Dickinson Creek Field Study

October 3, 2019

Carinna Baird, Maddie Marshall,

DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 1

Introduction:

Water quality testing is necessary for the health of a population. Many different types of

pollution can affect a water source and thus, affect how healthy the water is for its own habitats

and for human use (Brathwaite, 2019). Bodies of water are rarely in isolation, and they connect

to other bodies and rivers and are a part of a watershed. Thus, if a body of water is polluted, all

the other bodies of water downstream from it are affected (NOAA, 2018). Dickinson Creek is

within the Battle Creek Watershed, which flows into the Kalamazoo River, which flows into

Lake Michigan. So if Dickinson Creek were to be polluted, Lake Michigan could be affected

because the water from Dickinson Creek eventually flows into Lake Michigan, a much bigger

body of water (Kalamazoo River Watershed Council, 1998).

Dickinson Creek was tested to determine the water quality of the creek. Temperature,

Dissolved Oxygen, BOD, pH, Phosphate levels, Nitrate levels, Turbidity, and E.coli were all

tested. These different chemical tests were used together to calculate a value (Q-value) that

would gauge how healthy the stream was. In addition, Macromolecules, physical attributes, and

Citizens Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index were also observed to find the overall health of the

stream.

There are many different types of pollution, but they can be placed into two categories:

point or nonpoint source pollution. Point source pollution is discharged from the end of a pipe,

and accounts for 25% of all water pollution. Nonpoint source pollution originates primarily from

runoff, and accounts for 75% of all water pollution. Organic, inorganic, toxic, thermal, and

biological pollution are the 5 different types of pollution. Organic pollution comes from the

decomposition of living things. Inorganic pollution can come from mineral deposits, which
DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 2

suspends solids in the water. Toxic pollution is heavy metals and lethal organic compounds.

Thermal pollution is heated water from runoff, altering the temperature of the stream. And

biological pollution is the introduction of non-native species -- invasive species (Indiana

Department of Environmental Management, 2015). All of these types of pollution can alter a

component of stream health which affects other components which affects the overall health of

the stream (Indiana Department of Environmental Management, 2015). A healthy stream has lots

of obstacles that allows for habitats to be formed. Streams that meander and have boulders and

logs above the surface that causes riffles allows for different types of habitats in the water for

different species (Schlesinger, 2016).

Figure 1: Map of Dickinson Creek

Figure 1: A map of Dickinson Creek and its physical attributes was created. The stream
meanders with little human interaction. There was lots of vegetation, undercut banks, cobble,
and logs. The direction of the stream was flowing from the arches to the Kalamazoo River.
There were forests and shrubs which gave the stream shade. These physical attributes gave the
stream lots of variety and lots of different habitats for different species, which makes the
stream healthier.
DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 3

Chemical and Physical Testing Results:

Table 1: Groups 1 and 5

Test Average Q-Value Calculation Factor

Water Temp at Site 15 n/a n/a

(C)

Water Temp 1 Mile 15.24 n/a n/a

Upstream (C)

Water Temp -0.24 92 10.12

Difference (C)

Dissolved Oxygen % 85 92 16.56

B OD5 (mg/L) 1.665 88 10.56

pH 6.66 65 7.8

Phosphate (mg/L) 0.19 95 10.45

Nitrate (mg/L) 0.75 98 9.8

Turbidity (JTU) 0.25 95 8.55

E.coli (cfu/100 mL) 6.5 78 13.26

Total n/a n/a 87.1

Table 1: Chemical test data was averaged from groups 1 and 5 because the tests were done at

the same location: the head of the stream. All tests had an above average Q value except the

E.coli and pH tests. The Q value of each test was multiplied by a weighting factor, which was

determined by how vital the specific property was to stream health.

DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 4

Table 2: Group 2

Test Average Q-Value Calculation Factor

Water Temp at Site 14 n/a n/a

(C)

Water Temp 1 mile 15 n/a n/a

upstream (C)

Water Temp -1 90 9.9

Difference (C)

Dissolved Oxygen % 80 89 16.02

B OD5 (mg/L) 1.64 85 10.2

pH 6.33 60 7.2

Phosphate (mg/L) 0.3 93 10.23

Nitrate (mg/L) 0.4 99 9.9

Turbidity (JTU) 6.66 82 7.38

E.coli (cfu/100 mL) 17 67 11.39

Total n/a n/a 82.22

Table 2: Group 2 was at the mouth of the stream. All tests had an above average Q value except

the E.coli and pH tests. The Q value of each test was multiplied by a weighting factor, which was

determined by how vital the specific property was to stream health.

DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 5

Table 3: Group 3

Test Average Q-Value Calculation Factor

Water Temp at Site 14.3 n/a n/a

(C)

Water Temp 1 Mile 15 n/a n/a

Upstream (C)

Water Temp -0.7 91 10.1

Difference (C)

Dissolved Oxygen % 90 95 17.10

B OD5 (mg/L) 2.67 70 8.4

pH 6 52 6.24

Phosphate (mg/L) 1 40 4.4

Nitrate (mg/L) 1 98 9.8

Turbidity (JTU) 0 100 9

E.coli(cfu/100 mL) 3 87 14.79

Total n/a n/a 79.83

Table 3: Group 3 was halfway downstream. All tests had a relatively high Q value except the pH

and phosphate tests. The Q value of each test was multiplied by a weighting factor, which was

determined by how vital the specific property was to stream health.

DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 6

Table 4: Group 4:

Test Average Q-Value Calculation Factor

Water Temp at Site 15.5 n/a n/a

(C)

Water Temp 1 Mile 16.5 n/a n/a

Upstream (C)

Difference in Water -1 90 9.9

Temp (C)

Dissolved Oxygen % 100 100 18

B OD5 (mg/L) 2.34 77 9.24

pH 7 88 10.56

Phosphate (mg/L) 0.05 99 10.89

Nitrate (mg/L) 0.5 99 9.9

Turbidity (JTU) 0 100 9

E.coli (cfu/100 mL) 7 77 13.09

Total n/a n/a 90.58

Table 4: Group 3 was at the mouth of the stream. All tests had a relatively high Q values. The Q

value of each test was multiplied by a weighting factor, which was determined by how vital the

specific property was to stream health.

DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 7

Table 5: Group 6

Test Average Q-Value Calculation Factor

Water Temp at Site n/a n/a n/a

(C)

Water Temp 1 Mile n/a n/a n/a

Upstream (C)

Water Temp n/a n/a n/a

Difference (C)

Dissolved Oxygen % n/a n/a n/a

B OD5 (mg/L) n/a n/a n/a

pH 9 47 5.64

Phosphate (mg/L) 0.01 99 10.89

Nitrate (mg/L) 0.6 98 9.8

Turbidity (JTU) 0 100 9

E.coli (cfu/100 mL) 9.5 70 11.9

Total n/a n/a n/a

Table 5: group 6 had insufficient data collection, therefore a Q-value could not be calculated.
DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 8

Figure 2: Graph of Group Q-Values

Figure 2: The groups Q-Values for the chemical testing was shown in the bar graph. Group 4

had the highest Q-Value of 90.58 and Group 3 had the lowest Q-value of 79.83.

Table 6: WQI Ratings

Excellent 90-100%

Good 70-87%

Medium 50-69%

Bad 25-49%

Very Bad 0-24%

Table 7: The WQI Rating shows the quality of the total calculation of the chemical tests. This

shows what that chemical test data says about the quality of the stream but does not determine

the actual quality of the stream.

