John Pfeiffer Sean Sullivan Bob Wisseman Amy Puls 20250523 spreadsheet https://doi.org/10.5066/P14RZNGQ Version 1.0 of the Pacific Northwest Standard Taxonomic Effort (PNW-STE) is the culmination of many years’ work and builds greatly off the 2015 preliminary version hosted at the Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership web site (www.PNAMP.org). This tool standardizes the nomenclature and taxonomic targets for data generated from freshwater benthic macroinvertebrate biomonitoring (BMI) samples within the Pacific Northwest, continental USA. Described is the scope of the PNW-STE both geographically and in application, rules associated with the development and formatting of taxonomic names, suggested methods to increase harmonization and data quality, and guidelines for communication between biomonitoring project managers and laboratories contracted to perform sample analysis. This STE applies specifically to BMI samples collected from mid-order streams in the PNW with the objective of assessing the biointegrity of waterbodies. In the past several decades, this type of information has been routinely collected by all levels of government, private industry, and non-governmental organizations for multiple purposes, including regulatory (biocriteria). Standardizing laboratory protocols and data reporting is foundational for the many study and regulatory objectives this data is currently being tasked with. Though the application specifically targets the analysis of mid-order stream benthic biomonitoring samples, this STE also serves as a guidance for levels of taxonomic resolution that can be practically achieved in studies on other freshwater habitat types (e.g. lakes, rivers, headwater springs and streams, etc.), or for different sample types (e.g. drift, qualitative multi-habitat, fish gut content, food web, etc.) The PNW-STE is intended to be a guiding document for both data producers (sample processing laboratories) and data consumers (biomonitoring programs). Data consumers can use the PNW-STE to set expectations when contracting with data producing labs. Sample processing labs can utilize the PNW-STE to standardize lab bench taxonomic concepts and nomenclature of BMI’s during sample analyses and data formatting prior to delivery to their respective clients. The authors of the PNW-STE intend this STE to supply explicit taxonomic targets for each taxon and each life stage encountered during sample analysis. 20240613 publication date Complete None planned The PNW-STE is intended for use specifically for biomonitoring programs conducted in the states of Oregon and Washington, USA. Because of substantial similarity in the stream habitats and their BMI fauna, it is also appropriate for use in Idaho and montane regions of western Montana. Included on the list are some taxa reported from neighboring states and provinces, as they may be eventually found OR-WA-ID-western MT. -126.3867 -110.2588 50.1487 39.9434 ISO 19115 Topic Category biota USGS Thesaurus systematics and taxonomy macroinvertebrates benthic ecosystems USGS Metadata Identifier USGS:682cee3ad4be021a0d6b7d2d None Aeolosomatidae Hirudinidae Haemopidae Erpobdellidae Salifidae Glossiphoniidae Piscicolidae Lumbriculidae Enchytraeidae Haplotaxidae Naididae Nereididae Fabriciidae Ampharetidae Acalyptonotidae Amoenacaridae Arrenuridae Athienemanniidae Bogatiidae Krendowskiidae Laversiidae Mideidae Mideopsidae Momoniidae Neoacaridae Nudomideopsidae Eylaidae Limnocharidae Piersigiidae Hydrachnidae Lethaxonidae Aturidae Feltriidae Frontipodopsidae Hygrobatidae Pionidae Unionicolidae Wettinidae Limnesiidae Hydrovolziidae Hydryphantidae Rhynchohydracaridae Thermacaridae Anisitsiellidae Lebertiidae Oxidae Sperchontidae Teutoniidae Torrenticolidae Halacaridae Chappuisiidae Crangonyctidae Anisogammaridae Hyalellidae Corophiidae Haustoriidae Asellidae Sphaeromatidae Mysidae Leptocheliidae Panopeidae Varunidae Palaemonidae Astacidae Cambaridae Argulidae Amphizoidae Dytiscidae Gyrinidae Haliplidae Noteridae Carabidae Hydroscaphidae Sphaeriusidae Curculionidae Chrysomelidae Dryopidae Elmidae Eulichadidae Limnichidae Lutrochidae Psephenidae Ptilodactylidae Lampyridae Scirtidae Helophoridae Hydrochidae Hydrophilidae Hydraenidae Staphylinidae Athericidae Tabanidae Canaceidae Dolichopodidae Empididae Ephydridae Muscidae Phoridae Scathophagidae Sciomyzidae Sarcophagidae Syrphidae Stratiomyidae Tipulidae Cylindrotominae Limoniinae Pediciini Blephariceridae Deuterophlebiidae Ceratopogonidae Chaoboridae Chironomidae Corethrellidae Culicidae Dixidae Simuliidae Thaumaleidae Psychodidae Ptychopteridae Tanyderidae Crambidae Corydalidae Sialidae Sisyridae Hydropsychidae Polycentropodidae Psychomyiidae Philopotamidae Calamoceratidae Molannidae Odontoceridae Leptoceridae Apataniidae Brachycentridae Goeridae Lepidostomatidae Limnephilidae Belostomatidae Nepidae Corixidae Gelastocoridae Naucoridae Notonectidae Pleidae Gerridae Veliidae Hebridae Macroveliidae Hydrometridae Mesoveliidae Saldidae Capniidae Leuctridae Nemouridae Taeniopterygidae Chloroperlidae Perlidae Perlodidae Peltoperlidae Pteronarcyidae Baetiscidae Caenidae Ephemerellidae Leptohyphidae Ephemeridae Polymitarcyidae Potamanthidae Leptophlebiidae Ameletidae Ametropodidae Arthropleidae Heptageniidae Isonychiidae Oligoneuriidae Pseudironidae Baetidae Siphlonuridae Acanthametropodidae Aeshnidae Cordulegastridae Corduliidae Gomphidae Libellulidae Petaluridae Calopterygidae Coenagrionidae Lestidae Pontoporiidae Thremmatinae Uenoidae Phryganeidae Helicopsychidae Sericostomatidae Glossosomatidae Hydroptilidae Ptilocolepinae Rossianidae Rhyacophilidae Hydridae Oceanidae Tellinidae Corbiculidae Sphaeriidae Corbulidae Dreissenidae Unionidae Margaritiferidae Physidae Planorbidae Valvatidae Ampullariidae Viviparidae Lithoglyphidae Tateidae Semisulcospiridae Acroloxidae Lymnaeidae Physidae Thiaridae Assimineidae Bithyniidae Pomatiopsidae Planariidae Kingdom Animalia Subkingdom Bilateria Infrakingdom Protostomia Superphylum Spiralia Phylum Annelida Family Aeolosomatidae TSN: 68423 Class Clitellata Subclass Lumbriculata Order Hirudinida Suborder Arhynchobdellida Infraorder Hirudiniformes Family Hirudinidae TSN: 69407 Family Haemopidae TSN: 568839 Infraorder Erpobdelliformes Family Erpobdellidae TSN: 69438 Family Salifidae TSN: 568841 Suborder Rhynchobdellida Family Glossiphoniidae TSN: 69357 Family Piscicolidae TSN: 69296 Order Lumbriculida Family Lumbriculidae TSN: 68440 Family Enchytraeidae TSN: 68510 Subclass Tubificata Order Tubificida Family Haplotaxidae TSN: 68504 Family Naididae TSN: 68854 Class Polychaeta Subclass Errantia Order Phyllodocida Family Nereididae TSN: 65870 Subclass Sedentaria Infraclass Canalipalpata Order Sabellida Family Fabriciidae TSN: 1048722 Order Terebellida Family Ampharetidae TSN: 67718 Phylum Mollusca Class Bivalvia Subclass Autobranchia Infraclass Heteroconchia Order Sphaeriida Superfamily Tellinoidea Family Tellinidae TSN: 81032 Superfamily Sphaerioidea Family Sphaeriidae TSN: 81389 Order Venerida Superfamily Cyrenoidea Family Cyrenidae Order Myida Superfamily Myoidea Family Corbulidae TSN: 81708 Superfamily Dreissenoidea Family Dreissenidae TSN: 81330 Order Unionida Superfamily Unionoidea Family Unionidae TSN: 79913 Family Margaritiferidae TSN: 79914 Class Gastropoda Subclass Orthogastropoda Infraclass Heterobranchia Superorder Hygrophila Order Lymnaeida Superfamily Planorboidea Family Physidae TSN: 76676 Family Planorbidae TSN: 76591 Superfamily Acroloxoidea Family Acroloxidae TSN: 76473 Superfamily Lymnaeoidea Family Lymnaeidae TSN: 76483 Order Ectobranchia Superfamily Valvatoidea Family Valvatidae TSN: 70345 Infraclass Caenogastropoda Order Ampullariida Superfamily Ampullarioidea Family Ampullariidae TSN: 70341 Order Viviparida Superfamily Viviparoidea Family Viviparidae TSN: 70304 Order Littorinida Suborder Rissoidina Superfamily Truncatelloidea Family Lithoglyphidae TSN: 1132447 Family Tateidae TSN: 1132449 Family Assimineidae TSN: 71051 Family Bithyniidae TSN: 70745 Family Pomatiopsidae TSN: 70491 Order Cerithiida Superfamily Cerithioidea Family Semisulcospiridae TSN: 1132448 Family Thiaridae TSN: 71531 Phylum Platyhelminthes Subphylum Rhabditophora Infraphylum Trepaxonemata Superclass Euneoophora Class Acentrosomata Subclass Adiaphanida Order Tricladida Suborder Continenticola Superfamily Planarioidea Family Planariidae TSN: 54502 Superphylum Ecdysozoa Phylum Arthropoda Subphylum Chelicerata Class Arachnida Superorder Acariformes Order Trombidiformes Suborder Prostigmata Infraorder Anystina Superfamily Arrenuroidea Family Acalyptonotidae TSN: 83507 Family Amoenacaridae TSN: 895724 Family Arrenuridae TSN: 82862 Family Athienemanniidae TSN: 83514 Family Bogatiidae TSN: 895726 Family Krendowskiidae TSN: 83499 Family Laversiidae TSN: 895725 Family Mideidae TSN: 83465 Family Mideopsidae TSN: 83476 Family Momoniidae TSN: 83470 Family Neoacaridae TSN: 82858 Family Nudomideopsidae TSN: 895718 Superfamily Eylaoidea Family Eylaidae TSN: 83151 Family Limnocharidae TSN: 83145 Family Piersigiidae TSN: 83159 Superfamily Hydrachnoidea Family Hydrachnidae TSN: 83122 Superfamily Hygrobatoidea Family Lethaxonidae TSN: 895715 Family Aturidae TSN: 82973 Family Feltriidae TSN: 83313 Family Frontipodopsidae TSN: 895714 Family Hygrobatidae TSN: 83281 Family Pionidae TSN: 83330 Family Unionicolidae TSN: 83072 Family Wettinidae TSN: 895713 Family Limnesiidae TSN: 83050 Superfamily Hydrovolzioidea Family Hydrovolziidae TSN: 83118 Superfamily Hydryphantoidea Family Hydryphantidae TSN: 83212 Family Rhynchohydracaridae TSN: 895705 Family Thermacaridae TSN: 83227 Superfamily Lebertioidea Family Anisitsiellidae TSN: 83531 Family Lebertiidae TSN: 83033 Family Oxidae TSN: 83239 Family Sperchontidae TSN: 895710 Family Teutoniidae TSN: 83234 Family Torrenticolidae TSN: 83249 Infraorder Eupodina Superfamily Halacaroidea Family Halacaridae TSN: 82771 Subphylum Crustacea Superclass Altocrustacea Class Copepoda Infraclass Neocopepoda Superorder Podoplea Order Harpacticoida Family Chappuisiidae TSN: 86181 Class Malacostraca Subclass Eumalacostraca Superorder Peracarida Order Amphipoda Suborder Senticaudata Infraorder Gammarida Superfamily Crangonyctoidea Family Crangonyctidae TSN: 95080 Superfamily Gammaroidea Family Anisogammaridae TSN: 203113 Infraorder Talitrida Superfamily Talitroidea Family Hyalellidae TSN: 94022 Infraorder Corophiida Superfamily Corophioidea Family Corophiidae TSN: 93584 Suborder Amphilochidea Infraorder Lysianassida Superfamily Haustorioidea Family Haustoriidae TSN: 93959 Order Isopoda Suborder Asellota Superfamily Aselloidea Family Asellidae TSN: 92657 Suborder Flabellifera Family Sphaeromatidae TSN: 92283 Order Mysida Family Mysidae TSN: 89856 Order Tanaidacea Suborder Tanaidomorpha Superfamily Paratanaoidea Family Leptocheliidae TSN: 91554 Superorder Eucarida Order Decapoda Suborder Pleocyemata Infraorder Brachyura Superfamily Xanthoidea Family Panopeidae TSN: 621504 Superfamily Grapsoidea Family Varunidae TSN: 621521 Infraorder Caridea Superfamily Palaemonoidea Family Palaemonidae TSN: 96213 Infraorder Astacidea Superfamily Astacoidea Family Astacidae TSN: 97324 Family Cambaridae TSN: 97336 Superclass Oligostraca Class Branchiura Order Arguloida Family Argulidae TSN: 89406 Subphylum Hexapoda Class Insecta Subclass Pterygota Infraclass Neoptera Superorder Holometabola Order Coleoptera Suborder Adephaga Family Amphizoidae TSN: 111952 Family Dytiscidae TSN: 111963 Family Gyrinidae TSN: 112653 Family Haliplidae TSN: 111857 Family Noteridae TSN: 112606 Family Carabidae TSN: 109234 Suborder Myxophaga Family Hydroscaphidae TSN: 112744 Family Sphaeriusidae TSN: 678385 Suborder Polyphaga Infraorder Cucujiformia Superfamily Curculionoidea Family Curculionidae TSN: 114666 Superfamily Chrysomeloidea Family Chrysomelidae TSN: 114509 Infraorder Elateriformia Superfamily Byrrhoidea Family Dryopidae TSN: 113999 Family Elmidae TSN: 114093 Family Eulichadidae TSN: 678330 Family Limnichidae TSN: 114030 Family Lutrochidae TSN: 678328 Family Psephenidae TSN: 114069 Family Ptilodactylidae TSN: 114265 Superfamily Elateroidea Family Lampyridae TSN: 113835 Superfamily Scirtoidea Family Scirtidae TSN: 113924 Infraorder Staphyliniformia Superfamily Hydrophiloidea Family Helophoridae TSN: 193642 Family Hydrochidae TSN: 722226 Family Hydrophilidae TSN: 112811 Superfamily Staphylinoidea Family Hydraenidae TSN: 112756 Family Staphylinidae TSN: 113265 Order Diptera Suborder Brachycera Infraorder Tabanomorpha Family Athericidae TSN: 130928 Family Tabanidae TSN: 130934 Infraorder Muscomorpha Family Canaceidae TSN: 148316 Family Dolichopodidae TSN: 136824 Family Empididae TSN: 135830 Family Ephydridae TSN: 146893 Family Muscidae TSN: 150025 Family Phoridae TSN: 138921 Family Scathophagidae TSN: 678096 Family Sciomyzidae TSN: 144653 Family Sarcophagidae TSN: 151815 Family Syrphidae TSN: 139621 Infraorder Stratiomyomorpha Family Stratiomyidae TSN: 130150 Suborder Nematocera Infraorder Tipulomorpha Family Tipulidae TSN: 118840 Subfamily Cylindrotominae TSN: 119634 Subfamily Limoniinae TSN: 119654 Tribe Pediciini TSN: 121026 Infraorder Blephariceromorpha Family Blephariceridae TSN: 121227 Family Deuterophlebiidae TSN: 121286 Infraorder Culicomorpha Family Ceratopogonidae TSN: 127076 Family Chaoboridae TSN: 125886 Family Chironomidae TSN: 127917 Family Corethrellidae TSN: 125875 Family Culicidae TSN: 125930 Family Dixidae TSN: 125809 Family Simuliidae TSN: 126640 Family Thaumaleidae TSN: 126624 Infraorder Psychodomorpha Family Psychodidae TSN: 125351 Infraorder Ptychopteromorpha Family Ptychopteridae TSN: 125763 Family Tanyderidae TSN: 125799 Order Lepidoptera Superfamily Pyraloidea Family Crambidae TSN: 693963 Order Megaloptera Family Corydalidae TSN: 115023 Family