about the meanB (S.E. x 1.96) and the
number of observations (n) on the periphytic pro­
duction rates in 1972..............................

61

A-4. Community composition of periphyton on artificial
substrates in the Jordan R i v e r ...................

62

vi

LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE
1.

2.

3.
4.
5.
6.

7.

8.
9.
10.
11.

Page
The Jordan River in the vicinity of the National
Fish Hatchery in Antrim County, Northwestern
Lower Michigan . . ...............................

3

Location of waste discharges, settling basins
and study sites near the Jordan River National
Fish Hatchery.....................................

8

Rack with plexiglass plates as artificial sub­
strates for periphyton growth....................

13

Periphytic growth rates in the Jordan River,
Michigan, in 1971.................................

22

Periphytic growth rates in the Jordan River,
Michigan, in 1972.................................

24

Regression lines and equations of periphytic
growth rates in the Jordan River, Michigan, in
197 1 ..............................................

28

Regression lines and equations of periphytic
growth rates in the Jordan River, Michigan, in
1972 ..............................................

30

Mean diurnal dissolved oxygen concentrations and
temperatures measures at Station 1 in June, 1971

35

Mean diurnal dissolved oxygen concentrations and
temperatures measured at Station 3 in June, 1971

37

Mean diurnal dissolved oxygen concentrations and
temperatures measured at Station 1 in June, 1972

39

Mean diurnal dissolved oxygen concentrations and
temperatures measured at Station 3 in June, 1972

41

vii

INTRODUCTION

By the end of the 1950's, as a result of lamprey
(Petromyzon marinus) predation,

the lake trout (Salvelinus

namavcush) population of the Great Lakes was facing severe
reductions.

To compensate for the predatory losses, hatcher­

ies were built and stocking programs initiated.
Valley National Fish Hatchery,
Michigan

The Jordan

located in Antrim County,

(Figure 1) is part of this program.

The hatchery

began operation in 1964, utilizing two systems of springs
for its water supply.

The water was circulated through the

race-ways one to seven times, depending on the ambient air
temperatures, and then discharged into the Jordan River
without any formal treatment.
During the period*of*1966 to 1969, several short-term
studies were conducted on the Jordan River,
potential pollution by the hatchery.

investigating

In 1966, the Bureau of

Sport Fisheries and Wildlife estimated a nutrient budget for
the hatchery's effluent and the river.
concentrations in the river were high,

Although nutrient
"the hatchery's con­

tribution to the total load was very small"

(Anon. 1966).

Another study conducted by the Federal l^ater Pollution Control
Administration

(now Environmental Protection Agency)

in 1969

established that the "hatchery contributed significant amount
of fish-fecal material and unconsumed fish food, " which
1

2

Figure 1

The Jordan River in the vicinity of the
National Fish Hatchery in Antrim County,
Northwestern Lower Michigan.

Boyne

Falls

3

N //

S2
FH

0

[= 3

1

2

-- 1-- 1-- 1
km

Figure 1

FH
SI
52
53
5
6

-

Fish Hatchery
Station 1
Station 2
Station 3
Five Tile Creek
Six Tile Creek

4

supported pollution tolerant benthic organisms, and recom­
mended construction of settling ponds or lagoons for the
removal of solids from the hatchery's effluent (Anon. 1969a).
Later in the year, the Michigan Water Resources Commission
conducted a similar study

(Anon. 1969b).

Its findings and

conclusions were in agreement with the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, and also recommended settling pond or
lagoon facilities for the removal of suspended solids.

The

National Fish and Wildlife Service accepted the recommenda­
tions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
and the Michigan Water Resources Commission,

and in the winter

of 1971-1972 two 30-m long, 10-m wide and 3-m deep settling
basins were built with design to remove 80-95% of the sus­
pended solids from the wastewater.
These circumstances offered an opportunity to initiate
a two-phase investigation relating the effects of fish
hatchery wastes on the primary production of the Jordan River.
The first phase of this study intended to define the effects
of untreated hatchery wastes on the river.
in February and ended in July of 1971.

This period began

The second phase of

the investigation was intended to differentiate between the
effects of treated and untreated wastes on the Jordan River.
In order to maintain most of the variables uniform,

each phase

of the study was programed for the same seasons (February to
July)

in both years.

GENERAL STREAM MORPHOLOGY

The Jordan River drains a water shed in an interlobate
moraine o£ the Port Huron Morainic System, cutting its bed
out of sand, gravel and wind-blown sandy drifts
1915).

(Leverett,

It originates from a spring system 1.5 km west of US.

Rt. 131 and State Hwy. 32 in Antrim County, Michigan, and
empties into the South Arm of Lake Charlevoix at the village
of East Jordan, Michigan.
Before the turn of the century,

the watershed was part

of the vast eastern white pine (Pinus strobus) stands of
Michigan and adjacent States.

At the present, secondary

plant succession is in a serai stage of white oak (Ouercus
alba) , sugar maple
(Alnus rugosa).

(Acer saccharium), and smooth alder

There is considerably more variation in the

plant community adjacent to the stream and in the valley
proper.

The stream is broken into distributaries by small

islands,

and it is littered with fully and/or partially sub­

merged cedar and white pine logs and stumps.

These islands

and stream banks are dominated by northern white cedar
occidentalis) and eastern larch (Larix laricina) .

(Thuja,

Usually,

a community of big tooth (Populus qradidatata) and quaking
aspens

(P. tremuloides), white birch

(Betula papyrifera) and

red maple (Acer rumbrum) occupies the rest of the valley
proper.

5

6

The sandy,

loose soil and continuous vegetation provide

good percolation o£ precipitation into the ground water table
and prevent surface run-off into the Jordan River.

As a

result, the stream receives its flow from springs and ground
water seepages making the water-level in the Jordan River
relatively constant the year around.

Figure 2

Location of waste discharges, settling hasins
and study sites near the Jordan River National
Fish Hatchery.

\

Legend
Outfall No. 1
Outfall No. 2
Settling Basins
Pond
Five Tile Creek
Six Tile Creek
Forest Drive
Station 1
Station 2
Station 3
Springs

oo

meter
Figure 2

SCIENTIFIC APPROACH

Prior to 1972 the wastes o£ the National Fish Hatchery
entered the Jordan River in two separate outfalls about
250 m apart.

The first outfall discharged effluent into

Five Tile Creek about 50 m upstream from its confluence with
the Jordan River.

The second outfall carried effluent into

a distributary of the Jordan River
were selected for this study.

(Figure 2).

Three stations

Station 1 was located 15-20 m

above the confluence of Five Tile Creek and the Jordan River
in order to monitor potamological conditions uneffected by
the hatchery wastes.

