Baselineline data on macroinvertebrates of three rivers in the Tukuyu focus of Tanzania and effect of temephos 20 EC on the non- target saxicolous macroinvertebrates of river Mbaka during an experimental treatment (June -July 2003)

AFRICAN PROGRAMME FOR ONCHOCERCIASIS CONTROL (APOC) CONTROL OF ONCHOCERCIASIS IN THE TUKUYU FOCUS BASELINELINE DATA ON MAGROINVERTEBRATES OF THREE RIVERS IN THE TUKUYU FOCUS OF TANZANIA AND EFFECT OF TEMEPHOS aOEC ON THE NON. TARGET SAXICOLOUS MACROINVERTEBRATES OF RIVER MBAKA DURING AN EXPERTMENTAL TREATMENT (JUNE - JULY 2003) -!. By J. S Amakye and G. B. Amegbe CSIR WATER RESEARCH INSTITUTE P. O. BOXAH 38 ACHIMOTA-GHANA 4,1 q December 2003 0 5 A'/ft 2001 Atk ffi E'V rc+ " 4es*- Fr ryt \ II In r'1 a fu"'E{*^; I igg,' ' 't- * : ;.*'* . TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments Abstract 1.0 lntroduction 1.1 Description of Study Area 1.1.1 River Kiwira 1.1.2 River Lufilyo 1.1.3 River Mbaka 2.0 Materials and Methods 3.0 Results 3.1 Drift lndices 3.2 Saxicolous Macroinvertebrates 3.2.1 Species Diversity 3.2.2'Functional Feeding' groups rivers Kiwira. Lufilyo and Mbaka 3.3 Effect of temephos on non-target macroinvertebrates of River Mbaka 3.3.1 Drift 3.3.2 Saxicolous macroinvertebrate fauna 4.0 Discussion References Appendices i ii 1 1 1 1 5 5 8 8 8 I I 9 I 19 20 22 24 Fig. 1 Fig.2 Fig. 3 Fig. 4 Fig. 5 Fig. 6 Fig.7 Fig. I Fig. 9 LIST of FIGURES Map of Tanzania showing location of Tukuyu and two of the rivers studied River Kiwira at Lwangwa Masoko (Note deposits of coal slurry between the rocks and boulders) River Lufilyo at Kipapa (Note forest on riparian banks) River Mbaka at lpande (Note open banks) Composition of saxicolous macroinvertebrate community of River Kiwira Composition of saxicolous macroinvertebrate community of River Lufilyo Composition of saxicolous macroinvertebrate community of River Mbaka Species richness and diversity of saxicolous macroinvertebrates in Rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka before vector elimination operations Relative abundance of 'Functional Feeding' groups in saxicolous macroinvertebrates of Rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka in 2003 2 3 4 7 13 14 15 16 17 LIST of TABLES Table 1: Status of physical habitats of rivers in the project area (Iukuyu Focus) during June - July 2003 10 Table 2: Physico-chemical characteristics of waters of rivers Kiwira, Mbaka and Lufilyo (Tanzania) 11 Table 3: Day rift and Night Drift indices of rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka before vector elimination operations 12 Table 4: Effect of temephos on drifting macroinvertebrates of River Mbaka in July 2003 18 Table 5: Student t-test for the effect of temephos on saxicolous macroinvertebrates of River Mbaka in July 2003 21 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are grateful to the many individuals and institutions that helped to make this study possible. We are indebted to WHO-APOC for the resources and logistics provided us to undertake this study. Our gratitude goes to staff of the WHO representation office in Tanzania for facilitating and supporting the study team. We also acknowledge the support of the Director General of National lnstitute of Medical Research of Tanzania and his principal staff including the head and team at the Tukuyu Medical Research Station. Finally, we wish to thank the staff of the Department of Zoology and Marine Biology, University of Dar-Es- Salaam, Tropical Pesticide Research lnstitute, Dar-Es-Salaam, and Tanzania National Environmental Council for the great interest that they showed in our work and for their collaboration in the field. ABSTRACT Baseline data on non-target macroinvertebrate fauna gathered from three rivers before commencement of vector elimination operations in the Tukuyu Focus of Tanzania showed that density of saxicolous macroinvertebrates of River Kiwira, River Lufilyo and River Mbaka was 5769 individuals /m2, 11652 individuals/m2 and 6542 inndividuals/m2 respectively. Also, there were 30, 49 and 56 taxa respectively in rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka. Shannon-Weiner diversity and Margalef's index showed that the saxicolous macroinvertebrate community in River Kiwira was the least diverse while the most diverse community occurred in River Mbaka. The low diversity of macroinvertebrates observed in River Kiwira was attributed to the effect of the discharge of effluents from a near-by coalmine into the river. 'Day Drif index of macroinvertebrates before commencements of vector elimination operations in River Kiwira, River Lufilyo and River Mbaka was 1.78, 3.92 and 0 (0.0004) respectively. The corresponding 'Night Drift' values were 3.83, 5.73 and 10.17 respectively for rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka. 