The aquatic macroinvertebrate fauna in the Grampians National Park

7 Pages·1997·0.38 MB·English

by  T. J. Doeg

Memoirs ofthe Museum ofVictoria 56(2):467-473 (1997) 28 February 1997
https://doi.org/10.24199/j.mmv.1997.56.40
A CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT OF THE AQUATIC MACROINVERTEBRATE FAUNA
IN THE GRAMPIANS NATIONAL PARK
Doeg
T.J.
Freshwater Ecology Section, Flora and Fauna Branch, Department ofNatural Resources and Environment.
Vic. 3001. Australia
Abstract
Doeg,T.J., 1997. Aconservationassessmentoftheaquaticmacroinvertebrate faunainthe
Grampians National Park. Memoirs oftheMuseum ofVictoria 56: 467-473.
A total of236 aquatic macroinvertebrate taxa were identified at 32 riverine sites in the
Grampians National Park. At least 23 ofthe taxa may represent species restricted to the
park.ThegenusAustrophlebioides(Ephemeroptera, Leptophlebiidae)was missingfrom all
sites surveyed, despite suitable habitat. Ordination indicated three distinct groups ofsites
within the park, primarily based on the stream-bed substrate type. Standard conservation
measures were attempted (diversity, uniqueness, rarity, etc) with limited success. Twenty
sites showed some characteristics ofconservation significance. One site was shown to be
more diverse than all others, sixsites had more than threeendemic species present, seven
sites had the only record ofan endemic species, the Mackenzie River was shown to be a
uniquearea inthepark(with an associateddistinctfauna)andothersitesscored highlyon
statistical conservation indices. None ofthe conservation measures used could, by them-
selves, identify all the significant sites within the park.
Introduction edge of the taxonomy and distribution of
aquatic macroinvertebrates is not sufficiently
Traditional methods of assessing the conser- detailed in Victoriato allow correct assignment
vation status ofriverine sites revolve primarily of a conservation status (e.g., Doeg and Reed,
around the lack ofhuman disturbance at a par- 1995). Yen and Butcher (1994) suggest that
ticular site or within a catchment (Mitchell, single species conservation may be inappropri-
1990) or are based on the presence of species ate for the majority of invertebrates and that
withhighconservationstatus(e.g., CNR, 1995). other techniques or criteria should be applied.
However, assessments of the 'naturalness' of These include habitat-based or community-
individualsitesorcatchmentsdonotnecessarily based approaches.
translate immediately to the equivalent signifi- A number of alternative methods have been
cancefortheinvertebratecommunity. Meredith suggestedfortheseotherapproaches.Thispaper
et al. (1989) evaluated stream segments in East evaluatessomeofthesemethods,usingdatacol-
Gippsland according to the presence of lected as part of a National Estate survey of
impoundments, in-stream works, pollution streams in the Grampians National Park.
sources, reading, and the percentage oftimber
harvestingandnon-nativevegetation. However, Methods
the impact ofthese disturbances is site depend-
ant and such a simplistic evaluation may not Atotalof60 sites was sampled(Fig. 1)through-
reflect the impact onthe fauna. In fact, patterns outtheGrampiansNationalParkfromallmajor
in the aquatic macroinvertebrate fauna of the drainage areas. Sites ranged from wide veg-
area (derived from multivariate groupings) do etation-choked channels, small slow-flowing
not correspond to the on-ground patterns silty tributaries, faster flowing sand to cobble
derived from 'naturalness' evaluation (T. Doeg, bed streams to steep boulder dominated rivers.
Freshwater Ecology Section, unpublished cAotlleeacctehdsfitreo,mstthaendmaaridinsecdhankincekl ussaimnpgleasn wFeBrAe
data).
Where individual species are used to identify net (150 urn mesh net). Macroinvertebrates
sites of significance, the identification of the were picked from a one-tenth subsample and
species of conservation significance is often identified.Thefundingprovidedforthisproject
based on a well established knowledge ofboth allowed only 32 sites to be completed (Fig. 1).
thetaxonomyand distributionofcertaingroups Samples from the remaining sites are currently
offlora and fauna (e.g., fish). However, knowl- beingprocessedand afullanalysisoftheresults,
467
DOEG
468 T.J.
vertebratesi—nconservationanalysisfallintofive
main types diversity, presence of rare and
Grampians endangered species, presence of local endemic
National species, groupings of sites with distinct com-
VJPark \[ munity compositions, and proposed statistical
tests ofrarity.