Station 2 was 380 m below Station 1 and

approximately 180 m below the second outfall.

As determined

with fluorescein dye, the wastewater from the first outfall
was throughly mixed with the stream at Station 1; waste from
the second outfall followed the south or left bank of the
stream and became throughly mixed only after it had traveled
900 m downstream.

The third station was located in this area

of the Jordan River.
Periphyton Collections
According to Liao

(1970), fish hatcheries discharge the

following three types of pollutants.

These are

1) fecal

material and residual food, 2) drugs and disinfectants from
disease and parasite control, and 3) pathogenic bacteria and

9

10

parasites.

Basically,

they all undergo biological degrada­

tion or assimilation in the stream.

Although the Jordan

Valley National Fish Hatchery did not have any formal waste
treatment facility, prior to 1972, mineralization of the
above described pollutants was provided in the arrangement of
the outfalls.

Specifically, wastewater from both outfalls

flowed through a labyrinth of distributaries and small islands
before entering the main stream of the Jordan River.

These

provided natural settling basins which served as reservoirs
for the periodic slugs of particulate solids which were
washed out of the race-ways when workmen scrubbed and flushed
them.

Between flushings,

the stored sludge slowly decomposed

and mineralized in the distributaries.

Since synoptic

observations and conclusions found in the literature {cf.
Goldman,

1972) suggested that the pollutants after entering

the aquatic ecosystem were quickly mineralized,

the effects

of fish hatchery wastes could best be evaluated by comparing
primary productivity estimates obtained above and below the
outfalls in the Jordan River, rather than by the chemical
data obtained from the analyses of water samples.
It is generally accepted that true phytoplankton or
potamoplankton is only present in large, slowly flowing deep
rivers, but not in shallow streams with fast currents (Hynes,
1969; Hooper,

1969),

like the Jordan River.

If there is

primary production in shallow, fast flowing streams,

it is

usually by either periphyton or by aquatic macrophytes.

11

Since the Jordan River lacked substantial quantities of
aquatic macrophytes, periphyton grown on plexiglass arti­
ficial substrates was chosen for primary productivity
estimates.
Historically, glass microscope slides were the first
used of the artificial substrates for enumerating periphytic
algal cells in the aquatic environment.

Patrick et al.

(1954)

constructed the "diatometer" to determine diversity of these
algae in polluted and unpolluted environments.
dentally,

Quite acci­

she also discovered that styro-foam, supporting the

apparatus in the water was a better substratum than glass
slides (Hohn, 1968).

This discovery led to the use of other

materials,

such as wood shingles, concrete, slate and later

plastics.

A critical evaluation of the various methods has

been compiled by Sladeckova

(1962).

It was Grzenda (1960)

who first used plexiglass plates as artificial substrates for
the collection of periphyton biomass in calculation of pro­
ductivity estimates.

The numerous periphyton studies con­

ducted b y students at this institution since then have been
summarized by Ball et al.

(1969).

In the past, investigators have attached plexiglass
plates to concrete blocks to withstand flood periods and
vandalism

(Clifford, 1959; Grzenda, I960; King,

1964).

From

2.5-cm angle iron, 90-cm threaded rods and No. 225 Acco paper
clamps, racks (Figure 3) were constructed which would hold
eighteen 5 x 10 x 1 cm plexiglass plates.

Both of the angle

12

Figure 3.

Rack with plexiglass plates as artificial
substrates for periphyton growth.

13

Figure 3

14

Iron cross-members were adjustable for the depth at which
the plates were to be placed.

The sand bottom of the Jordan

River facilitated pressing the rods as legs into the stream
bottom.

The top of these rods were usually above water,

hence the rack could be pulled up enough to exchange the
slides.

Starting on 15 February in both years, two of these

racks with four plates on each rack were placed at all
stations.

These plates remained in the stream for 13 to 20

days and then were exchanged for clean ones.

At the time of

collection, each plate was placed individually in a plastic
bag, transported to the laboratory on ice, and kept frozen
until processing.

Each plate was meticulously picked free of

visible macroinvertebrates,

and the remaining material from

the plate and plastic bags was scraped and washed into alumi­
num weighing dishes.

Organic weight was determined by the

difference between dry-weight (105°C) and ash-weight

(550°C).

Accrual rates of periphyton on artificial substrates were
converted to rates of organic production in m g organic
material/m2 substrate area/day.

The genera of dominant algae

are indicated in Table A-4 of the Appendix.
Stream Metabolism
When using artificial substrates for periphyton sampling,
one cannot assume that the growth rates on artificial sub­
strates are equal or similar to growth rates on natural sub­
strates.

Hence,

in order to substantiate periphytic production

rates obtained on artificial substrates, oxygen concentrations

15

were measured at the beginning and end of a 500-m section
at Station 1 and a 275-m section at Station 3 of the Jordan
River on June 7, 8# 9* 30, and July 1, 1971; and June 6, 7,
8, 9, 21 and 22, 1972.

At each point of measurement a Delta

Scientific Oxygen Probe No. 1921 coupled with a Rustrak
Model 192 dissolved oxygen and temperature recorder were
placed for 24-hour periods.

Originally,

these diurnal oxygen

and temperature curves were to be utilized to calculate net
oxygen production by photosynthesis, and community respira­
tion, as described b y Odum (1956) .

However,

the dynamics of

dissolved oxygen in this particular section of the stream
were such as to make these procedures inappropriate.
A critique of this is found in the following section.

RESULTS

Previous studies of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and
Wildlife (Anon., 1966) and the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration (Anon., 1969a)

indicated that the

nutrient load from the hatchery was insignificant in relation
to the total load of the Jordan River.

Neither of these

investigations found a substantial increase of nitrogen or
phosphorus below the hatchery effluents.

Shauver

(1969)

calculated that 38.3 tons of nitrogen per year and 3.3 tons
of phosphorus per year were being discharged to the Jordan
River through the Federal Hatchery.

His figures combined the

nitrogen and phosphorus present in the spring system and that
in the waste from the hatchery.

These sources of phosphorus

and nitrogen were treated separately in this study in order
to determine the contribution from both sources.

Subtract­

ing quantities of phosphorus and nitrogen contributed by the
spring system from the total load to the stream, as determined
by periodic sampling was not appropriate.

Loading from the

hatchery came in slugs of undeterminable duration because of
periodic cleaning of settled solids from the race-ways.
Since the hatchery diverted all of the water from the springs,
this annual loading was calculated by applying the mean of

16

17

three samples

(Table A-l, Appendix) obtained from the springs

to the hatchery flow volume.

