Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of

Streambed Sediments in the White River

and Selected Tributaries in and near

Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96

Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4276

Prepared in cooperation with the

Indianapolis Department of Public Works

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of

Streambed Sediments in the White River

and Selected Tributaries in and near

Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96

By David C. Voelker and Danny E. Renn

Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4276

Prepared in cooperation with the

Indianapolis Department of Public Works

Indianapolis, Indiana

2000
U.S. Department of the Interior

BRUCE BABBITT, SECRETARY

U.S. Geological Survey

Charles G. Groat, Director

The use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the

U.S. Government.

For additional information, write to:

District Chief

U.S. Geological Survey

5957 Lakeside Boulevard

Indianapolis, IN 46278-1996

Copies of this report can be purchased from:

U.S. Geological Survey

Branch of Information Services

Box 25286

Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225-0286
Conten

Contents

Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Description of Study Area and Sampling Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Methods of Sample Collection and Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Collection of Benthic Invertebrates and Streambed Sediments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Computation of Biotic Indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera Richness Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Analysis of Benthic Invertebrates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

White River Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Tributary Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera Richness Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Comparison to Previous USGS Study, 1981 through 1987 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Analysis of Streambed Sediments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Metals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Herbicides, Insecticides, and Polychlorinated Biphenyls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Semivolatile Organic Compounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Figures

1. Map showing location of the study area in Indiana and locations of sites on the White River and

selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis where benthic invertebrates and streambed sediments

were collected, 1994–96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

2–7. Graphs showing:

2. Average monthly and maximum monthly streamflow, White River at Indianapolis,

U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging station 03353000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

3. Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera Richness Index values for each sampling

period, 1994–96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

4. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index values for each sampling period, 1994–96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

5. Changes in pollution-tolerant and pollution-intolerant organisms with time in the White River

near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1981–87 and 1994–96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

6. Concentrations of selected metals in streambed sediments for sites on the White River and

selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

7. Concentrations of selected herbicides, insecticides, and PCB’s in streambed sediments for sites

on the White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96 . . . . . . . . . . 

8. Concentrations of selected semivolatile organic compounds in streambed sediments for sites

on the White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96 . . . . . . . . . . 
iv Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

Contents—Continued

Tables

1. Sites on the White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, where benthicinvertebrate and streambed-sediment samples were collected, 1994–96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

2. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index as an evaluation of water quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

3. Summary of the number of taxa; density of benthic invertebrates; and the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera,

and Trichoptera Richness Index and Hilsenhoff Biotic Index values for sites on the White River . . . . . . 

4. Summary of benthic-invertebrate data for the White River sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

5. Summary of the number of taxa; density of benthic invertebrates; and the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera,

and Trichoptera Richness Index and the Hilsenhoff Biotic Index values for sites on tributaries to

the White River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

6. Summary of benthic-invertebrate data for sites on tributaries to the White River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

7. Descriptive statistics for selected constituents for 33 streambed-sediment samples collected at sites

on the White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

8. Freshwater-sediment threshold effect and probable effect levels for the protection of aquatic life . . . . . . 

9. Summary of detections of selected constituents for 33 streambed-sediment samples collected at sites

on the White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
Conte

Conversion Factors and Abbreviations

Multiply By To obtain

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer

Concentrations of chemical constituents in sediment are given in metric units. Chemical concentrations are giv

in grams per kilogram (g/kg), milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg), micrograms per gram (μg/g), or micrograms per

kilogram (μg/kg). Grams per kilogram is a unit expressing the concentration of chemical constituents as weight

(grams) per unit weight (kilogram) of sediment.

Other abbreviations used in this report:

CSO Combined-Sewer Outfall

DDD Dichlorodiphenyl dichloroethane

DDE Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene

DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane

DPW Department of Public Works (Indianapolis)

EPT Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera Biotic Index

HBI Hilsenhoff Biotic Index

PCB’s Polychlorinated biphenyls

PEL Probable Effect Level

RUP Restricted Use Pesticides

TEL Threshold Effect Level

USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

m2 square meter

mm millimeter

μm micrometer

Abstr

Abstract

During this study, 369 benthic-invertebrate samples were collected at 21 sites and

33 streambed-sediment samples were collected

at 14 sites to help develop and evaluate control

strategies to mediate the impact of point and

nonpoint sources of pollution on the White

River and selected tributaries in and near

Indianapolis, Indiana. Data analyses show

that 124 taxa were identified and that most

of the benthic invertebrates found belong

to one of three taxa: the pollution-tolerant

Diptera and the pollution-intolerant Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera. The Hilsenhoff Biotic

Index, which was calculated from the number

of arthropods and their tolerance to pollution,

ranged from 4.4 (very good) to 9.4 (very poor)

on the White River, and from 4.9 (good) to

9.1 (very poor) on the tributaries. The Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT)

Richness Index, which was calculated from the

number of taxa in pollution-intolerant species,

ranged from 0 to 9 for the White River and

from 0 to 9 for the tributaries. A high EPT

Richness Index value reflects a great diversity

of pollution-intolerant invertebrates at a site

and generally indicates good water quality.

A comparison of data collected during

the 1994 through 1996 study to data collected

during a 1981 through 1987 study indicates

that the proportion of pollution-tolerant taxa

increased in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis. This increase may be an indicator that

the water quality in the immediate vicinity

of Indianapolis has declined since the earlie

study. Comparison of the Hilsenhoff Biotic

Index values, however, indicates there has b

no change since the previous study.

In the analysis of streambed sediments

small amounts of 12 metals were detected.

Of those, only lead exceeded sediment-qua

guidelines for the protection of aquatic life

in three samples from two sites. Thirteen

insecticides were detected in the streambed

sediments, and of those only chlordane exceeded sediment-quality guidelines for the

protection of aquatic life. Seventeen semivolatile organic compounds also were detec

in streambed sediments at nine sites: four o

the White River and five on the tributaries.

Six of these compounds exceeded sediment

quality guidelines for the protection of aqua

life.

Introduction

The City of Indianapolis manages the

combined-sewer system in Indianapolis, Ind.,

and is developing control strategies to mediate

the impact of point- and nonpoint-pollution sour

on the White River and its tributaries in and nea

the city. To develop and evaluate these control

strategies, information is needed about the diver

and density of benthic invertebrates and the con

centrations of metals, insecticides, herbicides,

and semivolatile organic compounds sorbed on

Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed

Sediments in the White River and Selected

Tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana,

1994–96

By David C. Voelker and Danny E. Renn
2 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

streambed sediments. To provide this information,

the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation

with the Indianapolis Department of Public Works

(DPW) conducted a study from 1994 through 1996

to describe benthic-invertebrate communities

and streambed-sediment quality for sites on the

White River and selected tributaries in and near

Indianapolis.

Discharges from combined-sewer systems,

stormwater drains, municipal wastewater-treatment

facilities, industrial sources, and surface-water

runoff can degrade receiving waters by increasing

the concentrations of metals, organic compounds,

and nutrients (Crawford and others, 1992; Crawford and Wangsness, 1993; Martin and Craig,

1990; Martin, 1995; W.W. Stone, U.S. Geological

Survey, written commun., 1997). In urban areas,

this increase in concentrations can affect human

health and instream biota, thereby limiting the use

of these waters for municipal, industrial, and recreational purposes.

Benthic invertebrates were used as indicators

of water quality to evaluate the effect of pointand nonpoint-source pollution on the White River

and selected tributaries. Aquatic organisms act

as natural monitors of their environment. During

exposure to water of poor quality, organisms that

cannot tolerate the stress may be destroyed and

the aquatic-community structure changes (Cairns

and others, 1973). The benthic-invertebrate community can be an extremely sensitive indicator

of environmental changes. Even slight changes in

environmental conditions, if persistent, can lead

to changes in the benthic-invertebrate community

(Gaufin, 1973). Discharges of municipal and industrial wastewaters in urban areas can increase

the concentrations of organic compounds, metals,

and nutrients in receiving waters. Increased organic and nutrient concentrations can substantially

increase the growth of bacteria, which in turn increases the demand for oxygen and decreases

concentrations of dissolved oxygen in the receiving

waters. Organic enrichment also can cause oxygen

depletion in the stream, resulting in adverse effects

on biota.

Streambed and suspended sediments commonly contain substantially higher concentratio

of trace elements than generally are found dissolved in water. From 50 percent to almost

100 percent of the total stream transport of met

can be associated with these sediments (Horow

1991). In general, pesticides are hydrophobic

compounds with extremely low solubility in

water and strong sorption tendencies (Larson

and others, 1997), making their association

with streambed and suspended sediments very

likely. Streambed sediments can act as reservoi

for many chemical constituents and can be resuspended when disturbed. When compared

to suspended sediments, streambed sediments

have less spatial and temporal variability in thei

chemical and physical properties. Thus the con

centrations of metals, organic compounds, and

pesticides sorbed on streambed sediments can

provide information on the chemistry, location,

and source of point- and nonpoint-source pollut

(Horowitz, 1991).

Purpose and Scope

For selected sites on the White River and

its tributaries in and near Indianapolis, this repo

provides (1) information on the diversity and

density of benthic invertebrates; (2) an evaluation of the water quality at each site, using the

benthic-invertebrate data; (3) a comparison of

the benthic-invertebrate data collected for this

study to historical data; and (4) an evaluation

of the concentrations of metals, insecticides,

herbicides, and semivolatile organic compound

sorbed on streambed sediments.

The information and evaluations in this

report are based on the analysis of 369 benthicinvertebrate samples collected at 21 sites during

May, July, and September 1994 through 1996

and 33 streambed-sediment samples collected

at 14 sites during the month of August from

1994 through 1996. All benthic-invertebrate an

streambed-sediment samples were collected dur
Introduct

low-flow, steady-state streamflow conditions.

The Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (Hilsenhoff,

1987 and 1988) and the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) Richness Index

were used to evaluate the water quality at the

sampling sites.

Description of Study Area

and Sampling Sites

The study focuses on the White River and

selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Ind.

(fig. 1). Indianapolis is the capital of Indiana, the

largest city in the State, and is incorporated with

Marion County. Marion County has an area of

402 mi2 (square miles) (Sturm and Gilbert, 1978)

and in 1990 had a population of 783,042 (Bureau

of the Census, 1990). The study area is in the

central climate division in Indiana and has a

continental-type climate characterized by hot,

humid summers and cold, wet winters (Newman,

1966). The White River and its two largest tributaries, Fall Creek and Eagle Creek, are the

major sources of water supply for Indianapolis

(Duwelius, 1990).

Approximately 40 mi2 of the Indianapolis

area is serviced by a combined-sewer system

(fig. 1) (Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff,

1983). The combined-sewer system generally is

located in the central section of Indianapolis. There

are 137 combined-sewer outfalls (CSO’s) that can

discharge into the White River and its tributaries—

29 outfalls discharge directly into the White River,

28 to Fall Creek, 6 to Eagle Creek, 49 to Pleasant

Run, 4 to Bean Creek, and 21 to Pogues Run

(Paul Werderitch, Indianapolis Department of

Public Works, written commun., 1994).

Two large inputs to the White River are

the discharges from the Belmont and Southport wastewater-treatment plants. The Belmont

wastewater-treatment-plant outfall is about

0.5 mi (mile) upstream from the White River at

Stout Generating Station (sample site WRSTUP19 on fig. 1). The Southport wastewater-treatment

plant is about 2 mi upstream from the White River

at Wicker Road (sample site WRWICK-5).

Four low-head dams are located on the Wh

River and two low-head dams are located on Fa

Creek within the study area. These dams raise

the water surface of the stream, thereby decreas

the streamflow velocities and causing increased

sediment deposition. The low-head dam that

is the farthest downstream on the White River

in the study area is between sites WRSTUP-19

and WRSTDN-20. The site at White River at

Stout Generating Station (WRSTUP-19) is 1,50

(feet) upstream from the dam, and the site at Wh

River below Stout Generating Station (WRSTD

20) is 50 ft downstream from the dam. Lick Cre

with a drainage area of 26.2 mi2

, also enters the

White River between the two sites just upstream

from the dam.

A total of 21 sampling sites were located o

the White River and selected tributaries (table 1

10 on the White River, 1 on Williams Creek, 2 

Fall Creek, 2 on Eagle Creek, 2 on Pleasant Ru

2 on Bean Creek, and 2 on Pogues Run. Of thes

18 sites were in Marion County, 1 in Hamilton

County, and 2 in Morgan County (fig. 1). Sampl

sites were selected to establish benthic-commun

descriptions in sections of the White River and

its tributaries that may have been affected by

urban activities in Indianapolis. These sites included locations upstream and downstream from

CSO discharges and at sites where DPW has

historical water-quality data.