Diversitypatterns
Generally, sitesareconsideredtobeofsignifi-
cancebased ondiversity measures iftheyhavea
V large number of species present, or more cor-
f( •,0 a* \ >5 rectly, a higher number ofspecies present than
would be expected. There are insufficient data
on the Victorian fauna to establish (in a formal
sense)theexpectednumberofspeciesatanypar-
ticular site. Current work elsewhere under the
RiverHealth Initiativeisattemptingtoproduce
a predictive model, where the likely compo-
sition and diversity ofa site can be estimated
from a series ofenvironmental variables.
However, diversity measures alone may not
always indicate the true nature of the site.
Numerous examples exist where clearly dis-
turbed sites are not distinguished from undis-
turbedsites, basedsimplyonthenumberoftaxa
present (e.g., Doeg, 1985).
Inan overall sense, the 236taxaoffreshwater
—FsiagmuprleinIg.Msiateps.o1f—thesisttesudpyroacreesassehdodwuirnigngthtehilsocsattuidoyn;omf cmaocmrpoairnevserftaevboruartaebslyrewciotrhdeodtheart itnhteens3i2vessiutre-s
sites sampled but not processed during this veys in Victoria. For example, in East Gipps-
study. land, similar kick samples collected at 48 sites
resultedin269taxa(T. Doeg, unpublisheddata)
while similarordersoftotal diversity havebeen
includingthe speciescollectedwill be presented recorded in the upper Goulburn River (Doeg
elsewhere. 1985), the Thomson River (Doeg et al., 1987),
the Yarra River (Pettigrove 1989) and the
Conservation analysis Latrobe River (Metzeling et al., 1984). Care
The traditional conservation analysis of using should betaken in comparing regional diversity
between surveys due to differences in the distri-
land use characteristics to identify significant
bution ofsite characteristics, samplingmethods
esiltiemsin(aMteermeduicthhoeftthael.G,ra1m98p9i)ansshoNualtdi,onianlPfaacrtk, and taxonomic discrimination, but there is no
fromahighconservationrating.Thepresenceof reason to suspect that the total fauna collected
major reservoirs (Lake Wartook and Moora was any more orless diverse than other aquatic
Moora Reservoir), the extensive networks of sites sampled throughout Victoria.
roads and tracks, historical grazing and timber Thenumberoftaxafoundat eachsite(from 8
harvestingwouldautomaticallyreducethevalue to72)was broad(Fig. 2). The sitewith the high-
of most park streams. Despite this, the LCC estnumberoftaxawasatSite21 onFyansCreek
identified the Victoria Range, Serra Range and on the Grampians Tourist Road (72 taxa). This
the Major Mitchell Plateau as having Remote was substantially higher than any of the other
and Natural attributes worthy of note (LCC, sites, the site with the nearest diversity, also on
Fyans Creek, having only 56 taxa.
1991).
Noprevious attempt has been made to assess Rare, endangeredandendemicspecies
the conservation status of the Grampians in Thepresenceofrareandendangeredspeciesis
terms of the aquatic macroinvertebrate fauna. a valid determinantofhigh conservation status.
Suggestedmethodsofusingfreshwatermacroin- However, the lack ofadequate taxonomic and
MACROINVERTEBRATES IN THE GRAMPIANS NATIONAL PARK 469
distributional knowledge restricts our ability to
identify species that are truly rare or restricted
(Butcher and Doeg, 1995). However, no taxon
Number ofTaxa present on the official lists of rare and
endangered species (CNR, 1995) was located in
o o o c *o». Wol 0o\ -oJ 0o0
this survey. Given the paucity ofsamplingcon-
M39 HI ducted previously in the Grampians, it is not
VR48 surprising that rare or endangered species
llllllllllllll
described from elsewhere in the state were not
G5 IHIIIIIIIIIIIIHII
located there.