Sialidae TSN: 115001 Order Neuroptera Suborder Hemerobiiformia Family Sisyridae TSN: 115085 Order Trichoptera Superfamily Hydropsychoidea Family Hydropsychidae TSN: 115398 Family Polycentropodidae TSN: 117043 Family Psychomyiidae TSN: 115334 Superfamily Philopotamoidea Family Philopotamidae TSN: 115257 Superfamily Leptoceroidea Family Calamoceratidae TSN: 116529 Family Molannidae TSN: 116473 Family Odontoceridae TSN: 116496 Family Leptoceridae TSN: 116547 Superfamily Limnephiloidea Family Apataniidae TSN: 598182 Family Brachycentridae TSN: 116905 Family Goeridae TSN: 115934 Family Lepidostomatidae TSN: 116793 Family Limnephilidae TSN: 115933 Family Uenoidae TSN: 568757 Subfamily Thremmatinae TSN: 568760 Family Rossianidae TSN: 598186 Superfamily Phryganeoidea Family Phryganeidae TSN: 115867 Superfamily Sericostomatoidea Family Helicopsychidae TSN: 117015 Family Sericostomatidae TSN: 116982 Superfamily Glossosomatoidea Family Glossosomatidae TSN: 117120 Superfamily Hydroptiloidea Family Hydroptilidae TSN: 115629 Subfamily Ptilocolepinae TSN: 598222 Superfamily Rhyacophiloidea Family Rhyacophilidae TSN: 115096 Superorder Acercaria Order Hemiptera Suborder Heteroptera Infraorder Nepomorpha Superfamily Nepoidea Family Belostomatidae TSN: 103683 Family Nepidae TSN: 103747 Superfamily Corixoidea Family Corixidae TSN: 103364 Superfamily Ochteroidea Family Gelastocoridae TSN: 103768 Superfamily Naucoroidea Family Naucoridae TSN: 103613 Superfamily Notonectoidea Family Notonectidae TSN: 103557 Family Pleidae TSN: 103602 Infraorder Gerromorpha Superfamily Gerroidea Family Gerridae TSN: 103801 Family Veliidae TSN: 103885 Superfamily Hebroidea Family Hebridae TSN: 103964 Family Macroveliidae TSN: 103990 Superfamily Hydrometroidea Family Hydrometridae TSN: 103938 Superfamily Mesovelioidea Family Mesoveliidae TSN: 103953 Infraorder Leptopodomorpha Superfamily Saldoidea Family Saldidae TSN: 104063 Superorder Polyneoptera Order Plecoptera Suborder Euholognatha Family Capniidae TSN: 102643 Family Leuctridae TSN: 102840 Family Nemouridae TSN: 102517 Family Taeniopterygidae TSN: 102788 Suborder Systellognatha Family Chloroperlidae TSN: 103202 Family Perlidae TSN: 102914 Family Perlodidae TSN: 102994 Family Peltoperlidae TSN: 102488 Family Pteronarcyidae TSN: 102470 Infraclass Palaeoptera Order Ephemeroptera Suborder Carapacea Family Baetiscidae TSN: 101493 Suborder Furcatergalia Infraorder Pannota Superfamily Caenoidea Family Caenidae TSN: 101467 Superfamily Ephemerelloidea Family Ephemerellidae TSN: 101232 Family Leptohyphidae TSN: 568545 Infraorder Scapphodonta Superfamily Ephemeroidea Family Ephemeridae TSN: 101525 Family Polymitarcyidae TSN: 101569 Superfamily Potamanthoidea Family Potamanthidae TSN: 101509 Infraorder Lanceolata Family Leptophlebiidae TSN: 101095 Suborder Pisciforma Family Ameletidae TSN: 568544 Family Ametropodidae TSN: 101073 Superfamily Heptagenioidea Family Arthropleidae TSN: 609508 Family Heptageniidae TSN: 100504 Family Isonychiidae TSN: 609506 Family Oligoneuriidae TSN: 101029 Family Pseudironidae TSN: 609507 Family Baetidae TSN: 100755 Family Siphlonuridae TSN: 100951 Family Acanthametropodidae TSN: 568543 Order Odonata Suborder Anisoptera Family Aeshnidae TSN: 101596 Family Cordulegastridae TSN: 102026 Family Corduliidae TSN: 102020 Family Gomphidae TSN: 101664 Family Libellulidae TSN: 101797 Family Petaluridae TSN: 101659 Suborder Zygoptera Family Calopterygidae TSN: 102043 Family Coenagrionidae TSN: 102077 Family Lestidae TSN: 102058 Infrakingdom Deuterostomia Phylum Chordata Subphylum Vertebrata Infraphylum Gnathostomata Superclass Tetrapoda Class Mammalia Subclass Theria Infraclass Eutheria Order Cetacea Suborder Odontoceti Family Pontoporiidae TSN: 612589 Phylum Cnidaria Subphylum Medusozoa Class Hydrozoa Subclass Hydroidolina Order Anthoathecatae Suborder Capitata Family Hydridae TSN: 50844 Suborder Filifera Family Oceanidae TSN: 718974 None. Please see 'Distribution Info' for details. None. Users are advised to read the dataset's metadata thoroughly to understand appropriate use and data limitations. FRESC Science Data Coordinator USGS mailing

777 NW 9th St., Suite 400

Corvallis Oregon 97330 USA 541-750-1030 Aquatic Biology Associates, Rhithron Associates, Inc., EcoAnalysts, Inc. Richard K. Allen George F. Edmunds 20120531 publication The Canadian Entomologist vol. 91, issue 1 n/a Cambridge University Press (CUP) ppg. 51-58 https://doi.org/10.4039/Ent9151-1 Cheryl B. Barr 201109 publication The Coleopterists Bulletin vol. 65, issue 3 n/a Coleopterists Society ppg. 197-212 https://doi.org/10.1649/072.065.0301 James H. Thorp D. Christopher Rogers 2016 4 publication n/a Elsevier https://doi.org/10.1016/C2010-0-65589-1 Robert W. Pennak 198912 3rd publication R.D. Kathman R.O. Brinkhurst 1999 publication M. Wetzel S.V. Fend K. Coates R.D. Kathman S.R. Gelder 2009 publication N. Foster 1972 publication Biota of Freshwater Ecosystems Identification Manual No. 4 STEPHEN D. ATKINSON JERRI L. BARTHOLOMEW GREG W. ROUSE 20200317 publication Zootaxa vol. 4751, issue 2 n/a Magnolia Press https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4751.2.6 J.T. Carlton 2007 4 publication Berkeley, California University of California Press D.R. Cook 1974 publication Ann Arbor, Michigan The American Entomological Institute H. Smit 2020 1 publication Leiden, The Netherlands Nederlandse Entomologische Vereniging D.C. Rogers 2005 publication EcoAnalysts Technical Publication Series #1 D. Wang J.R. Holsinger 2001 publication Amphipacifica 3 / 39–147 E.L. Bousfield J.R. Holsinger 1989 publication Oregon State Univ. Tech. Bull. 67, 963–968 J.R. Holsinger 1977 publication Crustaceana Supplement 244-281 E.L. Bousfield 1989 publication Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 46, 1714–1725 H.H. Hobbs 1974 publication Smithson. Contrib. to Zool. 166, 161 E. Larson J.D. Olden 2011 publication Fisheries 36, 60–73 Keith A Crandall Sammy De Grave 20170808 publication Journal of Crustacean Biology vol. 37, issue 5 n/a Oxford University Press (OUP) ppg. 615-653 https://doi.org/10.1093/jcbiol/rux070 Ko Tomikawa Hiroshi Morino Jason Toft Shunsuke F. Mawatari 20060828 publication Journal of Natural History vol. 40, issue 17-18 n/a Informa UK Limited ppg. 1083-1148 https://doi.org/10.1080/00222930600828859 R.W. Merritt K.W. Cummins M.B. Bergs 2019 5th publication n/a Kendall/Hunt Pub. Co. D.H. Kavanaugh 1986 publication Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. 44 67–109 D.J. Larson Y. Alarie R.E. Roughley 2000 publication Ottawa National Research Council of Canada K.B. Miller J. Bergsten 2016 publication Baltimore, Maryland John Hopkins University Press K.B. Miller 2014 publication Davis, California Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists A.N. Nilsson 2000 publication Koleopterol. Rundschau 70 17–36 HANS FERY IGNACIO RIBERA 20180912 publication Zootaxa vol. 4474, issue 1 n/a Magnolia Press https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4474.1.1 A. Villastrigo I. Ribera M. Manuel H. Fery 2017 publication Zootaxa 4317 499-529 T. Mousseau R.E. Roughley 2007 publication Coleopt. Bull. 61 351-397 A.E.Z Short 2015 publication Davis, California Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists F.N. Young 1979 publication Southwest Nat. 24 406-429 H.P. Brown 1983 publication Washington D.C. United States Department of Agriculture W.D. Shepard C.B. Barr 1991 publication Pan-Pac. Entomol. 67 195-199 H.P. Brown 2001 publication Entomol. News 112 201-211 Y. Kamite 2013 publication Koleopterol. Rundschau 83 133-164 Y. Kamite 2009 publication Japanese J. Syst. Entomol. 15 199-226 P.D. Perkins 1980 publication Quaest. Entomol. 16 A. Smetana 1988 publication Mem. Entomol. Soc. Canada 142 1-316 M. Archangelsky 1997 publication Bull. Ohio Biol. Surv. 12 219p A.E.Z. Short C.E.I McIntosh 2014 publication Coleopterists Bull. 68 187-198 COLIN A. BRAMMER J. ROBERT HARKRIDER JOHN F. MACDONALD 20090410 publication Zootaxa vol. 2069, issue 1 n/a Magnolia Press https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2069.1.4 John F. MacDonald James R. Harkrider 199909 publication Journal of the North American Benthological Society vol. 18, issue 3 n/a University of Chicago Press ppg. 414-419 https://doi.org/10.2307/1468454 Bradley J. Sinclair Trey Simmons Michael B. Cole Jeffrey M. Webb Sean Sullivan 20220413 publication Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington vol. 123, issue 4 n/a Entomological Society of Washington https://doi.org/10.4289/0013-8797.123.4.852 Jack Zloty Bradley J. Sinclair Gordon Pritchard 20050210 publication Systematic Entomology vol. 30, issue 2 n/a Wiley ppg. 248-266 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3113.2005.00270.x A.H. Purcell A. Hoffman V.H. Resh 2008 publication Freshw. Biol. 53 2426-2437 J.K. Gelhaus V. Podeniene 2018 publication Davis, California Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists (SAFIT) P. Oosterbroek 2018 publication G.W. Courtney 1999 publication C.L. Hogue 1973 publication Univ. Calif. 15 83 ART BORKENT WILLIAM L. GROGAN, JR. 20091027 publication Zootaxa vol. 2273, issue 1 n/a Magnolia Press https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2273.1.1 J.H. Epler 2001 publication Palatka, Florida Special Publication SJ2001-SP13 North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources , and St. John’s River Water Management District G. Grodhaus 1987 publication J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 49 405-418 T. Andersen P.S. Cranston J.H. Epler 2013 publication Insect Syst. Evol. Supplement 573p O.A. Saether 1977 publication Bull. Fish. Res. Board Canada 196 1-143 G.A. Jackson 1977 publication J. Fish. Res. Board Canada 34 1321-1359 G. Grodhaus 1976 publication J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 49 405-418 OKSANA V. ZORINA 20130805 publication Zootaxa vol. 3694, issue 3 n/a Magnolia Press https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3694.3.1 E.A. Makachenko M.A. Makarchenko 2000 publication Int. Symp. Chironomidae 13th 171-176 M.W. Bode 1983 publication New York State Museum Bull. 425 1-40 Armin Namayandeh David V. Beresford 20210721 publication Journal of Natural History vol. 55, issue 19-20 n/a Informa UK Limited ppg. 1195-1211 https://doi.org/10.1080/00222933.2021.1939186 D.R. Oliver 1981 publication Can. Entomol. 113 711-722 E.A. Makachenko M.A. Makarchenko 2004 publication Euroasian Entomol. J. 3 307-310 Andrew Fasbender 20200212 publication CHIRONOMUS Journal of Chironomidae Research issue 33 n/a Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Library ppg. 17-30 https://doi.org/10.5324/cjcr.v0i33.3068 OLE A. SÆTHER 20040806 publication Zootaxa vol. 595, issue 1 n/a Magnolia Press https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.595.1.1 ANDREY A. PRZHIBORO OLE A. SÆTHER 20101112 publication Zootaxa vol. 2675, issue 1 n/a Magnolia Press https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2675.1.5 T. Wiederholm 1983 publication Sandby, Sweden Scandinavian Society of Entomology P.H. Adler D.C. Currie D.M. Wood 2004 publication Ithaca, New York Cornell University Press 941p L.U. Sun W.P. McCafferty 2008 publication Zootaxa 1801 A.V. Provonsha 1990 publication Trans. Am. Entomol. Soc. 116 801-884 L.M. Jacobus N.A. Wiersema J.M. Webb 2014 publication Portland, Oregon Joint Aquatic Science Meeting Richard K. Allen George F. Edmunds 20120531 publication The Canadian Entomologist vol. 91, issue 1 n/a Cambridge University Press (CUP) ppg. 51-58 https://doi.org/10.4039/Ent9151-1 Luke M. Jacobus 2010 publication Psyche: A Journal of Entomology vol. 2010 n/a Hindawi Limited ppg. 1-5 https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/493935 Luke M. Jacobus W. P. McCafferty 200803 publication Transactions of the American Entomological Society vol. 134, issue 1 &amp; 2 n/a American Entomological Society ppg. 185-274 https://doi.org/10.3157/0002-8320(2008)134[185:roege]2.0.co;2 S.K. Burian 2001 publication Bull. Ohio Biol. Surv. 13 80 TATIANA M. TIUNOVA NIKITA KLUGE 20160406 publication Zootaxa vol. 4098, issue 2 n/a Magnolia Press https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.9 Steven K. Burian Luke W. Myers 201112 publication Aquatic Insects vol. 33, issue 4 n/a Informa UK Limited ppg. 305-334 https://doi.org/10.1080/01650424.2011.639305 J.M. WEBB LUKE M. JACOBUS S.P. SULLIVAN 20180312 publication Zootaxa vol. 4394, issue 1 n/a Magnolia Press https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4394.1.6 J.M. Webb W.P. McCafferty 20081030 publication Canadian Journal of Arthropod Identification vol. 07 n/a The Biological Survey of Canada https://doi.org/10.3752/cjai.2008.07 D.K. Morihara W.P. McCafferty 1979 publication Trans. Am. Entomol. Soc. 105 139-221 PAULO VILELA CRUZ 20200702 publication Zootaxa vol. 4808, issue 2 n/a Magnolia Press https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4808.2.5 W.P. McCafferty R.P. Randolph 2000 publication Entomol. News 111 259-264 C.R. Lugo-Ortiz W.P. McCafferty R.D. Waltz 1999 publication Trans. Am. Entomol. Soc. 125 1-37 B.C. Kondratieff J.R. Voshell Jr. 1984 publication Trans. Am. Entomol. Soc. 110 129-144 M.L. Pescador 1985 publication Florida Entomol. 