Although affected by urban sources and

runoff from agricultural areas upstream, the

sites White River at 146th Street (WR146-0)

in Hamilton County and White River near Nora

(WRNORA-1), both identified as upstream site

are in areas that are least affected by urban activ

ties in Marion County. Six sampling sites in the

immediate vicinity of Indianapolis—White Riv

at Indianapolis (WRINDY-2), White River at H

ing Street (WRHARD-3), White River at Stout

Generating Station (WRSTUP-19), White Rive

below Stout Generating Station (WRSTDN-20)

White River at Tibbs-Banta Landfill (WRTBLF

and White River at Wicker Road (WRWICK-5)

represent sections of the river that may be most

directly affected by urban activities. Downstrea
MARION COUNTY

JOHNSON COUNTY

MORGAN COUNTY

WRHEND-18

WRWAVE-6

WRWICK-5

WRTBLF-4

WRSTDN-20

WRSTUP-19

WRHARD-3

ECRAY-11

PLRMER-7

BCGARF-9

BCSOU-15

WRINDY-2

PORVER-8

FC16-10

POR21-14

PLR16-13

ECDAN-17

WRNORA-1

FC71-16

WR146-0

WC96-12

Whit e

River

White

Rive r

Fall Creek

Eagle Creek

Pogues Run

Be an Creek

Pleasant Run

HAMILTON COUNTY

Eagle 

Creek 

Reservoir

Geist Reservoir

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:100,000, 1983

Albers equal area projection

Standard parallels 29 30' and 45 30', central meridian -86 

INDIANAPOLIS

39 37'57"

39 55'23"

86 19'35" 86 04'36"

10 

5 10 KILOMETERS

0

0

5

Buck 

Creek

03352500

03353500 03353120

Williams

Creek

03351000

03353611

EXPLANATION

Area serviced by combined sewers

Wastewater-treatment plant

County boundary

Basin boundary

WRHEND-18

Low-head dam

Sampling site with field identifier

03353120

03353611

 Gaging station with U.S. Geological Survey 

 site-identification number 

Gaging station with U.S. Geological Survey site-identific

number and sampling site with field identifier

INDIANA

WRSTUP-19

Southport wastewatertreatment plant

Belmont wastewatertreatment plant

Figure 1. Map Showing location of the study area in Indiana and locations of sites on the White River and sele

tributaries in and near Indianapolis where benthic invertebrates and streambed sediments were collected, 199
Introduction 5

Table 1. Sites on the White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, where benthic-invertebrate and streamcollected, 1994–96[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; mi2, square miles; BI, benthic invertebrate; SS, streambed sediment; -- no sample]

Field

USGS

site-identification Drainage

identifier number Site name Latitude Longitude area 

a (mi

WR146-0WRNORA-1WRINDY-2WRHARD-3WRSTUP-19WRSTDN-20WRTBLF-4WRWICK-5WRWAVE-6WRHEND-18WC96-12FC71-16FC16-10ECDAN-17ECRAY-11PLR16-13PLRMER-7BCSOU-15BCGARF-9POR21-14PORVER-8

40000108601230103351000033530000335319303353611394234086120900394019086134601

393827086141701

03353660b3929560862120010335107239525908600160103352875394851086181301394613086114700394721086031001394358086092100394349086080001394358086083901394746086055601

03352990

White River at 146th Street near Noblesville, IN

White River near Nora, IN (82nd Street)

White River at Indianapolis, IN (Morris Street)White River at Harding Street, Indianapolis, INWhite River at Stout Generating Station at Indianapolis, INWhite River below Stout Generating Station at Indianapolis, INWhite River at Tibbs-Banta Landfill near Southport, IN

White River at Wicker Road near Southport, IN

White River near Waverly, IN (State Road 144)White River at Henderson Bridge near Adams, INWilliams Creek at 96th Street at Indianapolis, IN

Fall Creek at 71st Street near Lawrence, IN

Fall Creek at 16th Street at Indianapolis, IN

Eagle Creek at Dandy Trail Road near Clermont, INEagle Creek at Raymond Street at Indianapolis, INPleasant Run at East 16th Street at Indianapolis, IN

Pleasant Run near South Meridian Street at Indianapolis, INBean Creek at Southern Avenue at Indianapolis, INBean Creek at Garfield Park at Indianapolis, INPogues Run at East 21st Street at Indianapolis, IN

Pogues Run at Vermont Street at Indianapolis, IN

400001395435

394505394337394252394234394019393827

393402

392956395537395259394720

394851394411394721394358

394349

394358

394746

394617

860123860620

861030861113861202861209861346861417

861520

862120861020860016861040

861813861148860310860921

860800

860839

860556

860825

1,1471,219

1,6351,6601,8721,8981,9201,947

2,026

2,126 17. 243 317

 164 209

 4.

 20.

 5.

 5.

 4.

 8.

aHoggatt, 1975.bStation number was listed as 393402086152000 in Renn, 1998.
6 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

sampling sites in the study area, White River near

Waverly (WRWAVE-6) and White River at Henderson Bridge (WRHEND-18), both in Morgan

County, are away from the most urban areas yet

are affected to some degree by urban activities in

Indianapolis (Crawford and Wangsness, 1993).

The upstream sampling sites on selected

tributaries to the White River were Williams

Creek at 96th Street (WC96-12), Fall Creek at

71st Street (FC71-16), Eagle Creek at Dandy

Trail Road (ECDAN-17), Pleasant Run at East

16th Street (PLR16-13), Bean Creek at Southern

Avenue (BCSOU-15), and Pogues Run at East

21st Street (POR21-14) (table 1). These sites

represent sections of the tributaries upstream

from CSO’s and, therefore, are less affected by

urban activities. The upstream sampling sites

were located as far upstream in Marion County

as possible where flows are adequate to maintain

a healthy benthic-invertebrate population even

during low streamflow conditions. Williams Creek

in the northern part of the study area has no CSOdischarge points along its length and was selected

for comparison with other upstream sites. The

downstream sampling sites are Fall Creek at

16th Street (FC16-10), Eagle Creek at Raymond

Street, (ECRAY-11) Pleasant Run near South

Meridian Street (PLRMER-7), Bean Creek at

Garfield Park (BCGARF-9), and Pogues Run

at Vermont Street (PORVER-8). These sites represent sections of the tributaries that are most subject

to urban impacts, including possible CSO discharges.

Methods of Sample Collection

and Analysis

Samples were collected during periods of

low-flow, steady-state streamflow conditions as

determined by review of monthly mean streamflows at USGS streamflow-gaging stations in the

study area. Generally, the average monthly streamflows during 1994 and 1995 were lower than the

long-term average monthly flow but, during 1996,

they were greater than the long-term average

monthly flow (fig. 2). USGS streamflow-gaging

stations used to determine when low-flow,

steady-state conditions were being met included

Pleasant Run at Arlington Avenue (03353120),

Eagle Creek at Indianapolis (03353500), Fall

Creek at Millersville (03352500), White River n

Nora (03351000), White River at Indianapolis

(03353000), and White River at Stout Generatin

Station (03353611) (fig. 1).

Collection of Benthic Invertebrate

and Streambed Sediments

Renn (1998) described the methods for

sampling benthic invertebrates and streambed

sediments for this study and lists the constituen

analyzed. Three benthic-invertebrate samples w

collected at each site. The samples were collect

twice a year, once in May or July and again in

September. Samples were collected with a Surb

sampler with a 0.0929-m2

 grid and a collection

net-bag mesh opening of 210 μm (micrometers

The samples were preserved with a 10-percent

Formalin solution and shipped to a contract lab

tory for identification and analysis. Each organi

was identified to the lowest possible taxonomic

level.

Although a total of 21 benthic-invertebrate

sites were sampled during the study, not all site

were sampled each year because of changes in 

location based on review of the data, or because

of changes in cooperator needs, or because a

storm interrupted sampling (Renn, 1998). In 19

19 sites were sampled in May and September,

and 20 sites were sampled in July and Septemb

1995. Because of a storm in July 1996, only 16

sites were sampled; 20 sites were sampled in

September 1996.

A total of 33 streambed-sediment samples

were collected during the study. The samples w

collected by scooping fine-grained sediments

from the top inch of the streambed. The sedime

then were sieved through a 2-mm (millimeter)

mesh-screen sieve before being sent to a USGS

laboratory for analysis. Samples were sieved

further at the laboratory, and sediment sizes
Methods of Sample Collection and Analysis 7

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

1994 1995 1996

0

16,000

2,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,000

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

1994 1995 1996

8,000

0

2,0004,0006,000

STREAMFLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

MAXIMUM MONTHLY AVERAGE MONTHLY

Figure 2. Average monthly and maximum monthly streamflow, White River at Indianapolis, U.S. Geological Survey stream
8 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

less than 63 μm were analyzed. A total of 14

streambed-sediment sites were sampled during

the study (Renn, 1998). In 1994, 12 sites were

sampled; 6 sites were sampled in 1995; and 5 sites

were sampled in 1996.

Computation of Biotic Indices

The Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) Richness Index and the Hilsenhoff

Biotic Index (Hilsenhoff, 1987 and 1988) were

used to evaluate water quality at the sampling sites.

These indices are computed from the numbers and

types of organisms in each sample. The number

of distinct taxa identified; the density; and the

percentage of taxa found that belong to the taxa

Hirudinea, Oligochaeta, Coleoptera, Diptera,

Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Gastropoda, Pelecypoda, and Tricladida were determined for each

sample. Following the methods described by

Crawford and others (1992), the data were used

to describe the diversity and density of benthic

invertebrates for this study.

Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and

Trichoptera (EPT) Richness Index

The EPT Richness Index is computed as the

total number of distinct taxa within the generally

pollution-intolerant orders Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera. These organisms are

more sensitive to low concentrations of dissolved

oxygen and high concentrations of metals or

natural organic compounds than many other types

of benthic invertebrates. Thus, a high EPT Richness Index value, which reflects a great diversity

of pollution-intolerant invertebrates at a site, generally indicates good water quality.

To determine the EPT Richness Index, the

total number of distinct taxa within the orders

Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera

were determined for the three benthic-invertebrate

samples collected at each site during each sampling event. The EPT Richness Index for each site

then was determined from the total number of

distinct taxa among all the samples at that site

for each sampling event.

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index

The Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) (Hilsen

hoff, 1987 and 1988) uses the number of benthi

invertebrates in the phylum Arthropoda at a site

and their tolerance to pollution to evaluate the

degree to which natural organic compounds are

likely to be present. Each benthic invertebrate

is assigned a tolerance value from 0 to 10, with

0 assigned to invertebrates least tolerant of orga

pollution and 10 assigned to invertebrates most

tolerant of organic pollution. Hilsenhoff (1987)

determined tolerance values for benthic invertebrates identified to the species level; later, on

the basis of his work in Wisconsin streams, he

determined generalized tolerance values for invertebrates identified only to the family level

(Hilsenhoff, 1988). Some of the organisms foun

in this study were not discussed by Hilsenhoff.

Bode and others (1996) expanded on Hilsenhof

work, and some tolerance values for organisms

found in this study were taken from that work.

A few organisms not listed in either investigato

work were assigned tolerance values based on

similarly classified organisms. In general, benth

invertebrates identified during this study with th

greatest intolerance to natural organic compoun

are in the orders Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, an

Trichoptera, and the most tolerant benthic inver

brates are in the orders Diptera and Oligochaeta

The HBI is divided into seven categories

(table 2). A low HBI value indicates excellent

water quality with little or no organic pollution

and a high HBI value indicates a poor water

quality and higher organic pollution. To determ

the HBI value, the three benthic-invertebrate

samples collected at each site during each sampling event were summed; the summation of ea

taxon was multiplied by the tolerance value for

that taxon. This product then was summed and

divided by the total number of arthropods in the

samples (Hilsenhoff, 1987 and 1988).
Analysis of Benthic Invertebra

Table 2. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index as an evaluation of

water quality (Hilsenhoff, 1987)

Biotic index Water quality Degree of organic pollution

0.00– 3.50

3.51– 4.50

4.51– 5.50

5.51– 6.50

6.51– 7.50

7.51– 8.50

8.51–10.00

Excellent

Very good

Good

Fair

Fairly poor

Poor

Very poor

No apparent

 organic pollution

Possible slight

 organic pollution

Some

 organic pollution

Fairly significant

 organic pollution

Significant

 organic pollution

Very significant

 organic pollution

Severe

 organic pollution

Analysis of

Benthic Invertebrates

Analysis of the benthic-invertebrate samples

collected in the study area identified 124 taxa.

Of these, 28 were identified to the family level,

64 to genus, and 32 to species. Ninety-three of

the 124 taxa were in the phylum Arthropoda. The

majority of the taxa identified during this study

belong to the generally pollution-tolerant Diptera

(flies, midges, and mosquitoes) and the relatively

pollution-intolerant Ephemeroptera (mayflies) and

Trichoptera (caddisflies). A complete listing of

benthic invertebrates collected during this study

is found in Renn (1998).

White River Sites

Variations in the density and diversity of

benthic-invertebrate taxa occur at sites along the

White River as it moves through Indianapolis

(table 3). The number of taxa identified in samples

generally increased over the period of the study,

with the highest number of taxa identified in the

1996 samples. In general, during each sample

round, the number of taxa identified decreased

in the downstream order, with the highest num

bers at the two most upstream sites; however, t

site at White River below Stout Generating Stat

(WRSTDN-20) also had high numbers of taxa.

The density of organisms also increased

over time, with the highest densities found duri

the 1996 sampling periods, which was also

when the highest average monthly streamflows

occurred during the study. With the exception o

the September 1995 sampling period, the lowe

density of organisms generally was found at th

White River at Harding Street (WRHARD-3)

and White River at Stout Generating Station

(WRSTUP-19) sampling sites. The sample ind

cating the lowest density of organisms was

collected from the White River at Indianapolis

(WRINDY-2) site in July 1995 (table 3).

Sites upstream and downstream from

Indianapolis have a higher percentage of the

pollution-intolerant Ephemeroptera and Tricho

tera in their communities (table 4) than do the s

in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis. The p

centage of Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera at th

sites in the vicinity of Indianapolis range from 0 

16 percent and 0 to 75 percent, respectively; bo

have a median of 1 percent or less. The percent

age of Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera at sites

upstream and downstream from Indianapolis ra

from 0 to 35 percent and less than 1 to 86 perce

respectively. The median percentage of Ephem

optera and Trichoptera found at sites upstream 

downstream from Indianapolis was 10 percent

and 31 percent, respectively.