G9
IlllllllliilHUIIIIII The majority of species collected have been
Gil lllllllllllllllllllllll recorded in other work in other places in Vic-
G7 toria. Significantly, 23 of the taxa (10% of the
G4 lllllllllllllllllllllllllllll fauna) were identified as either unrecorded in
G2 llllllllllllllllllllllllllllll recognised voucher collections, or as distinct
G10 from a known ordescribed species, and may be
new species restricted to the Grampians (herein
F26 JIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUII
G12 1 Illllll ccaaltleegdor'yendoefmihca'vitnaxga).liAmsitseudchd,itshteryibfuatllioinnstoatnhde
M41
Illlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll could possibly qualify for inclusion in lists of
M44 1lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll rare species. The unique nature of the Gram-
M43 lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll piansbiotarevealed inboth floraand vertebrate
2n2 WR36 llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll II) surveysisthereforealsoreflected inthepresence
ZB F20 lllllllllll!llllll||||||||||||||||| llll II of a large proportion of new and possibly
3 VV28 llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll liIIhi endemic freshwater taxa.
no- VR49 lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll inn Twenty seven of the 32 sites processed con-
WM43G208 lnlilllllll!llllllllllll!lllllllll!lllllllll!llllllllllllllhlllllllll imiiiili1I1I1!1 tn6,auimannbedeurnato-fnlsaeuamscethdtoatnxreiabaeuttnaadresyminoigfcletthsaeixtoeGnlw.eansTehl6,geaRtmiSovisettre
:illl!lllllllllll!!lllllllllllllllll innlllllllllllll on Hines Track. Nine ofthe potential endemic
VR51 l]llll!]lll[lllllli]llllllllllllll[l inn [minimi taxa were located at single sites within the
WR38
iiiiiiiiiiiium|]||[|]|j||||j||l| innllllllllllllllll park.
M45 lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll inn imiiniiiiiii Of particular interest, the major genus of
Gfi iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii mayfly, Austrophlebioides, was absent from any
Gl ofthe sites sampled. Austrophlebioides is com-
F22 IIIIINIIIIIIINIIIIIIIIIINIIIINI iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii mon on rocks in stony upland streams but 'are
W33 not commonly found at lowland sites or sandy
inniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
W29 sites' (Marchant et al., 1994), and are often
reduced in abundance due to the impact of
WR34 mm
iiiii iiiii human disturbance (Doeg, 1985, Doeg and
F25 |||||||||l|||llllipillllllllllllll iiiiillllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Koehn 1994). However, members ofthe genus
F21 lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll iiiii areknownthroughoutVictoriaatalmostallalti-
tudes,andoftenformasignificantcomponentof
the freshwater fauna. Even in some ofthe more
disturbedstreams,suchastheMittaMitta River
in north-east Victoria (Blyth et al., 1984), Aus-
trophlebioides were still located, albeit in
reduced numbers. While it is not unreasonable
forthe genus to be absent from the silt or sand-
basedsites,manyothersiteshadconditionssuit-
able for the taxon (particularly at cobble sites).
Figure2. Numberoftaxarecordedateachsite,sorted Given the number of sites sampled, the genus
efFryreaonnmcselCotrwoeeteshkte;—tfWoolhi—lgohweWisnatg.ncnNaoutcnmhbmReiervnestrs;f:rWGoRm—F—iGg—l.Metn1ewWligit;lhlFirea—fm- sithohualsdnheavveerbbeeeennlporceasteendtifiintwthaesGprreasmepnit.anEsi,theorr
Range; M McKenzie River; VR Victoria some (possibly natural or cyclical) event in the
Range. past has lead to its elimination.
470 T.J. DOEG
Sitegroupings all the remaining sites primarily with a sand or
The use of multivariate analyses can enable pebble component (mainly the Glenelg River,
the identification of distinct groupings of sites and William and Victoria Range sites). Such
that have adistinctive faunawithin a smallgeo- sites are widespread throughout the park.