The hatchery's nutrient load­

ing was estimated by calculating phosphorus and nitrogen
contents of fish-food pellets and lake trout fingerlings,
and applying the following scheme:
Pin fish-food

Pin fish = Pin waste

N in fish-food ~ N in fish ** Nin waste
Tonnage of fish-food pellets applied and lake trout fingerlings produced in 1970-1971 and 1971-1972 were graciously
provided by the hatchery manager Mr. Charles T. Hiltz.

The

concentrations of phosphorus and nitrogen in water samples,
fish-food pellets of various sizes and fish of various ages
were determined by the Water Quality Laboratory of the Insti­
tute of Water Research, Michigan State University.
In Table 1 discharges and annual phosphorus and nitro­
gen budgets of the Jordan River, Five Tile Creek, Six Tile
Creek and the hatchery are summarized.

The discharge of the

Jordan River above the hatchery, the hatchery, and the dis­
charges of Five and Six Tile Creeks have been taken as 100%
of flow and load.

If the estimates of discharge, and phos­

phorus and nitrogen loadings at Station 3 below the hatchery
were larger than those estimated for these four components,
the surplus could have been provided only by other springs
and ground water seepages.

Table 1.

Mean discharge (ra3/min) and phosphorus and nitrogen budgets (kg/yr) of the
Jordan River, Five Tile Creek, Six Tile Creek and the hatchery effluent in
1970-1971.

Discharge
m 3/min
1. Jordan River
above hatchery
2. Five Tile Creek
3. Six Tile Creek
4. Hatchery effluent
Subtotal
Jordan River at
Station 3

%

Discharge

Phosphorus
kg/yr

%

Phosphorus

Nitrogen
kg/yr

Nitrogen

%

81.7

1,739

54.7

64,384

77.6

7.48

6.2

236

7.4

4,875

5.9

14.58

12.1

306

9.6

9,502

11.5

898

28.3

4.173

5.0

98.55 *

(22.06)**

(18.3)**

120.61

100.0

3,179

100.0

82,934

100.0

163.12

135.2

3,246

102.1

154,154

185.9

♦Discharge of the Jordan River was obtained by determining cross sections, and measur­
ing flow velocities with a Gurley Current Meter.
**The hatchery diverts the flow of Five and Six Tile Creeks.
hatchery management.

Flow data obtained from

It is indicated in Table 1 that at Station 3 the discharge was 42.5 m 3/min or 35.2% greater than the sums of
these four main contributors.

This additional 35.2% flow

was contributed by spring and ground water seepages.

The

additional flow contributed 2.1% more phosphorus and 85.9%
more nitrogen than could be accounted for in the monitored
sources.

The phosphorus and nitrogen data also reveal that

the hatchery's contribution of phosphorus was substantial?
896 kg/yr or 28.3% of the total contributed by the above
described major components of flow.

However,

the nitrogen

contribution was relatively small; 4,173 kg/yr or only 5.0%
of the total contributed by the four major components.

There

were an additional 71,220 kg/yr of nitrogen contributed by
spring and ground water seepages.
In 1972, only the hatchery's phosphorus and nitrogen
loading was recalculated and was found to be 998 kg/yr of
phosphorus and 4,604 kg/yr of nitrogen.

These quantities

were very close to the phosphorus and nitrogen loadings of
the National Fish Hatchery in the previous year.
In order to provide a comparison of the hatchery's waste­
water to municipal wastewater in terms of phosphorus and
nitrogen, 898 kg/yr phosphorus and 4,173 kg/yr nitrogen were
converted to population equivalents of municipal wastewater
with mean values of phosphorus

(as P - 10-15 mg/1)

nitrogen (as total N - 25-35 mg/1)
Uttormark (1972).

and

calculated by Rohlick and

The hatchery's contribution of phosphorus

20

was equal to a population equivalent of 341; the population
equivalent for nitrogen was 672.
Periphyton
There is an agreement among workers
1954; Odum,

1957a; Castenholtz,

1964; Wetzel and Westlake,

(Patrick et al.f

1960; Sladecek and Sladeckova,

1969) that periphyton communities

on sundry artificial substrates are similar if not identical
in composition to communities on natural substrates.

Since

the major objective in this study was to establish a method
which would provide some quantitative measure of the effects
of hatchery wastes on the Jordan River, the criteria of
Newcomb

(1949) was accepted, namely that ... "the weight of

organic matter

[production rate] produced on suitable, uniform

submerged surface provide a somewhat more direct measure of
the productive capacity of a body of water” ... than what
could bb obtained from natural substrates, since the position­
ing of artificial substrates in the stream usually optimizes
conditions for periphytic growth.
Periphytic growth rates as ash-free organic weight
(mg/m2/day) were calculated from biomass accrual for each
station.

These rates for 1971 and 1972 are depicted in

Figures 4 and 5 respectively on a two dimensional model,

in

which the abscissae represent time (March-June, 1971 and 1972)
and the ordinates represent periphytic growth rates

(mg/m2/day).

The latter scale is in base-10 logarithm for convenient
representation, since growth rates suggested exponential

21

Figure 4.

Periphytic growth rates in the Jordan River,
Michigan,

in 1971.

1

22

1000

95% confidence
limit about the
mean

100

50

St
/ St

10

Periphytic

growth

rates

as mg

organic

material/m2/day

500 —

March

April

May
Figure 4

June

23

Figure 5.

Periphytic growth rates in the Jordan River,
Michigan,

in 1972.

24

1000

! - 95% confidence limit
about the mean
\T

Tt

100

50 —

Periphytic

growth

rates

as mg organic

material/m2/day

500

10

5—

March

April

May

Figure 5

June

25

increases during the sampling periods.

The mean value per

date and the 95% confidence limits about the means are com­
piled in Tables A-2 and A-3 of the Appendix.
In order to utilize these data for quantifying stream
enrichment by the hatchery effluent, a two-way
time) analysis of variance was performed.

(station x

The analysis of

variance for 1971 and 1972 data are presented in Tables 2
and 3 respectively.

Since some of the variables of the

experiments could not be measured in the field,

their control

was attempted in the statistical analysis by removing possible
sources of variation of racks within station, time, and time
x station interaction from the error term.

The results of

the analysis of variance indeed indicated that:

1) production

rates were significantly different among stations, 2) produc­
tion rates were significantly different between racks within
the same station, 3) periphytic production rate was a function
of time, where time represented functional changes in water
temperature,

light intensity, photoperiod, etc., 4) signifi­

cant interaction existed between station and time.

In order

to identify these differences among stations, and indicate
any changes in periphytic production rates between 1971 and
1972, the data were subjected to regression analyses.