Generally, Diptera were the highest percentage of taxa identified in the study area. The

percentage of the total number of invertebrates 

the pollution-tolerant Diptera at sites in the vic

ity of Indianapolis ranges from 14 to 97 percen

with the median of all sample events being 75 p

cent. The range of percentages for Diptera at si

upstream and downstream from Indianapolis is

2 to 93 percent, with a median of 31 percent.
10 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

Table 3. Summary of the number of taxa; density of benthic invertebrates; and the Ephemeroptera,

Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) Richness Index and Hilsenhoff Biotic Index values for sites on the

White River

[see table 1 for site names and descriptions; m2, square meter; Sept, September; --, not sampled]

Field

identifier

Sampling

date

Number

of taxa

Density

(organisms/m2)

EPT

Richness Index

Hilsenhoff

Biotic Index

Upstream sites:

WR146-0 May 1994 19

Sept 1994 20

July 1995 20

Sept 1995 19

July 1996 27

Sept 1996 27

WRNORA-1 May 1994 28

Sept 1994 20

July 1995 13

Sept 1995 17

July 1996 26

Sept 1996 22

Sites in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis:

WRINDY-2 May 1994 17

Sept 1994 13

July 1995 8

Sept 1995 18

July 1996 26

Sept 1996 19

WRHARD-3 May 1994 18

Sept 1994 10

July 1995 5

Sept 1995 15

July 1996 30

Sept 1996 22

WRSTUP-19 May 1994 --

Sept 1994 --

July 1995 9

Sept 1995 16

July 1996 22

Sept 1996 20

WRSTDN-20 May 1994 --

Sept 1994 --

July 1995 11

Sept 1995 18

July 1996 28

Sept 1996 28

5,200

3,100

1,300

1,200

15,000

13,000

2,400

4,000

8,400

5,500

42,000

3,900

1,800

4,000

290

5,000

18,000

7,800

2,000

950

420

5,700

11,000

3,700

--

--

510

1,900

11,000

3,600

--

--

2,100

8,200

24,000

140,000

7

7

9

6

8

7

7

6

6

7

7

6

5

0

0

3

7

4

3

0

1

3

6

4

--

--

2

2

4

2

--

--

3

5

8

6

5.8

5.1

5.0

5.8

5.4

5.8

5.4

5.2

4.4

4.7

5.2

4.8

5.9

7.9

7.4

6.9

9.0

9.2

5.9

6.4

6.8

7.0

8.4

9.4

--

--

6.9

6.7

8.5

8.8

--

--

5.4

4.7

6.1

6.4
Analysis of Benthic Invertebrat

Table 3. Summary of the number of taxa; density of benthic invertebrates; and the Ephemeroptera,

Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) Richness Index and Hilsenhoff Biotic Index values for sites on the

White River—Continued

Field

identifier

Sampling

date

Number

of taxa

Density

(organisms/m2)

EPT

Richness Index

Hilsenhoff

Biotic Index

Sites in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis—Continued:

WRTBLF-4 May 1994 16 3,500

Sept 1994 13 5,900

July 1995 7 1,400

Sept 1995 15 8,600

July 1996 -- --

Sept 1996 24 4,100

WRWICK-5 May 1994 11 3,300

Sept 1994 19 2,000

July 1995 5 540

Sept 1995 15 3,800

July 1996 -- --

Sept 1996 19 1,200

Downstream sites:

WRWAVE-6 May 1994 12 4,500

Sept 1994 15 2,500

July 1995 7 2,400

Sept 1995 12 6,500

July 1996 -- --

Sept 1996 17 12,000

WRHEND-18 May 1994 13 3,400

Sept 1994 16 1,800

July 1995 -- --

Sept 1995 -- --

July 1996 -- --

Sept 1996 -- --

5

4

4

5

--

5

2

6

2

4

--

4

2

6

3

4

--

4

3

5

--

--

--

--

5.9

4.9

5.6

5.5

--

5.7

6.0

5.8

6.3

6.8

--

6.3

6.0

5.2

5.4

4.8

--

4.9

5.9

4.7

--

--

--

--

The abundance of benthic invertebrates varies

among sites and sampling events but is generally

the same for sites upstream and downstream from

Indianapolis and for sites in the immediate vicinity

of Indianapolis. The median density for the White

River sites upstream and downstream from Indianapolis was 4,050 organisms/m2 (organisms per

square meter) and 4,040 organisms/m2 for sites

in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis. The diversity of taxa for the two groups, however, differs

greatly. The percentages of taxa found belonging

to the pollution-intolerant taxa Ephemeroptera

and Trichoptera are higher at sites upstream and

downstream from Indianapolis than at sites in

the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis.

Besides water quality, a factor contributin

to the decrease in macroinvertebrate diversity i

the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis may be 

different streamflow characteristics and substra

material at the sites (Renn, 1998). Sites on the

White River upstream and downstream from In

napolis had silt to gravel-size material with are

of cobble to boulder-size material that generall

form run and riffle areas. Most White River site

in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis had s

currents or pooled streamflow conditions, and t

streambed contained fine-grained material in ad

tion to gravel and cobbles.
12 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries Table 4. Summary of benthic-invertebrate data for the White River sites [see table 1 for site names and descriptions; %, percent of total number of organisms; < , less than; Sept, September; -- , not sampled] Annelida Insecta 

Field identifier Date Hirudinea Oligochaeta

%

%

Coleoptera

%

Diptera Ephemeroptera

%

%

Trichoptera

%

Gastro

%

WR146-0

(upstream site)

May 1994 0Sept 1994 0July 1995 0Sept 1995 0July 1996 0Sept 1996 0

WRNORA-1

(upstream site)

May 1994 0Sept 1994 0July 1995 <1Sept 1995 <1July 1996 0Sept 1996 <1

WRINDY-2

(site in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis)

May 1994 <1Sept 1994 4July 1995 10Sept 1995 <1July 1996 0Sept 1996 <1

50

<1

1

<1

0

47

60

<1<1

0

33

52

<1<1<1

<1

7

<1

10

<1

3

<1

21

5

11

<1

10

010

<1<1<1

8631193866582818

2

4

37

4

482485858079

5

143235231921

94

10

1513

300

<1

3

<1

1

35

448

13

<1

3184

56

3964

<1

00

<1

2

<1

<<

<
Analysis of Benthic Invertebrates 13

Table 4. Summary of benthic-invertebrate data for the White River sites—Continued

Annelida Insecta 

Field

identifier Date

Hirudinea Oligochaeta

% %

Coleoptera

%

Diptera Ephemeroptera

% %

Trichoptera

%

Gastr

WRHARD-3

(site in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis)

May 1994 <1

Sept 1994 2July 1995 3Sept 1995 <1July 1996 <1Sept 1996 1

WRSTUP-19

(site in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis)

May 1994 --Sept 1994 --July 1995 <1Sept 1995 2July 1996 2Sept 1996 3

WRSTDN-20

(site in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis)

May 1994 --

Sept 1994 --July 1995 1Sept 1995 2July 1996 <1Sept 1996 <1

66

37

0

<1

2

<1

----

8

124

----

0

<1

32

0

00

<1<1

0

----

0

2

<1

2

----

02

<1<1

18

4292

9783

88

----

75

769387

----

3514

7074

3

03

<1

2

<1

----

2

6

<1<1

----

<1<1

5

<1

<1

00

<1

<1

<1

----

<1

<1

<1<1

----

4575

2220

<<

<<

<<
14 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries Table 4. Summary of benthic-invertebrate data for the White River sites—Continued Annelida Insecta 

Field identifier Date Hirudinea Oligochaeta

%

%

Coleoptera

%

Diptera Ephemeroptera

%

%

Trichoptera

%

Gastr

WRTBLF-4

(site in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis)

May 1994 0Sept 1994 0July 1995 0Sept 1995 0July 1996 --Sept 1996 <1

WRWICK-5

(site in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis)

May 1994 0Sept 1994 0July 1995 0Sept 1995 0July 1996 --Sept 1996 <1

WRWAVE-6

(downstream site)

May 1994 0Sept 1994 0July 1995 <1Sept 1995 0July 1996 --Sept 1996 0

WRHEND-18

(downstream site)

May 1994 0Sept 1994 <1July 1995 --Sept 1995 --July 1996 --Sept 1996 --

13

<1<1<1

--

<1

13

<1

0

<1

--

02

<1<1

0

--

<1

1

<1

--------

0

<1

02

--

<1

0

<1

0

2

--

0

<1

00

2

--

<1

0

<1

--------

8429

4843

--

49854475

89

--

7093

4843

14

--

129152

--------

16

34

--

10

<1

16

0

1

--

30

8

<1

5

--

2

<1

26

--------

1

60

4850

--

38

<1

1123

4

--

23

4

4056

78

--

86

7

13

--------

<

<

2

<<
Analysis of Benthic Invertebrate

Tributary Sites

The numbers of distinct taxa and densities

at the upstream and downstream tributary sites

are shown in table 5. The densities of benthic invertebrates for the upstream sites ranged from 130 to

66,000 organisms/m2

, and the densities of benthic

invertebrates for the downstream sites ranged from

130 to 15,000 organisms/m2

. Diversity and density

varied greatly among the tributaries, with three

tributaries—Fall Creek, Bean Creek, and Pogues

Run—showing generally lower numbers of taxa

at the downstream sites. The number of samples

showing lower numbers of taxa at the downstream

sites was about equal to those having a higher

number of taxa. The density of organisms primarily was lower at the downstream sites, with

only Pleasant Run showing overall increases in

the number of taxa and density of organisms at the

downstream site. Because of the consistency in

habitat and streamflow conditions at the tributary

sites, those conditions are not considered to be a

factor in the changes in the diversity and density

of benthic invertebrates observed between the

upstream and downstream sites.

The diversity of benthic invertebrates at the

upstream tributary sites is greater than that at

the downstream tributary sites (table 6). The percentage of Diptera ranges from 22 to 94 percent

of the total taxa found at the downstream sites,

with a median of 84 percent. At the upstream

sites, the percentage of Diptera ranges from 15 to

96 percent, with a median of 47 percent. The percentage of Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera at the

downstream sites ranges, respectively, from 0 to

25 percent and 0 to 40 percent. The median percentage of Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera at

the downstream sites is 2 percent and 3 percent,

respectively. The upstream sites percentage of

Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera ranges from

0 to 38 percent and 0 to 48 percent, respectively.

At the upstream sites, the median percentage of

Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera is 5 percent and

16 percent, respectively.

Median densities of organisms in the tribu

ies are almost one-fourth less than densities in

the White River. Generally, the percentage of

pollution-intolerant taxa (Ephemeroptera and T

choptera) was higher at the upstream tributary s

than at the downstream tributary sites.

Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and

Trichoptera (EPT) Richness Index

The EPT Richness Index values calculated

for sites on the White River and selected tributar

in and near Indianapolis are presented in tables 

and 5 and are displayed on figure 3. For the Wh

River, the EPT Richness Index values ranged fr

0 at the White River at Indianapolis (WRINDY-

site during September 1994 and July 1995 and

at the White River at Harding Street (WRHARD

site during September 1994 to 9 at the White

River at 146th Street (WR146-0) and at the

White River below Stout Generating Station

(WRSTDN-20) sites during July 1996. The EPT

values for sites upstream from Indianapolis wer

higher than the EPT values for sites located in t

immediate vicinity of Indianapolis.

The EPT values for sites upstream from In

anapolis ranged from 6 to 9. At the White River

at 146th Street (WR146-0) site, only one of the

EPT values was less than 7; at the White River

near Nora (WRNORA-1) site, all of the EPT va

ues were 6 or 7. The EPT values for sites in the

immediate vicinity of Indianapolis ranged from 

to 8. At the White River at Indianapolis (WRIN

2) site, half of the EPT values ranged from 4 to 

at the White River at Harding Street (WRHARD

site, more than half of the EPT values ranged fr

3 to 6; and at the White River at Stout Generati

Station (WRSTUP-19) site, all of the EPT valu

were 2 or 4. At the White River below Stout Ge

ating Station (WRSTDN-20) site, half of the EP

values were 6 or above; at the White River at th

Tibbs-Banta Landfill (WRTBLF-4) site, half of

the EPT values were 5; and at the White River a
16 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

Table 5. Summary of the number of taxa; density of benthic invertebrates; and the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, an

Trichoptera (EPT) Richness Index and Hilsenhoff Biotic Index values for sites on tributaries to the White River

[see table 1 for site names and descriptions; m2, square meter; Sept, September; --, not sampled]

Field

identifier

Sampling

date

Number

of taxa

Density

(organisms/m2)

EPT

Richness Index

Hilsenhoff

Biotic Index

Upstream sites:

WC96-12

FC71-16

ECDAN-17

PLR16-13

BCSOU-15

POR21-14

May 1994

Sept 1994

July 1995

Sept 1995

July 1996

Sept 1996

May 1994

Sept 1994

July 1995

Sept 1995

July 1996

Sept 1996

May 1994

Sept 1994

July 1995

Sept 1995

July 1996

Sept 1996

May 1994

Sept 1994

July 1995

Sept 1995

July 1996

Sept 1996

May 1994

Sept 1994

July 1995

Sept 1995

July 1996

Sept 1996

May 1994

Sept 1994

July 1995

Sept 1995

July 1996

Sept 1996

25

16

12

--

21

29

28

16

12

18

30

32

13

14

6

15

27

20

10

18

10

14

27

19

11

12

7

17

28

19

17

15

7

13

24

17

6,200

6,500

600

--

12,000

2,400

2,400

2,900

690

6,300

10,000

1,400

3,100

6,800

1,300

2,000

66,000

4,100

2,100

1,400

180

1,300

4,000

1,100

3,800

1,900

430

1,900

1,500

2,400

8,100

2,300

130

610

1,700

2,000

9

4

4

--

5

5

9

7

5

6

9

8

3

3

2

4

7

5

2

4

3

5

6

5

1

5

1

5

5

3

4

4

2

3

6

3

5.4

5.3

5.0

--

5.6

5.2

6.0

5.5

5.6

5.8

5.1

6.1

5.9

5.4

6.1

5.2

5.8

5.2

6.0

6.3

5.0

6.2

5.8

6.1

6.0

8.4

6.4

6.3

5.8

5.4

6.0

6.2

6.0

5.8

5.8

5.4
Analysis of Benthic Invertebrat

Table 5. Summary of the number of taxa; density of benthic invertebrates; and the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, an

Trichoptera (EPT) Richness Index and Hilsenhoff Biotic Index values for sites on tributaries to the White River—

Continued

Field

identifier

Sampling

date

Number

of taxa

Density

(organisms/m2)

EPT

Richness Index

Hilsenhoff

Biotic Index

Downstream sites:

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLRMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORVER-8