68 432-444 A.S. Menke 1979 publication Berkeley, California University of California Press G.M. Stonedahl J.D. Lattin 1986 publication Oregon State Univ. Tech. Bull. 150 1-84 K.J. Tennessen 2019 publication Cham, Switzerland Springer M.J. Westfall M.L. May 1996 publication K.W. Stewart B.P. Stark 2002 2nd publication Columbus The Caddis Press 510p Scott Grubbs Richard Baumann R. DeWalt Tari Tweddale 20140414 publication ZooKeys vol. 401 n/a Pensoft Publishers ppg. 11-30 https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.401.7299 R.W. Baumann A.R. Gaufin R.F. Surdick 1977 publication Mem. Am. Entomol. Soc. 31 1-206 R.W. Baumann B.C. Kondratieff 2010 publication Illiesia 6 315-327 Eric J South Rachel K Skinner R Edward DeWalt Mark A Davis Kevin P Johnson Valentina A Teslenko Jonathan J Lee Rachel L Malison Jeong Mi Hwang Yeon Jae Bae Luke W Myers 20210702 publication Insect Systematics and Diversity vol. 5, issue 4 n/a Oxford University Press (OUP) https://doi.org/10.1093/isd/ixab014 V. A. Teslenko 20091118 publication Entomological Review vol. 89, issue 7 n/a Pleiades Publishing Ltd ppg. 815-819 https://doi.org/10.1134/s0013873809070070 L.W. Myers B.C. Kondratieff 2017 publication Illiesia 13 192-224 Bill P. Stark C. Riley Nelson 1994 publication Insect Systematics &amp; Evolution vol. 25, issue 3 n/a Walter de Gruyter GmbH ppg. 241-273 https://doi.org/10.1163/187631294X00072 G.B. Wiggins 2006 publication Toronto, Ontario University of Toronto Press 352p DONALD R. GIVENS 20151214 publication Zootaxa vol. 4057, issue 4 n/a Magnolia Press https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4057.4.1 S. Chuluunbat J.C. Morse J.L. Lessard M.E. Benbow M.D. Wesner J. Hudson 2010 publication J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 29 413-430 O.S. Flint 1984 publication Smithson. Contrib. to Zool. 398 58p R.W. Wisseman J.J. Giersch D.E. Ruiter 2012 publication Davis, California Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists (SAFIT) workshop G.B. Wiggins J.S. Richardson 1989 publication J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 8 355-369 R.N. Vineyard G.B. Wiggins H.E. Frania P.W. Shefter 2005 publication R. Ontario Museum Contrib. Sci. #2 141 T. Ito 1995 publication Japanese J. Entomol. 63 493-502 J.J. Giersch R.W. Wisseman 2012 publication Davis, California Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists G.L. Mackie 2007 publication Ohio Biol. Surv. 25 436 J.B. Burch 1989 publication Hamburg, Michigan Malacologcial Publications David C. Campbell Stephanie A. Clark Charles Lydeard 20170328 publication ZooKeys vol. 663 n/a Pensoft Publishers ppg. 107-132 https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.663.11320 R. Hershler H.P. Liu 2017 publication Denver, Colorado U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, National Operations Center Technical Note 449 The Pacific Northwest Standard Taxonomic Effort (PNW-STE) is the culmination of many years’ work and builds greatly off the 2015 preliminary version hosted at the Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership web site (www.PNAMP.org). Quality Control of Taxonomy Producing consistent and accurate taxonomic data, first depends on individual taxonomists maintaining curiosity, having openness to continuing education, and a willingness to seek second opinions and also share their own. If individual taxonomists or individual labs remain isolated, with no cross-pollination of experience, the data produced will inexorably diverge over time. Developing this STE is one component of sharing knowledge and experience. In-person taxonomic workshops are another. Attendance at these workshops has declined in recent years, mainly due to the cost of travel and taking time off from paid work. Hopefully, information gaps can be closed and new taxonomic information disseminated digitally at the PNAMP web site. Beyond that, labs and individuals currently operating in the PNW that process benthic biomonitoring samples have a good track record of maintaining open lines of communication between taxonomists. Formal QA/QC checks on taxonomy are often required by benthic biomonitoring program managers. Specifications on how this is done has varied across the years and North American programs. It can be as simple as requesting a reference collection of all taxa identified to be checked by a second taxonomist (internally within a lab, or externally by an independent lab). Or it can be as time consuming as having taxonomists archive each individual taxon identified in a separate, labeled vial for all samples in a project. A subset of project samples is then randomly selected and sent to an outside lab for review. The original lab is blind to what samples might be selected, but the outside lab is not blind to taxa identifications of the original lab. Biomonitoring programs in the PNW have by consensus adopted a QC check protocol on taxonomy that keeps both the original and second taxonomists/labs blind to how each identified and enumerated a sample. After completing identification of sorted samples by taxonomist/lab A, all project samples are archived, usually in several vials, e.g. general taxa, Chironomidae, and Oligochaeta. The client or program manager selects a subset of project samples (often budgeted for 10% of the project sample set), notifies lab A of the samples elected and who has been chosen to be lab B for an independent check. Lab A sends the samples selected to lab B, and the data for those samples to the client. Lab B sends the data they produce from the QC samples to the client. The client either assesses data comparability, or requests lab A or B to perform this service. Remember this is not free, all these steps have to be budgeted by the client and labs participating. This QC check on taxonomy is first a learning process for the taxonomists involved. After both labs submit their data to the client, they can then see where specific identifications differed, and how unique and not unique taxa were handled. Adjustments in identification and enumeration can then be made for the entire project dataset. The second aspect of the QC check addresses how comparable the data is between labs A & B. Two measures of precision are commonly used to evaluate taxonomic data quality, Percent Difference in Enumeration (PDE) and Percent Taxonomic Difference(PTD) (Stribling et al., 2008, 2003). Analyst bias can also be addressed by calculating the Percent Taxonomic Completeness (Stribling et al., 2008). Sample taxa lists and counts are compared and metrics calculated using the equations below. Measurement quality objectives for PTD, PDE and PTCabsolute difference are typically 85%, 5%, and 10%, respectively, though program specific goals may dictate setting different targets. Any quality control should be viewed as a means to improve precision overtime and not just achieve minimal standards. Taxonomist Qualifications Taxonomic identification of subsampled individuals should be conducted by trained individuals. There are no formal academic programs geared towards training all-around or group specialized benthic macroinvertebrate taxonomists that we know of. Most taxonomists currently practicing in the PNW are self-taught, usually as an adjunct interest to college course or thesis work. Sometimes world renowned invertebrate specialists are entirely self-taught, having never attended college or taken any course-work. The point here is taxonomists are judged by their peers on their knowledge and what they produce, not by any academic or certification credentials. Freshwater BMI taxonomy is not a high paying profession. Folks who stick with it are doing it from a place of passion, unlikely to attempt any type of subterfuge or less than a dedicated approach to their profession. There are opportunities for individuals to gain experience and training in the morphological identification of BMI taxa. Programs like the Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists (SAFIT) (http://www.safit.org/) and the Society for Freshwater Science (SFS) host taxonomic training workshops. SFS offers the Taxonomic Certification Program (https://stroudcenter.org/sfstcp/) which will evaluate a taxonomist’s ability to identify individuals to certain taxonomic levels. In the end, it is the exchange and circulation of specimens, images, literature and information amongst the BMI taxonomic community that provides the most effective continuing education opportunities, and resolves the most taxonomic unknowns and problems. Fortunately, labs in the PNW actively participate in this information and specimen exchange. Regardless of level of training or certification, frequent and rigorous QA/QC procedures is the only reliable indicator of the quality of taxonomic data produced. Taxonomic identifications are less programmatic of a process as sample preparation and sorting. Each individual taxonomist identifies samples in their own way. The important component here is that if the PNW-STE is being followed, the nomenclature, hierarchy and vital metadata components are being standardized. Standard Taxonomic Evaluation Status (STE_Status) is used as a categorical variable to delineate the expected taxa targets, and targets for those individuals that are too damaged or immature (D/I) to achieve target. The accepted values are TRUE and D/I. D/I indicates accepted coarser level identifications for individuals too damaged or too immature to achieve the desired taxonomic target. TRUE indicates that the taxon name in the Final_ Identification column is the target taxonomic level. NA (not applicable) is reserved for taxa or life-stages that are generally excluded from BMI datasets for bioassessement purposes. Final_Identification: The Final identification field will contain only current names of taxa expected to be reported in PNW benthic samples. Any name in this field is ‘accepted’ according to the STE committee. Names can be provisional as needed or ‘informal’ group names used that are approved by the STE committee (the term operational taxonomic unit for these exceptions has been used frequently in the scientific literature). For the purposes of this list ‘monotypic taxa’ are defined as taxa containing only one known species in North America at the time of publication of the versioned list. Final identification names can be used as direct taxon identifiers by data consumers instead of the taxonomic serial number (TSN). Formatting best practices: All taxa at the rank of genus or higher shall have the first letter capitalized. All species names shall be lower case By convention binomial genus/species names have been italicized. This convention is not used here because of the difficulties it presents for data formatting. Provisional taxa and informal group names: Species groups shall have the genus and species name capitalized as to especially note and differentiate the group level from the species level. The word group shall be spelled out and capitalized (i.e. “Group”) Species complexes shall have the genus name capitalized, species name lowercased, and the word complex lowercased. For example -Rhyacophila atrata complex Taxonomic authority, in general, will follow International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) rules. The taxonomic authority shall be formatted so that the author and date of the original description of the taxon shall be listed and separated by a comma (e.g. Hoffmeister, 1843) if a taxon’s binomial has changed the original author(s) shall be listed and parenthesis surrounding the name. For example, Drunella doddsii was originally described as Ephemerella doddsii Needham, 1927, and has since been transferred to the genus Drunella and shall be listed as “(Needham, 1927)”. For provisional names, slashed taxa, or published group names the source of the name (publication) shall be listed with a “sensu” preceding the citation. For example, Rhyacophila Brunnea/Vemna Group (sensu Giersch and Wisseman, 2012). Taxonomic authorities reference and validate the specific name and spelling used in the Final Identification, and also assist tracking of nomenclatural changes through the literature. They are not used for programming purposes. The PNW-STE is intended for use specifically for biomonitoring programs conducted in the states of Oregon and Washington, USA. Because of substantial similarity in the stream habitats and their BMI fauna, it is also appropriate for use in Idaho and montane regions of western Montana. Included on the list are some taxa reported from neighboring states and provinces, as they may be eventually found OR-WA-ID-western MT. Though the focus of this STE is Oregon and Washington, other western Nearctic regions or states could adapt this STE for their use, supplementing it with their local fauna. The PNW-STE lists taxa reported thus far from benthic biomonitoring samples from wadeable streams in OR/WA, and also includes some benthic taxa that can be found in large rivers, transitional waterbodies, and lentic systems. Benthic macroinvertebrates are defined as: Invertebrates substantially associated with the benthos; either the stream sediment surface or interstitial crevices and pores down to about a 10 centimeter depth in bottom sediments. Only larger benthic macroinvertebrate taxa that are effectively retained in the sample after processing with 500 micron mesh nets and sieves (e.g. Tardigrada are excluded). Most planktonic, water column, water surface, terrestrial, and semi-aquatic associated taxa are excluded. By historical precedent some taxa that are not strictly benthic continue to be included in data sets (e.g. Culicidae, Chaoboridae, Corixidae, etc.). These are important components of the fauna in low gradient streams. Macroinvertebrate parasites free of their host are counted and reported (e.g. mermithid Nematoda, Branchiobdellida, etc.). By convention and precedent, colonial invertebrates such as freshwater sponges and bryozoans are not included in data sets. Only Ostracoda (more benthic related) of the microcrustaceans are included in data sets. All Cladocera and Copepoda are excluded, including those more benthic related, such as harpacticoid copepods (not effectively retained on 500 micron mesh anyway) and the family Chydoridae of the Cladocera. Rejected are