The test of water temperature also affects dissolved oxygen levels, the rate of

photosynthesis, and the metabolic rate of aquatic organisms. Higher temperature can lower

dissolved oxygen levels, which weakens aquatic life. Dissolved oxygen measures the amount of

oxygen in the water. The oxygen comes from the atmosphere and aquatic plants. Higher levels of

dissolved oxygen can indicate stream health as most aquatic life depends on it (CIESE, 2019).
DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 9

Biochemical oxygen demand is a measure of the amount of oxygen used by aerobic bacteria as

they consume and break down organic waste. Higher BOD levels indicate that there is a lot of

organic waste, as aerobic bacteria has to work hard and use a lot of oxygen to break down the

organic waste. If the bacteria is using a lot of the dissolved oxygen available, that leaves little for

other aquatic life, meaning that the stream isn’t very healthy (YSI, 2019). The pH test measures

the concentration of H+ ions. The pH scale ranges from 0-14 with 0 being the most acidic and 14

being the most basic and 7 being neutral. Aquatic life thrives at a pH range of around 6-8

(USGS, n.d). The phosphate tests measures the amount of phosphate present in the water. Higher

amounts of phosphate can lead to rapid algae growth. The decomposition of the excessive algae

leads to lower oxygen levels within the water (Green, 2018). The Nitrate test measures the

amount of nitrate present in water. Higher levels of nitrate contributes to rapid algae growth. The

decomposition of the algae leads to lower oxygen levels in the water (WRIG, n.d.). Turbidity is a

measure of how clear water is. More turbid water doesn’t let as much light through the water and

limits photosynthesis. Water with high turbidity also increases the temperature of the water,

which lowers dissolved oxygen (Lenntech, 2019). E.coli bacteria comes from the feces of

warm-blooded animals. Water with higher amounts of E.coli in it can result in illness from those

who come into contact with the water (Lewis, 2019).

The Q-value, or quality value, helps to calculate the overall health of a stream into one

value. A higher Q-value indicates a healthier stream, while a lower one indicates an unhealthy

stream. To calculate a Q-value, at least 6 of the 8 tests need to be done so the value can be

accurate. Each test has to have its own Q-value calculated, which are found through their specific

graphs. The Q-value from each test is then multiplied by a weighting factor, which is determined
DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 10

by how important the test is to water quality. This gives the calculation factor for each test. All

the tests are added up which gives the overall Q-value. If less than 8 tests are used, the number

must be converted to account for that (Indiana Department of Environmental Management,

2015).

Macroinvertebrate Results:

Table 8: Group 1 and 2

Intolerant Moderately Fairly Very Total

Intolerant Tolerant Tolerant

Number Taxa 5 5 0 0 n/a

Represented

Weighting 4 3 2 1 n/a
Factor

Total 20 15 0 0 35
Table 8: Many intolerant and moderately intolerant macroinvertebrate species were found. No

tolerant macroinvertebrate species were found. The different tolerance levels were weighted

based on how important that tolerance level was to the stream health.
DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 11

Table 9: Group 4

Intolerant Moderately Fairly Very Total

Intolerant Tolerant Tolerant

Number Taxa 2 4 1 2 n/a

Represented

Weighting 4 3 2 1 n/a
Factor

Total 8 12 2 2 24
Table 9: Many moderately intolerant macroinvertebrate species were found. Some intolerant,

fairly tolerant, and very tolerant macroinvertebrate species were also found. The different

tolerance levels were weighted based on how important that tolerance level was to the stream

health.

Table 10: Group 5

Intolerant Moderately Fairly Very Total

Intolerant Tolerant Tolerant

Number Taxa 5 5 0 1 n/a

Represented

Weighting 4 3 2 1 n/a
Factor

Total 20 15 0 1 36
Table 10: Many intolerant and moderately intolerant macroinvertebrate species were found. No

fairly tolerant macroinvertebrate species were found and 1 very tolerant macroinvertebrate

species was found. The different tolerance levels were weighted based on how important that

tolerance level was to the stream health.

DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 12

Table 11: PTI Ratings

Excellent 23+

Good 17-22

Fair 11-16

Poor 10 or less
Table 11: The PTI Rating shows the quality of the macroinvertebrate species in the stream in a

sample.