May 1994

Sept 1994

July 1995

Sept 1995

July 1996

Sept 1996

May 1994

Sept 1994

July 1995

Sept 1995

July 1996

Sept 1996

May 1994

Sept 1994

July 1995

Sept 1995

July 1996

Sept 1996

May 1994

Sept 1994

July 1995

Sept 1995

July 1996

Sept 1996

May 1994

Sept 1994

July 1995

Sept 1995

July 1996

Sept 1996

7

14

10

13

--

11

19

26

12

18

29

29

12

10

9

15

18

22

10

9

7

17

32

17

9

10

6

15

19

13

440

1,500

890

1,600

--

1,000

2,400

1,300

620

1,600

15,000

3,500

4,200

1,900

780

2,600

2,200

5,400

490

1,400

400

6,600

4,900

1,600

620

690

130

610

5,300

700

1

3

3

4

--

3

7

4

5

5

6

5

0

3

2

4

2

5

0

3

2

4

5

2

0

1

0

2

3

3

5.9

6.7

6.7

6.6

--

4.9

6.0

6.8

6.6

6.7

6.1

6.2

6.0

6.4

7.1

6.5

6.2

6.5

5.8

9.1

6.9

6.6

5.6

6.0

6.4

7.8

7.0

6.4

6.1

6.6
18 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries Table 6. Summary of benthic-invertebrate data for sites on tributaries to the White River [see table 1 for site names and descriptions; %, percent of total number of organisms;<, less than; Sept, September; --, not sampled] Annelida Insecta 

Field identifier Date Hirudinea Oligochaeta

%

%

Coleoptera

%

Diptera Ephemeroptera

%

%

Trichoptera

%

Gastro

WC96-12

(upstream site)

May 1994Sept 1994July 1995Sept 1995July 1996Sept 1996

FC71-16

(upstream site)

May 1994Sept 1994July 1995Sept 1995July 1996Sept 1996

FC16-10

(downstream site)

May 1994Sept 1994July 1995Sept 1995July 1996Sept 1996

000

--

0

<1

00000000

<1

0

--

0

520

--

<1

<1

902

<1

02

15

0

0

<1

--

0

14

20

--

2

11

<1

2634302

3

4

--

14

731820

--

68

15

8552425132408292

92

90

--

22

13

3

13

--

2

1

3

1411

4

1738

20

<1

2

--

<1

1

4722

--

24

12

1

27372945

503

2

2

--

40

<

<

<<<<
Analysis of Benthic Invertebrates 19

Table 6. Summary of benthic-invertebrate data for sites on tributaries to the White River—Continued

Annelida Insecta 

Field Hirudinea Oligochaeta Coleoptera Diptera Ephemeroptera Trichoptera Gastr

identifier Date % % % % % % 

ECDAN-17

(upstream site)

May 1994 <1 6 0 90 <1 <1 Sept 1994 0 <1 0 41 5 21 <July 1995 0 0 0 41 <1 15 

Sept 1995 0 <1 5 29 5 39 <

July 1996 0 <1 <1 86 <1 12 <

Sept 1996 0 0 0 29 2 43 

ECRAY-11

(downstream site)

May 1994 <1 39 <1 48 6 6 

Sept 1994 2 9 1 50 22 <1 1July 1995 0 1 0 84 3 9 Sept 1995 <1 2 <1 76 4 7 July 1996 <1 1 <1 92 1 3 Sept 1996 <1 0 <1 78 3 10 

PLR16-13

(upstream site)

May 1994 <1 <1 0 96 0 3 Sept 1994 <1 2 0 81 6 8 July 1995 0 2 0 41 14 39 

Sept 1995 0 5 1 43 25 16 July 1996 0 <1 <1 55 5 15 <

Sept 1996 0 1 <1 82 5 6 

PLRMER-7

(downstream site)

May 1994 0 6 0 93 0 0 

Sept 1994 <1 2 0 71 25 1 July 1995 0 1 0 83 14 1 Sept 1995 <1 0 0 87 5 4 

July 1996 <1 3 0 92 <1 2 <

Sept 1996 1 <1 2 89 2 3 
20 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries Table 6. Summary of benthic-invertebrate data for sites on tributaries to the White River—Continued Annelida Insecta 

Field

identifier Date

Hirudinea Oligochaeta

%

%

Coleoptera

%

Diptera Ephemeroptera

%

%

Trichoptera

%

Gastro

BCSOU-15

(upstream site)

May 1994Sept 1994July 1995Sept 1995July 1996Sept 1996

BCGARF-9

(downstream site)

May 1994Sept 1994July 1995Sept 1995July 1996Sept 1996

POR21-14

(upstream site)

May 1994Sept 1994July 1995Sept 1995July 1996Sept 1996

PORVER-8

(downstream site)

May 1994Sept 1994July 1995Sept 1995July 1996Sept 1996

0260

14

<1

000

<1<1

0

<1

000

<1

0

<1

000

<1

2

43

<1

03

<1

0

34

00

<1

4

<1

9

434

3

<1

30

192718

3

4

<1

000

<1

0

0

<1

00

<1

0

<1

<1

0

<1

2

4

0

00

<1

0

0

55728565

6749

64909490

75

80

89

473827

58

47

68

727356

70

90

<1

509

2

<1

0131

8

0

<1

4

14

9

5

<1

0

002

0

1

043

11

9

48

0535

12

14

<1

2411

4

7

38

0

<1

01

2

2

11

<

135

2

12

2
0

12

2468

10

0

12

2468

10

EXPL

MAY 1994 SAMPLE

BELMONT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

SOUTHPORT

TREATMENT

PLANT

WR146-0 WRNORA-1 WRINDY-2 WRHARD-3 WRWAVE-6 WRHEND-18 WC96-12 WRTBLF-4 WRWICK-5 FC71-16 ECDAN-17 BCSOU-15 POR21-14 FC16-10 ECRAY-11 PLRMER-7 BCGARF-9 PLR16-13 PORVER-8

BELMONT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

SOUTHPORT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

WR146-0 WRNORA-1 WRINDY-2 WRWAVE-6 WRHEND-18 WC96-12 WRTBLF-4 WRWICK-5 FC71-16 ECDAN-17 BCSOU-15 POR21-14 FC16-10 ECRAY-11 PLRMER-7 BCGARF-9 PLR16-13 PORVER-8

SEPTEMBER 1994 SAMPLE

EPT INDEX EPT INDEX

WRHARD-3

Figure 3. Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) Richness Index values for each sampling period, 1994-96, in the

UPSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER

DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY

OF INDIANAPOLIS

WASTEWATERWhite River and selected tributaries.
0

0

12

2468

10

0

12

2468

10

WR146-0 WRNORA-1 WRINDY-2 WRHARD-3 WRWAVE-6WC96-12 FC71-16 ECDAN-17 PLR16-13 BCSOU-15 POR21-14 FC16-10 WRTBLF-4 WRWICK-5 ECRAY-11 PLRMER-7 BCGARF-9 PORVER-8 WRSTUP-19 WRSTDN-20

WR146-0 WRNORA-1 WRINDY-2 WRHARD-3 WRSTUP-19 WRSTDN-20 WRTBLF-4 WRWICK-5 WRWAVE-6 FC71-16 ECDAN-17 PLR16-13 BCSOU-15 POR21-14 FC16-10 ECRAY-11 PLRMER-7 BCGARF-9 PORVER-8

EXPLAN

JULY 1995 SAMPLE

SEPTEMBER 1995 SAMPLE

EPT INDEX EPT INDEX

BELMONT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

SOUTHPORT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

BELMONT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

SOUTHPORT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

Figure 3. Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) Richness Index values for each sampling period, 1994-96, in the

UPSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER

DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY

-

OF INDIANAPOLIS

White River and selected tributaries—Continued.
0

12

2468

10

0

12

2468

10

WR146-0 WRNORA-1 WRINDY-2 WRHARD-3 WC96-12 FC71-16 ECDAN-17 PLR16-13 BCSOU-15 POR21-14ECRAY-11 PLRMER-7 WRSTUP-19 WRSTDN-20 BCGARF-9 PORVER-8

BELMONT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

SOUTHPORT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

JULY 1996 SAMPLE

SEPTEMBER 1996 SAMPLE

EXP

WR146-0 WRNORA-1 WRINDY-2 WRHARD-3 WC96-12 FC71-16 ECDAN-17 PLR16-13 BCSOU-15 POR21-14 FC16-10 PLRMER-7 WRSTUP-19 WRSTDN-20 WRTBLF-4 WRWICK-5 WRWAVE-6 ECRAY-11 BCGARF-9 PORVER-8

BELMONT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

SOUTHPORT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

EPT INDEX EPT INDEX

Figure 3. Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) Richness Index values for each sampling period, 1994–96, in the

UPSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER

DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY

OF INDIANAPOLIS

White River and selected tributaries—Continued.
24 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

Wicker Road (WRWICK-5), half of the EPT

values ranged from 4 to 6. These EPT values

indicate that the diversity and density of pollutionintolerant invertebrates are higher in the upstream

reaches than in the downstream reaches of the

White River and selected tributaries.

The EPT values for sites downstream from

Indianapolis were slightly higher than the EPT

values for sites located in the immediate vicinity

of Indianapolis but were lower than the EPT values

for sites upstream from Indianapolis. The EPT

values for sites downstream from Indianapolis

ranged from 2 to 6. At the White River near Waverly (WRWAVE-6) site, the EPT values ranged

from 2 to 6; at the White River at Henderson

Bridge (WRHEND-18) site, the EPT values were

3 and 5. These EPT values support the analysis of

benthic-invertebrate data showing that the diversity

and density of pollution-intolerant invertebrates

increase with distance downstream from Indianapolis. Similar to the HBI, contributing factors to

the decreased EPT values in the immediate vicinity

of Indianapolis could be the different streamflow

characteristics and substrate materials among sites.

For the tributary sites (table 5), the EPT values ranged from 9 at Williams Creek at 96th Street

(WC96-12) in May 1994 and at Fall Creek at

71st Street (FC71-16), which occurred in May

1994 and July 1996 (both of which are upstream

sites), to 0 at Pleasant Run near South Meridian

Street (PLMER-7) in May 1994, Bean Creek at

Garfield Park (BCGARF-9) in May 1994, and

Pogues Run at Vermont Street (PORVER-8) in

May 1994 and July 1995 (all of which are downstream sites). For four of the five tributaries with

upstream and downstream sites (with the exception

of Eagle Creek), the EPT values for sites upstream

generally were higher than the EPT values for

the downstream sites. For these tributaries, the

maximum difference between the upstream and

downstream EPT values were 8 for Fall Creek

during May 1994, 4 for Pleasant Run during July

1996, 2 for Bean Creek during September 1994,

and 4 for Pogues Run during May 1994. For Eagle

Creek, the upstream site almost always had lower

EPT values than the downstream site (this may be

because the upstream site is 4,000 ft downstream

from the outlet of Eagle Creek Reservoir). In ge

eral, the EPT values support the HBI analysis

discussed later in this report and indicate that th

diversity and density of pollution-intolerant inv

tebrates are greater at the upstream sites compa

to the downstream sites in the sampled tributari

Williams Creek had some of the highest EPT

values of the tributaries with EPT values rangin

from 4 to 9, with more than half of the values

being between 5 or 9. For the tributaries, stream

conditions probably are not a contributing facto

to the decreased EPT values observed at the

downstream sites. All tributary sites had riffle

to run streamflow conditions and gravel- and

cobble-size substrate material (Renn, 1998).

The high EPT values for sites on the Whit

River upstream from Indianapolis were similar 

the high EPT values for the sites on Eagle Cree

and the site on Williams Creek. The EPT value

at the upstream site on Fall Creek were higher

than or equal to values for the upstream sites on 

White River. The EPT values for upstream sites 

the other tributaries were lower than these value

but similar to the EPT values for sites on the Wh

River downstream from Indianapolis. The EPT

values for the downstream sites on the tributarie

were lower than the EPT values for the upstream

tributary sites, while the EPT values for sites on

the White River in the immediate vicinity of In

napolis were the lowest. These values support

the analysis of the benthic-invertebrate data tha

showed that the diversity of pollution-intolerant

taxa is greater at the upstream tributary sites tha

the downstream sites. Further analysis of the EP

values indicates that, in general, the spring and 

EPT values at each site are similar.

Hilsenhoff Biotic Index

The HBI values calculated for sites on the

White River and selected tributaries in and near

Indianapolis are presented in tables 3 and 5 and 

displayed in figure 4. The data show that for sit

on the White River, the HBI values ranged from
0

10

2468

EXPLA

0

10

2468

WR146-0 WRNORA-1 WRINDY-2 WRHARD-3

WRWICK-5 WRWAVE-6 WRTBLF-4 WRHEND-18 WC96-12 FC71-16 ECDAN-17 PLR16-13 BCSOU-15 POR21-14 FC16-10 PLRMER-7 BCGARF-9 PORVER-8 ECRAY-11

MAY 1994 SAMPLE

HILSENHOFF BIOTIC INDEX HILSENHOFF BIOTIC INDEXSEPTEMBER 1994 SAMPLE 

WR146-0 WRNORA-1 WRINDY-2 WRHARD-3

WRTBLF-4 WRWICK-5 WRWAVE-6 WRHEND-18 WC96-12 FC71-16 ECDAN-17 PLR16-13 BCSOU-15 POR21-14 FC16-10 ECRAY-11 PLRMER-7 BCGARF-9 PORVER-8

UPSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER

DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

IN THE IMMEDIATE

Figure 4. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) values for each sampling period, 1994-96, in the White River and selected tributaries.

BELMONT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

SOUTHPORT

TREATMENT

PLANT

WASTEWATERBELMONT

WASTEWATER- TREATMENT

PLANT

SOUTHPORT

TREATMENT

PLANT

WASTEWATER

VICINITY OF INDIANAPOLIS
0

08246

0

08246

JULY 1995 SAMPLE

SEPTEMBER 1995 SAMPLE

WR146-0

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC71-16

ECDAN-17

PLR16-13

BCSOU-15

POR21-14

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLRMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORVER-8

WR146-0

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

FC71-16

ECDAN-17

PLR16-13

BCSOU-15

POR21-14

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLRMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORVER-8

WRTBLF-4

WRSTDN-20

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

EXPLA

UPSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER

DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF

INDIANAPOLIS

Figure 4. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) values for each sampling period, 1994-96, in the White River and selected tributaries—Continued.