graphic area, like the Grampians. Classification In general, ordination by Reciprocal Averag-
by TWINSPAN indicated the formation of 4 ing (Fig. 4) reflected the major groupings
distinct groups of sites (Fig. 3). The first div- outlined by the classification, but with little
ision, indicatingthemost distinctgroup(Group discrimination between the mixed substrata
1), separated a group of 7 sites on the Glenelg sites. Significantly,theordinationindicatedthat
River and one site on the McKenzie River the community composition at Site 43 (located
upstream of Wartook Reservoir. Seven of the immediately below a popular tourist complex
Group 1 siteswerethosewithpredominantlysilt with a defective sewage system) was distinct
and/or vegetation substrata. Unusually, Site 12 from the remaining Mackenzie River sites,
(Moora Creek) has a substrate of cobbles and which showed ahigherdegreeofsimilarity. Site
boulders,butanearbyparallelroad,suggestinga 43wasnotclearlydistinctfromtheothersiteson
sedimentation impact. the basis ofdiversity measures alone (a total of
Even though the majority of Group 1 sites 26 taxa compared to 24-43 at the other sites in
were located in the Glenelg River catchment, the group), but had a distinctly disturbed fauna
other sites (that have not been processed yet) dominated by oligochaetes and chironomids.
with similar substrates can be found in other
catchmentsinthepark. Hence,theseparationof
theGroup 1 probablyreflectsthedistributionof
a habitat-type and not a particular area of JSU Q
significance. 5
onTthhee sMeccKoenndzmiaejRoirvdeirvdisoiwonnssterpeaarmatoefdtthheeWsaitre-s 325000 AOFGyleanneslgCrReievker
9 WannonRiver
t2)o.oTkhReesseersvitoeisrwferroemianllaohfitghhegortahdeirensti,tehsi(gGhrfoluopw SAcxo2irse 210500 39H 10 iHO£jWMViiaclctlkoieranimzaiRReaanRniggveeer
stream, generallywith the highest proportion of
100
larger particle sizes (cobbles through to 12
boulders). This division is ofmore significance, 50 £d7a o 41 *-
as while this may also be substrate based, there
o 42
arenosimilarhabitatswithinthepark,andsimi- -50
lar faunal compositions at sites outside the 100 G
McKenzie River catchment are unlikely to be -50 50 100 150 200 250
found. Thus, the McKenzie River downstream Axis1Score
ofLakeWartookmaybeseenasanareaofsome Figure4. ReciprocalAveraging(RA)plotshowingthe
local conservation significance (despite the relationship between sites. Only site numbers for
presence ofthe reservoir upstream). Groups 1 and 2 from the TWINSPAN analysis are
Group 3 contained sites on Fyans Creek and shown.
the Wannon River (substrates composed pri-
marily ofcobbles), with Group 4 comprised of
Rarity measures
While the techniques or measurements
employed to evaluate conservation significance
above are relatively widespread and accepted,
the evaluation offreshwater macroinvertebrate
communities using statistical indices does not
4.5,7,9,10,12,39 appear to have been used for freshwater
41,42,43.44,43 macroinvertebrates in Victoria or Australia.
2t8.,23,46,,386,,1318,,2468,, 20,292,1,302,2,332S, Such indices were developed to enable an
49,51 objectiveassessmentofsitevalues, freefromthe
Group1 drawbacks of more subjective value
Figure 3. TWINSPAN dendrogram showing the judgements.
relationship between sites and site groupings. Objective tests on conservation criteria were
Numbers as for Fig. I. based on the methods described in Eyre and
MACROINVERTEBRATES IN THE GRAMPIANS NATIONAL PARK 471
Rushton (1989). Each of the 236 taxa was Species Rarity Total
assigned a score on a geometric scale (1-16) — —
© K©i (si u©> u» *©>.
