Datasets for "Leveraging historical datasets to quantify the recovery of an impaired streаm entering Yellowstone National Park"

The dataset collection published here support the companion article by the same title, published in the journal <i>Discover Conservation.</i> The sources of the original data are given in each of the attached files. The following describes the overall project concept followed by descriptions of the contents of each file.The evaluation of reclamation work on aquatic recovery is theoretically straightforward. However, some impaired waters persist for decades prior to any formal clean-up actions, span multiple jurisdictional boundaries, and consequently include work by multiple investigators. Further, knowledge of a given impairment may be based on a collection of short duration studies from targeted locations. Finally, modest funding exists for long-term environmental characterization work which often narrows the scope and duration of the work that is possible by a single investigator. Given these challenges, we argue that it is valuable to comprehensively evaluate past work and carefully consider how to leverage it through the integration of previous datasets into current assessments. Additionally, watershed level assessments benefit from collaborative partnerships involving multiple stakeholders with a common interest. In the case of Soda Butte Creek, a mine-impaired streаm entering Yellowstone National Park, studies conducted over three decades demonstrated the degraded nature of Soda Butte Creek. Following a large-scale reclamation effort, we collaboratively designed an assessment approach that integrated physicochemical sampling and ecological surveys and supported comparisons to historic datasets. Direct comparisons of water quality data, macroinvertebrate community summaries, and fish abundance data pre- and post-reclamation were useful for quantifying whether desired ecological benchmarks were met. Further, in Yellowstone’s Soda Butte Creek, response times of water quality and ecological indicators to reclamation were relatively rapid and demonstrate that recovery of contaminated streаms in the region can be measured in years rather than decades.The following datasets are available here:<b>(1) USDA Forest Service Water Quality Data for the Mainstem of Soda Butte Creek (2000 to 2018)</b>Water chemistry data from two mainstem Soda Butte Creek locations collected by the U.S. Forest Service Custer Gallatin National Forest or their representatives as part of the New World Mining District Response and Restoration Project (https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/custergallatin/home/?cid=stelprdb5407502). Data and collection methods are summarized from annual Project Summary reports posted on the New World Mining District Response and Restoration Project report repository (https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/custergallatin/home/?cid=stelprdb5407567). Water chemistry data from two mainstem Soda Butte Creek locations: below the McLaren Mill and Tailings sampling location (SBC-2) and Soda Butte Creek at the Yellowstone National Park Boundary (SBC-4) used in analyses associated with<i> "</i><i>Leveraging historic datasets to quantify the recovery of an impaired stre</i><i>а</i><i>m entering Yellowstone National Park</i><i>"</i> are summarized. Other water chemistry data are available from the reports in this repository.<b>(2) Study Coordinates for Ray et al. 'Leveraging historic datasets to quantify the recovery of an impaired stre</b>а<b>m entering Yellowstone National Park' Fig. 3</b>Coordinates for discrete water quality sampling locations and biological sampling reaches presented in 'Leveraging historic datasets to quantify the recovery of an impaired streаm entering Yellowstone National Park' and associated with Figure 3.<b>(3) Water Quality Portal Project and Site Identifier Information for NPS Soda Butte Creek data</b>The Water Quality Portal (WQP; https://www.waterqualitydata.us/) is repository for discrete water-quality data in the United States. The repository integrates publicly available water-quality data from the National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as well as other local, state, federal, and tribal organizations. All NPS-collected water chemistry data for available for Soda Butte Creek, including those presented in this the manuscript '<i>Leveraging historic datasets to quantify the recovery of an imp</i><i>aired stre</i><i>а</i><i>m e</i><i>ntering Yellowstone National Park</i>' is available at the Water Quality Portal using YELL_SBC_STUDY for the project ID. Water chemistry data for individual sites are available within that project and the site identifier (e.g., WQX-YELL_SBC2) for the mainstem of Soda Butte Creek and its primary tributaries are contained within this folder.<b>(4) Summary of dissolved copper concentrations:</b> In mg/L (ppm) downloaded from the WQP using the project and site identifier from (3).<br><b>(5) Historical macroinvertebrate data from 1972, 1975, and 1986 surveys</b>Spreadsheet including data extracted from a 1974 Montana State University thesis by James H. Chadwick, and two reports. Further descriptions of the datasets and full citations are given in the Readme tab of the spreadsheet and in the companion journal article.<b>(6) Macroinvertebrate Data from September 2018 Soda Butte Creek Sampling</b>Macroinvertebrate summaries from 7 samples collected in the upper Soda Butte Creek Drainage from September 21 to September 23, 2018. Samples were processed at Rhithron Associates, Inc. Missoula, Montana in March 2019. Upon arrival, samples were unpacked and examined, and identifiers on each jar label were checked against the chain of custody. All samples arrived in good condition. An inventory spreadsheet was created which included project code and internal laboratory identification numbers and was uploaded into the Rhithron database prior to sample processing. Subsamples of a minimum of 500 organisms were obtained using EMAP protocols (USEPA 2004) and Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) standard procedures (MDEQ 2012): Caton sub-sampling devices (Caton 1991), divided into 30 grids, each approximately 6 cm by 6 cm were used. Each individual sample was thoroughly mixed in its jar(s), poured out and evenly spread into the Caton tray, and individual grids were randomly selected. Technicians assessed organism density in each sample prior to sorting in order to comply with the multiple MDEQ SOP requirements of a) a target number of 500 (± 10%) organisms and b) the need to completely pick the last selected grid. If organism density was high, technicians reduced the grid size and created a 120 grid matrix on the tray. If organism density was moderate, the entire Caton tray was divided into 30 grids. If the amount of detritus was too sparse to spread over the entire Caton tray, technicians evenly distributed it over a smaller portion of the tray and divided that portion into 30 appropriately sized grids. Once the sample was distributed appropriately individual grids were randomly selected. The contents of each grid were examined under stereoscopic microscopes using 10x-30x magnification. All aquatic invertebrates from each selected grid were sorted from the substrate, and placed in 80% ethanol for subsequent identification. Grid selection, examination, and sorting continued until at least 500 organisms were sorted. The final grid was completely sorted of all organisms. Organisms were individually examined by certified taxonomists, using 10x – 80x stereoscopic dissecting scopes (Leica S8E) and identified to the lowest practical level consistent with MDEQ (MDEQ 2012) data requirements, using appropriate published taxonomic references and keys. Identification, counts, life stages, and information about the condition of specimens were recorded on electronic bench sheets. Organisms that could not be identified to the taxonomic targets because of immaturity, poor condition, or lack of complete current regionally-applicable published keys were left at appropriate taxonomic levels that were coarser than those specified.To obtain accuracy in richness measures, these organisms were designated as “not unique” if other specimens from the same group could be taken to target levels. Organisms designated as “unique” were those that could be definitively distinguished from other organisms in the sample. Identified organisms were preserved in 80% ethanol in labeled vials, and archived at the Rhithron laboratory. Chironomids and oligochaetes were carefully morphotyped using 10x – 80x stereoscopic dissecting microscopes (Leica S8E) and representative specimens were slide mounted and examined at 200x – 1000x magnification using an Olympus BX 51 or Leica DM 1000 compound microscope. Slide mounted organisms were archived at the Rhithron laboratory. Further details are provided in the<b>(7) Technical Summary provided by Rhithron Associates for the 2018 macroinvertebrate taxonomic analyses (pdf)</b><b>(8) Summary of fish collection data. </b>Supporting data for figure 9 in the companion article.