HILSENHOFF BIOTIC INDEX HILSENHOFF BIOTIC INDEX 

BELMONT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

SOUTHPORT

PLANT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT
0

10

2468

0

0

10

2468

WRSTUP-19

WC96-12

FC71-16

ECDAN-17

PLR16-13

WR146-0

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

BCSOU-15

POR21-14

PLRMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORVER-8

WRSTDN-20

ECRAY-11

HILSENHOFF BIOTIC INDEX HILSENHOFF BIOTIC INDEX EXPLA

UPSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER

DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY

OF INDIANAPOLIS

Figure 4. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) values for each sampling period, 1994-96, in the White River and selected tributaries—Continued.

WRSTUP-19

WR146-0

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC71-16

ECDAN-17

PLR16-13

BCSOU-15

POR21-14

ECRAY-11

PLRMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORVER-8

FC16-10

JULY 1996 SAMPLE

SEPTEMBER 1996 SAMPLE

BELMONT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

SOUTHPORT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

SOUTHPORT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT

BELMONT

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

PLANT
28 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

4.4 (very good water quality) at White River

near Nora (WRNORA-1) to 9.4 (very poor

water quality) at White River at Harding Street

(WRHARD-3). The HBI values for sites upstream from Indianapolis, White River at

146th Street (WR146-0) and White River near

Nora (WRNORA-1), ranged from 4.4 (very good)

to 5.8 (fair); these values were lower than the HBI

values for sites on the White River located in the

immediate vicinity of Indianapolis, which ranged

from 4.7 (good) to 9.4 (very poor). Data for May

1994 indicate no real difference in the HBI among

the White River sites. The higher HBI values

for sites in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis,

compared to sites upstream from Indianapolis,

indicate increased effects from organic pollution

in the White River as it flows through Indianapolis.

Further analysis of the HBI values indicates that,

in general, the two yearly HBI values at each site

are similar.

The HBI values for sites downstream

from Indianapolis—White River near Waverly

(WRWAVE-6) and White River at Henderson

Bridge (WRHEND-18)—ranged from 4.7 (good)

to 6.0 (fair); these values were slightly lower than

the HBI values for sites in the immediate vicinity

of Indianapolis and similar to the values for sites

upstream from Indianapolis. The lower HBI values

for sites downstream from Indianapolis, compared

to sites in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis,

suggest that the source of the pollution from natural organic compounds is associated with the

urban areas of Indianapolis and that the effects

of that organic pollution decrease downstream

from the city.

Little variation occurred in the HBI for sites

upstream and downstream from Indianapolis from

1994 through 1996. At the sites in the immediate

vicinity of Indianapolis, however, a decrease in

water quality for this period is indicated by the

HBI (table 3 and fig. 4).

Although the sampling site White River at

Stout Generating Station (WRSTUP-19) is only

1,550 ft upstream from the site White River bel

Stout Generating Station (WRSTDN-20), the

changes in HBI values between the two sites ar

substantial. The HBI values at the White River 

Stout Generating Station ranged from 6.7 (fairly

poor) to 8.8 (very poor) water quality, and the v

ues at the White River below Stout Generating

Station ranged from 4.7 (good) to 6.4 (fair) wat

quality. Some of the variation in the benthic com

munities between these two sites may be related

to substrate material sampled, aeration over the

dam between the sites, and changes in streamflo

characteristics between the pooled upstream sit

and the riffles downstream from the dam.

The HBI values for the most upstream site

on the White River (White River at 146th Street

WR146-0) and the most downstream site with

more than one year of data (White River at

Waverly, WRWAVE-6) are similar. HBI values

at 146th Street range from 5.0 (good) to 5.8 (fai

and from 4.8 (good) to 6.0 (fair) at Waverly. A

higher number and diversity of taxa were identifi

at the White River at 146th Street site than at th

White River at Waverly site. At the 146th Street

site, the number of pollution-tolerant taxa found

during the study is almost twice the number

of the pollution-intolerant taxa. At Waverly, the

combined number of pollution-intolerant taxa w

about twice the number of the pollution-toleran

Diptera. While both sites have fair to good wate

quality, conditions at Waverly are more conduc

to the pollution-intolerant taxa.

For the tributaries, the HBI values ranged

from 4.9 (good) at Fall Creek at 16th Street (FC

10) in September 1996 to 9.1 (very poor) at Bea

Creek at Garfield Park (BCGARF-9) in Septem

1994. With a few exceptions, the HBI values fo

the upstream tributary sites were lower than the

HBI values for the downstream tributary sites. I

general, the water quality of the upstream sites 
Analysis of Benthic Invertebrate

good to fair, with the exception of Bean Creek

where the September 1994 sample indicated the

upstream water quality was poor. The downstream

site on Bean Creek also had a very poor HBI value

for the September 1994 sample, which was different from the other samples at that site. The water

quality at the downstream sites did not exceed

fair, except for the September 1996 sample for

Fall Creek which was good. The increased HBI

values for the downstream sites indicate increased

pollution from natural organic compounds may

occur between the upstream and downstream sites.

Williams Creek, which had only one sampling

site, represents stream conditions not affected by

urban activities of Indianapolis but may be affected

by suburban activities in the basin. The HBI values

at this site were some of the lowest for the tributaries, with values that ranged from 5.0 (good) to 5.6

(fair). For the tributaries, the habitat conditions are

probably not a contributing factor to the increased

HBI values observed at the downstream sites.

All tributary sites had riffle to run streamflow

conditions and gravel- and cobble-size substrate

material (Renn, 1998).

The HBI values for sites on the White River

upstream and downstream from Indianapolis are

similar to the HBI values for the upstream sites

on the tributaries. As previously mentioned, habitat

may be one reason for the decrease in intolerant

taxa in the White River in the immediate vicinity

of Indianapolis. Another factor that may contribute

to the increased HBI values observed at the sites on

the White River in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis is that the tributaries, with the exception

of Williams Creek, enter the White River in this

area. This area also is subject to the direct effects

of urbanization, including urban runoff, CSO discharge, and industrial-municipal discharges.

Comparison to Previous

USGS Study, 1981 through 1987

Crawford and others (1992) evaluated the

effects of municipal wastewater on the quality

of the White River near Indianapolis. In January

1983, the City of Indianapolis completed upgrades

to its two wastewater-treatment plants, the Belm

Avenue and Southport Road wastewater-treatm

plants. That upgrade of the treatment facilities

included ozonation for disinfection of the efflue

and, at the beginning of the 1994 disinfection se

son (April 1 through October 30), the facilities

converted to chlorination of effluent. To evaluat

the effects of the 1983 upgrades on streamwate

quality, benthic-invertebrate samples were collected annually from 1981 through 1987, two tim

before and five times after the treatment faciliti

were upgraded, and during periods of relatively

low flow in late summer or early fall. Benthicinvertebrate samples were collected at White Ri

at Westfield Boulevard (upstream from the city)

White River below Stout Generating Station (in 

immediate vicinity of Indianapolis), and White

River near Waverly (downstream from Indianap

lis). The habitats at each site were similar at the

time of sampling. During the 1981 through 198

study, benthic invertebrates were collected, usin

Surber sampler with a sampling area of 0.093 m

The mesh size (1,024 μm), however, was much

larger than that used in the 1994 through 1996

study (210 μm). Small invertebrates may have

been under represented in samples of the 1981

through 1987 study because of the use of a larg

mesh size.

Crawford and others (1992) found that mo

of the benthic-invertebrate community belonged

to one of six taxa: the pollution-intolerant taxa

Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera and the more

pollution-tolerant taxa Diptera, Gastropoda, Hir

inea, and Oligochaeta. The benthic communitie

found during the 1994 through 1996 study also

belonged to the same six taxonomic groups,

but the highest percentage of taxa belonged to

three groups—Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, and

Diptera. Comparison of the pollution-intolerant

and the pollution-tolerant taxa at the most upstream site during the 1981 through 1987 study

(White River at Westfield Boulevard) and the

most upstream site during the 1994 through 199

study (White River near Nora) shows that, in ge

eral, the pollution-intolerant taxa were a higher

percentage of the total taxa than the pollutiontolerant taxa during both studies (fig. 5). The tw
30 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

0

0

100

20

40

60

80

EXPLANATION

EPHEMEROPTERA AN

DIPTERA, GASTROPOD

0

0

100

20

40

60

80

0

100

20

40

60

80

PERCENT OF TOTAL

NUMBER OF ORGANISMS

PERCENT OF TOTAL

NUMBER OF ORGANISMS

PERCENT OF TOTAL

NUMBER OF ORGANISMS

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1994 1995 1996

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1995 1996

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1994 1995 1996

Figure 5. Changes in pollution-tolerant (Diptera, Gastropoda, Hirudinea, and Oligochaeta) and pollution-intolerant

(Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera) organisms with time in the White River near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1981–87 and 1994–

(POLLUTION INTOLER

AND OLIGOCHAETA

(POLLUTION TOLERAN

NOTE: Columns may not add t

due to other species in samples

WHITE RIVER AT WESTFIELD BOULEVARD/NORA

WHITE RIVER BELOW STOUT GENERATING STATION

WHITE RIVER AT WAVERLY
Analysis of Benthic Invertebrate

sites are about 5 river miles apart, but both represent conditions upstream from the influences

of urban Indianapolis. There was no significant

difference in the percent of total number of

pollution-tolerant and intolerant invertebrates

between the 1981 through 1987 study and the

data collected during the 1994 through 1996 study,

indicating that there has been little or no change in

the water quality above Indianapolis since 1987.

The HBI also can be used to compare the

1994 through 1996 water quality to historical water

quality. Crawford and others (1992) calculated

HBI values at each site for each annual sample.

At the White River at Westfield Boulevard, the

HBI values for 1981 to 1987 ranged from 5.03 to

6.69, indicating water quality that varied from

good to fairly poor. This site can be compared to

White River near Nora, where HBI values for 1994

through 1996 ranged from 4.4 to 5.4, indicating

very good to good water quality. These results indicate that the water quality has improved slightly

between the two sampling periods.

A plot of the data for the White River below

Stout Generating Station (WRSTDN-20) indicates

that the benthic-invertebrate community sampled

during the 1994 through 1996 study differs somewhat from that present during the 1981 through

1987 study (fig. 5). The number of pollutionintolerant taxa increased significantly between

1983 to 1987 after the wastewater-treatment-plant

improvements were completed. During the 1994

through 1996 study, the percentage of pollutionintolerant taxa is much higher than the percentage

found during 1981 and 1982; the percentage of

pollution-tolerant taxa, however, is a much higher

percentage of the total taxa than during 1986 or

1987. This indicates that the 1994 through 1996

water quality may be better than during 1981 and

1982 but is of poorer quality than during 1986

and 1987. Also noteworthy is the reversal in communities from 1995 to 1996 at this site. Other than

the significant increase in streamflow during 1996

(fig. 2), there is no apparent reason for the decrease

in pollution-intolerant species in 1996. This reversal was not evident at other sites, indicating the

possibility of a local change in water quality prior

to the collection of samples in 1996.

During the 1981 through 1987 study, the H

values for the White River below Stout Generat

Station ranged from 5.06 to 8.41, reflecting good 

poor water quality. During the 1994 through 19

study, the HBI values at the White River below

Stout Generating Station ranged from 4.7 to 6.4

or from good to fair water quality. These results

indicate some improvement, with little change i

the water quality at the White River below Stou

Generating Station since 1987 (with the excepti

of the 1996 reversal in tolerant versus intoleran

species) (fig. 5).

Crawford and others (1992) found that the

number of pollution-intolerant taxa increased

as a percentage of the total number of taxa at

the White River at Waverly after the upgraded

wastewater-treatment plants became operational in January 1983. The distribution of

pollution-tolerant and intolerant taxa found dur

the 1994 through 1996 study is similar to the di

tribution Crawford and others (1992) found afte

the wastewater-treatment-plant improvements

were made. In 1994, the number of pollutiontolerant taxa was about equal to the number of

pollution-tolerant species, indicating at least a

temporary change in water quality at the site.

The HBI values computed for 1981 throug

1987 for the White River near Waverly ranged

from 5.21 to 9.88, indicating water quality that

varied from good to very poor (Crawford and

others, 1992). During the 1994 through 1996 sa

pling, the HBI values at the White River near

Waverly ranged from 4.8 to 6.0, indicating good

to fair water quality. The later sampling indicat

that the water quality at White River at Waverly

compares favorably with the last 5 years of sam

pling during the 1981 through 1987 study. Thes

results indicate little change in the water quality

at White River at Waverly since 1987.

Results of the analyses of the 1994 throug

1996 benthic-invertebrate data indicate that the

water quality upstream and downstream from

Indianapolis is similar to that found after the up

graded Indianapolis wastewater-treatment plant

became operational. Comparison of the HBI val

also indicates little or no change in water qualit

since the 1981 through 1987 study by Crawford

and others (1992).
32 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

Analysis of

Streambed Sediments

Thirty-three streambed-sediment samples,

collected at 14 sites during 1994 through 1996,

were analyzed for selected metals, pesticides,

and semivolatile organic compounds (Renn, 1998).

Five sites were sampled in 1994 and 1996, and

four sites were sampled in 1995. Analytical results

from the samples were examined to determine if

temporal patterns exist in the streambed-sediment

data. The highest concentrations of metals were

detected in samples collected during 1996. These

concentrations may be because of the aboveaverage streamflows in spring 1996 prior to the

sampling (fig. 2). No other temporal patterns were

seen. Descriptive statistics for selected constituents

are listed in table 7.