based on the number of sites out of the 32 at © © <©J\ © © © V©I ©
wspheiccihesitowcacsurcorlilnegcteatd,faewwaerrdisnigtesh.igThehreschoirgehsestto Gl Tllll^lllllllllllllllIlllIllIllll|||l||||I||T||-||.|||||||I||||||||||||||||ll1l!lllllll '
score (16) was assigned to species occurring at G2 !l|||n||l!llllll!llll!llll!lllllll
only one ofthe sites sampled, with 8 points to G4 IIIIIIIIMIIIIIUIillllll
speciesoccurringat 2-4sites, 4tospeciesat4-7 G5
llllllllllllllllllllllllIUIll
sites, 2tospeciesat8-15 sitesand 1 tospeciesat G6 I!IIII!IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!IIIII!IIIII>IIIIUIIIIIIIIII1II|||!I|III]INIIIIIIII!>IIIIIIIIIIII
16-32 sites. G7
—A site score (termed the Species Rarity Total IIIIIII1IIIII1IIIIUI
SRT) was calculated asthe simple sum ofall G8 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUl||||||||llll i i Illil
the scores ofall the species present at the site. G9 1
Each of the SRT indices were divided by the G10
numberofspeciesateachsitetoobtainasecond Gil IIIIIIIIPIIIIPii
sitescore,theSpeciesQualityFactor(SQF).The G12
SRTandSQFweregraphedandanalysedbyeye F20
to detect sites of outlying low or high rarity F21 imillllllll!l!llllllllllllllll!llllllllllll!llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllliillllillllhlllliillllllllllllllHIIIIIIII
valWuheis.le such indices have some appeal as a CZ! F22 lllllllllllll!llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll||||l||||||l||l|lllll|
a F25 lllllll!lllllllllllllllllll||||||||||||||||||||||lllllllllllllllllllllllll
simple estimateofsite significance, it isimport- Z
F26
ant to understand exactly what the indices s
reflect. The SRT is a simple sum ofthe individ- 3 W28
ual species score, so that a site with many rare IT W29
species scores higher than a site with fewer rare T W30 lllllllllllllllllllllllHIIIIIINIIIIINIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINIIIIIllllllHlllll.ini
species. W33 iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii||iiiiiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinii
However, the SRT score will also be affected WR34
by the total number oftaxa, so that a site with WR36
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIUDI
manytaxawillscorehigherthanasitewithfewer WR38
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
taxa, even ifthey have the same numberofrare M39 ii
orrestrictedspecies.Thisisdemonstrated inthe
M41
present case. Site 21 clearly had the highest lllllllllllllllllllllllllll
M42
values forSRT(Fig. 5)ofallthesitesexamined.
This site also had the highest numberoftaxaof M43
any site. But that site did not have the highest M44 Diimiipiiiniiiiii
number, or proportion, of taxa unique to that M45 llllllllllllllllllllllllllll]||||||]]|||llllllllllllll!lllllllll
site. There were 6 taxa found only at Site 21 VR48 mm
(8.3%ofthetotalatthesite),thesamenumberas VR49
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Sisitceo8mp(6arouetdowfi4t0ht9axaat,Si1t5e%s 6of(t4h4ettaoxtaa,l)2,0b%u)ttahnids VR51 iiiiiiiiiiiiimiiiiii|1!I1!I||||1I||!!11I||11I
30 (38 taxa, 23%). Site 9 had 5 unique taxa Figure 5. Species Rarity Total for each site.
(representing 31% ofthe 16 taxa collected, the
highest proportion ofall sites). uniqu—e taxa (31%, 23%, 21% and 20% respect-
WhileSites 6and 30hadthesecond andthird ively thefourhighestproportionsofallsites).
highest SRT respectively, Site 8 was ranked This provides a more intuitively satisfying
sixth, and 9wasranked 15thamongallthesites. solution to the use ofindices, downplaying the
Hence, the calculation ofSRT values does not presence ofcommon taxa and identifying sites
seemtoreflectallthepossiblecriteriathatcould with the largest proportion of the fauna
be used to determine the rarity ofa site. composed ofrestricted taxa.
The Species Quality Factor (the SRT divided
by the number oftaxa) overcomes many ofthe Conclusions
problems ofusingthe raw score. By standardis-
ing the score, the SQF more reflects the pro- Dependingon thetype ofmeasure used, twenty
portionoftaxaatasitethatarerare.Hence,Sites sites with some significance status could be
96,),3i0n,t5hiasncdal6caulllastcioornerhefilgehcetsitn,gitnhtehpartooprodretrio(Fniog.f imdoernteifdiievder(sTeabtlhean1)a.llOonteherssi,tesiwxassitseshohwand tmoorbee
.
472 DOEG
T.J.
Species Quality Factor References
Blyth, J.D., Doeg, T.J. and St Clair, R.M., 1984.