本数据集合集为同名配套文章提供支持，该文章发表于《Discover Conservation》期刊。原始数据的来源详见各附件文件。下文先阐述项目整体理念，再逐一说明各文件内容。

填复工程对水生生态恢复效果的评估在理论上较为直接，但部分受损水体在正式清理行动前已持续退化数十年，跨越多个行政边界，因此涉及多位研究者的工作。此外，对特定受损状况的认知可能基于一系列针对特定区域的短期研究。最后，长期环境特征研究的资金有限，这往往限制了单一研究者可开展工作的范围与时长。鉴于这些挑战，我们认为全面评估过往工作并审慎思考如何通过整合历史数据集到当前评估中以充分利用这些工作具有重要价值。此外，流域尺度的评估可从涉及多个利益相关方的协作伙伴关系中获益，这些伙伴拥有共同的目标。

以苏打巴特溪（Soda Butte Creek）为例——这是一条流入黄石国家公园（Yellowstone National Park）的矿山受损溪流——三十余年的研究证实了其退化状态。在大规模填复工程后，我们协作设计了一套评估方法，整合了理化采样与生态调查，并支持与历史数据集的对比。通过直接比较填复前后的水质数据、大型无脊椎动物（macroinvertebrate）群落汇总数据及鱼类丰度数据，可有效量化是否达到预期生态基准。此外，苏打巴特溪的水质及生态指标对填复工程的响应速度相对较快，这表明该区域受污染溪流的恢复周期可按年而非数十年计。

以下是可用数据集：

**(1) 美国林务局苏打巴特溪干流水质数据（2000-2018）**
美国林务局（U.S. Forest Service）卡斯特加拉廷国家森林公园（Custer Gallatin National Forest）或其代表在“新世界矿区响应与恢复项目”（New World Mining District Response and Restoration Project，https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/custergallatin/home/?cid=stelprdb5407502）框架下，于苏打巴特溪干流两个点位采集的水化学数据。数据及采集方法汇总自该项目年度总结报告，这些报告发布于“新世界矿区响应与恢复项目”报告库（https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/custergallatin/home/?cid=stelprdb5407567）。本部分汇总了苏打巴特溪干流两个点位的水化学数据：麦克拉伦磨坊与尾矿采样点下游（SBC-2）及黄石国家公园边界处的苏打巴特溪（SBC-4），这些数据用于《利用历史数据集量化流入黄石国家公园的受损溪流恢复状况》一文的相关分析。其他水化学数据可从该报告库的报告中获取。