Sediment-quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life (table 8) were used as criteria

to determine if the concentrations of metals,

pesticides, and semivolatile organic compounds

detected in the streambed-sediment samples

could affect receiving waters. The sedimentquality guidelines for freshwater sediments were

developed in Canada (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, 1995) by evaluating the

sources of chemicals to the aquatic environment,

their distribution in sediments, their behavior

and persistence in sediments, their potential

to bioaccumulate, and their effects on aquatic

organisms that are exposed to the sediments. Two

assessment values were calculated, the threshold

effect level (TEL) and the probable effect level

(PEL) for 23 compounds in freshwater environments. The TEL represents the concentrations

below which effects on aquatic life occur rarely

and the PEL represents the concentrations above

which effects on aquatic life occur frequently.

PEL’s were used to determine if the chemical

constituents detected during the study could have

an adverse effect on aquatic life.

Metals

Twelve metals were detected in the

streambed-sediment samples (Renn, 1998). These

metals are aluminum, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, magnesium, manganese,

Table 8. Freshwater-sediment threshold effect and

probable effect levels for the protection of aquatic life

(Modified from Canadian Council of Ministers of the

Environment, 1995)

[μg/g, microgram per gram; μg/kg, microgram per kilogram]

Chemical

 constituent

Threshold

effect level1

Probable

 effect leve

Metals (μg/g)

Arsenic

Cadmium

Chromium

Copper

Lead

Mercury

Nickel

Zinc

Pesticides (μg/kg)

Chlordane

DDT, total

p,p’-DDD

p,p’-DDE

Dieldrin

Endrin

Heptachlor epoxide

Lindane

Miscellaneous

organics (μg/kg)

PCB’s, total

Semivolatile

organic compounds

(μg/kg)

Benzo(a)anthracene

Benzo(a)pyrene

Chrysene

Fluoranthene

Phenanthrene

Pyrene

5.90

.596

37.3

35.7

35.0

.174

18.0

123

4.5

6.98

3.54

1.42

2.85

2.67

.60

.94

34.1

31.7

31.9

57.1

111

41.9

53.0

17

3.53

90

197

91.3

.486

35.9

315

8.9

4,450

8.51

6.75

6.67

62.4

2.74

1.38

277

385

782

862

2,355

515

875

1Threshold effect level (TEL): the concentration below whi

adverse effects on aquatic life occur rarely.

2

Probable effect level (PEL): the concentration above which

adverse effects are predicted to occur frequently.
Analysis of Streambed Sedimen

Table 7. Descriptive statistics for selected constituents for 33 streambed-sediment samples collected at sites on t

White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96

[μg/g, microgram per gram; < , less than; mg/kg, milligram per kilograms; μg/kg, microgram per kilogram; Ins. Dat., insufficient data to com

statistics; g/kg, gram per kilogram; mm, millimeter]

Constituent Median Mean Minimum Maximum

Interquartile

range

Number o

samples be

detection le

Metals

Aluminum (μg/g)

Arsenic (μg/g)

Cadmium (μg/g)

Chromium (μg/g)

Copper (μg/g)

Iron (μg/g)

Lead (μg/g)

Magnesium (mg/kg)

Manganese (μg/g)

Mercury (μg/g)

Nickel (μg/g)

Zinc (μg/g)

Pesticides

Chlordane (μg/kg)

DDT (μg/kg)

DDD (μg/kg)

DDE (μg/kg)

Diazinon (μg/kg)

Dieldrin (μg/kg)

Endosulfan (μg/kg)

Endrin (μg/kg)

Heptachlor (μg/kg)

Heptachlor epoxide (μg/kg)

Lindane (μg/kg)

Malathion (μg/kg)

Miscellaneous organics

PCB’s (μg/kg)

1,300

3

1

6

10

5,600

20

28,000

230

.02

10

30

5

.10

.4

.4

.4

.7

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

.0858

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

15

1,780

3.33

1.07

8.46

22.3

5,580

30.8

28,600

258

.051

14.6

39.8

10.7

.178

1.08

.636

.578

.883

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

.115

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

30.1

150

2

<1

1

10

380

<10

14,000

86

<.01

<10

5

1

<.1

<.1

.1

<.2

<.1

<.1

<.1

<.1

<.1

<.1

<.2

<1

4,800

9

3

70

97

17,000

140

51,000

840

.34

30

190

40

.7

5.3

3.4

1.9

2.8

.1

2

.1

.4

.1

.3

220

1,445

2

.117

5.5

11

4,550

20

8,000

110

.045

10

25

15

.242

1.45

.7

.65

.9

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

.147

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

28.5

0

0

8

0

0

0

2

0

0

6

3

0

0

13

2

0

2

5

30

31

32

20

29

30

2
34 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

Table 7. Descriptive statistics for selected constituents for 33 streambed-sediment samples collected at sites on t

White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96—Continued

Constituent Median Mean Minimum Maximum

Interquartile

range

Number o

samples be

detection le

Semivolatile organic compounds

Acenaphthylene (μg/kg) Ins. Dat.

Anthracene (μg/kg) Ins. Dat.

Benzo(a)pyrene (μg/kg) 238

Benzo(b)fluoranthene (μg/kg) 311

Benzo(k)fluoranthene (μg/kg) 207

Benzo(a)anthracene (μg/kg) 136

Benzo(ghi)perylene (μg/kg) Ins. Dat.

Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (μg/kg) 156

Butyl benzyl phthalate (μg/kg) Ins. Dat.

Chrysene (μg/kg) 214

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene (μg/kg) Ins. Dat.

Fluoranthene (μg/kg) 320

Fluorene (μg/kg) Ins. Dat.

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene (μg/kg) Ins. Dat.

Naphthalene (μg/kg) Ins. Dat.

Phenanthrene (μg/kg) 152

Pyrene (μg/kg) 280

Inorganic and inorganic + organic carbon

Carbon, inorganic (g/kg) 37

Carbon, inorganic+organic (g/kg) 44

Streambed sediment

Percentage finer than 0.125 (mm) 2.1

Percentage finer than 0.062 (mm) .7

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

360

415

314

342

Ins. Dat.

182

Ins. Dat.

362

Ins. Dat.

677

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

396

588

37.8

45.5

3.04

1.02

<200

<200

<400

<400

<400

<400

<400

<200

<200

<400

<400

<200

<200

<400

<200

<200

<200

19

26

.4

.2

210

550

1,700

1,300

1,500

2,400

930

490

660

2,000

550

3,600

270

810

320

2,900

3,100

59

78

24.6

6.4

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

370

383

290

270

Ins. Dat.

129

Ins. Dat.

370

Ins. Dat.

830

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

Ins. Dat.

491

770

7

12

1.8

.65

32

28

23

21

26

25

29

23

32

25

32

15

32

29

32

21

15

0

0

0

0

mercury, nickel, and zinc. Aluminum, arsenic,

chromium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese,

and zinc were detected in all 33 samples, with

aluminum, iron, magnesium, and manganese

having the highest concentrations. Cadmium was

detected in 25 samples from all 14 sites; lead

was detected in 31 samples from all 14 sites; mercury was detected in 27 samples from all 14 sites;

and nickel was detected in 30 samples from 13 sites

(fig. 6). The samples also were analyzed for cyanide, but no sample had a concentration of cyanide

above the detection limit.

Concentrations of copper, lead, mercury, a

zinc are higher in the immediate vicinity of Ind

napolis than they are upstream or downstream fr

the city (fig. 6), indicating that the source of the

metals likely is related to urban activities within 

immediate vicinity of the city.

Data collected in the White River Basin si

1991 as part of the USGS National Water-Quali

Assessment (NAWQA) Program showed simila

distributions of lead and mercury in fine-graine
Analysis of Streambed Sedimen

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORV

UPSTREAM IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF INDIANAPOLIS DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

MICROGRAMS PER GRAM MICROGRAMS PER GRAM MICROGRAMS PER GRAM

SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1994 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1995 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUS

EXPLANATION

Figure 6. Concentrations of selected metals in streambed sediments for sites on the White River and selected

tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96.

0

5,000

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

0

10

2

4

6

8

0

4

1

2

3

ALUMINUM

ARSENIC

CADMIUM

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

NDND

NDNDND

ND

ND

ND

ND INDICATES NOT DETECTED AT CONCENTRATION SHOWN

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT
36 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORV

UPSTREAM IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF INDIANAPOLIS DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

MICROGRAMS PER GRAM MICROGRAMS PER GRAM MICROGRAMS PER GRAM

SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1994 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1995 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 

EXPLANATION

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

0

80

20

40

60

0

100

20

40

60

80

0

20,000

5,000

10,000

15,000

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

CHROMIUM

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

COPPER

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

IRON

Figure 6. Concentrations of selected metals in streambed sediments for sites on the White River and selected

tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96—Continued.
Analysis of Streambed Sedimen

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORV

UPSTREAM IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF INDIANAPOLIS DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

MICROGRAMS PER GRAM MICROGRAMS PER GRAM MICROGRAMS PER GRAM

SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1994 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1995 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 

EXPLANATION

ND INDICATES NOT DETECTED AT CONCENTRATION SHOWN

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

0

150

50

100

0

60,000

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

0

1,000

200

400

600

800

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

PROBABLE EFFECT LEVEL = 91.3 MICROGRAMS PER GRAM

LEAD

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

MAGNESIUM

MANGANESE

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

ND

ND

Figure 6. Concentrations of selected metals in streambed sediments for sites on the White River and selected

tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96—Continued.
38 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORV

UPSTREAM IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF INDIANAPOLIS DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

MICROGRAMS PER GRAM MICROGRAMS PER GRAM MICROGRAMS PER GRAM

SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1994 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1995 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 

EXPLANATION

ND INDICATES NOT DETECTED AT CONCENTRATION SHOWN

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORV

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

0

0.4

0.1

0.2

0.3

0

40

10

20

30

0

200

50

100

150

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

MERCURY

ND

ND

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

NICKEL

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

ZINC

Figure 6. Concentrations of selected metals in streambed sediments for sites on the White River and selected

tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96—Continued.
Analysis of Streambed Sedimen

sediments (<63 μm) throughout the basin, similar

to those determined in this study. The highest concentrations of these metals were in the Indianapolis

area, and the lowest concentrations were in rural

areas (W.W. Stone, written commun., 1997).

The Canadian sediment-quality guidelines

suggest PEL’s for 8 of the 12 metals detected in

the streambed sediments collected in this study—

arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead,

mercury, nickel, and zinc. Of these, only lead exceeded the PEL of 91.3 μg/g (micrograms per

gram) (table 8) in three samples from two sites

(table 9). The maximum lead concentration detected was 140 μg/g at the White River above

Stout Generating Station (WRSTUP-19). Lead

also exceeded the PEL in two samples at the White

River at Indianapolis (WRINDY-2), both with

concentrations of 120 μg/g. Because the two sites

that exceeded the PEL for lead are in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis, the source of this lead

may be related to urban activities.

Herbicides, Insecticides, and

Polychlorinated Biphenyls

Streambed sediments were analyzed for

5 herbicides and 23 insecticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB’s). No herbicides were

detected in the samples, but 12 insecticides were

found in concentrations above detection limits.

These are chlordane, DDT, DDD, DDE, diazinon,

dieldrin, endosulfan, endrin, heptachlor, heptachlor

epoxide, lindane, and malathion. PCB’s also were

detected in 31 samples (table 9). Chlordane

and DDE were detected in all samples from all

sites; diazinon and dieldrin were detected in most

samples at all sites; DDT, DDD, and PCB’s were

detected in most samples at 13 sites; heptachlor

epoxide was detected in 13 samples at 9 sites;

and endosulfan, endrin, heptachlor, lindane, and

malathion had the lowest number of detections

(table 9).

Chlordane, DDT, dieldrin, endosulfan, end

heptachlor, and lindane are organochlorine inse

ticides. DDD and DDE are degradation product

of DDT, and heptachlor epoxide is the degradat

product of heptachlor. Organochlorine insectici

are a class of organic insecticides that contain

50 percent or more chlorine. Organochlorine in

ticides have extremely low water solubility and

strong sorption tendencies and are characterized

by their persistence in the environment. Routes 

loss and degradation include runoff, volatilizati

photolysis, and aerobic and anaerobic biodegra

tion (Larson and others, 1997). In general, these

processes occur very slowly.

The use of organochlorine insecticides in

the United States began in the 1940’s and conti

ued into the 1970’s, with peak use occurring in

the late 1950’s and early 1960’s (Larson and

others, 1997). The use of most organochlorine

insecticides in the United States was banned or

severely restricted by the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (USEPA) in the early to mid

1970’s as potentially adverse human-health and

ecological effects of these compounds became

apparent.