'Day Drift'(DDl) and'Night Drif indices (NDl) were higher in the post treatment period in River Mbaka than during the pre-treatment period. DDI and NDI remained high for about 48hr after treatment of River Mbaka with temephos. The popufation of saxicolous macroinvertebrates in River Mbaka was reduced by -34o/o when density of the pre-treatment period was compared with density of saxicolous macroinvertebrates one day (24hr) after the experimental treatment of River Mbaka with temephos. Although there was no significant difference between the density of the saxicolous macroinvertebrate populations in the pre-treatment and post treatment periods, temephos impacted significantly on Baetidae, Heptageniidae (Ephemeroptera), Tanytarsini, Orthocladiinae and Tanypodinae (Chironomidae) (p<0.005). The study recommended that the food habits of the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera of rivers in the operational zone be studied further to establish their 'Functional Feeding' groups in view of apparent differences noted in the literature regarding the role of some species in the flows of energy in the streams in the study area. il 1.0 INTRODUCTION The African Programme for Onchocerciasis Control (APOC) has been undertaking disease control in some 19 African countries since 1999. The control is mainly based on distribution of lvermectin to infected human populations. However, in three foci, viz. Bioko lsland (Equatorial Guinea), ltwara and Mpamba foci (Uganda) and Tukuyu Focus (Tanzania) feasibility studies have confirmed that it is possible to eliminate the vector. Elimination of the vector therefore is underway in these countries (WHO/TDR , 2004). Vector elimination operations started at the Tukuyu focus in July 2003 with an experimental treatment of River Mbaka with temephos. Also, baseline data on macroinvertebrate fauna (especially the entomofauna) of Rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka were collected. The baseline studies would ensure that the vector elimination operations in future did not affect the biological diversity of the rivers seriously. Also, the baseline data gathered would provide a benchmark by which impact of future operations could be assessed. 1.1 Description of Study Area The study was undertaken at the Tukuyu Focus in Southwestern Tanzania (Fig 1). The area has been described as the Scotland of Tanzania because of its scenic beauty and the low ambient temperatures that occur in the region during the winter. The rivers that were studied are: 1.1.1 River Kiwira A reach of the river at Lwangwa Masoko (9'31'47. 1' S 33' 42' 32.5" E) near a coalmine was studied. The status of the physical habitat of the river is presented in Table 1 . 'Total Habitat Score' was 1 00; and, it was the river with the most degraded habitat. There were no trees shading the river and water was generally murky with deposition of coal slurry along the banks of the river (Fig. 2). The pH of the water was slighly alkaline and contained high levels of arsenic (Table 2). 1.1.2 River Lufilyo The reach of the river that was studied was near Kipapa (33' 17' 45.3" s 33. 54' 15.7E) at the foothills of the Livingston Mountains (Fig.3). This was the least impacted river, The habitat score was 15,1. The riparian forests reached the banks of the river. The pH was slightly alkaline with a good growth of epifaunal substrate. The water was clear and had a good current speed (Table 1) but arsenic concentration in the river water was high (Oable 2). 1 0 s0 r00 150 1.rL Ktl S(A L E 0 50 100 150 tE6END tnt.rnotionot Bdry "--J--- p1y61 qr, Loka a HqJor Town U6AN DA NJ t lllRWAN DA LA t(E .' V I ( TOR IA. \ KENYA BURUN n ,t\/nl\ / "l' ,',1 ,/,<- Arusho a ) \ o Toboro I I ( ) \! \ . q tU U (. ( o \ ? c o ? -- A Tok u U ZAMBIA ( Lrnd , IMO tl 100 3ooE J50 Figl: Map of Tanzania showing Location of Tulatyu and Two of the Rivers Studied. rc4 ) o F <F- Fig. 2:River Kiwira at Lwangwa Masoka (Note Deposits of Coal Slurry Between the Rocl<s and Boulders) 3 .*trfr& .rdry i.,q* ffi9(B- [h dr I il lr 'llP 7',''. Nd, 't* , ffi r;s:,., $' Fig.3: River Lufilyo at Kipapa (Note Forest shading Portions of the River) 4 hd$ir$'t @* *nfl "tr k ,j tr r;El. E'- ,Te"/ d3- *rh *? 1.1.3 River Mbaka River Mbaka was used to test for the effect of temephos on the non-target macroinvertebrate fauna in an experimental treatment. The river was located at lpande (9" 27'55.7" S 33" 50'19.3'E). The stream habitat score was 1 32 (Table 1). The river was exposed to sunlight throughout the day and the river had good current (Fig. 4). Again, arsenic concentration was above WHO guideline levels. 2.0 MATERIALS and METHOD Water samples were collected from all three rivers and sent to Ghana for analysis to assess the quality of water from the three rivers. The methods of analysis used followed 'those of Clesceri et a/. (1998). Water samples were stored in plastic bottles and kept frozen until ready for analysis. The method developed by Barbour and Stribling (1991) was used to assess the physical habitats of rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka. The sampling methods developed by the Onchocerciasis Control Programme (OCP) for the study of macroinvertebrate fauna were used in gathering the baseline data on the rivers (Yam6ogo ef a/. 