Macroinvertabrae were collected by jabbing at the bottom of the stream with nets and

kicking in front of the nets to loosen macroinvertebrate from the rocks and sediment at the

bottom. The macroinvertebrate were sorted and classified in their correct type and tolerance

levels. Data was analyzed by adding together the number of species present and weighting the

number based on their intolerance to pollution. This number was then classified into a PTI rating.

A more intolerant macroinvertebrate’s presence in a stream can be an indicator of the stream’s

health (Arlington, 2019).

DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 13

Citizens Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Score:

Figure 3: CQHEI

Figure 3: The CQHEI gives a score for different physical attributes of a stream, like substrate,
fish cover, and stream shape. Dickinson Creek had mostly small substrate with no smothering
or silting. There were lots of habitats for fish and other aquatic animals in the river, including
roots, shrubs, and logs. The stream meanders a lot as well which allows for more vegetation
and possible habitats. The Riparian width was narrow, which allows for less vegetation. The
vegetation was mostly forest and wetland which allow for some shading. The water went knee
deep and had both riffles and runs.
Discussion and Conclusion:

By using chemical tests, the Citizens Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Score, and

determining the types of macroinvertebrate present, the overall health of a stream was analyzed
DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 14

by determining a Q-value and using PTI ratings. Dickinson creek was deemed healthy using

these evaluations. Data was only collected for one day, therefore, the data may not be accurate to

the overall health of the stream, but rather, the stream at that time.

In the chemical testings in Tables 1-4, the Q-values listed are all above 70%, which

according to Table 6, the WQI rating, puts Dickinson Creek in the ‘Good’, which is 70-87%,

category for stream health for this test. This is also shown in Figure 2, where the Q-values for the

groups are compared. In Table 1, which showed groups 1 and 5, the Q-value was 87.1. In Table

2, which showed group 2, the Q-value was 82.22. In Table 3, which showed group 3, the Q-value

was 79.83. In Table 4, which showed group 4, the Q-value was 90.58. In Table 5, which showed

group 6, a Q value could not be determined because the results did not meet the requirements to

formulate one.

In the macroinvertebrate results in Tables 7-9, all the PTI scores were all above 23,

which, according to Table 10, puts Dickinson creek in the ‘Excellent’ category in stream health

for this test. In Tables 7 and 9, groups 1,2, and 5 all had 5 species present in the intolerant

category. In table 8, group had 4 species present in the moderately intolerant category.

The Citizens Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index observed the streams physical

attributes and gave the stream a score on those attributes, which was shown in Figure 3. The

stream got an overall score of 69. The stream lost points mainly in the substrate, because it

consisted mostly of small substrate and lacked variety. The stream had lots of fish cover and

meandered a lot. The maximum amount of points for the CQHEI was 114. Dickinson Creek

scored enough points to be considered a Warm Water Habitat (WWH), which means that it had
DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 15

good depth, flow, substrate, and forest canopy over the stream. This is the second best rating

possible for the CQHEI.

The Q-value is a single value calculated from multiple test results. Q-values are

calculated by weighting some chemical tests more based on how important they are to water

quality. For example, the weighting factor for dissolved oxygen is 0.18, while the weighting

factor for turbidity is 0.09, indicating that dissolved oxygen is more important for stream health

(Pathfinder, 2006). Q-values combine all these tests because they are all interrelated. In Figure 4,

all of the different tests connect to each other and usually relate back to dissolved oxygen. Which

makes sense because the oxygen is the most essential element for an organism to live (Lenntech,

2018).

Figure 4: Chemical Attributes Web

Figure 4: Different chemical attributes of a body of water affect each other. Which means

different chemical tests can reveal other attributes from a body of water.

Certain species of macroinvertebrate can tolerate a lot more pollution than others.