The

regression lines and their equations are shown in Figure 6
and Figure 7 for 1971 and 1972 respectively.

26

Table 2.

Analysis of variance of periphytic growth rates in
1971.

Sources of
Variation
Station
Racks w/i
Station
Time
Station x Time
Error Term

Degrees of
Freedom

Sum of
Squares

Mean
Square

F Ratio

2

15.3686

7.6843

241.276^

3

1.6410

0.5470

17.176♦

7
14

62.6661

8.9523

281.089^

4.5104

0.3222

10.116♦

120

3.8213

0.0318

♦Significant at the 0.001% level.

Table 3.

Analysis of variance of periphytic growth rates in
1972.

Sources of
Variation

Degrees of
Freedom

Sum of
Squares

Mean
Square

F Ratio

Station
Racks w/i
Station

2

7.7587

3.8793

163.152♦

3

0.7765

0.2588

10.886♦

Time

7

31.7848

4.5407

190.966♦

14
121

1.6875
2.8771

0.1205

5.069^

Station x Time
Error Term

♦Significant at the 0.001% level.

0.0238

27

Figure 6

Regression lines and equations of periphytic
growth rates in the Jordan River, Michigan,
in 1971.

28

log Y^= -0.1150

4-

0.2908X

Station 2?

log

0.2274 + 0.2908X

Station 3

log Y 3=

0.7357

0.2908X

2.5

St
2.0

—

- log

of mg/ma/day.

3 .0 —

Station 1;

Periphytic

production

rates

St
1.5
St

1.0

0.0
March

April

May

-0.5

Figure 6

June

29

Figure 7

Regression lines and equations of periphytic
growth rates in the Jordan River, Michigan,
in 1972.

** 0

<1

31

Stream Metabolism
As described by Odum (1956) there are essentially four
main processes effecting oxygen (and carbon-dioxide) concen­
trations in streams.

These are

1) photosynthetic release

of oxygen during the day, 2) uptake of oxygen as a result of
community respiration, 3) diffusion of oxygen between air
and water as a function of saturation gradient, and 4) influx
resulting from accrual of water with different oxygen con­
centrations.

If diurnal concentrations of dissolved oxygen

are measured between stations, these processes may be quanti­
tatively expressed a s :
Q = P - R + D + A ;

where

Q = rate of change of dissolved oxygen per unit area
between stations,
P = rate of gross primary production,
R i= community respiration,
D = rate of oxygen diffusion,
A = rate of accrual from tributary water between
stations.
The rates of gross primary production and community
respiration expressed in g 0 2 / m a/day would have been valuable
tools in 1) quantifying the effects of hatchery wastes on the
stream community, 2) substantiating the periphytic production
rates, and 3) detecting any changes of stream metabolism
resulting from the treatment of the hatchery wastes in the
second year of study.

However, component "A", rate of oxygen

accrual resulting from the accrual of ground and surface
water with different oxygen concentrations

(usually lower)

could not be determined since innumerable springs entered this

32

section of the Jordan River above and below the stream's sur­
face.

This has been documented in the discharge data in

Table 1.

Therefore, absolute values of primary production

and community respiration could not be estimated with this
commonly used technique.

However, the diurnal oxygen concen­

trations and temperature curves were treated in the following
manner.

A mean curve was calculated for each station from

the data obtained in June,

1971 and June, 1972.

are presented in Figures 8 through 11.

These curves

Each of these curves

revealed the following common characteristics:
oxygen ranged between 8.0 and 11.0 mg/1;

1) dissolved

2) dissolved oxygen

usually approached or reached 100% saturation (corrected for
300 m above mean sea level elevation) between 1000 and 1400
i

hours, and steadily declined after reaching a maximum in the
daylight hours until about 2000-2200 hours;
hours of darkness

3) during the

(2200-0500 hours) dissolved oxygen curves

paralleled 100% saturation.

Respiration,

accrual and dif­

fusion working together produced an oxygen deficit which was
constant during these hours of darkness.
can be expressed as follows:

Quantitatively,

D - (R + A) = K.

this

This constant

"K" was expanded into the daylight hours by use of dotted
lines in Figures 8 through 11.

The area between the dotted

line and the dissolved oxygen curve is gross production of
oxygen by photosynthesis.

For the determination of "K", I

have taken the distance between 100% saturation and D.o. at
2100 hours and extended it to the daylight hours.

Then I

33

calculated the rate of oxygen produced in g 0 a/m2/hr from
the shaded area between 0900 and 1600 hours.

These mean

rates are presented in Table 4 with their statistical treat­
ment of a student-t test.

Although these rates were a little

higher at Station 3 in both years,
not significant at the 0.20% level.

their differences were

34

Figure 8

Mean diurnal dissolved oxygen concentrations
and temperatures measured at Station 1 in
June, 1971.

Dissolved oxygen m g /I
00 CD

O

—

O

GO

PO

X
o

0>

H*

IQ

ft
O
CD

w

u>
Ul

ro

a o
ro

O

O

GO

o — r ow^c7i ( n- >JoocD
o o o o o o o o o o
•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Temperature °C

■

•

36

Figure 9

Mean diurnal dissolved oxygen concentrations
and temperatures measured at Station 3 in
June,

1971.

r

Oissolved oxygen m g/l
^
0

00 cd o
0

0

0

~

ro

o

o

o

CD

ro

H*
tfl
C
H
©

v£>

X
o
c

•n
tft

w
-J

0>

ro

ao
o
o

ro

O

12.0

co

II .0

00

10.0

O

Temperature °C

01

o>

38

Figure 10.

Mean diurnal dissolved oxygen concentrations
and temperatures measured at Station 1 in
June,

1972.

Dissolved oxygen m g /l

00 CD o
b

O

o

o

—
b

00

ro

Hours
of Day

LJ

no

ID

O

no

O

o
oo

o
•

—

*

ro 04
•

•

«

*

at

•

o)
•

s

•

o o o o o o o o
Temperature °C

40

Figure 11.

Mean diurnal dissolved oxygen concentrations
and temperatures measured at Station 3 in
June,

1972.

41

mg/1

11.0 =.
10.0 ;

100 % Saturation
D.O.

9 .0 -

8.0 -

1 3 .0

12.0

10.0
I

08

12

16

20
Hours of Day
Figure 11

24

04

J 9 .0
08

°C

1 4 .0

Temperature

Dissolved

12 . 0 p

oxygen

t

42

Table 4.

Mean gross primary production estimates at Station
1 and 3 in June, 1971 and 1972.

Station 1

Station 3

1971

X^ = 4.10 g 0 2/ m a/hr

X 2 = 4.50 g 0 2/ m a/hr

1972

X3 = 3.93 g 0 2/ m a/hr

X4 = 4.43 g 0 2/ m a/hr

Statistical Hypothesis

Conclusion:
equal.