1996; WHO, 2002). A complement of three 'Day Drift' and six 'Night Drift' samples was collected from each river. A modified Surber sampler that enclosed an area of 0.0225 m' was used to collect saxicolous macroinvertebrates from the rivers. The sampler was pressed to the bottom of the river at a location with a relative uniform bottom and where epifaunal rheophytes were growing. Cleaning the substratum with a nailbrush then dislodged the macroinvertebrates enclosed by the sampler. A minimum of five replicate Surber samples was collected from each river. All samples were preserved in 4o/o formalin, in the field, and sent to Ghana for processing and analysis. ln Ghana, samples were examined under a dissecting microscope and all macroinvertebrates sorted out. The taxa encountered were then identified with the aid of keys and the numbers of the various taxa present in each sample noted (Dejoux et al., 1983). From the data obtained from the drift samples Day Drift (DDl) and Night Drift indices (NDl) were estimated as: DDI or NDI = /' AxCxT Where n = Mean number of organisms caught by drift nets over the duration of Sampling. A = Area of mouth of drift net submerged in water (in m2). C = Speed of water current (in mSecl) T = Duration of Sampling (in seconds). 5 ln regard of the saxicolous benthos, the data were used to estimate the following: i. Density of the saxicolous macroinvertebrates. ii. The species richness of each river (Margalef's lndex) s',- IR= - ln(a) Where R = Species richness S = number of taxa present N = total number of individuals present in sample iii. The Shannon - Weiner Diversity lndex (H'): fl' = -Ito,, I n)ln(n, I n)l t-l Where fl, = the number of individuals in taxon i n = the total number of individuals in the sample s= no of taxa iv. The 'Functional Feeding'groups present in the saxicolous macroinvertebrates The Relative abundance of the various macroinvertebrate families present in the saxicolous fauna Experimentaltreatment of River Mbaka with temephos took place at about 09.50 hr on 2nd July 2003. To determine the effect of temephos on the non-target saxicolous macroinvertebrates, Student t-test was performed to test the hypothesis that there was no difference in the density of macroinvertebrate populations prior to and 24 hr after treatment with the Simulium larvicide. The Drift lndices at selected periods from 1"tto 3'd July in River Kiwira were also followed. 6 Fig. 4: River Mbaka at lpande (Note Open Banl<s) 7 't-.f 7 -. *)^r *i&p .a-l *,'i.'J{ 1,1 1l,i ' 3.0 RESULTS 3.1 Drift lndices The Drift lndices of all three rivers before operational activities began are presented in Table 3: ln all three rivers, DDI was less than NDl. DDI for rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka was 1 .78, 3.92 and 0.0; and NDI was 3.83, 5.73 and 5.01 respectively for the rivers. Generally, NDI of rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka under normal conditions were 2, 5, and 1.5 times DDI respectively. 3.2 SaxicolousMacroinveftebrates River Kiwira. Density of saxicolous macroinvertebrates of River Kiwira was 5769 individuals /m2. Diptera, Trichoptera and Ephemeroptera were the constituent orders of macroinvertebrates of the river (Fig. 5a). The Diptera was the dominant order (87o/o) whereas the Ephemeroptera constituted 3% of all the macroinvertebrates present. The Baetidae were the only family of Ephemeroptera present in the saxicolous macroinvertebrates. ln regard of the Trichoptera, the Hydroptilidae and Leptoceridae constituted 75o/o and 25 % respectively of that order. On the other hand, the Orthocladiinae (85.4olo), on the other hand, dominated the Diptera (Fig. 5b - 5d). River Lufilyo Density of saxicolous macroinvertebrates of River Lufilyo was 11652 individuals lmz. Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera and Diptera were the major constituents of the saxicolous fauna. The relative abundance of the constituent saxicolous groups was 43%, 19o/o, 38o/o and 2o/o for Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Diptera and 'All Other'taxa respectively (Fig. 6a). The 'All Other'taxa comprised Nematoda (35.7Yo), Collembola and Oligochaela (21.4olo), Spongiliidae, Sisyridae and Pyralidae (7.1o/o) (Fig. 6b). The Baetidae dominated the Ephemeroptera (96%); the Leptoceridae (660/o) dominated the Trichoptera and the Orthocladiinae (61%) dominated the Diptera (Fig.6c- 6e). The highest saxicolous macroinvertebrate population density in the study area was observed in River Lufilyo. River Mbaka The Saxicolous macroinvertebrates of River Mbaka consisted of Ephemeroptera (44o/o), Plecoptera (1%), Trichoptera (9olo), Diptera (42%o), Coleoptera (3%), Odonata (0.06%) and some othergroups that constituted 1% of the total fauna. Thus, the Diptera and Ephemeroptera were