01 August 2007 1 of 2
Project Title: Database development for definition and assessment of nutrient levels and their biological effects in the Missouri River.
PI: Donald Huggins Co-PI: Debbie Baker
Project Cost: $14,200
Project Description:
The Central Plains Center for BioAssessment (CPCB) proposes to provide data and analytical support to USEPA Regions 7 and 8 to support efforts to coordinate the nutrient criteria work of states and tribes in the Missouri River Basin ( www.epa.gov/msbasin/subbasins/mo/index.htm
), including Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, and Nebraska in USEPA Region 7 and South Dakota, North
Dakota, and Montana in Region 8. A similar group, the Upper Mississippi River Sub-basin
Hypoxia Nutrient Committee ( www.umrshnc.org/ ), has been established to define and assess nutrient impacts in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. CPCB currently compiles and analyzes data for the Region 7 Nutrient and Biocriteria Regional Technical Assistant Groups (RTAG, www.cpcb.ku.edu/progwg/html/index.htm
), and is involved with sampling the Missouri River and its tributaries ( www.cpcb.ku.edu/research/html/index.htm
). Following the RTAG model, provision of a centralized location to assemble and analyze data will help to streamline criteria development and provide a non-regulatory forum for states and tribes. CPCB will gather existing data on nutrient stressors and receptors in the Missouri River from states, tribes, universities, and other organizations, then merge the data into one relational database for use by the regions.
Tasks:
1.
Establish a centralized database of Missouri River data relevant to nutrient levels and biological effects of nutrient enrichment of river ecosystem. a.
Solicit from federal, state, tribal, and local agencies and academic institutions the chemical and biological data available from the Missouri River. b.
Incorporate all data into one MSAccess relational database. c.
Document data acquisition and compilation, including methods, detection limits,
QAQC procedures, etc. d.
Present data at regional meetings (in person or conference calls) and make data and documents available on the CPCB webpage.
2.
Provide basic and some advanced statistical assessment of nutrient data and potential relationships with biological response variables. a.
Basic statistics include descriptive statistics, regressions, and correlations for the entire river, and by classifications determined by the region (ecoregions, reach segments, etc.). b.
The regional workgroup will assess the data and basic analyses and give recommendations for further analyses to determine which biological assemblages are best suited to monitor nutrient enrichment, the best potential biological conditions in Missouri River reaches, and recommendations for applicable usebased nutrient criteria (nutrient benchmarks).

01 August 2007 2 of 2 c.
These analyses will build toward the future tasks of developing a Missouri River
Biological Condition Gradient (BCG) that relates biota to human disturbance; investigation into the feasibility of applying this BCG and; the potential biological attributes of riverine biotic assemblages for further refining Missouri River nutrient criteria.
Project Outcomes:
Results from analyses of the river database, regional meetings, and summary documentation will provide states and tribes with resources for determining their own nutrient criteria for nitrogen, phosphorus, chlorophyll and turbidity in the Missouri River. Each state can use the data to further refine the criteria based on stream size, ecoregion, watershed land use/land cover, etc.
Timeline and Major Milestones:
2007
Sept. Receive funding.
TBA Attend 1 st
regional meeting (scheduled by EPA) to discuss potential datasets and analyses.
Oct. Solicit and merge Missouri River data from various sources.
2008
Mar. Perform analyses suggested by the regions.
TBA Attend 2 nd
regional meeting (scheduled by EPA) to review stream document.
Apr. Continue analyses suggested by the regions.
June Send summary to the regions, meet if necessary.
Aug. Submit final data and statistical report to EPA.
Budget justification:
We estimate work will take 142 hours, at $100/hour. A detailed budget breakdown is attached.