Ho:

Xx =

X2

Ho:

X 3 = X4

Hi:

Xx ^

X2

Hi:

X 3 / X4

t = 0.788

t = 0.493

t .20[l0] = 1,372

t .20[6] “ 1,440

Ho:X. =X_ and Ho:X_ = X. areaccepted as being
1
4
J
4

DISCUSSION

It would be in order to briefly recall certain portions
of the geochemical cycles of phosphorus and nitrogen so that
some explanation could be provided for the phosphorus and
nitrogen budget estimates for the hatchery and receiving
stream system.

The spatial distribution or partitioning of

phosphorus and nitrogen in an aquatic ecosystem has long
intrigued researchers.

These two major nutrients essential

for plant growth exhibit two entirely different partitionings
within the components of an aquatic ecosystem.

The following

discussion will pursue the route each of these elements may
take in an aerobic, open system such as the Jordan River.
Basically, phosphorus tends to form relatively insoluble
precipitates with Fe, Mg, and Ca ions, and adsorbs to particu­
late organic and inorganic material, with only a small quantity
in equilibrium solution.
radioactive phosphorus
ecosystems,

Hayes and Phillips

(1958) traced

(®2P) through the components of lentic

and found that its spatial distribution was quickly

established with turn over time from a few minutes in phyto­
plankton cells to a few days in zooplankton, higher aquatic
plants, the decomposer community and the bottom sediments.
Clifford (1959) found similar results of partitioning of 32P
in a lotic system.

He found 32P being rapidly distributed in

43

44

the periphyton community, higher aquatic plants and in the
stream bottom after application.

Nitrogen, on the other hand,

presents an entirely different partitioning.

The inorganic

forms, such as NHs-N, N O 2 -N, and N03-N are readily soluble in
water and escape precipitate complexing or adsorption in an
aquatic system.

Some fraction may be assimilated by growing

primary producers.

Certain transformations occur with the

presence of bacteria from NH 3 -N to NO 2 -N to NO 3 -N.

Since all

of these forms are highly soluble, they tend to b e transported
from an open lotic system.
In view of these basic cyclic differences, certain
stipulations can be presented for the phosphorus and nitrogen
influx of the Jordan River for the hatchery's input.

Although

there were 898 and 998 kg of phosphorus entering the Jordan
River via hitchery operation in 1970-1971 and 1971-1972
respectively, these quantities were rapidly taken up by the
components of the system, and slowly released in equilibrium
concentrations.

It was shown in Table 1 that there was an

additional 35.2% more discharge at Station 3.

This volume of

water represented only an additional 2.1% phosphorus.

This

would suggest that the additional 35.2% discharge was prac­
tically free of phosphorus, which is obviously not so.

If a

mean concentration of 0.03 mg/1 of phosphorus obtained from
the Jordan River measurements

(Table A r l t Appendix)

is applied

to the additional 35.2% flow, which must represent other
springs and ground water seepages in the vicinity of the study

45

area,

it will result in quantity of 804 kg phosphorus in a

year added to the Jordan River.

It is incorporated into the

various components of the ecosystem, and only 67 kg
is transported downstream.

(Table 1)

The additional 85.9% nitrogen at

Station 3 is brought into the Jordan River by numerous springs
and groundwater seepages is not tied up in the system and is
transported downstream.
In summary, it may be stipulated that since this section
of the Jordan River ecosystem readily assimilated the phos­
phorus load from the National Fish Hatchery, its capacity for
phosphorus is not yet overloaded.

The additional nutrients

increase production at each trophic level providing a higher
harvest of game fish.

Similar idea was reported by Hynes

(1969), that in poorly producing streams limited enrichment
may be beneficial to fish harvesting.

The aspect which de­

mands consideration is the long term effects of the phosphorus
and nitrogen loads transported to Lake Michigan via the Jordan
River and Lake Charlevoix.

However, Shauver (1968), in his

study of the Jordan River Watershed,

indicated that there are

more significant contributors of phosphorus and nitrogen than
the National Fish Hatchery.

The combined effect of these

sources needs further attention.
Periphyton
The periphyton community responded distinctly to the
enrichment of the river by the hatchery wastes.

The periphyton

production rates among stations were significantly different

46

at the 0.001% level.

The rates of periphytic production

rates represented by the slope of each regression line
(Figures 6 and 7), were the same for all three stations during
each sampling period, indicating that ecological factors such
as temperature regime,

light intensity, photoperiod and

current velocity are similar at all three stations.

However,

additional nutrients at Station 3 could support a larger
standing crop at any given time.
At the time the second phase of this study was to begin
in early March,

1972, the hatchery waste discharges were

diverted into the newly built settling basins.

These two

basins were to provide variable detention time for the efflu­
ent when residual food and fish-fecal material was scraped
and washed from the race-ways.

Liao

(1970b) summarized the

characteristics of salmonid hatchery wastes indicating that
the normal hatchery effluent contained 5 mg/1 BOD which is
usually lower than BOD concentrations in a final effluent of
a well operating secondary municipal waste treatment facility.
But BOD concentrations at the time of cleaning operations may
be as high as 49 mg/1.

This BOD concentration in the efflu­

ent is usually in violation of state and federal standards.
Following construction of settling basins, the hatchery efflu­
ent flowed through these and into an area bordered by natural
elevations on three sides and by the Forest Drive on the
fourth.

The addition of hatchery effluent to the springs

which were originally present in this area, formed a small

47

pond (Figure 2).

The water left this pond through culverts

under Forest Drive, and gradually joined the Jordan River.
This diversion of hatchery wastes excluded the second station
from receiving enrichment.

The 1972 sampling program,

duplication of 1971 procedures,

in

included this station.

Periphytic production rates of 1972

(Figures 5 and 7) indi­

cated that the production rates at Station 1 and 2 were very
close.

The 95% confidence intervals of the means of these

two stations overlap or closely approach each other in all
but two cases.

On the other hand, the results of the analysis

of variance indicated station differences significant at 0.001%
level.

Since the 95% (0.05%) confidence intervals of Stations

1 and 2 overlaped,

the contribution to significant differences

at the 0.001% level is due to differences between Stations 1
and 3, and Stations 2 and 3.
wastes after February of 1972,

Since Station 2 did not receive
it is understandable that the

stream responded immediately to the reduction of available
phosphorus and possibly nitrogen.

Mean periphytic production

rates were higher at all stations in 1972 than in 1971;
however,

if production rates of Station 1 and 3 were compared

in the same years, the ratio of Station 1 and 3 for 1971 was
1:7; for 1972 it was only 1:5.