the more dominant taxa in River Mbaka (Fig. 7a). lt was observed that the Odonata was made up of only Libellulidae whereas the Coleoptera was made up of Gyrinidae (41 .7o/o) and Elmidae (S8.3%). ii iii E There was a wide variety of Ephemeroptera in Mbaka. However, The Baetidae (72.4o/o) was dominant. The Caenidae (16.9olo), Heptageniidae (5.3%), Leptophlebiidae (2.7%) and Tricorythidae (2.7o/o) followed in that order of dominance (Fig. 7b.). Hydropsychidae, Leptoceridae and Hydroptilidae were the constituent families of Trichoptera observed in the saxicolous macroinvertebrates of River Mbaka. The pattern of dominance of the families was Hydropsychidae (80.3%)> Leptoceridae (10.6%) >Hydroptilidae (9.1olo). The Orthocladiinae dominated the Diptera (Fig. 7c and 7d). 3.2.1 Species Diversity Diversity of the macroinvertebrate saxicolous fauna of rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka is presented in Figure 8.The number of taxa encountered in rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka was 30, 49 and 56 respectively. Margalef's lndex for the three rivers was 5.96, 9.2 and 11.8 respectively. Shannon- Weiner lndex also indicated that River Mbaka had the most diverse saxicolous macroinvertebrate fauna. Thus, all the indices showed that River Mbaka had the most diverse fauna while River Kiwira was the least diverse. 3.2.2'Functional Feeding' Groups in Rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka. ' Gathering Collectors'dominated the saxicolous macroinvertebrates of allthree rivers. 'Gathering Collectors'represented 9Oo/o,71o/o and 630/o respectively, of the entire fauna of rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbaka, respectively, before vector elimination operations started in Tanzania (Fig. 9a - 9c). However, no 'Fiftering Collectors'were observed in River Kiwira (Fig. 9a). 3.3 Effect of Temephos on Non-Target Macroinvertebntes of River Mbaka 3.i.1 Drift The effect of temephos on non-target macroinvertebrates followed the pattern that was observed in rivers in West Africa. ln both regions, the presence of temephos increased Day and Night Drift lndices several times in the post treatment period. 9 Table I : Status of Physical Habitat of Rivers in The Project Area (fukuyu Focus) During June - July 2003. River Kiwira at Lwangwa Masoko Lufilyo at Kipapa Mbaka at lpande GPS Coordinates 9"31'47. 1"S33"42',32.5"E 33"17'45. 3" S 33" 54',15. 7" E 9" 27'55. 7"S 33' 50' 19.3"E Altitude 789 586 Stretch of River (m) 350 350 183 Mean Width (m) 55 25 48 Mean Depth (m) 1.2 1.8 0.9 Bottom Type Sandy with space rocky areas Rocks, Cobbles and Mud Sand, mud and Rocks Water Temperature('c) 18 18 20 Current Speed (mSec ') 0.35 0.80 0.65 % Shaded Waters Poor (3) Marginal(7) Poor (1) Clarity of Water Sub-optimum (12) Optimum (17) Optimum (16) Epifaunal Substrate Poor (7) Sub-Optimum (12) Sub-Optimum (15) PoolSubstrate Characterisation Poor (5) Poor (1) Poor (1) PoolVariability Poor (3) Poor (0) Poor (0) Sediment Deposition Optimum (18) Marginal(7) Channel Flow Status Optimum (19) Optimum (19) Optimum (20) Channel Alteration Optimum (18) Optimum (20) Optimum (20) Channel Sinuosity Marginal(7) Marginal(8) Poor (3) Bank Stability (Left) Optimum (9) Optimum (10) Optimum (9) Bank Stabili$ (Right) Sub-Optimal(7) Optimum (10) Optimum (10) Bank Vegetation (Left) Sub-Optimum (8) Optimum (10) Optimum (10 Bank Vegetation (Right) Poor (1) Optimum (10) Optimum (10) Riparian Vegetation (Left) Poor (1) Sub-Optimum (9) Optimum (10) Riparian Vegetation (Risht) Optimum (0) Poor (0) TOTAL SCORE 100 151 132 Note: Highest score for each parametff is 20 except for Bank Stability, Bank Vegetation and Riparian Vegetation where maximum score for each bank is l0 l0 Table 2 PHYSICO-CHEMICAL C.HARACTERISTICS OF WATERS OF RIVERS KIWIRA, MBAKA AND I,UFILYO (TANZANTA). Parameter Unit ofMeasurement River Kiwira River Mbaka River Lufilyo WHO Gurdeline Colour (Apparent) Hz 30 1N 50 0-500 pH pH -Un[ 7.39 6.15 713 50-85 Total Suspended SoIds Mg/l 45 <1 0 Conductivity pS 732 100.0 116.0 Total Drssolved Solids mg/l 51 2 70.0 81 2 1000 Turbidity NTU 5 17.9 1.9 0 - 15 Total Hardness (As CaCO3) mg/l 26.O 400 240 500 Calcrum Hardness mg/l 12.O 180 140 Magnesrum Hardness mg/l 140 22.O 10.0 Calcrum mg/l 4.8 7.2 5.6 200 Total Alkalinity (As CaCOo) mg/l 30.0 600 62.0 Brcarbonate (As CaC03) mg/l 366 73.2 75.6 Carbonate (As CaC03) mg/l 0 0 0 Manganese mg/l <0.001 <0 001 <0 001 0.5 Sodrum mg/l 9.0 12.9 189 2N Potassrum mg/l 2.18 514 612 30 Magnesium mgll 3.4 53 2.4 150 Total lron mg/l o 027 134 0.073 0-1 0 Ammonra (NH3-N) mg/l .001 <. 