The use of chlordane was banned in 1988;

between 1983 and 1988, the only permitted use

for chlordane was for control of subterranean

termites (EXTOXNET, 1993). The range of

concentrations of chlordane, 1 to 40 μg/kg

(micrograms per kilogram), detected in the

streambed-sediment samples is shown in table 7

Figure 7 shows that the highest concentrations o

chlordane are found at sites in the immediate vi

ity of Indianapolis, and the concentrations at th

sites exceeded the 8.9 μg/kg PEL for chlordane

(table 8). The maximum chlordane concentratio

detected was 40 μg/kg at Pogues Run at Vermo

Street (PORVER-8). These concentrations likel

are the remnants of efforts to control subterrane

termites in the urban areas of Indianapolis or

are from the movement of contaminated sedime

upstream.
40 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

Table 9. Summary of detections for selected constituents for 33 streambed-sediment samples collected at sites on 

White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96

[PEL, probable effect level; --, no PEL; μg/g, microgram per gram; mg/kg, milligram per kilogram; μg/kg, microgram per kilogram;

g/kg, gram per kilogram]

Chemical

constituent

Maximum

concentration

Number

of sites

at which

detected

Number

of samples

in which

detected

Number

of sites

exceeding

PEL

Number

of sample

exceedin

PEL

Metals

Aluminum (μg/g)

Arsenic (μg/g)

Cadmium (μg/g)

Chromium (μg/g)

Copper (μg/g)

Iron (μg/g)

Lead (μg/g)

Magnesium (μg/kg)

Manganese (μg/g)

Mercury (μg/g)

Nickel (μg/g)

Zinc (μg/g)

Pesticides

Chlordane (μg/kg)

DDT (μg/kg)

DDD (μg/kg)

DDE (μg/kg)

Diazinon (μg/kg)

Dieldrin (μg/kg)

Endosulfan (μg/kg)

Endrin (μg/kg)

Heptachlor (μg/kg)

Heptachlor epoxide (μg/kg)

Lindane (μg/kg)

Malathion (μg/kg)

Miscellaneous organics

PCB’s (μg/kg)

4,800

9

3

70

97

1,700

140

51,000

840

.34

30

190

40.0

.70

5.30

3.40

1.90

2.80

.10

2.00

.10

.40

.10

.30

220

14

14

14

14

14

14

14

14

14

14

13

14

14

13

13

14

14

14

3

2

1

9

3

2

13

33

33

25

33

33

33

31

33

33

27

30

33

33

20

31

33

31

28

3

2

1

13

4

3

31

--

0

0

0

0

--

2

--

--

0

0

0

8

0

0

0

--

0

--

0

--

0

0

--

0

--

0

0

0

0

--

3

--

--

0

0

0

15

0

0

0

--

0

--

0

--

0

0

--

0
Analysis of Streambed Sedimen

Table 9. Summary of detections for selected constituents for 33 streambed-sediment samples collected at sites on 

White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96—Continued

Chemical

constituent

Maximum

concentration

Number

of sites

at which

detected

Number

of samples

in which

detected

Number

of sites

exceeding

PEL

Number

of sample

exceedin

PEL

Semivolatile organic compounds

Acenaphthylene (μg/kg)

Anthracene (μg/kg)

Benzo(a)pyrene (μg/kg)

Benzo(b)fluoranthene (μg/kg)

Benzo(k)fluoranthene (μg/kg)

Benzo(a)anthracene (μg/kg)

Benzo(ghi)perylene (μg/kg)

Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (μg/kg)

Butyl benzyl phthalate (μg/kg)

Chrysene (μg/kg)

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene (μg/kg)

Fluoranthene (μg/kg)

Fluorene (μg/kg)

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene (μg/kg)

Naphthalene (μg/kg)

Phenanthrene (μg/kg)

Pyrene (μg/kg)

Inorganic and inorganic + organic carbon

Carbon, inorganic (g/kg)

Carbon, inorganic+organic (g/kg)

210

550

1,700

1,300

1,500

2,400

930

490

660

2,000

550

3,600

270

810

320

2,900

3,100

59

78

1

4

7

8

5

5

4

6

1

5

1

9

1

4

1

7

9

14

14

1

5

10

12

7

8

4

10

1

8

1

18

1

4

1

12

18

33

33

--

--

3

--

--

5

--

--

--

3

--

2

--

--

--

5

5

--

--

--

--

3

--

--

8

--

--

--

3

--

2

--

--

--

9

8

--

--

The use of DDT was banned in the U.S. in

1972 (EXTOXNET, 1993). Table 7 shows the range

of concentrations of DDT and the degradation

products of DDT—DDD and DDE—detected

in the streambed-sediment samples. All three constituents show higher concentrations at sampling

sites on the White River in the immediate vicinity

of Indianapolis than at sites upstream and downstream from Indianapolis. Figure 7 also shows

that the concentrations of DDT and its degradation products are higher at sites on Fall Creek

and Bean Creek. The highest concentrations of

DDT (0.7 μg/kg) and DDD (5.3 μg/kg) were

detected in samples from the White River at

Indianapolis (WRINDY-2) site. The maximum 

centration of DDE (3.4 μg/kg) was detected at 

Bean Creek at Garfield Park (BCGARF-9) site

The PEL’s for DDT, DDD, and DDE were not 

ceeded in samples from any site during this stu

Dieldrin was banned for use in the U.S. in

1985 except for subsurface termite control, dipp

non-food roots and tops, and moth-proofing in 

closed manufacturing process (EXTOXNET,

1993). Table 7 shows the range (0.3 to 2.8 μg/k

of dieldrin concentrations for sites on the Whit

River and its tributaries. Figure 7 shows that th
42 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORV

UPSTREAM IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF INDIANAPOLIS DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM

SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1994 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1995 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 

EXPLANATION

Figure 7. Concentrations of selected herbicides, insecticides, and PCB’s in streambed sediments for sites on the

White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96.

ND INDICATES NOT DETECTED AT CONCENTRATION SHOWN

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

0

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0

6

2

4

0

4

1

2

3

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

DDT

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

NDND

DDD

DDE

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT
Analysis of Streambed Sedimen

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORV

UPSTREAM IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF INDIANAPOLIS DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM

SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1994 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1995 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 

EXPLANATION

ND INDICATES NOT DETECTED AT CONCENTRATION SHOWN

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

0

50

10

20

30

40

0

2.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

0

3

1

2

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

CHLORDANE

PROBABLE EFFECT LEVEL =

8.9 MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

NDND

DIAZINON

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

NDND

ND

ND

ND

DIELDRIN

Figure 7. Concentrations of selected herbicides, insecticides, and PCB’s in streambed sediments for sites on the

White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96—Continued.
44 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM

SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1994 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1995 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 

EXPLANATION

ND INDICATES NOT DETECTED AT CONCENTRATION SHOWN

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

0

0.5

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0

250

50

100

150

200

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE ND

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

E E E E

E

E

E

E INDICATES ESTIMATED CONCENTRATION

PCB’s

Figure 7. Concentrations of selected herbicides, insecticides, and PCB’s in streambed sediments for sites on the

White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96—Continued.

IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF INDIANAPOLIS
Analysis of Streambed Sedimen

concentrations of dieldrin found in streambed

sediments in the White River are highest in the

immediate vicinity of Indianapolis. Similar distributions are seen in the tributary sediments sampled

as part of this study. The maximum concentration

of dieldrin, 2.8 μg/kg, was detected at the White

River at Indianapolis (WRINDY-2) site and did

not exceed the PEL of 6.67 μg/kg.

The registration of endrin for agricultural

purposes was withdrawn in 1984 (EXTOXNET,

1993), but endrin was detected at the White River

at Waverly (WRWAVE-6) and Fall Creek at

16th Street (FC16-10) sites. One of these sites was

in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis, and one

was downstream from Indianapolis. The PEL for

endrin (62.4 μg/kg) was not exceeded at any site.

The use of heptachlor began to be phased

out in 1978 and ultimately was banned in 1988

(EXTOXNET, 1993). Concentrations of heptachlor

epoxide, a degradation product of heptachlor, were

at or above the detection limit at nine sites on the

White River and tributaries in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis. The maximum concentration of

heptachlor epoxide (0.4 μg/kg, which is less than

the PEL) was detected at Pogues Run at Vermont

Street (PORVER-8).

Of the organochlorine insecticides detected,

only endosulfan and lindane still are used in the

United States. Endosulfan and lindane are listed

by the USEPA as Restricted Use Pesticides (RUP)

(EXTOXNET, 1993) and, as such, may be purchased and used only by certified applicators.

Endosulfan also is included in the USEPA’s toxicity class I of highly toxic compounds, while

lindane is included in the toxicity class II of moderately toxic compounds (EXTOXNET, 1993).

Endosulfan was detected at three sites, all of which

are in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis.

Lindane was detected at three sites, including sites

throughout the study area. The PEL for lindane

(1.38 μg/kg) was not exceeded in any of the samples; there is no PEL for endosulfan.

Diazinon and malathion are organophosph

insecticides with relatively high toxicities. Orga

phosphate insecticides came into wide-scale us

in the U.S. in the late 1960’s and 1970’s as the

use of organochlorine insecticides decreased. O

ganophosphate insecticides, as a group, vary

considerably in chemical and environmental pro

erties (Larson and others, 1997). The persistenc

of organophosphate insecticides in the aquatic

environment is variable as well. The potential to

be transported by runoff is low for diazinon and

malathion.

Some formulations of diazinon are include

in the USEPA’s toxicity class II of moderately

toxic compounds or toxicity class III of slightly

toxic compounds, with some formulations also

being listed by the USEPA as a RUP (EXTOXN

1993). In 1988, the USEPA canceled registratio

of diazinon for use on golf courses and sod farm

because of the die-off of birds that often congre

gated in these areas. Malathion is listed by the

USEPA as a General Use Pesticide and also is

included in the USEPA’s toxicity class III of

slightly toxic compounds (EXTOXNET, 1993).

Malathion, which was introduced in 1950, is a

wide-spectrum insecticide that was one of the

earliest organophosphate insecticides developed

Malathion is used for the control of harmful inse

on fruits and vegetables and for the control of

mosquitoes, flies, household insects, animal par

sites, and head and body lice. It had been used

for mosquito control in Marion County prior to

1994 (Terry Gallagher, Marion County Health

Department, oral commun., 1999). Malathion

was detected only at Bean Creek at Garfield Par

(BCGARF-9) and Pogues Run at Vermont Stree

(PORVER-8), both of which are downstream tr

tary sites in the immediate vicinity of Indianapo

Table 7 shows the range (<0.2 to 1.9 μg/kg

concentrations found for diazinon. Figure 7 sho

that the concentrations of diazinon detected in

the streambed sediments are substantially lower

in the samples collected from the White River

than in the samples collected from the tributarie

with the highest concentrations at the Williams

Creek site. This spatial distribution may be the

result of residential pest control. These data are
46 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

supported by Crawford (1996), who reported substantially higher concentrations of diazinon in an

urban stream in comparison with two agricultural

streams.

PCB’s are mixtures of chlorinated biphenyls.

The use of PCB’s was banned in 1979 by the

USEPA because of human-health concerns when

adverse ecological effects became apparent. PCB’s

were used primarily in capacitors and transformers

but also in the formulation of pesticides, cutting

oils, plastics, adhesives, sealants, inks, and paints.

As with organochlorine insecticides, PCB’s have

extremely low water solubility and strong sorption

tendencies and are characterized by their persistence in the environment (EXTOXNET, 1993).

Figure 7 shows the range of concentrations

of PCB’s. The figure shows that, generally, the

highest concentrations were detected at the sites

on the White River in the immediate vicinity

of Indianapolis. The largest concentrations were

detected in the sediments of Fall Creek; however, none exceeded the PEL of 277 μg/kg. The

maximum concentration of PCB’s was 220 μg/kg

for Fall Creek at 16th Street (FC16-10). The maximum concentration at sites on the White River

was 110 μg/kg at the White River at Indianapolis

(WRINDY-2) site.

Semivolatile Organic Compounds

Seventeen of 54 semivolatile organic compounds were detected in the streambed-sediment

samples (table 9 and Renn, 1998). Benzo(a)pyrene,

benzo(b)fluoranthene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate,

fluoranthene, phenanthrene, and pyrene were the

most frequently detected, having been detected in

10 to 18 samples from six to nine sites (table 9).

Acenaphthylene, anthracene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(ghi)perylene,

butyl benzyl phthalate, chrysene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, fluorene, indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, and

naphthalene were detected in one to eight samples

from one to five sites. The maximum concentration

of semivolatile organic compounds ranged from

210 μg/kg for acenaphthylene to 3,600 μg/kg fo

fluoranthene. The median concentration for sem

volatile organic compounds ranged from 136 μg

for benzo(a)anthracene to 320 μg/kg for fluoran

thene.

Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate and butyl benz

phthalate are used as plasticizers in the manufac

turing of plastic products (Verschueren, 1983).

The remainder of the compounds detected are

produced by the combustion of hydrocarbon fu

and organic material, such as gasoline in automobiles, diesel fuel in trucks, natural gas for

heating, coal in electrical generating plants, coa

in coke processing, and wood-burning fireplace

(Verschueren, 1983).

The occurrence of benzo(a)anthracene,

benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, fluoranthene, phenan

threne, and pyrene was associated with sites in 

immediate vicinity of Indianapolis. The highest

concentrations generally were found at the Plea

ant Run at Meridian Street (PLMER-7) site.

The distribution patterns for benzo(a)anthracen

benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, fluoranthene, phenan

threne, and pyrene are shown in figure 8. None

of the semivolatile organic compounds analyze

for were detected at White River near Nora

(WRNORA-1), White River at Tibbs-Banta Lan

fill (WRTBLF-4), White River at Wicker Road

(WRWICK-5), and Williams Creek at 96th Stre

(WC96-12). At the White River near Waverly

(WRWAVE-6) site, a concentration of 2,400 μg

of benzo(a)anthracene was detected in the May

1994 sample. Benzo(a)anthracene was not detec

in any of the four subsequent samples collected 

this site during this study.

The NAWQA study conducted in the Whi

River Basin during 1992 (W.W. Stone, written

commun., 1997) showed the highest concentrati

of benzo(a)pyrene and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthala

in the Indianapolis area and the lowest concentr

tions in rural areas. In this study, these compou

showed a pattern of distribution in the White Ri

of low concentrations upstream from Indianapo

higher concentrations in the immediate vicinity 

Indianapolis, and successively lower concentrations downstream from Indianapolis.
Analysis of Streambed Sedimen

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORV

UPSTREAM IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF INDIANAPOLIS DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM

SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1994 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1995 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 

EXPLANATION

Figure 8. Concentrations of selected semivolatile organic compounds in streambed sediments for sites on the

White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96.