This reduction may be due to

the operation of the detention basins.
Primary production estimates have long been used to
classify aquatic ecosystems in regard to their natural successional stage and their degree of cultural perturbation.

48

In Table 5 selected periphytic growth rates obtained by other
researchers from lakes and streams are compared with the
present study.

It appears that since the primary producer

element in a limnetic section of a lake is phytoplankton,
periphytic production there is limited by competition for
available nutrients and light.

This is indicated by low

periphytic production rates obtained b y Newcomb
Nielson (1953), Sladecek and

Sladeckova

(1949,1950),

(1964).

In streams,

periphytic algae benefit from constant fresh supply of
nutrient salts (and transport of metabolic waste products)
resulting from the current (Hynes, 1969).
do not compete for required resources.

Planktonic algae

When substrates are

provided, higher periphytic production rates can be found in
streams than in open lakes.
were observed in Tesar

For example,

interesting results

(1971) who found a mean periphytic

production rate of 281 m g / m 2/day in the Pine River.

This is

a marginal trout stream receiving some domestic wastes and
farm-land runoff in central lower Michigan.

King

(1964)

characterized different pollution zones of the Red Cedar River
by using periphytic production rates as indicators.

In his

study. Zone I was the section of the stream at the vicinity
of Michigan State University Campus receiving domestic wastes
from storm drains and septic tank overflows.

Zone II was a

section of the stream meandering through woodland and farm­
land; Zone III received primarily treated domestic sewage
from the village of Williamston, Michigan.

Productivity values

found at each of these zones are listed in Table 4.

49

Table 5.

Comparison of periphytic production rates in m g
organic matter per nr per day measured by artificial
substrate methods.

References

Locations

Production
mg/m2/day

Newcomb (1949)
Newcomb (J.950)
Nielson (1953)
Grzenda (I960)
Kevern (1962)
Sladecek and
Sladeckova (1964)
King (1964)

Sodon Lake, Mich.
Walnut Lake, Mich.
Cloverleaf Lake, Cal.
Red Cedar River, Mich.
Artificial Stream

37.6
11.8
65.0
777
143

Sledlice Res., Chec.
Red Cedar River, Mich.
Zone I
Zone II
Zone III
Kevern et al. (1966) Artificial Stream
King and Ball (1966) Red Cedar River, Mich.
Tesar (1971)
Pine River, Mich.
Present Study
Overall mean for
Jordan Rivep, 1971
Mean for Station 1
Mean for Station 2
Mean for Station 3
Overall mean for
Jordan River, 1972
Mean for Station 1
Mean for Station 2
Mean for Station 3

21.0
187
389
379
310
327
281
28
11
24
74
47
21
38
101

50

In comparing productivity values of the Jordan River
to values in the literature,

it appeared that periphytic pro­

duction rates at Station 1 and 2 were closer to periphytic
production rates found in limnetic waters, while rates at
Station 3 were similar to low stream productivity estimates.
Stream Metabolism
The methods described by Odum

(1956) for estimating

primary production in flowing water has been utilized by many
investigators in basic and applied research alike.

Odum put

this method to vigorous scrutiny in the study of Silver
Springs

(Odum, 1957a), and others in Florida

(Odum, 1957b).

Primary productivity of flowing marine environments was
estimated utilizing this method by Odum and Hoskin (1958),
Odum, Burkholder and Rivero

(1959), and Odum and Wilson

Among others Mclntire et al.

(1962).

(1964) and Mclntire and Phinney

(1965) employed diurnal oxygen curves to estimate primary
production and community metabolism in laboratory streams.' ’
In applied limnology, Duffer

(1965) and Baumgardner (1966)

used this method to estimate the effects of domestic and oil
refinery enrichment in streams of southeastern Oklahoma.
Data obtained by some of these authors are presented in Table
6.

It appears that the success of these studies depended on

1) a wide fluctuation of oxygen concentrations from day to
night, and 2) a well-defined drainage accrual.
these fit the case of this study.

Neither of

Saturation varied between

80-100%, and oxygen accrual from ground and surface tributaries

51

Table 6.

Some primary productivity estimates compiled from
the literature.

Reference

Location

Odum

Silver Springs,
Florida w .nter

(1957a)

P

R

8.0
35.0

2.8
5.0

63.8
2.0
23.9

70.7
2.5
13.2

Mclntire et al.
(1964)

Spring
Homosassa Springs
Blue Springs
Rainbow Springs
Laboratory
Stream

2.9-4.1

1.6-4.2

Mclntire et al.
(1965)

Laboratory
Stream

1.7-6.4

1.2-3.8

Duffer

Blue River
Winter
Summer

Odum

(1957b)

(1965)

Baumgardner
(1966)

Skeleton Creek
Winter
Summer

10.1
48.0
2.8-13.5
4.2-60.4

P - Primary productivity - g Oa/m2/day
R - Community respiration - g 0a/m2/day

9.1
19.0
11.5-41.2
4.9-81.8

52

were impossible to determine.
this method,

In view of the wide use of

it should b e pointed out that its successful

application is limited to situations such as those referenced
above.
The oxygen data as treated here provided reasonable
evidence that local conditions of primary productivity,
community respiration, ground and surface water accrual and
stream aeration in the Jordan River were not effected sig­
nificantly by the hatchery effluent either before or after
installation of settling basins.

If there was any change

resulting from the treatment facilities,

it was buffered and

made undetectable by the factors influencing oxygen balance
of the stream.

SUMMARY

This investigation was conducted to determine the effects
of fish hatchery wastes on the receiving stream before and
after the installation of two settling basins.
1. The Jordan Valley National Fish Hatchery discharged
the equivalent of 900 kg of elemental phosphorus and 4,170
kg of elemental nitrogen between July 1970 and June 1971, and
I,000 kg of phosphorus and 4,604 kg of nitrogen between July
1971 and June 1972.

These quantities comprised approximately

28% and 5% of the yearly influx of phosphorus and nitrogen
respectively in the Jordan River at the vicinity of the
National Fish Hatchery.
2. Periphytic production rates were determined at one
station above (Station 1) and two stations below (Stations 2
and 3) the waste outfalls for March to June,
to June 1972.

1971 and March

These rates increased exponentially during

both of the study periods.
3. Mean production rates during March to June 1971, were
II.72 mg/m2/day at Station 1, 24.85 m g / m 2/day at Station 2,
79.24 mg/m2/day at Station 3.

These mean production rates

were significantly different at the 0.001% level.
4. Mean production rates during March to June, 1972 were
20.81 mg/m2/day at Station 1? 38.17 m g / m 2/day at Station 2;

53

54

101.50 mg/ma/day at Station 3.