001 <0 001 0 -o.5 NInte (NOr-N) mg/l 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0 -3.0 Nitrate (NOg -N) mg/l o24€, 061 I 1.55 0-500 Phosphate mg/l <0.001 0.073 o 122 Chlonde mg/l 8.9 6.0 40 250 Fluoride mg/l 0 592 o 278 0 674 15 Sulphate (SOa) mg/l 203 1.'t9 150 250 Nrckel mg/l 0 04t, 0 078 0.065 002 Lead mg/l o 216 0 255 0.143 001 Arsenrc mg/l 0.60 0 081 0246 001 Copper mg/l 0 009 0 013 0 015 2.O Ztnc mg/l 203 0 005 0.01 1 250 11 Table 3 Day Drrft and Night Drift Indices of Rivers Kiwira Lufilyo and Mbaka Before Vector Elimination Operations. RIVER DDI NDI KIWIRA 1.78 3.83 LUFILYO 3.92 5.73 MBAKA 0 (0.0004) 5.01 t2 aoa Ea aG lmo. 900 8DO 700 600 50.0 40.0 300 200 100 00 b: R.ldiv. Abund.nc. of F.dll.r of Eph.fiffopt r. d Saricolo[ tac]olmrarbbr.ba ln Rivar Klwlrr E o o =ooo ECEffioftB€ Tnchoptffi DrpteE 87% r: Rcldiya Abumdrc. of lr.crdN.rt b[tB in Silicoloua F1m of Rlvar l(wira B.fioo Vcbr Cortol Opmdgl. (Jun 20O:lI 1o% ooo coo oc aoa Eao ac 'tflr.0 900 an0 700 d)0 500 lo0 30_0 m0 r0.o 0.0 I o a! =a D o Ioq ofooo J!g aoo olJ o a- oo f D o of ol o 3, 2. r oo o o =ooo c: Relatry€ Abundance of Famtllos of Tnclpptem of Saxcolrus Maqomvertebrales m Rtvs Kvtra 100 0 s0 800 700 600 500 400 300 no 100 00 d: Rdrty. Abund.m. of F.tdllG of Dipa.n of S.ricolG Urcrolnvanabnta. ln Rivar KMrr a- 5a IDl o oaj o o OB{o a D q f 6 Fig. 5: Composition of Smicolous Macroinvertebrate Community of River Kiwira 13 3% tta o3! Allffi6 *L EphmrcpbE 43* ,l{)0 350 30-0 357 DpbE st 19* a Cotrpsdpn o[ SrE@b6 MrcEn€rlcbaetcs rn Rrwa LulIyb (Juro 2003) 996 1m0 - 90l 0/t c: R.l.livG Aburdare of F.rili6 of Eptxmrop,tlre in SuicdM facroinycri.br.t: of Rivff Lufilyo b: R.lrtin Abund.ne ol All OthG' Srxicolous tl rcreinrrhbnt t in Rwr Lufilyo 250 200 150 100 50 00 a o c a aq 2'11 211 710 71 71 I6 J oo6 I o dE =o -oD oI oo @ o o 9. o 3q 9.o z o3 D oo o!o e oo ! Eooo a oo E00 700 g 600 5s0! roo4 goo 200 10 0 oo 66 ao c a a c 700 600 s0 400 s0 200 100 00 -o oo =og oo r o aE = o 700 600 500 100 300 mo r00 00 m c6 I Cdi€ vo d ooa ta o aE d: R.lrtiE Abundrn6 of F.triliG of Trichoptan in S.ricolous t.crinnilabraLa of Riwr LufilF o2 rot75n", c: Ralrtv. Abund.nca of Frtdllaa of Dipt n in S.xicoloua Urcrcany.It bEt a of Rivs Lufilyo Fig.6: Composition of Saxicolous Macroinvertebrate Community of River Lufilyo 94 39 o3 939J9J-='C9FEgEEEFHE8:r=iE.g I T t4 59 o9 ao! C ao aL m0 m-0 GO.0 50,0 '(,0 3lt_0 20_o 10 0 00 169 721 27 53 -ou6oof.doo 27 { =-8 Et aD o olo t_oao @oo doo roE oD =oq ao o Eplmm ptora tll* fl,r,Eftge // Pleoptm 115gr a: Co.rTailim of Sicoaor.. fGriN.ri.brb. .a Riyf, lbdc B.lbr. Tr..hrilUilh T.m0ftc b: R.hlrv. Aburfrr. d FftiIG d Eph.Eo*n d Erp.rlErtd Trtrtllfit tiilh T.mpha 20EC r o dE Iooo c: R.alliY. AhfrE of FniliG d T|{GhoFrr d TrtrtildUilh Tf,nCala Cd€ptra All OrH 1* 1m_0 9.0 &.0 7r.0 m,0 500 r()0 3D0 200 100 00 aoa E ao oL 3t5 OdonatE < 1% Dipttra 1% roE o o =-aD o - o oo =dDo {Dl !oofoo o +oooe foo {of n 5 o =ato3 f 60_o 50.0 /00 300 20.o r0.o 0,0 at aoa ca aL !76lal r2t r9 o at oEooofdoo a5 .2 3g oo d R.ldv. ADu.Ltc. d Frtdlh. d Dipt n of Tt rtilrtUithTrreha Fig. 7: Compositton of Smicolous Macrotnvertebrate Community of River Mbakn l5 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 axaF o ott E z r os2 436 I o rr.8 a 3.4 I o 5-$ a 211 14.0 120 10.0 80 6.0 4.0 2.O 00 xoEE l |- R. Lufilyo R. i,baka R. Kiwira FQ. E: Speceb Richness and Divestty of Saxicolous Macre inverGbrates in Rayers Kiwira , Lufilyo and tbaka B€ilore Vector Elimination Operations (June July 2(Xl3 ) I NodTaca O M4alefs lnde< A Shannon Weiner lndex t6 Predats Stredder GatsrE Coll€cttr 90t6 r: RJdvt ADurdfE d Furc0md Fasfng Gdp. ln Y.cbroofltDl Opcrdo6 (llnc m) PGdetils 6r8* * Shrqdd€.s r5* Filtsrtg Coilocfus 8% Gsthoring CollocloG 71X b: R.ldy. Aburftrc. d Rmcdqd MrE gouF ln S.dcoloB l*rcaN.rth d Rlyf U{lyo B.hf. Vc{DrCootol Op.rdqr. Slrcddec 1% Predatds a* \. Sll€(ldsc < 1%PE(Hors t3I GdHing 52*Frltglng Coll€ctors a* G€r0tsng Coll€dm 63X Filjsnng 35* c: Frr-d6d Fa.dng eorTa io S.rirdoa lacKi- ftJatr.t3 d Rivr lbd(. B.torc Erpdn r*C Tr.rhntIilh TfirplE d: R.mliml F..dng GM.F in S.d@tqE ffihT.mpha. Fig.9: Relative Abundance of 'Functional Feeding' Groups in Smicolous Mocroinvertebrates of Rivers Kiwira, Lufilyo and Mbakn tn 2003. t7 Table 1: Effect of Temephos on Drifting Macroinvertebrates of River Mbaka in July 2003 Pre-Treatment Post Treatment 1$ Juty 2oos 2nd Juty 2oo3 3'd July 2oo3 Day Drift lndex (15.00hr) 0.0004 21.0 12.8 Night Drift lndex (21.00 hr) 5.01 50. I 12.4 18 3.3.2 Saxrcolous M a c ro i nve fte b rate F a u n a Density of saxicolous macroinvertebrates before and after treatment of River Mbaka with temephos is presented in Table 5. Prior to treatment, density of saxicolous macroinvertebrates was 6542 individuals/m' 1't+t per Surber). Density was 4356 individuals/m2 198 per Surber) 24 hr after treatment with temephos. Thus, there was a 34o/o reduction in density of saxicolous macroinvertebrates of River Mbaka because of the treatment of the river with temephos. The effect of temephos on the taxa present in the river however varied. The Ephemeroptera and Diptera were most adversely affected by treatment of River Mbaka with temephos. When density of Ephemeroptera in the pre- treatment period was compared with density of the post treatment period it was observed that there was a