eggs, egg masses, non-aquatic adults, specimens dead prior to collection, empty shells and cases. More rules on what to include or reject from benthic macroinvertebrate biomonitoring data sets are included under sample processing guidelines (below). Bear in mind, the actual STE list and rules for inclusion in data sets are meant to standardize and dampen “noise” in benthic biomonitoring data sets. Most programs have provisions in their databases for reporting incidental taxa encountered in samples that are routinely excluded from data analysis, but provide useful information on taxa distribution and habitat association, or even relevant auxiliary information for interpreting biological integrity and biodiversity (e.g. empty shells of mussels, a group generally imperiled throughout the PNW, or tailed frog tadpoles). Similarly, benthic specimens that can be reliably identified to a finer taxonomic level can also supply useful information (e.g. mature pupae of most caddisflies can be reliably identified to species). We encourage recording of ancillary records to share with specialists that are interested in particular groups. Also, we encourage archiving and sharing of specimens that may be of value to specialists. Sample Preservation This is a most important part of the journey of a BMI sample through the analysis process that is usually out of the control of the receiving lab. It is the responsibility of every biomonitoring program out there to deliver properly preserved BMI samples. Taxonomic identification accuracy and consistency is quite dependent on the preservation state of specimens. Labs are obligated to reject poorly preserved samples where differential rates of decay significantly compromise what taxa can be recorded and whether accurate abundance estimates can be obtained (e.g. small, soft-bodied taxa may disintegrate before larger, more hard-bodied taxa). Because it is important for field personnel and program managers to understand, we will digress here to explain the difference between a fixative and preservative. Most BMI samples were once “fixed” with formalin or formaldehyde. Fixed/fixative meaning that the highly toxic formalin solution is used in sufficient concentration and amount to halt all microbial activity in a sample, and thus suspend significant decay. Processing labs currently don’t want to deal with formalin preserved samples (a carcinogen). In fact, they need to be notified in advance if toxins such as formalin have been used, or particularly nasty and toxic denaturing compounds have been added to alcohol solutions. Ethyl alcohol (or ethanol, or ETOH) is itself a microbial byproduct. It is a preservative (slows decay down) and not a fixative. Copious amounts of concentrated ethanol are necessary to “preserve” samples and is intended to nearly halt all microbial decay. Properly preserving with ethanol requires using 95-100% ethanol solution. Collected stream sediment plus macroinvertebrates need to be placed on a sieve or into a sieve bucket and thoroughly flushed of fine particulate organic matter (FPOM) and mineral silt that hold lots of stream water. Samples are drained of as much stream water as possible, and then placed in sample jars. A sample jar should never be filled more than half way with a sample, then filled to the top of the jar with 95% ethanol. For samples containing a high proportion of filamentous algae or fine organic matter that retains a lot of water, it is recommended that at the end of the sampling day, the original alcohol be mostly decanted off and replaced with fresh 95-100% ethanol. If grain (pure) ethanol cannot be obtained, then denatured ethanol can be used. Denaturing means that the ethanol manufacturer has added some kind of “stinky” organic solvent to the grain alcohol to keep people from drinking it. Grain alcohol is only available tax free to those with a permit (easily obtained in most cases). Pure grain alcohol can be obtained in liquor stores at exorbitant prices after liquor taxes have been applied, but is a wasted expense. In a pinch, Isopropyl alcohol can be used to preserve samples. However, this is discouraged as it tends to desiccate BMI specimens, making them shrivel, become brittle, and break apart. Other preservation cautions and tips include: Don’t leave jars of unpreserved samples in direct sunlight in the field. Heating and decay of the sample will occur very rapidly. Filling sample jars to the top with ethanol also cuts down on sloshing back-and-forth of the sample during transport that fragments BMI specimens, Store samples out of direct sunlight. Refrigerating samples is not required, though it will slow decay of poorly preserved samples and keep samples out of direct sunlight. 20240613 Sample Inventory and Tracking Upon receipt, samples are inventoried and label information cross-checked against a sample log or chain-of-custody document supplied by the client. Sample metadata supplied by clients should at a minimum include waterbody name, station name or code, replicate number or letter if multiple replicates from a site are to be processed separately, date collected, number of jars the sample is contained in if large samples are split between jars; and total square area sampled. When splitting a single large sample between multiple jars for preservation, the convention is to label jars, e.g. 1 of 3, 2 of 3, and 3 of 3; or 1/3, 2/3, and 3/3. Other metadata for each sample useful for specific taxa records and labeling for museum specimens is State, County, latitude/longitude in decimal degrees, and elevation in meters if known. Clients are notified of sample arrival and condition of the samples the day the lab receives the samples. Suggestions on how to improve packaging and shipping, and initial observations of the preservation state of samples are relayed to clients. Questions about or discrepancies in essential metadata are resolved with the client before proceeding with sample processing. Laboratories may choose to assign their own unique sample identifiers to each sample for their Laboratory Information Management System. 20240613 Sample Preparation Sample collection protocols encourage clients to include as much of the organic and mineral sediment matrix as necessary to insure 99+% of the macroinvertebrates collected make it into the sample jar. That being said, there is much clients can do to clean samples of large debris and mineral sediments stream-side. This reduces the amount of preservative used, saves macroinvertebrates from being macerated by shifting gravel during transport, reduces shipping expenses, and decreases the overall carbon footprint. Further preparation of a sample for subsampling and sorting is best done in the lab, rather than the field. Sample preparation includes: Pour the sample onto a 500 micron sieve (Number 35) and rinse with cold water to remove any volatile, obnoxious, denaturing agents. Transfer the sample to a wash tub and flood with cold water, using the cold water stream from the faucet streams or squirt bottle to rinse off and discard large organic debris and large gravel. Elutriate off the macroinvertebrates plus organic debris from mineral sediments by repeatedly flooding the tub and pouring off. Agitate (vibrate by hand) the partially flooded mineral sediments remaining in the tilted tub to force any mollusks or stone-cased caddisflies to the corner edge of the tub and slide these into the sample now on the sieve. Repeat until no specimens remain in the tub. Discard the mineral material. Rinse the sample in the sieve gently from above with cold water to remove organic and mineral fines. Then place the sieve in the empty tub and partially fill with cold water, being careful that the sample doesn’t spill back into the tub. Agitate the sieve back and forth rapidly. This removes a surprising amount of fines from below that hinder sorting. Transfer the sample to a jar and re-preserve awaiting the next step, or place the sample directly on a subsampling tray for immediate sorting. The purpose of the rinsing from above and below is two-fold; first to remove fines that hinder sorting; and secondly to standardize the rinsing/sieving intensity applied to each sample, removing many of the small invertebrate specimens smaller than 500 microns. Skipping this step greatly influences the resultant data profile of the benthic macroinvertebrate community. For example, small invertebrates in samples with only a little coarse mineral and organic debris are rapidly sieved out; while they may be retained in great numbers in samples with large amounts of fine debris and filamentous algae. Unfortunately, there is not much that can be done for small invertebrates caught in high amounts of filamentous algae. Incompletely sieved samples can result in a community profile dominated by early instar and damaged specimens needing to be left at a coarse taxonomic level by the taxonomist. This is supposed to be Macroinvertebrate biomonitoring. Stressed here for sample preparation is gentle treatment and rinsing of the sample to avoid undo fragmentation of macroinvertebrates. Also, use cold water only. Warm or hot water rapidly turns macroinvertebrate specimens to mush. 20240613 Subsampling BMI biomonitoring samples can contain a few hundred to tens of thousands of macroinvertebrate specimens. The typical 8 square foot composite benthic sample collected and processed with 500 micron mesh, contains well over a thousand specimens. To standardize the data “snapshot” taken of the benthic community, most biomonitoring programs stipulate that a specific target subsample count be sorted from all samples. Most biomonitoring programs in the OR and WA request a 500 organism minimum subsample to be randomly acquired. Many California biomonitoring programs set a 600 organism minimum. A dated subsampling target still in use is a 300 organism count (e.g. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols.). Be aware that it is almost impossible to process samples so that all have exact 500 organism counts. Allowance needs to be made for sorted specimens that may be rejected by the taxonomist, and also for technicians to finish sorting a final fraction from the subsampling device. Subsampling targets are more realistically e.g. 500-600 organisms. After many years of experimenting with random subsampling protocols and devices, consensus from actual practitioners has settled on KISS (keep it simple stupid). A gridded frame of metal mesh nestled in a tub is used to float and randomly disperse a sample as best as possible across the entire mesh surface. The screened interior tray is carefully lifted from the tub to “plate” the evenly dispersed sample onto the screen mesh. The mesh used is usually 250 micron because it provides a smoother surface that reduces mangling of macroinvertebrate specimens when scooping fractions from the tray. In the PNW, the gridded Caton Tray (Caton 1991) is most often used by labs for large samples with copious amounts of sediment matrix. Grids can be of any size, but 30 squares is used most often. Note that the Caton Tray is no longer being manufactured, so some labs have had to fabricate their own version. Squares of the Caton Tray are numbered and a random number generator that can be set to a maximum of e.g. 30 (available online) is used to randomly select a square for sorting. A “cookie cutter” device or modified and sharpened spatula is used to isolate the square chosen and transfer it to a petri dish for sorting. Transferring a square from the Caton Tray is messy, and often mangles some specimens. Sorting technicians continue to select squares for sorting until the target count is achieved, say minimum 550 organisms to allow for some to be rejected by the taxonomist and still meet the 500 organism minimum. The last square sorted can be a partial square, e.g. 1/4, 1/2, or 3/4 so that the target count is not grossly exceeded. Another type of subsampling tray uses a standard 8” diameter, 250 micron mesh soil sieve. This device works better for smaller samples than the Caton Tray. Eight, numbered, pie wedge shaped grids are drawn onto the mesh surface with an indelible marker. The sieve is placed in a shallow tray, flooded with water to about ½ inch above the mesh surface, and the sample randomly dispersed across the mesh surface as above, then the sieve carefully lifted to “plate” the sample out onto the mesh. A random number generator adjusted to 8, is again used to select fractions for sorting. Here, the wedge selected can be carefully isolated with a sharpened spatula and the entire sieve tilted to slide that fraction into a petri dish for sorting. A squeeze bottle with alcohol is then used to rinse off the entire wedge selected into the petri dish. Transfer of fraction contents is more complete using this device, and mangling of specimens is greatly reduced. Sorting technicians always record the total fraction of the sample that has been sorted, so that abundance data can be converted back to a full sample basis, e.g. 5.25/30 squares sorted. The entire sample sediment matrix from which sorting technicians removed the macroinvertebrates may be saved and re-preserved for QA/QC checks on sorting efficacy. 