Response ofthe macroinvertebrate fauna ofthe
Mitta Mitta River, Victoria, to the construction
and operation ofDartmouth Dam. Construc-
1:
tion and initial filling period. OccasionalPapers
from the Museum ofVictoria 1: 83-100.
Butcher,R.andDoeg,T., 1995.Conservationoffresh-
waterinvertebrates. VictorianNaturalist 112: 15-
19. —
CNR, 1995. Threatenedfauna in Victoria 1995.
Department of Conservation and Natural
Resources: Victoria.
Doeg, T.J., 1985. Macroinvertebrate communities in
the Goulburn River and tributaries above Lake
Eildon,Victoria.BulletinoftheAustralianSociety
forLimnology 47-6
1 1: 1
Doeg, TJ. and Koehn, J.D., 1994. Effectsofdraining
anddesiltingasmallweirondownstreamfishand
macroinvertebrates. Regulated Rivers 9: 263-
V5 277.
nZ Doeg, T. and Reed, J., 1995. Distribution of the
endangered Otway stonefly Eusthenia nothofagi
Zwick (Plecoptera: Eustheniidae) in the Otway
Ranges. Proceedings ofthe RoyalSociety ofVic-
toria 107: 45-50.
Eyre,M.D.andRushton,S.P., 1989.Quantificationof
conservationcriteria usinginvertebrates.Journal
ofAppliedEcology 26: 159-171.
LCC, 1991. Wilderness: Special Investigation. Einal
Recommendations. Land Conservation Council,
Victoria.
Marchant, R., Barmuta, L.A. and Chessman, B.C.,
1994. Preliminary study of the ordination and
classification ofmacroinvertebrate communities
from running waters in Victoria, Australia. Aus-
tralian Journal of Marine and Freshwater
Research 45: 1-18.
Meredith,C,Goss,H.andSeymour,S., 1989. Nature
conservation valuesoftheriversandcatchmentsof
Gippsland. Report No. 44. Department ofWater
Resources, Victoria.
Metzeling, L., Graesser, A., Suter, P. and Marchant,
Figure 6. Species Quality Factor for each site. R., 1984.Thedistributionofaquaticmacroinver-
tebrates in the upper catchment ofthe Latrobe
than 3 endemic species present, seven sites had River, Victoria. Occasional Papers from the
the only record of an endemic species, the Museum ofVictoria 1: 1-62.
Mackenzie Riverwasshowntobeauniquearea Mitchell, P.A., 1990. Theenvironmentalcondition of
in the park (with an associated distinct fauna) RVeiscotuorricaens, Msetlrbeaomusr.ne.Department of Water
acensd. oNtohneresiotfesthsecorceodnsheirgvhaltyioonn smteaatissutriceasl iunsdeid- PettiYgarorvrea,RVi.vJe.r, u1s9i8n9g.mBaicorlooignivcearltembornaitteos.riSncgieontfiftihce-
could, by themselves, identify all of the sites Report Series No. 88/104. Environment Protec-
within the park with characteristics of conser- tion Authority, Victoria.
vation significance. It is clear that for aquatic Yen,A. and Butcher, R., 1994.Anoverviewofthecon-
macroinvertebrates to be used to identify areas servation status of non-marine invertebrates in
or sites of conservation significance, far more Australia. Endangered Species Unit and Aus-
information on the characteristics of natural tralian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra.
undisturbed communities needs to be col-
lected.
MACROINVERTEBRATES IN THE GRAMPIANS NATIONAL PARK 473
Table 1. Summary ofsites displaying some degree ofuniqueness based on each ofthe types of
analysis used in this report.
Site Diversity Endemic species Only site for Members of SRT SQF
present endemic species distinct group
4
1
2 1
5 3
6 6 2 2 4
8 1
9 2 1
10
1
11
21 + 4 1 1
25 5
30 3 2
33 4
34 1
36 4
+
41-45
49 4
—
E—xplanationofcodes:Diversity Thesitewiththehighestnumberoftaxa;Ende—micspeciespresent
More than 3 possibleendemic species present; Onlysite—forendemicspecies Numberofloc—al
SRT
taxarestricted to only that site; Membersofdistinctgroup Mckenzie River sites; Rarity
Topfourranked scores forSpeciesRarityTotal; RaritySQF—lopfourranked scoresfor Species
Quality Factor.