highly significant reduction (78Yo) in density 24 hr after treatment of river Mbaka with the larvicide (p<<<0.05). On the other hand, , there was a 19.7% reduction in the Diptera. Although the reduction in the latter case was not significant, temephos caused significant reductions of the Chironomidae especially the Orthocladiinae (p<0.05), Tanytarsini (p<0.01) and Tanypodinae (p s 0.1). ln regard of the Ephemeroptera, the families that were significantly affected were the Baetidae (f 0.01) and the Heptagenidae (p< 0.05). The Hydroptilidae apparently were the only Trichopteran family that was affected significantly by temephos (Iable 5) t9 4.0 DISCUSSION It is well known that drift is a naturaloccurrence in streams (Mi.iller, 1954; Elliot, 1965; 1967). Statzner et al. (1984) reviewed the effects of in-stream factors on drift intensity (drift index) in Africa. They showed that factors such as spate and saxicolous macroinvertebrate density could affect drift index. lt may be surmised therefore that DDI and NDI in an undisturbed river or stream are apparently unique and tend to be constant to river until there is a disturbance within the river basin. Thus, DDI and NDI could be used to monitor changes within a river basin. ln regard of River Mbaka, there was no macroinvertebrates in the Day Drift (DDl = 0.0004) in the pre- treatment period (Table 4). The experimental treatment of River Mbaka was effected around 9.50hr on 2nd July 2003. The larvicide was applied at a point that was -1.5 km upstream of the site of the study. lt is worth noting that by 15.00hr of the same day DDI had increased from 0 to 45.0. A similar effect of temephos was observed on NDI as NDI increased from 5.0 to 50.0 (Table 4). The behaviour of macroinvertebrates of River Mbaka under the influence of temephos was therefore similar to that observed in River Apu and Mbaka in the Republic of Equatorial Guinea (Amakye and Amegbe, 1999). Dejoux observed that high drift indices were usual occurrences at the start of treatments of rivers with temephos; and that subsequent treatments elicited less intense drift of macroinvertebrates (Dejoux, 1983). Temephos caused about 34% reduction in density of the saxicolous macroinvertebrates of River Mbaka. The impact of temephos on the saxicolous macroinvertebrate population of River Mbaka therefore was comparable to that observed in River Musola (Republic of Equatorial Guinea) where a similar level of reduction was observed (Amakye, lnpress). ln regard of the RiverMbaka, however, unlike in RiverMusola (Republic of Equatorial Guinea) where many of the Trichopteran taxa, especially the Hydropsychidae, were detached from the bottom, the Trichoptera were not affected significantly by temephos in River Mbaka. Also, instead of observing a reduction in density of some taxa in the post treatment period there was rather an increase in their density. lt is likely that moribund individuals got trapped in the bottom sediment of the river; and this could explain the increase in density of some taxa in the post treatment period. Also, temephos affected 'Gathering Collectors' and 'Predators' in River tVlbaka whereas 'Filtering Collectors' were not affected (Fig.9). This was unexpected because the impact of temephos would be great on the 'Filtering Collectors' to which lhe Simulium larvae, the target organism belonged. ln a study of feeding habits of macroinvertebrates in the highland streams of Kenya Dobson et at. (2002) found that larvae of Heptagenidae and Tricorythidae were 'Filtering Collectors'. Dejoux et al. (1982), on the other hand, observed that the same larvae in West Africa were predators. it is apparent therefore that the feeding habits of the different taxa in West and East Africa are different. lt is necessary therefore that the feeding habits of macroinvertebrate taxa in the rivers in Tanzania, especially those belonging to Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera and Chironomidae be studied further to establish the 'Functional Feeding' groups of these sensitive taxa. 20 Table 5: Sndent t-Test for Effect of Temephos on the Smicolous Macroinvertebrates of River Mbaka in 2003. Alote.' * =P5J0.7; n= * P=30.01;t= V=9 Pre-Treatment PostTreatmentTaxon Mean Number Per Surlcer Mean Number Per Surber f - statistic PercentageChange EPHEMEROPTERA 67.2 14.8 4.26n* 78 Baetidae 45.4 0.3 5.26* -99.3 Caenidae 10.2 6.3 1.03 -38.2 Leptophlebiidae 6.2 5.5 0.12 -11.3 Tricorythidae 1.6 1.7 -0.03 6.3 Heptagenidae 3.2 0.7 2.21* -78.1 PLECOPTERA 1.6 1.2 0.48 -25 Neoperla spio 1.6 1.2 0.48 -25 TRICHOPTERA 11.8 29.8 -'t.47 152.5 Hydropsychidae 10.0 29.0 -1.63 190 Leptoceridae 1.0 0.5 0.73 -50 Hydroptilidae 0.8 0.0 1.81* -1 00 Ecnomidae 0.0 0.33 -0.91 100 DIPTERA s0.2 40.3 1.42 -'t9.7 Ceratopogonidae 1.2 1.5 -0.26 25 Psychodidae 0.0 2.7 -1.30 100 Simuliidae 2.8 4.8 -1.0s 71.4 Chironomidae 51.0 30.8 2_32* -39.6 Chironominae 12.0 16.8 -0.81 40 Chironomini 't.0 16.8 -3.20* 158 Tanytarsini 11.0 0.00 