20240613 Sample Sorting Guidelines Most labs can attest that well trained, experienced, and conscientious sample sorting technicians are an invaluable partner to their lab, and it behooves them to make sure they are happy and well rewarded. Sorters remove benthic macroinvertebrates from the sample matrix using dissecting scopes at 6x-30x magnification. Fractions of the sample are placed in petri dishes a little at a time and all BMI’s removed and placed in vials with preservative for identification by taxonomists. The preservative recommended at this stage of sample processing is 80-85% grain ethanol. The end concentration is somewhat reduced with distilled water over the 95-100% used in bulk sample preservation to prevent “burning” of specimens. Highly concentrated ethanol (like Isopropyl) sucks water from specimens, desiccating and shriveling them. Labs choose the number of groups/vials the sorting technician sorts a sample into. Typically, at least the Chironomidae (midges) and perhaps the Oligochaeta (worms) are sorted into their own, clearly labeled vials to be handed off to taxonomic specialists. It is recommended that sorting technicians also maintain a sample sorting log that records all sample label data, total sample fraction sorted, total number of organisms sorted, sorter initials, total time spent sorting, date sorted and any comments on sample the sample matrix. Sorted sample matrix (sediment residue picked clean of BMI’s) may be saved by the sorting technician for QA/QC checks on sorting efficacy. Checks on technicians in training are usually done on every sample. For trusted, experienced sorters, random internal lab checks are sufficient. QA/QC checks on sorting efficacy are performed by a second technician going through the entire sorted sample matrix, or in cases of large matrix samples with a 20% aliguot. The second person enumerates the number of individuals and calculates the sorting efficacy (SE) of the primary technician (Equation 1). The absolute minimum efficacy is 90% of all BMI removed with no systematic errors (e.g. not recognizing and sorting a particular BMI taxa). Some labs maintain a 95% efficacy on most quantitative sample types, but loosen requirements to 90% for more qualitative samples, or ones with particularly harsh sorting conditions. Sorting Efficacy= (A/(A+B))*100 Where: A is the number of organisms recovered in original subsampling process. B is the number of organisms recovered by the secondary examination of the sample residue. It is the prerogative of the client to have all sorted residues returned to them (at a cost), so they may have an independent lab evaluate sorting efficacy. 20240613 Sorting Instructions A surprising panorama of life forms and curious objects are encountered in samples that are not BMI’s. Sorting technicians need training and guidance on what to sort from the samples and what to leave behind. The basic rule is to sort and count all recognized benthic macroinvertebrates. When in doubt whether they are a BMI, then sort, but don’t count, and let the taxonomist make the final call. Some frequently encountered items in benthic samples that are rejected are: Obvious terrestrial invertebrates. Aphids, leaf-hoppers, spiders, collembola, pill bugs and thrips are some of the most frequently encountered terrestrials that fall into streams (always terrestrial). All Hymenoptera adults are terrestrial (ants, bees, wasps and parasitoids). Beetle larvae and adults and misc. dipteran larvae and pupae are the most difficult for a novice to tell whether they are terrestrial or aquatic, so when in doubt sort, but don’t count these. Insect adults with “lacey” wings, whether of terrestrial or aquatic origin do not count, these include EPT orders, Lepidoptera, Megaloptera, Odonata, and Diptera. Aquatic beetles and some hemipterans with hardened elytra covering their hind wings may count as fully aquatic. Some labs want sorters to extract but don’t count selected adults (e.g. EPT taxa) for species level identification for their own records. Larval and pupal molt skins do not count. Look for the split down the ecdysial line of the mid-dorsum of specimens. Cast skins are usually translucent and don’t have any soft tissue adhering to the inside. Invertebrate specimens that were obviously dead before the sample was taken. In well preserved samples they will be the ones that are obviously decayed and/or covered with microbial growth. In poorly preserved samples, it is more difficult to ascertain. Microcrustaceans besides Ostracoda. All Cladocera and Copepoda do not count. Tardigrada, trematodes, rotifers are rejected taxa, though they are unlikely to be encountered because of their small size. Eggs, egg masses or egg cases of invertebrates or vertebrates do not count. Oligochaeta worms partially extruded from egg cases do not count. Water surface invertebrate taxa do not count. Commonly encountered are water striders in the hemipteran families Gerridae, Veliidae, and Mesoveliidae. Adult whirligig beetles (Gyrinidae) do not count. Freshwater sponges and ectoproct colonies and statoblasts do not count, though taxonomists may want to note their presence for incidental purposes. See the STE list for taxa that are swimmers more associated with the water column that are included because they may be partially benthic or included because of historical precedent (e.g. Culicidae, Corixidae, Notonectidae, etc.). Empty Trichoptera (caddisfly), Lepidoptera (moth) cases, or Chironomidae (midge) tubes. Taxonomists may want sorters to include a few of these in the sorted sample to aid identification of larvae or pupae. Empty mollusk shells. Again, taxonomists may want sorters to include a few of these to aid identification of live specimens, or to provide incidental records, e.g. presence of mussel shells (an imperiled group in the PNW). Soft tissue of bivalves often becomes separated from shells in preserved samples, especially the Sphaeriidae. Counts are based on soft tissue (meat) instead of empty shells. Juveniles held in adult brood pouches do not count towards the target subsample, e.g. Amphipoda, Isopoda, and some leeches. Parasites firmly attached or within hosts are not counted. Mermithid nematodes are often seen bursting out of Baetis and Simulium. Unless the nematode specimen is entirely free of the host body, it is not counted. Vertebrates do not count. They are usually released stream-side during sample collections, but some individuals may still be present, e.g. tadpoles, juvenile amphibians, and small fish. Taxonomists may want to note their presence as an incidental observation, as they can provide significant information on the biointegrity and habitat quality of a site (e.g. tadpoles of the tailed frog, Ascaphus). Sorting and sample preparation technicians need to be alert for auxiliary information a client or field crews write on sample labels. For example, many biomonitoring programs now release larger crayfish or mussels back into the stream before preserving a sample, and note the number on the sample label. This information needs to be passed along to the taxonomists for inclusion in data sets, as either added to the random sample, or recorded as incidental data. Fragmented specimens. Do not count misc. detached body parts from specimens. A rule of thumb for larval or pupal insects in moderately to well preserved samples is what counts is at least a head with some of the thorax attached. Loose heads and abdomens may be sorted, but not counted. Ultimately, how to handle fragmented specimens is at the discretion of the lab and taxonomists. Worm counts are based on heads. Taxonomists in each lab need to train sorting technicians on what arthropod fragments may be important for identification, e.g. selection of some mayfly gills or abdominal tips. Sorting technicians need to notify lab managers and taxonomists immediately of very poorly preserved samples, and let them decide if it is worth continuing to sort. To maintain sample processing quality and integrity, it is important to maintain a feedback loop and information exchange between sorting technicians and taxonomists. 20240613 Taxonomic Standard Operating Procedures We recommend that taxonomic data contain these minimum fields obtained during identification: Taxonomic Name- this would be the “Final_Identification” column contained in the PNW-STE. Life Stage- while there is variability still among laboratories in how they are coded, general categories are: Larvae or L, includes the term nymph for hemimetabolous insects, and juvenile for such orders as Hemiptera Adult or A Pupae or P Unknown or U- used for non-insects because the reproductive state of individuals is usually not known Qualifier(s) - This is a narrative statement/category explaining why the individual(s) did not get identified to the taxonomic target suggested in the PNW-STE. Variability exists among labs in how this is coded, but common categories include: Immature Early Instar Damaged Sex- some associations have not been made for all sexes for some taxa. Uniqueness/Distinctness- This is a binary category where the bench taxonomist uses best professional judgement to designate whether individuals are probably a unique taxon in the sample or not, regardless of parent/child relationships. For example, damaged or early instar larvae may be left at a coarser taxonomic level but may or may not be unique depending on other taxa in that group identified to a finer level (but see aggregating below). Or, pupae encountered may only be able to be identified to family and designated not unique, if there are one or more genera of that family present in the larval form. Non-unique taxa are counted towards the total abundance and assigned traits for various metrics, but are not counted towards total or group taxa richness. How this is coded currently varies among reporting labs. Comments: Comments can be longer narratives that help support the above data items while retaining a harmonized nomenclature. 20240613 Aggregating Data or Not The term “aggregating” taxa counts is in common usage with those familiar with biomonitoring programs in the PNW. The word choice for what it refers to is unfortunate, but regardless it refers to whether the taxonomist uses best professional judgement to assign early instar or damaged larvae to a pair of closely related taxa found in the sample that have been identified to a finer taxonomic level based on definitive and observable morphological characters. For example; the hydropsychid genera Cheumatopsyche and Hydropsyche often co-occur in samples and often in large numbers. Many early instar and damaged larvae cannot be positively identified to either genus by the diagnostic characters, but the probability is very high that they indeed are one or the other, and not a third or fourth genus present. Not aggregating ID’s and data leads to counts such as: Cheumatopsyche L 10 unique Hydropsyche L 20 unique Hydropsychidae L 60 not unique early instar Aggregating the data utilizes the proportion of specimens identified to genus to assign the early instar larvae to either genus. Thus: Cheumatopsyche L 30 unique Hydropsyche L 60 unique One problem here is different taxonomists are more or less comfortable in the initial assignment of specimens to genus. Often, experience and gestalt can be used to assign many early instar to either genus reliably. The different choices here do impact some metric values and other forms of data analysis, often considerably. Though the Hydropsychidae-not unique are not counted towards taxa richness metrics, they do impact such metrics as diversity indices (e.g. % 3 dominant taxa, or Shannon-Wiener Index), and metrics where traits differ between the genera and family. For example Cheumatopsyche is a BCG attribute 5 taxon, while Hydropsyche and Hydropsychidae are BCG attribute 4. Results of multivariate analysis is also effected. Some commonly encountered co-occurring sister taxa in PNW benthic biomonitoring samples are Cheumatopsyche/Hydropsyche, Baetis tricaudatus complex/Baetis bicaudatus complex, and Heterlimnius corpulentus/Optioservus larvae. All of these pairs differ considerably in some assigned traits. The authors advocate for allowing the taxonomists to aggregate data, particularly for common taxa pairs that are abundant in samples. Assigning not unique status to rarer taxa has little impact on the results of data analysis. 