Significant differences

existed between production rates at Station 1 and Station 3;
also between Station 2 and 3.
5.

Diurnal oxygen concentration and temperature curves

were obtained from sections above and below the hatchery
discharges.

Ground and surface water accrual with different

oxygen concentrations which were necessary to calculate gross
primary production and community respiration values.

A

primary production index was calculated from the diurnal
oxygen curves.

These data indicated that the oxygen balance

on the Jordan River was not effected significantly by the
hatchery effluent either before or after installation of
settling basins.

REFERENCES

Anonymous.
1966.
The effects of the Jordan River National
Fish Hatchery on the Jordan River.
Report, Bureau of
Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Washington, D.C., 9 pp.
Anonymous.
1969a. Water quality conditions at the Jordan
River National Fish Hatchery, Elmira, Michigan.
Report,
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Lake
Michigan Basin Office.
12 pp.
Anonymous.
1969b;
Biological monitoring of the Jordan
River at the vicinity of the Jordan River National Fish
Hatchery, Elmira, Michigan. Mich. Water Res. Comm.,
DNR, Lansing, Mich.
10 pp.
Baumgardner, R. K.
1966.
Oxygen balance in a stream receiv­
ing oil refinery effluent.
Ph.D. Thesis.
Oklahoma
State University.
42 pp.
Castenholtz, R. W.
1960. Seasonal changes in the attached
algae of freshwater and saline lakes in the lower Grand
Coulee, Washington.
Limnol. Oceanogr.
5:1-28.
Clifford, H. F.
1959.
Response of periphyton to phosphorus
introduced into a Michigan trout stream. M. S. Thesis,
Michigan State University.
Duffer, W. R.
1965.
Oxygen balance in a Southern Great Plains
stream in Southeastern Oklahoma.
Ph.D. Thesis.
Oklahoma State University.
37 pp.
Goldman, C. R.
1972. The role of minor nutrients in limiting
the productivity of aquatic ecosystems.
Limnol.
Oceanogr. Special Symposia 1:21-33.
Grzenda, A. R.
1966.
Primary production, energetics, and
nutrient utilization in a warm-water stream.
Ph.D.
Thesis. Michigan State University.
99 pp.
Hayes, F. R. and J. E. Phillips.
1958. Lake water and sedi­
ment.
IV. Radiophosphorus equilibrium with muds,
plants and bacteria under oxidized and reduced condi­
tions.
Limnol. Oceanogr. 3:459-475.

55

56

Hohn, M. H., 1968.

Personal communication.

Hooper, F. F.
1969.
Eutrophication indices and their rela­
tion to other indices of ecosystem change.
Eutrophica­
tion:
Causes, Consequences, Correctives.
Proceeding
of a Symposium, National Academy of Science, Washington,
D.C.
661 pp.
Hynes, H. B. N.
1969. The enrichment of streams.
Eutrophi*cation:
Causes, Consequences, Correctives.
Proceeding
of a Symposium, National Academy of Science, Washington,
D.C.
661 pp.
Kevern, N. R
1962. Primary productivity and energy relation­
ships in artificial streams.
Ph.D. Thesis. Michigan
State University.
________ , J. L. Wilhm and G. M. Van Dyne.
1966. Use of
artificial substrates to estimate the productivity of
periphyton. Limnol. Oceanogr.
11:499-502.
King, D. L. 1964. A n ecological and pollution-related study
of a warm-water stream.
Ph.D. Thesis. Michigan State
University.
________ , and R. C. Ball.
1966. A quantitative and qualita­
tive measure of aufwuchs production.
Trans. Amer. Micros.
Soc. 85:232-240.
Liao, P. B.
1970a.
Pollution potential of salmonid fish
hatcheries. Water & Sewage Works, Vol. 117, No. 8:
291-297.
________ . 1970b. Salmonid hatchery wastewater treatment.
Water & Sewage Works, Vol. 117, No. 12;439-443.
Mclntire, C. D., R. L. Garrison, H. K. Phinney, and C. E.
Warren.
1964.
Primary production in laboratory streams.
Limnol. Oceanogr. 9:92-102.
Mclntire, C. D. and H. K. Phinney.
1965.
Laboratory studies
of periphyton production and community metabolism in
lotic environments.
Ecol. Monogr. 35:237-258.
Newcomb, C. L.
1949.
Attachement materials in relation to
water productivity.
Trans. Amer. Microscop. Soc.
68:355-361.
Newcomb, C. L.
1950. A quantitative study of attached material
in Sodon Lake, Michigan.
Ecology, 31:204-215.

57

Nielson, R. S.
1953. Apparatus and methods for collection
of attachement materials in lakes.
Prog. Fish-Cult.
15:87-89.
Odum, H. T,
1956.
Primary production of flowing water.
Limnol. Oceanogr.
1:102-117.
________ .
1957a.Trophic structure and productivity of
Silver Springs, Florida.
Ecol. Monogr., 27:55-112.
________ .
1957b. Primary production measurements in eleven
Florida springs and a marine-turtle-grass community.
Limnol. Oceanogr.
2:85-97.
________ ., and C. M. Hoskin.
1958. Comparative studies
the metabolism of marine waters.
Publ. Inst. Mar.
Sci. Texas.
5:16-46.

on

________ ., and P. Burkholder and J. Rivero.
1959. Measure­
ments of productivity of turtle grass flats, reefs and
the Bahia Fosforescente of Southern Puerto Rico.
Publ.
Inst. Mar. Sci. Texas.
6:159-170.
________ ., and R. F. Wilson.
1962. Further studies on
reaeration and metabolism of Texas bays.
Publ. Inst.
Mar. Sci. Texas.
8:23-55.
Odum, E. P. in collaboration with H. T. Odum.
1959.
Funda­
mentals of Ecology.
Second Edition. W. B Saunders
Co., Philadelphia and London.
546 pp.
Patrick, R., M. H. Hohn, and J. H. Wallace.
1954. A new
method for determining the pattern of the diatom flora.
Notulae Naturae.
No. 259:1-12.
Rohlich, G. A. and P. D. Uttormark.
1972. Wastewater treat­
ment and eutrophication.
Limnol. and Oceanogr. Special
Symposia.
1:231-245.
Shauver, J. M.
1968. A preliminary survey of the Jordan
River Watershed. Reproduced by The Institute of Water
Research, Michigan State University.
45 pp.
Sladecek, V. and A. Sladeckova.
1964.
Determination of the
periphyton production b y means of the glass slide method.
Hydrobiologia, 23:125-185.
Tesar, F. J.
1971.
Primary production in a Michigan stream.
M. S. Thesis, Michigan State University.
Wetzel, R. G. and D. F. Westlake.
1969.
Periphyton, pp. 30-40
R. A. Vollenweider, Editor.
A manual on methods for
measuring primary production in aquatic environments.
I.B.P. Handbook No. 12. F. A. Davis Co.
Philadelphia, Pa.