ND INDICATES NOT DETECTED AT CONCENTRATION SHOWN

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

0

2,500

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

0

2,000

500

1,000

1,500

0

2,500

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

NDND

ND

PROBABLE EFFECT LEVEL =

385 MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM

BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

BENZO(A)PYRENE

PROBABLE EFFECT LEVEL =

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

PROBABLE EFFECT LEVEL =

862 MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM

782 MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM

CHRYSENE

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND
48 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9

PORV

UPSTREAM IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF INDIANAPOLIS DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM

SITES ON THE WHITE RIVER SITES ON SELECTED TRIBUTARIES

MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM

SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1994 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 1995 SAMPLE COLLECTED AUGUST 

EXPLANATION

ND INDICATES NOT DETECTED AT CONCENTRATION SHOWN

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

WRNORA-1

WRINDY-2

WRHARD-3

WRSTUP-19

WRSTDN-20

WRTBLF-4

WRWICK-5

WRWAVE-6

WC96-12

FC16-10

ECRAY-11

PLMER-7

BCGARF-9PORV

0

4,000

1,000

2,000

3,000

0

3,000

1,000

2,000

0

4,000

1,000

2,000

3,000

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

PROBABLE EFFECT LEVEL =

ND

FLUORANTHENE

ND

ND

ND

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

NDND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

NDND

ND

PHENANTHRENE

PROBABLE EFFECT LEVEL =

ND

ND

ND

ND

515 MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM

ND

ND

NDND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

BELMONT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

PYRENE

PROBABLE EFFECT LEVEL =

875 MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM

ND

ND

ND

ND

NDND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

ND

SOUTHPORT WASTEWATER-TREATMENT PLANT

2,355 MICROGRAMS PER KILOGRAM

Figure 8. Concentrations of selected semivolatile organic compounds in streambed sediments for sites on the

White River and selected tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, 1994–96.
Summary and Conclusion

Summary and Conclusions

The Indianapolis Department of Public Works

and the U.S. Geological Survey completed a cooperative study on the White River and selected

tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana, from

1994 through 1996. The purpose of the study was

to determine the diversity and density of benthic

invertebrates and the concentrations of metals,

insecticides, herbicides, PCB’s, and semivolatile

organic compounds sorbed on streambed sediments.

A total of 369 benthic-invertebrate samples

were collected at 21 sites during May, June, and

September 1994 through 1996 during low-flow,

steady-state streamflow conditions. In the samples

collected, 124 taxa were identified—28 to the

family level, 64 to the genus level, and 32 to the

species level. Ninety-three of the 124 taxa identified are in the phylum Arthropoda. The Hilsenhoff

Biotic Index (HBI) (calculated from the number of

arthropods and their tolerance to pollution) and the

Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT)

Richness Index (calculated from the number of

taxa in three pollution-intolerant species) were

used as indicators of water-quality conditions

in the study area. The indices also were used to

determine any changes between a study conducted

from 1981 through 1987 and this study.

Analysis of the benthic data shows that a

major part of the organisms identified belonged

to three taxonomic groups—Diptera, Ephemeroptera, and Trichoptera. When comparing median

percentages of the number of organisms found,

analysis shows that the pollution-tolerant Diptera

were more than twice as abundant at sites in the

immediate vicinity of Indianapolis than at sites

upstream or downstream from Indianapolis.

Analysis showed diversity of organisms in the

downstream tributary sites similar to the White

River sites in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis and diversity of organisms in the upstream

tributary sites similar to the White River sites

upstream and downstream from Indianapolis.

On the White River, the EPT Richness Ind

values ranged from 0 to 9. The EPT values for s

upstream from Indianapolis ranged from 6 to 8; 

EPT values for sites in the immediate vicinity

of Indianapolis ranged from 0 to 8; and the EPT

values for sites downstream from Indianapolis

ranged from 2 to 6. The decreased EPT values

for sites in the immediate vicinity of Indianapo

compared to sites upstream from Indianapolis,

indicate increased natural organic and nutrient

pollution. The increased EPT values for sites

downstream from Indianapolis, compared to

sites in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis,

indicate that the effects of natural organic and

nutrient pollution have decreased. For the tributaries, the EPT values ranged from 0 to 9. For

four of the five tributaries that had upstream and

downstream sites, the EPT values for upstream

sites, with few exceptions, were always higher

than for downstream sites. The decreased EPT

values for the downstream sites in these tributar

compared to the upstream sites, indicate increas

natural organic and nutrient pollution. Compari

EPT values for sites on the White River to sites

on the tributaries, the sites on the White River

upstream and downstream from Indianapolis ha

similar values to the upstream sites on the tribu

ies. The EPT values for the downstream sites on

the tributaries were lower than the values on the

White River sites upstream and downstream fro

Indianapolis and the upstream sites on the tribu

taries; the values for sites on the White River in

the urban area of Indianapolis were lower than 

downstream sites on tributaries.

For the White River, the HBI values indica

water quality that ranged from 4.4 (very good) 

9.4 (very poor). The HBI values for sites upstre

from Indianapolis ranged from 4.4 (very good) 

5.8 (fair); the HBI values for sites in the immedi

vicinity of Indianapolis ranged from 4.7 (good) 

9.4 (very poor); and the HBI values for sites do

stream from Indianapolis ranged from 4.7 (goo

to 6.0 (fair). Although streamflow and substrate

conditions at some of the sites in the immediate

vicinity of Indianapolis were different from oth
50 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

sites in the study area, the increased HBI values

for those sites indicate increased pollution from

natural organic compounds in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis. The decreased HBI values for

sites downstream from Indianapolis indicate that

the effects of pollution from natural organic compounds decrease quickly.

The HBI values for the tributaries range from

4.9 (good) to 9.1 (very poor). For each of the five

tributaries that had upstream and downstream sites,

the HBI values for sites upstream, with few exceptions, were lower than for sites downstream. The

increased HBI values for the downstream sites in

the tributaries, compared to the upstream sites,

indicate increased pollution from natural organic

compounds. Comparing HBI values for sites on

the White River to sites on the tributaries, the sites

on the White River upstream and downstream

from Indianapolis had similar values to the upstream sites on the tributaries. The HBI values

for the downstream sites on the tributaries were

higher than the sites upstream and downstream

from Indianapolis, and the values for sites located

on the White River in the immediate vicinity of

Indianapolis were even higher.

Streambed sediments were collected at

14 sites and analyzed to determine the concentrations of 13 metals, 23 insecticides, 5 herbicides,

and 54 semivolatile organic compounds. A total

of 33 streambed-sediment samples were collected

from 1994 through 1996 during low-flow, steadystate streamflow conditions. Of the 13 metals

analyzed, aluminum, iron, magnesium, and manganese had the highest concentrations; arsenic,

cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury,

nickel, and zinc had lower concentrations. Only

cyanide had concentrations that were below the

detection limit for all samples. Copper, lead,

mercury, and zinc concentrations were higher at

sites on the White River in the immediate vicinity

of Indianapolis. Lead was detected in 31 samples

from all 14 sites; in three samples from two sites,

lead was the only metal to exceed sediment-quality

guidelines for the protection of aquatic life.

Streambed-sediment samples were analyz

for 23 insecticides and PCB’s, of which 13 wer

detected—chlordane, DDT, DDD, DDE, diazin

dieldrin, endosulfan, endrin, heptachlor, heptach

epoxide, lindane, malathion, and PCB’s. Chlordane, DDT, DDD, DDE, diazinon, dieldrin, and

PCB’s were detected at most sites for most sam

plings; endosulfan, endrin, heptachlor, heptachl

epoxide, lindane, and malathion had the lowest

number of detections. Distributions of chlordan

DDT, DDD, DDE, dieldrin, heptachlor epoxide

and PCB’s were similar. In general, the highest

concentrations for these constituents were detec

in samples from sites in the immediate vicinity 

Indianapolis. For diazinon, the highest concentr

tions were associated with sites on the tributarie

Endosulfan, heptachlor, and malathion were

detected at sites in the immediate vicinity of Ind

napolis; endrin and lindane were detected at sit

in urban and non-urban areas. Although the last

permitted use for any of these compounds was 

1988, chlordane, DDT and its degradation produ

DDD and DDE, dieldrin, heptachlor epoxide (th

degradation product of heptachlor), and PCB’s

were detected at 14 sites in the study area. Heptachlor epoxide was detected at nine sites, and

endrin was detected at two sites.

Seventeen semivolatile organic compound

were detected in the streambed sediments—

acenaphthylene, anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene,

benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene,

benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(ghi)perylene, bis(2-

ethylhexyl)phthalate, butyl benzyl phthalate,

chrysene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, fluoranthene,

fluorene, indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, naphthalene,

phenanthrene, and pyrene. The maximum conce

tration of semivolatile organic compounds rang

from 210 μg/kg for acenaphthylene to 3,600 μg

for fluoranthene. The median concentration for

semivolatile organic compounds ranged from

136 μg/kg for benzo(a)anthracene to 320 μg/kg

for fluoranthene. Benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b)fluo

thene, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, fluoranthene,

phenanthrene, and pyrene were detected more

frequently than the other compounds. Acenapht
Reference

ylene, anthracene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)

anthracene, benzo(ghi)perylene, butyl benzyl

phthalate, chrysene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, fluorene, indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, and naphthalene

were detected in one to eight samples from one

to five sites. The semivolatile organic compounds

detected were associated with sites in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis.

References

Bode, R.W., Novak, M.A., and Abele, L.E., 1996,

Quality assurance work plan for biological stream

monitoring in New York State: New York State

Department of Environmental Conservation technical report, 89 p.

Bureau of the Census, 1990, TIGER: The coast-to-coast

digital map data base: 18 p.

_____1991a, Census of population and housing, 1990,

Public Law 94-171 data (United States) [machinereadable data files]: Washington D.C., The Bureau

[producer and distributor].

_____1991b, Census of population and housing, 1990,

Public Law 94-171 data technical documentation:

Washington D.C., The Bureau.

_____1991c, TIGER/Line Census Files, 1990

[machine-readable data files]: Washington, D.C.,

The Bureau [producer and distributor].

_____1991d, TIGER/Line Census Files, 1990 technical

documentation: Washington, D.C., The Bureau,

63 p.

Cairns, Jr., John, Dickson, K.L., and Lanza, Guy, 1973,

Rapid biological monitoring system for determining aquatic community structure in receiving

systems, in Cairns, Jr., John, and Dickson, K.L.,

ed., Biological methods for the assessment of water

quality: American Society for Testing and Materials Technical Publication 528, Philadelphia, Pa.,

p. 148–163.

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment,

1995, Protocol for the derivation of Canadian

sediment quality guidelines for the protection of

aquatic life: Report CCMEEPC-98E, Prepared by

the Technical Secretariat of the Water Quality

Guidelines Task Group, Winnepeg, Manitoba, 38 p.

Crawford, C.G., 1996, Influence of natural and hum

factors on pesticide concentrations in surface

waters of the White River Basin, Indiana:

U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 119-96, 4 p

Crawford, C.G., Martin, J.D., and Wangsness, D.J.,

1992, Recovery of benthic-invertebrates comm

ties in the White River near Indianapolis, India

USA, following implementation of advanced

treatment of municipal wastewater: Archiv für

Hydrobiologie, v. 126, p. 67–84.

Crawford, C.G., and Wangsness, D.J., 1993, Effects 

advanced treatment of municipal wastewater on 

White River near Indianapolis, Indiana—Trend

water quality, 1978–86: U.S. Geological Survey

Water-Supply Paper 2393, 23 p.

Duwelius, R.F., 1990, Water-resources programs and

hydrologic-information needs, Marion County,

Indiana, 1987: U.S. Geological Survey Open-F

Report 90-0159, 24 p.

EXTOXNET, 1993, The EXtension TOXicology

NETwork, A pesticide information project of

Cooperative Extension Offices of Cornell Univ

sity, Michigan State University, and University

of California at Davis (revised 9/93). EXTOXN

files maintained and archived at Oregon State

University at URL http://ace.orst.edu/info/

extoxnet/, accessed April 2, 1999.

Gaufin, A.R., 1973, Use of aquatic invertebrates in t

assessment of water quality, in Cairns, Jr., John

and Dickson, K.L., ed., Biological methods for 

assessment of water quality: American Society 

Testing and Materials Technical Publication 52

Philadelphia, Pa., p. 97–116.

Hilsenhoff, W.L., 1987, An improved biotic index o

organic stream pollution: The Great Lakes Ento

mologist, 20:31–39.

Hilsenhoff, W.L., 1988, Rapid field assessment of

organic pollution with a family-level biotic ind

Journal of the North American Benthological

Society, 7:65–68.

Hoggatt, R.E., 1975, Drainage areas of Indiana strea

U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Divis

231 p.
52 Benthic Invertebrates and Quality of Streambed Sediments, White River and Selected Tributaries

References—Continued

Horowitz, A.J., 1991, A primer on sediment-trace

element chemistry (2d rev. ed.): Lewis Publishers,

Chelsea, Mich., 136 p.

Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff, 1983,

Combined sewer overflow water quality impact

analysis, City of Indianapolis, Indiana: Indianapolis, Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Grant

No. C180885 01 [variously paged].

Larson, S.J., Capel, P.D., and Majewski, M.S., 1997,

Pesticides in surface waters—Distribution, trends,

and governing factors: Ann Arbor Press, Inc.,

Chelsea, Mich., 373 p.

Martin, J.D., 1995, Effects of combined-sewer

overflows and urban runoff on the water quality

of Fall Creek, Indianapolis, Indiana: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations

Report 94-4066, 92 p.

Martin, J.D., and Craig, R.A., 1990, Effects of storm

runoff on water quality in the White River and 

Creek, Indianapolis, Indiana, June through Octo

1986 and 1987: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 89-4185, 114 

Newman, J.E., 1966, Bioclimate, in Lindsey, A.A., e

Natural features of Indiana: Indianapolis, India

Academy of Science and Indiana State Library

p. 171–180.

Renn, D.E., 1998, Benthic-invertebrate and streamb

sediment data for the White River and its

tributaries in and near Indianapolis, Indiana,

1994–96: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File

Report 98-533, 159 p.

Sturm, R.H., and Gilbert, R.H., 1978, Soil survey

of Marion County, Indiana: Washington, D.C.,

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conserva

Service, 63 p.

Verschueren, Karel, 1983, Handbook of environmen

data on organic chemicals (2d ed.): VanNostran

Reinhold Company, Inc., New York, 1,310 p.