20240613 Quality Control of Taxonomy Producing consistent and accurate taxonomic data, first depends on individual taxonomists maintaining curiosity, having openness to continuing education, and a willingness to seek second opinions and also share their own. If individual taxonomists or individual labs remain isolated, with no cross-pollination of experience, the data produced will inexorably diverge over time. Developing this STE is one component of sharing knowledge and experience. In-person taxonomic workshops are another. Attendance at these workshops has declined in recent years, mainly due to the cost of travel and taking time off from paid work. Hopefully, information gaps can be closed and new taxonomic information disseminated digitally at the PNAMP web site. Beyond that, labs and individuals currently operating in the PNW that process benthic biomonitoring samples have a good track record of maintaining open lines of communication between taxonomists. Formal QA/QC checks on taxonomy are often required by benthic biomonitoring program managers. Specifications on how this is done has varied across the years and North American programs. It can be as simple as requesting a reference collection of all taxa identified to be checked by a second taxonomist (internally within a lab, or externally by an independent lab). Or it can be as time consuming as having taxonomists archive each individual taxon identified in a separate, labeled vial for all samples in a project. A subset of project samples is then randomly selected and sent to an outside lab for review. The original lab is blind to what samples might be selected, but the outside lab is not blind to taxa identifications of the original lab. Biomonitoring programs in the PNW have by consensus adopted a QC check protocol on taxonomy that keeps both the original and second taxonomists/labs blind to how each identified and enumerated a sample. After completing identification of sorted samples by taxonomist/lab A, all project samples are archived, usually in several vials, e.g. general taxa, Chironomidae, and Oligochaeta. The client or program manager selects a subset of project samples (often budgeted for 10% of the project sample set), notifies lab A of the samples elected and who has been chosen to be lab B for an independent check. Lab A sends the samples selected to lab B, and the data for those samples to the client. Lab B sends the data they produce from the QC samples to the client. The client either assesses data comparability, or requests lab A or B to perform this service. Remember this is not free, all these steps have to be budgeted by the client and labs participating. This QC check on taxonomy is first a learning process for the taxonomists involved. After both labs submit their data to the client, they can then see where specific identifications differed, and how unique and not unique taxa were handled. Adjustments in identification and enumeration can then be made for the entire project dataset. The second aspect of the QC check addresses how comparable the data is between labs A & B. Two measures of precision are commonly used to evaluate taxonomic data quality, Percent Difference in Enumeration (PDE) and Percent Taxonomic Difference(PTD) (Stribling et al., 2008, 2003). Analyst bias can also be addressed by calculating the Percent Taxonomic Completeness (Stribling et al., 2008). Sample taxa lists and counts are compared and metrics calculated using the equations below. Measurement quality objectives for PTD, PDE and PTCabsolute difference are typically 85%, 5%, and 10%, respectively, though program specific goals may dictate setting different targets. Any quality control should be viewed as a means to improve precision overtime and not just achieve minimal standards. 20240613 Data Deliverables Databases and formats for data entry are unique among nearly every producer and consumer of benthic biomonitoring data in the PNW. We propose the following fields be included in taxonomic data files that intend to follow the PNW-STE for benthic biomonitoring samples. Developing a uniform data reporting and coding format for biomonitoring programs is bridge yet to be crossed in the PNW, and one that could be next explored. The involvement of all major producers and users of biomonitoring data in the PNW is encouraged. Unilateral decisions invite push-back and are usually counterproductive. Sample metadata provided by the client (essential to have on chain of custody forms or sample logs) is used in sample identifier columns in data files: Lab Sample ID-unique laboratory generated ID if used by a lab to track samples Client Sample ID- unique client generated ID if used by client Waterbody name Site or station descriptor, if applicable Date sample collected Total square area sampled so a conversion factor for adjusting taxa abundances to a standard 1 square meter basis can be calculated by the lab; e.g. 1.345 for an 8 square foot composite sample Auxiliary information about the project and sites that that we highly encourage the client to share with the processing lab is: Sampling protocol used; e.g. targeted riffle sample, 8 square foot composite, or reach wide transect method, 8 square foot composite Latitude and longitude in decimal degrees is very helpful and also serves as an additional unique ID for a site State and county where the site resides is minimal information required for museum and published distributional records Elevation in meters, river basin, subbasin, maps of sites if readily available Minimal data fields supplied by sample processing labs are: Taxon (Final_Identification) Abundance or count for each taxon Life stage (Larvae, Pupae, or Adult for insects, and Unknown for non-insects; or L,P,A, and U) Proportion of sample sorted: some labs use two columns, one for the number of squares sorted and the second for the total number of squares, e.g. 3 of 30 squares sorted. Other labs supply the already calculated multiplier in a single column needed to adjust abundances to a full sample basis, e.g. X10 for 3 of 30 squares sorted. Unique taxon in sample? Yes or No, or True or False Incidental taxa? Yes or No, or True or False. For taxa information to be incorporated into databases for other purposes, but not used to generate sample metrics, indices, etc. Comments, any narrative needed to explain a particular identification Processing labs may also be asked to supply quality control statistics, the extent of which is negotiated between the processing lab and client. 20240613 PNW benthic macroinvertebrate STE list 20231218 (1).csv Comma Separated Value (CSV) file containing data. Producer Defined Final_Identification The scientific name of the benthic macroinvertebrate organism Producer Defined The final identification field contains only current names of taxa expected to be reported in Pacific Northwest benthic samples. Any name in this field is ‘accepted’ according to the STE committee. Names can be provisional as needed or ‘informal’ group names used that are approved by the STE committee (the term operational taxonomic unit for these exceptions has been used frequently in the scientific literature). For the purposes of this list ‘monotypic taxa’ are defined as taxa containing only one known species in North America at the time of publication of the versioned list. Final identification names can be used as direct taxon identifiers by data consumers instead of the taxonomic serial number (TSN). Taxonomic_Authority The author and date of the original description of the taxon Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined The Taxonomic Authority field will follow International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) rules. The taxonomic authority shall be formatted so that the author and date of the original description of the taxon shall be listed and separated by a comma (e.g. Hoffmeister, 1843) if a taxon’s binomial has changed the original author(s) shall be listed and parenthesis surrounding the name. For example, Drunella doddsii was originally described as Ephemerella doddsii Needham, 1927, and has since been transferred to the genus Drunella and shall be listed as “(Needham, 1927)”. For provisional names, slashed taxa, or published group names the source of the name (publication) shall be listed with a “sensu” preceding the citation. For example, Rhyacophila Brunnea/Vemna Group (sensu Giersch and Wisseman, 2012). Taxonomic authorities reference and validate the specific name and spelling used in the Final Identification, and also assist tracking of nomenclatural changes through the literature. STE_STATUS_Adult A categorical variable to delineate the expected taxa targets "Adults", and targets for those individuals that are too damaged or immature (D/I) to achieve target Producer Defined NA No Data Producer defined TRUE TRUE indicates that the taxon name in the Final_ Identification column is the target taxonomic level Producer defined D/I D/I indicates accepted coarser level identifications for individuals too damaged or too immature to achieve the desired taxonomic target Producer defined STE_STATUS_Larva A categorical variable to delineate the expected taxa targets "Larva", and targets for those individuals that are too damaged or immature (D/I) to achieve target Producer Defined NA No Data Producer defined TRUE TRUE indicates that the taxon name in the Final_ Identification column is the target taxonomic level Producer defined D/I D/I indicates accepted coarser level identifications for individuals too damaged or too immature to achieve the desired taxonomic Producer defined FALSE False indicates that the taxon name in the Final_ Identification column is not the target taxonomic level Producer defined STE_STATUS_Pupa A categorical variable to delineate the expected taxa targets "Pupa", and targets for those individuals that are too damaged or immature (D/I) to achieve target Producer Defined NA No Data Producer defined D/I D/I indicates accepted coarser level identifications for individuals too damaged or too immature to achieve the desired taxonomic Producer defined TRUE TRUE indicates that the taxon name in the Final_ Identification column is the target taxonomic level Producer defined TSN A Taxonomic Serial Number assigned by the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS), a program administered by the U.S. federal government to assign a unique serial number to all officially described life forms on earth Producer Defined TSN is a Taxonomic Serial Number assigned by the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS), a program administered by the U.S. federal government to assign a unique serial number to all officially described life forms on earth. Though good intentioned, this program is underfunded, understaffed and years behind in processing taxonomic literature and nomenclature updates. Many taxa found on this PNW STE list have yet to be assigned a TSN. Final Identification names and taxonomic hierarchy on the PNW STE list is generally current through 2023, while ITIS listings may be years behind. Some agency biomonitoring programs and databases utilize the TSN in programming for data analysis. We suggest they consider using the Final Identification name directly instead of the TSN, as a central purpose of this STE is to bring order to the chaos in scientific names used historically in BMI data sets. Identification_Literature Short-hand literature citations Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined Identification_Literature: are short-hand literature citations that should be consulted by taxonomists to identify BMI specimens to the target taxonomic levels. Citations are not necessarily listed in chronological order or order of importance, and multiple citations are separated by a semicolon. Full citations are found in the document PNAMP PNW benthic macroinvertebrate STE version 2.0 citations posted at the PNAMP web site. Common_Translations A list of scientific names now considered to be junior synonyms and/or common mis-identifications of the name provided in the Final Identification Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined Common_Translations: is a list of scientific names, separated by a semicolon, now considered to be junior synonyms of the name provided in the Final Identification; in other words incorrect, discontinued names that have been “sunk”. For example the current Final Identification may be Rhyacophila Brunnea/Venma Groups, but previously used names in historic data sets may be Rhyacophila acropedes group, Rhyacophila brunnea group, Rhyacophila acropedes, Rhyacophila brunnea, Rhyacophila acropedes/vao, etc. Common mis-identifications are also listed. Common translations are particularly useful for data consumers trying to harmonize historic data sets. Comments Narrative comments regarding each taxon Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined This field contains narrative comments regarding each taxon, and can range from cautionary notes on ID, to taxa distribution, habitat association, and occurrence in benthic biomonitoring samples from the PNW to date. Provisional taxa status are also explained here. Comments are text based and not limited on size. Kingdom Kingdom is the second highest taxonomic rank below Domain. Kingdoms are divided into smaller groups called phyla. Producer Defined Animalia A biological kingdom that consists of multicellular, eukaryotic organisms Producer defined Phylum A level of classification, or taxonomic rank, that is below kingdom and above class Producer Defined Annelida The annelids also known as the segmented worms, are animals that comprise the phylum Annelida. The phylum contains over 22,000 extant species, including ragworms, earthworms, and leeches. Producer defined Arthropoda Arthropods are invertebrates in the phylum Arthropoda. They possess an exoskeleton with a cuticle made of chitin, often mineralised with calcium carbonate, a body with differentiated (metameric) segments, and paired jointed appendages. Producer defined Bryozoa Bryozoa are a phylum of simple, aquatic invertebrate animals, nearly all living in sedentary colonies. Typically about 0.5 millimetres (1⁄64 in) long, they have a special feeding structure called a lophophore, a "crown" of tentacles used for filter feeding. Producer defined Cnidaria Cnidaria is a phylum containing over 11,000 species of aquatic invertebrates found both in freshwater and marine environments, including jellyfish, hydroids, sea anemones, corals and some of the smallest marine parasites. Their distinguishing features are an uncentralized nervous system distributed throughout a gelatinous body and the presence of cnidocytes or cnidoblasts, specialized cells with ejectable flagella used mainly for envenomation and capturing prey. Their bodies consist of mesoglea, a non-living, jelly-like substance, sandwiched between two layers of epithelium that are typically one cell thick. Producer defined Mollusca Mollusca is a phylum of protostomic invertebrate animals, whose members are known as molluscs. The four most universal features defining modern molluscs are a soft body composed almost entirely of muscle, a mantle with a significant cavity used for breathing and excretion, the presence of a radula (except for bivalves), and the structure of the nervous system. Producer defined Nemata The nematodes commonly known as roundworms or eelworms constitute the phylum Nematoda. Species in the phylum inhabit a broad range of environments. Most species are free-living, feeding on microorganisms, but many are parasitic. Producer defined Nematomorpha Nematomorpha (sometimes called Gordiacea, and commonly known as horsehair worms, hairsnakes, or Gordian worms) are a phylum of parasitoid animals superficially similar to nematode worms in morphology, hence the name. Most species range in size from 50 to 100 millimetres (2.0 to 3.9 in), reaching 2 metres (79 in) in extreme cases, and 1 to 3 millimetres (0.039 to 0.118 in) in diameter. Producer defined Nemertea Nemertea is a phylum of animals also known as ribbon worms or proboscis worms, consisting of about 1300 known species. Most ribbon worms are very slim, usually only a few millimeters wide, although a few have relatively short but wide bodies. Producer defined Platyhelminthes Platyhelminthes is a phylum of relatively simple bilaterian, unsegmented, soft-bodied invertebrates commonly called flatworms. Being acoelomates (having no body cavity), and having no specialized circulatory and respiratory organs, they are restricted to having flattened shapes that allow oxygen and nutrients to pass through their bodies by diffusion. Producer defined Porifera Sponges or sea sponges are primarily marine invertebrates of the metazoan phylum Porifera (meaning 'pore bearer') a basal animal clade and a sister taxon of the diploblasts.They are sessile filter feeders that are bound to the seabed. Producer defined Tardigrada Tardigrades known colloquially as water bears or moss piglets, are a phylum of eight-legged segmented micro-animals. Producer defined Subphylum In zoological nomenclature, a subphylum is a taxonomic rank below the rank of phylum. Not all fauna phyla are divided into subphyla. Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined Chelicerata The subphylum Chelicerata constitutes one of the major subdivisions of the phylum Arthropoda. Chelicerates include the sea spiders, horseshoe crabs, and arachnids (including harvestmen, scorpions, spiders, solifuges, ticks, an)d mites, among many others) Producer defined Crustacea Crustaceans are invertebrate animals that constitute one group of arthropods that are traditionally a part of the subphylum Crustacea a large, diverse group of mainly aquatic arthropods including decapods (shrimps, prawns, crabs, lobsters and crayfish), seed shrimp, branchiopods, fish lice, krill, remipedes, isopods, barnacles, copepods, opossum shrimps, amphipods and mantis shrimp. Producer defined Hexapoda The subphylum Hexapoda or hexapods comprises the largest clade of arthropods and includes most of the extant arthropod species. It includes the crown group class Insecta (true insects), as well as the much smaller clade Entognatha, which includes three classes of wingless arthropods that were once considered insects: Collembola (springtails), Protura (coneheads) and Diplura (two-pronged bristletails). Producer defined Class In biological classification, class is a taxonomic rank between phylum and order. Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined Aphanoneura The Aphanoneura are a class of Annelida, with an equivocal relationship with clitellates (oligochaetes and leeches) and no clear affiliation with any of the traditional polychaete groups Producer defined Clitellata The Clitellata are a class of annelid worms, characterized by having a clitellum – the 'collar' that forms a reproductive cocoon during part of their life cycles. Producer defined Polychaeta Polychaeta is a paraphyletic class of generally marine annelid worms, commonly called bristle worms or polychaetes. Each body segment has a pair of fleshy protrusions called parapodia that bear many bristles, called chaetae, which are made of chitin. Producer defined Arachnida Arachnids are arthropods in the class Arachnida of the subphylum Chelicerata. Adult arachnids have eight legs attached to the cephalothorax. Producer defined Branchiopoda Branchiopoda, from Ancient Greek (bránkhia), meaning "gill", and (poús), meaning "foot", is a class of crustaceans. It comprises fairy shrimp, clam shrimp, Diplostraca (or Cladocera), Notostraca, the Devonian Lepidocaris and possibly the Cambrian Rehbachiella. They are mostly small, freshwater animals that feed on plankton and detritus. Producer defined Malacostraca Malacostraca is the second largest of the six classes of pancrustaceans behind insects. Its members, the malacostracans, display a great diversity of body forms and include crabs, lobsters, spiny lobsters, crayfish, shrimp, krill, prawns, isopods, amphipods, and mantis shrimp. They are segmented animals, united by a common body plan comprising 20 body segments (rarely 21), and divided into a head, thorax, and abdomen. Producer defined Maxillopoda Maxillopoda is a diverse class of crustaceans which includes the barnacles, copepods and a number of related animals. Maxillopodans are mostly small,including the smallest known arthropod, Stygotantulus stocki. They often have short bodies, with the abdomen reduced in size, and generally lacking any appendages Producer defined Ostracoda Ostracods, are a class of the Crustacea (class Ostracoda), sometimes known as seed shrimp. Some 33,000 species have been identified. They are small crustaceans, typically around 1 mm (0.04 in) in size, but varying from 0.2 to 32 mm (0.0079 to 1.3 in), the latter in the case of the marine Gigantocypris. In most cases, their bodies are flattened from side to side and protected by a bivalve-like valve or "shell" made of chitin, and often calcium carbonate. Producer defined Insecta Insects are hexapod invertebrates of the class Insecta. They are the largest group within the arthropod phylum. Insects have a chitinous exoskeleton, a three-part body (head, thorax and abdomen), three pairs of jointed legs, compound eyes, and a pair of antennae. Producer defined Hydrozoa Hydrozoa is a taxonomic class of individually very small, predatory animals, some solitary and some colonial, most of which inhabit saline water. Producer defined Bivalvia Bivalvia or bivalves is a class of aquatic molluscs (marine and freshwater) that have laterally compressed soft bodies enclosed by a calcified exoskeleton consisting of a hinged pair of half-shells known as valves. Producer defined Gastropoda Gastropods, commonly known as slugs and snails, belong to a large taxonomic class of invertebrates within the phylum Mollusca called Gastropoda Producer defined Hoplonemertea Hoplonemertea is a class of ribbon worms.It contains two orders: Monostilifera, Polystilifera. The proboscis is armed with one or more stylets; intestine straight, mostly with paired lateral diverticula; no posterior ventral sucker. Producer defined Acentrosomata A class of flatworms (specifically, members of the phylum Platyhelminthes) that lack centrosomes, which are crucial organelles involved in cell division Producer defined Subclass In zoological nomenclature, a subclass is a taxonomic rank below the rank of class. Not all fauna classes are divided into subclass . Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined Scolecida Scolecida is an infraclass of polychaete worms. Scolecids are mostly unselective deposit feeders on marine detritus Producer defined Hirudinea Leeches and other segmented parasitic or predatory worms comprise the subclass Hirudinea within the phylum Annelida Producer defined Oligochaeta Oligochaeta is a subclass of soft-bodied animals in the phylum Annelida, which is made up of many types of aquatic and terrestrial worms, including all of the various earthworms Producer defined Lumbriculata Lumbriculata is a subclass of Clitellata and comprise of parasitic leeches Producer defined Errantia Errantia is a diverse group of marine polychaete worms in the phylum Annelida. Traditionally a subclass of the paraphyletic class Polychaeta, it is currently regarded as a monophyletic group within the larger Pleistoannelida, composed of Errantia and Sedentaria Producer defined Sedentaria Sedentaria is a diverse clade of annelid worms. It is traditionally treated as a subclass of the paraphyletic class Polychaeta, but it is also a monophyletic group uniting several polychaetes and the monophyletic class Clitellata. It is the sister group of Errantia Producer defined Acari Mites are small arachnids (eight-legged arthropods). Acari or mites span two large orders of arachnids, the Acariformes and the Parasitiformes, which were historically grouped in the subclass Acari Producer defined Copepoda Copepods are assigned to the class Copepoda within the superclass Multicrustacea in the subphylum Crustacea. Producer defined Eumalacastraca Eumalacostraca is a subclass of crustaceans, containing almost all living malacostracans, or about 40,000 described species. The remaining subclasses are the Phyllocarida and possibly the Hoplocarida. Eumalacostracans have 19 segments (5 cephalic, 8 thoracic and 6 abdominal) Producer defined Eumalacostraca Eumalacostraca is a subclass of crustaceans, containing almost all living malacostracans, or about 40,000 described species. The remaining subclasses are the Phyllocarida and possibly the Hoplocarida. Eumalacostracans have 19 segments (5 cephalic, 8 thoracic and 6 abdominal) Producer defined Branchiura Branchiura were once thought to be copepods but are now recognised as a separate subclass in the superclass Oligostraca. Branchiurans have a flattened, oval body, which is almost entirely covered by a broad, oval carapace, four thoracic segments each with a pair of swimming legs, a pair of anterior compound eyes, and an unsegmented abdomen without appendages which ends in paired abdominal lobes separated by the medial anal cleft Producer defined Pterygota Pterygota is a subclass of insects that includes all winged insects and groups who lost them secondarily. Pterygota group comprises 99.9% of all insects Producer defined Hydroidolina Hydroidolina is a subclass of Hydrozoa and makes up 90% of the class Producer defined Autobranchia Autobranchia is a bivalve subclass with a Midventrally fused mantle and tubiform to barrel-shaped shell; head with tubular snout and 2 bunches of slender tentacles Producer defined Heterodonta Heterodonta is a bivalve subclasswith a complex hinge comprised of relatively small numbers of different types of teeth and the shell is never nacreous Producer defined Palaeoheterodonta Palaeoheterodonta is a subterclass of bivalve molluscs. It contains the extant orders Unionida (freshwater mussels) and Trigoniida. They are distinguished by having the two halves of the shell be of equal size and shape, but by having the hinge teeth be in a single row, rather than separated into two groups Producer defined Prosobranchia Prosobranchia was a large taxonomic subclass of sea snails, land snails and freshwater snails Producer defined Truncatelloidea Truncatelloidea is a subclass of snails, gastropod mollusks in the clade Caenogastropoda Producer defined Adiaphanida Adiaphanida are a taxonomic infraclass within the class Neoophora that includes parasitic flatworms Producer defined Order Order is one of the eight major hierarchical taxonomic ranks in Linnaean taxonomy. It is classified between family and class. Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined In biological classification, the order is a taxonomic rank used in the classification of organisms and recognized by the nomenclature codes. The name of an order is usually written with a capital letter. Suborder A taxonomic category that ranks below order and above family Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined The taxonomic names of a group of related animals, more closely related than an order but less similar than a family. Superfamily In taxonomy, a superfamily is a category of related families within an order or suborder. Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined The taxonomic names of a group of related animals, more closely related than a suborder but less similar than a family. Family Family is one of the eight major hierarchical taxonomic ranks in Linnaean taxonomy. It is classified between order and genus Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined In biological classification, the family is a taxonomic rank used in the classification of organisms and recognized by the nomenclature codes.The delineation of what constitutes a family—or whether a described family should be acknowledged—is established and decided upon by active taxonomists. Subfamily A taxonomic category that ranks below Family but above Genus Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined In biological classification, a subfamily is an auxiliary (intermediate) taxonomic rank, next below family but more inclusive than genus. Standard nomenclature rules end zoological subfamily names with "-inae" Tribe A taxonomic rank above genus but below family and subfamily Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined In biology, a tribe is a taxonomic rank above genus, but below family and subfamily. It is sometimes subdivided into subtribes. By convention, all taxa ranked above species are capitalized, including both tribe and subtribe. In zoology, the standard ending for the name of a zoological tribe is "-ini". Genus group A genus group may be referred to A taxonomic rank below tribe consisting of multiple genuses Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined Deronectina Deronectina is a subtribe to Hydroporini and consists of predacious diving beetles in the family of Dytiscidae Producer defined Micropsectra/Tanytarsus Micropsectra/Tanytarsus are non-biting midges of the family Chironomidae Producer defined Cricotopus/Orthocladius Cricotopus/Orthocladius non-biting midges in the subfamily Orthocladiinae of the bloodworm family Chironomidae Producer defined Thienemannimyia Group The Thienemannimyia Group contains Thienemannimyia is a genus of non-biting midges in the