3.08* -1 00 Orthocladiinae 31.4 11.7 2.79"" -62.7 Tanypodinae 7.6 2.3 2.10* -69.7 Rhagonidae 0.0 0.5 -0.91 100 Tipulidae 0.0 0.3 -0.91 100 Other (unidentified) 0.2 0.0 1.11 -1 00 LEPIDOPTERA 0.0 0.3 -0.91 100 Pyralidae 0.0 0.3 -0.91 100 COLEOPTERA 4.2 10.5 1.48 150 Gyrinidae 4.4 0.5 0.16 25 Elmidae 3.8 10.2 -1.64 70.6 TOTAL 147.2 98.0 1.61 -33.5 2t REFERENCES Amakye, J. S. and Amegbe, G. B. (1999).Baseline information on aquatic macroinvertebrates of Bioko lsland and impact of Simulium larvicide temephos 20EC on them, March - April 999 . Mimeographed 135pp. Amakye, J. S. (n press). Effect of temephos 20EC on the non-target saxicolous fauna of a tropical African lsland river at first treatment'. West African Journal of Applied Ecology. Clesceri, L. S., Greenberg, A. E. and Eaton, A. D. (eds.) (1998). Standard methodsforthe examination of waste end wastewater. 20th. Edition. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association and Water Environment Federation (APHA, AWWA & WEF). 1015 Fifteenth Street N.W. Washington D.C. 2005- 2605 USA. Dejoux, C., Elouard, J-M, Forge, P. and Maslin, L.L. (1982). Catalogue icnographique des insectes aquatiques de Cote d'lvoire. ORSTOM Bouak6. Mimeographed. 178pp. Dejoux, C. (1983). Utilisation du temephos en campagne de lutte contre Simulium damnosum en Afrique de I'Ouest. lmpact des premieres cycles de traitment sur le milieu aquatique. Rev. Hydrobiol. trop.l6 (2): 163-179. Dobson, M., Mangana, A., Mathooko, J. M. and Ndegwa, F. K. (2002} Detritivores in Kenyan highland streams: more evidence for paucity of shredders in the tropics? Freshwater Biology,4T: 909 - 91 9. Elliott, J. M. (1965). Dailyfluctuationsof drift invertebrates in a Dartmoorstream. Nature,20:1127 _ 1129. Elliott, J. M. (1967). lnvertebrate drift in a Dartmoor stream. Arch. Hydrobiot,6S (2): 202 - 237 Mtlller, K. (1954) lnvestigations on the organic drift in North Swedish streams. Report. tnst. Freshwat. Droftningholm, 35 1 35 - 148. Statzner, 8., Dejoux, C. and Elouard, J. M. (1984). Field experiments on the relationship between drift and benthic densities of aquatic insects in tropical streams. Rev. Hydrobiottrop. 17(4): 31g- 334). World Health Organisation (2002). Preserving the environment: a major OCp concern over the past twenty-five years. Geneva 50pp. 22 Yam6ogo, L., Abban, E. K., Elouard, J. M. Traor6, K and Calamari, D. 1993) Effect of permethrin as Simulium larvicide on non-target aquatic fauna. Ecotoxicology, 2: 157 - 174. 23 APPENDICES DATABASE ON MACROINVERTEBRATES OF RIVERS KIWIRA, LUFILYO AND MBAKA 24 Appendix 1a River: Kiwira Date: 26:6:03 Type of Sample: Day Drift Duration of Sample: 10 min Current Speed: 0.35mSec 1 APPENDIX 1 DATABSE OF RIVER KIWIRA: Taxon DD' DD2 DD3 Total Mean DI Collembola 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.3333 0.03 EPHEMEROPTERA Centroptilum E36 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.3333 0.03 Centropti/um E/53 0.0000 3.0000 0.0000 3.0000 1.0000 0.08 Tnco74hus sp 0.0000 2.0000 1.0000 3.0000 1.0000 0.08 TRICHOPTERA Ch e u matopsych e 6 I ci {e ra 0.0000 s.0000 2.0000 7.0000 2.3333 0.18 Ecnomus T2B 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.3333 0.03 DIPTERA 5imu/ium damnosum 5.0000 2.0000 0.0000 7.0000 2.3333 0.18 Mlodorum CC5/ 0.0000 4.0000 0.0000 4.0000 1.3333 0.10 Po/ypedilum CCB 5.0000 5.0000 0.0000 10.0000 3.3333 0.25 Stenochironomus CC16 0.0000 2.0000 4.0000 6.0000 2.0000 0.15 Crytptochironomus CC/3 0.0000 0.0000 8.0000 8.0000 2.6667 0.20 Crthocladl nae CO13 2.0000 7.0000 1.0000 10.0000 3.3333 0.25 Crthocladiinae COlo 3.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.0000 1.0000 0.08 Orlhocladitnae CO6 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.3333 0.03 {Lnotanypus CTPT 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.3333 0.03 Psychodidae 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.3333 0.03 Atherix sp 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.3333 0.03 COLEOPTERA midae C9O 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.3333 0.03 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.3333 0.03 TOTAL 15.0000 37.0000 18.0000 70.0000 23.3333 1.78 25 Potamojytes C//B Appendix 1b: River: Kiwira Date: 26:6:03 Type of Sample: Night Drift Duration of Sample: 10 min Current Speed = 0.35mSec-1 Area of Mouth of Net Submerged = 0.0625 m2 Taxon ND1 ND2 ND3 ND4 ND5 ND6 Total Mean NDI Colle mhola 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.1667 0.01 EPH EMEROPTERA Centroptilum E31 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 14.0000 14.0000 2.3333 0.18 Centroptilum E36 4.0000 6.0000 4.0000 8.0000 8.0000 0.0000 30.0000 5.0000 0.38 Centroptilum E/55 9.0000 3.0000 5.0000 1.0000 8.0000 1.0000 27.0000 4.5000 0.34 Afrobaetoies sp 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.1667 0.01 Caenomedea E/5./ 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 4.0000 3.0000 2.0000 10.0000 1.6667 0.13 Caenodes E/57 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.0000 0.5000 0.04 I rrco4tthus sp 2.0000 2.