APPENDIX

58

59

Table A-l Concentrations of phosphorus as P and nitrogen as N
expressed in mg/1 in Five Tile Creek (STC), Six
Tile Creek (6TC), Jordan River above (JRA) and
Jordan River below (JRB) the hatchery's discharge.

5/14/71
6/18/71
7/13/71
8/10/71
9/10/71
10/16/71
11/16/71

JRA
0.02 mg/1
II
0.05
II
0.02
If
0.02
M
0.03
II
0.05
II
0.04
II
X = 0 .03

JRB
0.03 mg/1
II
0.04
II
0.02
II
0.04
II
0.04
II
0.05
11
0.05
X = 0 .04 I I

JRA
0.90 mg/1
II
1.25
II
1.06
If
0.98
11
2.15
II
1.43
II
0.92
11
X=1.27

II

STC
0.01 mg/1

6/23/72
2/3/72
3/6/72
4/10/72
5/16/72
6/23/72

5TC
0.98 mg/1
1.51 I I
II
1.25
•

6TC
0.06 mg/1
II
0.02
II
0.05
II
X = 0 .04

to

5TC
0.05 mg/1
II
0.06
II
0.04
II
X = 0 .05

it

4/1/71
4/18/71
5/14/71

Nitrogen

X

Phosphorus

JRA
0.07 mg/1
II
0.01
H
0.03
II
0.01
II
0.01
II
0.03

JRB
0.03 mg/1
II
0.02
II
0.07
II
0 .02
II
0.02
II
0.03

P as total elemental phosphorus
N as total elemental nitrogen

6TC
0.77 mg/1
II
1.72
II
1.30
11
X = 1 .24
JRB
1.51 mg/1
1.48 I I
II
1.39
»•
1.67
II
2.98
II
2.28
II
1.26
II
X=1.79
6TC
1.92 mg/1

JRA
1.24 mg/1
II
2.13
II
1.46
II
1.03
II
1.33
II
1.44

JRB
1.24 mg/1
II
1.39
II
1.95
II
1.20
M
1.62
•1
1.48

60

Table A-2 Means (X), standard errors (S.E.), 95% confidence
limits about the means (S.E. x 1.96) and the number
of observations (n) on the periphytic production
rates in 1971.

Station

S.E. x 1.96

n

(Data irregular— not used.)

1-2/25
II-3/20

X

W
CO

Date

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

6.44
6.03
16.85

1.99
1.15
6.00

3.90
2.25
11.77

5
6
6

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

5.49
10.94
41.06

.56
1.53
7.48

1.10
3.00
14.65

6
6
6

IV-4/22

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

7.65
29.14
109.86

.72
4.81
4.23

1.42
9.43
8.28

6
6
6

V-5/6

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

21.10
85.63
204.33

.74
4.64
40.22

1.45
9.10
78.82

6
6
6

VI-5/20

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

41.37
80.85
379.74

5 .93
15.00
13.38

11.62
29.34
26.23

6
6
3

VII-6/8

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

83.15
613.85
1237.10

10.72
64.68
79.89

21.00
126.78
156.59

3
6
9

VIII-6/22

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

39.67
261.18
560.94

3.00
17.85
101.78

5.87
34.98
199.48

5
9
5

III-4/6

61

Table A-3 Means (X), standard errors (S.E.)* 95% confidence
limits about the means (S.E. x 1.96) and the number
of observations (n) on the periphytic production
rates in 1972.

X

Date

Station

1-2/25

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

6.37
13.64

.52
.70

1.02
1.37

7
8

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

8.12
10.13
22.70

.56
.71
1.38

1.10
1.39
2.70

8
6
8

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

9.10
10.10
25.43

1.10
1.25
2.75

2.16
2.45
5.39

9
7
6

IV-4/21

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

17.03
24.79
57.28

4.46
4.75
3.77

8.74
8.31
7.39

6
5
7

V-5/8

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

21.51
45.38
116.20

2.48
4.83
22 .80

4.86
9.47
44.84

8
6
8

VI-5/20

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

63.27
107.01
482.50

4.87
15.60
114.23

9.54
30.57
223.89

8
6
8

VII-6/2

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

61.11
107.93
477.48

6.74
17.31
85.64

13.21
33.93
167.85

6
6
6

VIII-6/15

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

89.79
111.05
421.38

1.00
7.78
82.88

1.96
15.25
162.44

5
7
3

IX-6/28

St. 1
St. 2
St. 3

146.95
277.81
206.37

10.38
64.57
30.99

20.34
126.56
60.74

4
2
4

II-3/16

III-4/3

S.E.

S.E. x 1.96

n

Table A-4 Community composition of periphyton on artificial substrates in the Jordan
River.

Station 1

Station 2

5/14

Gomphonema spp. 68%
Synadra
spp. 16%
Cvmbella
spp. 8%

Gomphonema
Cvmbella
Diatoma
Meridion
Svnedra

5/30

Synedra
spp. 45%
Gomphonema spp. 36%
Cvmbella
spp. 6%

Cvmbella
spp. 38%
Gomphonema spp. 31%
Svnedra
spp. 20%

Svnedra
spp. 38%
Gomphonema spp. 27%
Cvmbella
spp. 18%

6/18

Gomphonema spp. 49%
Svnedra
spp. 36%

Gomphonema
Svnedra
Navicula
Cvmbella

Gomphonema
Synedra
Tabellaria
Meridion

7/1

Svnedra
spp. 44%
Gomphonema spp. 32%
Meridion
spp. 13%

Svnedra
spp. 58%Gomphonema spp. 23%
Cvmbella
spp. 14%

Station 3
spp.
spp.
spp.
spp.
spp.

spp.
spp.
spp.
spp.

44%
26%
12%
10%
8%

26%
25%
21%
18%

Genera Representing 1-5%
Achnanthes
Amphora
Cocconeis
Eunotia
Nitzschia

spp.
spp.
spp.
spp.
spp.

SVhedra
Meridion
Gomphonema
Cymbella
Diatoma

spp.
spp.
spp.
spp.
spp.

38%
21%
14%
11%
8%

spp. 48%
spp. 29%
spp. 9%
spp. 7%

Svnedra
spp. 57%
Gomphonema spp. 18%
Cvmbella
spp. 13%