subfamily Tanypodinae of the bloodworm family Chironomidae Producer defined Neoleptophlebia/Paraleptophlebia Neoleptophlebia/Paraleptophlebia is a genus group containing Paraleptophlebia, a genus of mayflies in the family Leptophlebiidae. Producer defined Anafroptilum/Procloeon Anafroptilum/Procloeon is a genus group that contains Procloeon, a genus of small minnow mayflies in the family Baetidae Producer defined Aeshna/Rhionaeschna Aeshna/Rhionaeschna is a genus group containing genuses of dragonflies from the family Aeshnidae. They are also known as blue-eyed darners Producer defined Coenagrion/Enallagma Coenagrion/Enallagma is a genus group containing genuses of damselflies in the family Coenagrionidae, commonly called the Eurasian Bluets Producer defined Neaviperla/Suwallia Neaviperla/Suwallia is a genus group containing genuses of green stoneflies in the family Chloroperlidae Producer defined Kogotus/Rickera Kogotus/Rickera is a genus group containing genuses of Perlodid stoneflies in the family Perlodidae Producer defined Dolophilodes/Sisko Dolophilodes/Sisko is a genus group containing genuses of caddisfly in the Philopotamidae family. Producer defined Genus Genus is a taxonomic rank above species and below family Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined Genus is a taxonomic rank above species and below family as used in the biological classification of living and fossil organisms as well as viruses. In binomial nomenclature, the genus name forms the first part of the binomial species name for each species within the genus. The Genus name is capitalized. The composition of a genus is determined by taxonomists. Subgenus Subgenus is a taxonomic rank directly below genus Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined Catatasina Catatasina refers to a subgenus within the Odontomyia genus of soldier flies, specifically a subgenus of the family Stratiomyidae, also known as marsh flies Producer defined Odontomyia Odontomyia is a genus of soldier flies in the family Stratiomyidae. Producer defined Odontomyiina Odontomyiina is a genus of soldier flies in the family Stratiomyidae. Producer defined Erioptera Erioptera is a genus of crane fly in the family Limoniidae Producer defined Mesocyphona Mesocyphona is a subgenus of limoniid crane flies Producer defined Ormosia Ormosia is a genus of crane flies in the family Limoniidae. There is also a large subgenus within Ormosia called "Ormosia" Producer defined Parormosia Parormosia is a subgenus within the genus Ormosia of flies (family Limoniidae). Ormosia is a genus of craneflies known for its diverse species, and Parormosia is a distinct group within that diversity Producer defined Lurdia The ventral lobes of the spiracular disc of the larvae are hook-like and very distinctive. This subgenus is widespread, but rare, in the PNW in cool-cold montane streams. Producer defined Rhabdomastix Common and widspread in PNW cool-cold montane streams, particularly in sandy substrates. A relatively sensitive taxon. Producer defined (Nostococladius) The subgenus is not monotypic. Multiple species occur in western North America (Post et al. 2023). These are very distinctive larvae mutualistic in Nostic algae. A single larvae eventually matures and pupates in each Nostoc "ear". Nostoc ears are usually at least translucent and late instar larvae and pupa can be readily seen and counted. Larvae often eject from the ear when preserved, so each ear has to be checked to see if it is empty. In ears containing a late instar larvae, there may occasionally be tiny, early instar larvae (< 1 mm long) embedded in the Nostoc. These can be ignored, as they will probably not mature. Cricotopus (Nostococladius) is occasional in PNW biomonitoring samples from streams and rivers thus far; patchily distributed in montane streams; cool and cold water preference; small and mid-order stream preference, but will extend into lower river reaches of cooler rivers; wide range of gradient; mid to high elevation preference. Generally found in cool-cold, oligotrophic, montane streams, but patches of ears may be found in warmer, mesotrophic large streams and small rivers. Generally intolerant of fine sediment and filamentous algal growth promoted by nutrient enrichment that would smother Nostoc ears. Also intolerant of high scour and resorting of sediments during winter rains or spring snow-melt. Producer defined (Symposiocladius) Refers to other larval forms encountered that are not O. (Symposiocladius) annectens or O.(Symposiocladius) lignicola, and to damaged and immature larvae that cannot be placed to species. Producer defined Draeconia Draeconia is a subgenus of Ephemerella and includes E. maculata Producer defined Ephemerella Ephemerella is a subgenus of Ephemerella and includes E.alleni, E. aurivirillii, E. velmae, and the E. excrucians group which are a meddled mess Producer defined Vittapallia This is one of the most common and widespread ephemerellids in western North American streams and rivers. Larvae are often russet colored and have a pale median stripe. Mature larvae have relatively sharp, dorsally projecting tubercles on abdominal terga 2/3 to 8/9. The mesonotum may have very small, dark, excresences on the mesonotum, especially on and between the forewing pads. The maxillary palps are long. Producer defined Nosopus Nosopus is a subgenus found in Lepidostoma in the Astanea Group, Hoodi Group, Spiral Case Group, Unicolor Group Producer defined Pseudosetodes Pseudosetodes is a subgenus found in Oecitis in the Avara Group Producer defined Species_Group In biology, a species group is a group of closely related organisms that are so similar in appearance and other features that the boundaries between them are often unclear. The taxa in the complex may be able to hybridize readily with each other, further blurring any distinctions. Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined Species groups are ubiquitous and are identified by the rigorous study of differences between individual species that uses minute morphological details, tests of reproductive isolation, or DNA-based methods, such as molecular phylogenetics and DNA barcoding. The existence of extremely similar species may cause local and global species diversity to be underestimated. Species_subgroup A species subgroup is a classification within a larger group of species, often used to categorize related populations or species that share some characteristics. It's a rank below the species level and is used when there are variations within a species that warrant further distinction Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined nan nan Species_complex In biology, a species complex is a group of closely related organisms that are so similar in appearance and other features that the boundaries between them are often unclear. The taxa in the complex may be able to hybridize readily with each other, further blurring any distinctions. Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined albiplumus albiplumus is a species of chironomid fly called Cardiocladius albiplumus Saether, 1969. This species is classified within the order Diptera (flies), family Chironomidae (midges), and genus Cardiocladius Producer defined lignicola lignicola can be commonly found in freshwater and marine environments. Taxonomically, Savoryella lignicola has been referred to several orders (Jones et al. 2016). Recently, Savoryella together with Ascotaiwania, Canalisporium (and its sexual morph Ascothailandia) formed a distinct clade in the Hypocreomycetidae Producer defined Tvetenia tshernovskii Tvetenia tshernovskii is a species of Chironomidae (non-biting midges). It was described by Pankratova in 1968. It is sometimes considered a synonym of Tvetenia vitracies. Tvetenia tshernovskii is classified under the subgenus Heynotendipes, which replaces the older subgeneric name Trichotendipes Producer defined flavistriga complex Small minnow mayfly which could be either Baetis flavistriga or Baetis phoebus in the family Baetidae Producer defined intercalaris complex Baetis intercalaris a small minnow mayfly and similar Baetis in the family Baetidae Producer defined adonis complex adonis is a species of Baetis from the family of Baetidae and part of the Rhodani group Producer defined bicaudatus complex bicaudatus is thought to be a species complex of the genus Baetis with multiple types that haven't been fully sorted out yet Producer defined magnus complex magnus is a species complex of Baetis from the family of Baetidae and part of the Rhodani group Producer defined piscatoris complex piscatoris is a species complex of Baetis from the family of Baetidae and part of the Rhodani group Producer defined tricaudatus complex tricaudatus is a species complex of Baetis from the family of Baetidae and part of the Rhodani group Producer defined vernus complex vernus is a species complex of Baetis from the family of Baetidae and part of the Vernus group Producer defined nigrisoma/siletz "nigrisoma/siletz" to two distinct species of the genus Peltoperlidae (a family of stoneflies) Producer defined americanus complex This complex of species is Holarctic in distribution, and very widespread and common in North America. Mitochondrial DNA CO1 barcoding and some morphologiacl differences Producer defined numerosus complex Brachycentrus numerosus is on the US PNW watch list. This widespread North American species is not positively known from the US PNW yet, but there are indications that it occurs in British Columbia. Flint (1984) indicates that Brachycentrus numerosus may be a complex of closely related species that are very difficult to separate. The larval head is distinctively banded and spotted. Producer defined atrata complex There are 5 species in this North American complex. Since Rhyacophila atrata (an eastern species) has priority, the complex is named after it. In the PNW, the atrata complex consists of 2 broadly distributed putative species, Rhyacophila pellisa and R. valuma; and R. colonus, a rare and patchily distributed species in SW OR and northern CA. Rhyacophila pellisa/valuma is probably a grouping of sister "species " that grades in form from more westward to eastward mountain ranges in the west, with an outlier species in the CA Sierras. The Rhyacophila atrata complex is widespread and common in cool-cold, low to high elevation, mid-order streams in forested basins throughout the PNW. They are relatively sensitive to human disturbance, so are not as common as other Rhyacophila groups in stream biomonitoring samples. Larvae are often early to mid-instar in summer index period biomonitoring samples, making their identification more challenging. The apicolateral spur on the anal proleg and the right mandible with three apical teeth is visible by the 3rd instar. Larvae of this complex are small, with mature larvae only about 7 mm long. Producer defined unimaculata complex There are 2 species in this complex confined to the PNW; Rhyacophila unimaculata known from subalpine springs and small streams in the northern Rockies of MT & BC; and R. unimaculata known from mid to high elevations, cold springs and spring channels in the OR Cascades. Both appear to be rare, patchily distributed, and unlikely to be found in benthic biomonitoring samples from mid-order streams. Larvae for R. unimaculata have been described and used in the Giersch & Wisseman (2012) key. The presumed larvae of R. unipunctata has recently been found, and ambiguously keys to vetina & unimaculata complex. The next version of the key will include this species. Producer defined vetina complex There are two species in this complex, both of whch are very rare and patchily distributed in alpine/subalpine small streams and springs. Rhyacophila belona is in the northern Rockies (AB, BC, MT, WY). R. vetina is known from about a dozen high elevation sites in the Cascade Mountains from BC south to OR from adults only. Note that key step 21A in uncorrected versions of the Giersch and Wisseman (2012) key mistakenly goes to couplet 23, and not couplet 22 as it should. Rhyacophila narvae larvae without a well developed 2-tone head color pattern pattern can be mistaken for this complex. Producer defined Species A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms in which any two individuals of the appropriate sexes or mating types can produce fertile offspring, typically by sexual reproduction. It is the basic unit of classification and a taxonomic rank of an organism, as well as a unit of biodiversity. Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined All species are given a two-part name, a "binomial". The first part of a binomial is the genus to which the species belongs. The second part is called the specific name or the specific epithet (this column consists of just the2nd part - the specific name) Unnamed: 27 This is an empty column that is not part of the dataset Producer Defined << empty cell >> No Data Producer defined nan nan GS ScienceBase U.S. Geological Survey mailing address

Denver Federal Center, Building 810, Mail Stop 302

Denver CO 80225 United States 1-888-275-8747 sciencebase@usgs.gov Unless otherwise stated, all data, metadata and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. Although these data and associated metadata have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data for other purposes, nor on all computer systems, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. Digital Data https://doi.org/10.5066/P14RZNGQ None 20250527 FRESC Science Data Coordinator USGS mailing

777 NW 9th St., Suite 400

Corvallis Oregon 97330 USA 541-750-1030 fresc_outreach@usgs.gov FGDC Biological Data Profile of the Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata FGDC-STD-001.1-1999