**(2) Ray等人《利用历史数据集量化流入黄石国家公园的受损溪流恢复状况》图3研究坐标**
《利用历史数据集量化流入黄石国家公园的受损溪流恢复状况》一文及图3中呈现的离散水质采样点与生物采样河段的坐标。

**(3) 国家公园管理局苏打巴特溪数据的水质门户项目及点位标识符信息**
水质门户（Water Quality Portal，WQP；https://www.waterqualitydata.us/）是美国离散水质数据的存储库，整合了来自国家公园管理局（National Park Service，NPS）、美国地质调查局（U.S. Geological Survey，USGS）、美国环境保护署（U.S. Environmental Protection Agency，EPA）及其他地方、州、联邦和部落组织的公开水质数据。所有NPS采集的苏打巴特溪水化学数据（包括《利用历史数据集量化流入黄石国家公园的受损溪流恢复状况》手稿中呈现的数据）均可通过项目ID“YELL_SBC_STUDY”在WQP获取。本文件夹包含该项目下各点位的水化学数据，以及苏打巴特溪干流及其主要支流的点位标识符（如WQX-YELL_SBC2）。

**(4) 溶解铜浓度汇总**
以mg/L（ppm）为单位，使用（3）中的项目及点位标识符从WQP下载的溶解铜浓度汇总数据。

**(5) 1972、1975及1986年大型无脊椎动物历史数据**
包含从James H. Chadwick 1974年蒙大拿州立大学（Montana State University）论文及两份报告中提取数据的电子表格。数据集的进一步描述及完整引用信息见表格的Readme标签页及配套期刊文章。

**(6) 2018年9月苏打巴特溪大型无脊椎动物数据**
2018年9月21日至23日在苏打巴特溪上游流域采集的7个样本的大型无脊椎动物汇总数据。样本由Rhithron Associates公司于2019年3月在蒙大拿州米苏拉市处理。样本到达后，工作人员开箱检查，核对每个 jar 标签上的标识符与 custody 链。所有样本状态良好。工作人员创建了包含项目代码及实验室内部识别号的 inventory 电子表格，并在样本处理前上传至Rhithron数据库。

采用EMAP协议（美国环保署2004）及蒙大拿州环境质量部（Montana Department of Environmental Quality，MDEQ）标准程序（2012）获取至少500个生物的子样本：使用Caton子采样装置（Caton 1991），分为30个网格（每个约6cm×6cm）。每个样本在其容器中充分混合后倒出，均匀铺在Caton托盘上，随机选择单个网格。技术人员在分拣前评估样本中的生物密度，以符合MDEQ标准操作程序的两项要求：a) 目标数量为500个（±10%）生物；b) 需完全分拣最后选中的网格。若生物密度较高，技术人员缩小网格尺寸，在托盘上创建120个网格矩阵；若密度中等，则将整个Caton托盘分为30个网格；若碎屑量过少无法铺满整个托盘，则均匀分布在托盘的较小区域，并将该区域分为30个适当大小的网格。

样本分布妥当后，随机选择单个网格。每个选中网格的内容物在10x-30x放大倍数下通过立体显微镜检查。所有水生无脊椎动物从基质中分拣出来，放入80%乙醇中以备后续鉴定。网格选择、检查及分拣过程持续至至少500个生物被分拣完成，最后一个网格需完全分拣所有生物。

认证分类学家使用10x-80x立体解剖镜（Leica S8E）对生物进行个体检查，并根据MDEQ（2012）数据要求，利用适当的公开分类学参考文献与检索表，鉴定至尽可能低的分类水平。鉴定结果、计数、生活史阶段及样本状况信息记录在电子工作台表中。因未成熟、状况不佳或缺乏完整的区域适用公开检索表而无法达到分类目标的生物，保留在比指定更粗的分类水平。为确保丰富度测量的准确性，若同组其他样本可达到目标分类水平，则这些生物被标记为“非独特”；若能与样本中其他生物明确区分，则标记为“独特”。

已鉴定生物保存在标注的80%乙醇瓶中，并存档于Rhithron实验室。摇蚊（Chironomids）与寡毛类（oligochaetes）通过10x-80x立体解剖镜（Leica S8E）进行仔细形态分型，代表性样本制成玻片，在200x-1000x放大倍数下通过Olympus BX51或Leica DM1000复合显微镜检查。玻片样本存档于Rhithron实验室。更多细节见下文（7）。

**(7) Rhithron Associates提供的2018年大型无脊椎动物分类分析技术摘要（pdf）**

**(8) 鱼类采集数据汇总**
配套文章中图9的支撑数据。