Therefore, the presence of certain macroinvertebrates would indicate the amount of pollution the
DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 16

stream has, or the health of the stream. For example, Stonefly Nymphs are categorized in the

intolerant column, while the Aquatic Worm is categorized in the very tolerant column. This

means that Stonefly Nymphs have very little tolerance for water pollution, thus their presence

would be an indicator of the health of the stream (Hadley, 2019).

The data collection for this study was completed in one day and tested one stream. If the

health of Dickinson Creek and other bodies of water within the Battle Creek Watershed were to

be determined, a variety of locations and different times would need to be used. There are also

many more tests that can aid in determining stream quality that weren’t used in this study. For

example, the flow rate of Dickinson Creek was not tested. The flow rate is a measure of how fast

the water in the stream is moving. A slower stream increases temperature which lowers the

amount of dissolved oxygen in a stream (NIWA, 2016). This test could aid in calculating the

overall health of a stream and making it more precise.

DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 17

Literature Cited:

Brathwaite, D., Dannielle, Dannielle Importance of Water Quality Testing. Retrieved October

4, 2019, from https://aquabsafe.com/importance-water-quality-testing/.

CIESE. (2019). Temperature. Retrieved October 4, 2019, from

http://www.k12science.org/curriculum/waterproj/temperature/.

Green, J. (2019, March 2). How Do Phosphates Affect Water Quality? Retrieved October 4,

2019, from https://sciencing.com/phosphates-affect-water-quality-4565075.html.

Habitat indicators of stream health. (2016, May 19). Retrieved October 4, 2019, from

https://www.niwa.co.nz/our-science/freshwater/tools/shmak/manual/9habitat.

Hadley, D. (2019, August 12). What Aquatic Insects Tell Us About Water Quality. Retrieved

October 4, 2019, from

https://www.thoughtco.com/water-monitoring-and-aquatic-macroinvertebrates-1968647.

Indiana Department of Evironmental Management. (2015). Volunteer Stream Monitoring

Training Manual. Retrieved October 4, 2019, from

https://www.in.gov/idem/riverwatch/files/volunteer_monitoring_manual.pdf.

KanCRN. (n.d.). KanCRN Science Collaborative Research Network, KanCRN. Retrieved

October 4, 2019, from http://www.pathfinderscience.net/stream/cproto4.cfm.

DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 18

Lenntech. (2019). Water Treatment Solutions. Retrieved October 4, 2019, from

https://www.lenntech.com/turbidity.htm.

Lewis, L. (2019). E. Coli - Health Implications in Recreational and Drinking Water.

Retrieved October 4, 2019, from

https://thewaterproject.org/water-scarcity/health-implications-of-e-coli.

Macroinvertebrates. (n.d.). Retrieved October 4, 2019, from

https://environment.arlingtonva.us/streams/macroinvertebrates/.

Schlesinger, B. (2016, June 7). What makes a healthy stream? Retrieved October 4, 2019,

from https://blogs.nicholas.duke.edu/citizenscientist/what-makes-a-healthy-stream/.

Subwatershed Plans. (n.d.). Retrieved October 4, 2019, from

https://kalamazooriver.org/learn/plans/subwatersheds/.

US Department of Commerce. (2017, November 30). What is a Watershed? Retrieved

October 4, 2019, from https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/watershed.html.

USGS. (n.d.). pH and Water. Retrieved October 4, 2019, from

https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-school/science/ph-and-water?qt-science

_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects.

Water Treatment Solutions. (n.d.). Retrieved October 4, 2019, from

https://www.lenntech.com/why_the_oxygen_dissolved_is_important.htm.
DICKINSON CREEK FIELD STUDY 19

WRIG. (n.d.). Nitrates and Their Effect on Water Quality - A Quick Study. Retrieved October

4, 2019, from

http://www.wheatleyriver.ca/media/nitrates-and-their-effect-on-water-quality-a-quick-stud

y/.

YSI. (2019). Biochemical Oxygen Demand - BOD. Retrieved October 4, 2019, from

https://www.ysi.com/parameters/biochemical-oxygen-demand-bod.