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.0000 8.0000 1.3333 0.10 Notonu rus 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.1667 0.01 TRICHOPTERA Ch e u ma topsyc h e 6 /q le ra 6.0000 2.0000 0.0000 7.0000 6.0000 6.0000 27.0000 4.5000 0.34 Leptocendae T34 0.0000 4.0000 2.0000 5.0000 7.0000 0.0000 18.0000 3.0000 0.23 Hyd roptr I rdae (l ndet. ) 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.1667 0.01 NydroptilaT24 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000 0.3333 0.03 DIPTERA gmuhum damnosum 7.0000 2.0000 0.0000 9.0000 3.0000 12.0000 33.0000 5.5000 0.42 Ni/odorum CC5/ 0.0000 4.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.0000 0.6667 0.05 Polypedilum CCB 6.0000 5.0000 0.0000 9.0000 2.0000 5.0000 27.0000 4.5000 0.34 ttenochtronomus Ll16 11.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.0000 0.0000 0.0000 17.0000 2.8333 0.22 Cryptochironomus CC/3 5.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.0000 0.8333 0.06 Nanocladius CO1 0.0000 0.0000 8.0000 0.0000 5.0000 0.0000 13.0000 2.',t667 0.17 Cncotopus bsantuensrs 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 12.0000 0.0000 12.0000 2.0000 0.15 Srthocladiinae CO13 0.0000 0.0000 3.0000 2.0000 0.0000 7.0000 12.0000 2.0000 0.15 Crthocladiinae COlO 11.0000 0.0000 4.0000 0.0000 0.0000 12.0000 27.0000 4.5000 0.34 Crthocladiinae (06 7.0000 7.0000 12.0000 0.0000 8.0000 0.0000 34.0000 5.6667 0.43 COLEOPTERA Elmrdae C9O 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 2.0000 6.0000 1.0000 0.08 Potamodfies C//B 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,0000 0,1667 0.01 PotamodFes C59 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.1667 0.01 Micronecta H19 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.1667 0.01 Plea sp 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.1667 0.01 P i sces 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00 0.00 TOTAL 71.0000 37.0000 57.0000 64.0000 64.0000 151.0000 En ?2A? 3.83 26 !FIrIrIrIl Appendix 1c: River: Kiwira Date: 26:6:03 Type of Sample: Surber Area of Surber =0.0225m? Taxon Surber I Surber 2 Surber 3 Surber 4 Surber 5 Total Mean Density EPH EMEROPTERA Centroptilum E31 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.2000 8.89 TRICHOPTERA Ch e u ma (opsyc h e {a la /e ra Leptoceridae T34 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.2000 8.89 3rthotrichra T14 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.2000 8.89 Crthotrrchra T39 2.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 3.0000 0.6000 26.67 DIPTERA Polypedlum CC5 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 3.0000 0.0000 4.0000 0.8000 35.s6 Po/ypedilum CCB 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.2000 8.89 Cryptochronomus CC2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.2000 8.89 Cyptochrronomus CC/5 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000 0.4000 17.78 -t -cntronomtnt cL/) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 6.0000 7.0000 1.4000 62.22 ,l)ttctochtrooomuS LL5 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.2000 8.89 5tenochironomus CCLZ 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.0000 3.0000 0.6000 26.67 Sttctochronomus CC47 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.2000 8.89 Stictochironomus CC49 3.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 3.0000 0.6000 26.67 Chironomrni(lndet.) 0.0000 2.0000 13.0000 5.0000 0.0000 20.0000 4.0000 177.78 Tanytarunt (/n,/et.) 0.0000 1.0000 2.0000 1.0000 2.0000 6.0000 1.2000 53.33 Nanoc/adrusCO1 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.2000 8.89 Cncotopus CO3 0.0000 0.0000 4.0000 5.0000 8.0000 17.0000 3.4000 151 .1 1 Crrcotopus CO4 6.0000 14.0000 11.0000 25.0000 8.0000 64.0000 12.8000 568.89 Cncotopus CO5 82.0000 8.0000 40.0000 39.0000 104.0000 273.0000 54.6000 2426.66 Crt cotopu s h sa otuensts 0.0000 0.0000 23.0000 17.0000 12.0000 52.0000 10.4000 462.22 Crrcotopus CO9 0.0000 5.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 s.0000 1.0000 44.44 Crthocladiinae CO13 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.2000 8.89 Cdhocladirnae COlO 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000 2.0000 4.0000 0.8000 35.56 Srthocladiinae CO6 0.0000 s.0000 36.0000 18.0000 13.0000 72.0000 14.4000 640.00 Cricotopus CC7 0.0000 1.0000 2.0000 2.0000 4.0000 9.0000 1.8000 80.00 Crthocladiinae (l ndet. ) 0.0000 13.0000 3.0000 21.0000 12.0000 49.0000 9.8000 435.56 Ab,labesmyia CfP3 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.2000 8.89 Procladtus CTP4 2.0000 3.0000 11.0000 9.0000 12.0000 37.0000 7.4000 328.89 Tipu lidae 0.0000 1.0000 2.0000 3.0000 1.0000 7.0000 1.4000 62.22 Ta F,a nrdae 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000 2.0000 0.4000 17.78 TOTAL 97.0000 56.0000 152.0000 153.0000 191.0000 649.0000 129.8000 5768.88 27 APPENDIX 2 DATABASE ON RIVER LUFILYO Appendix 2a: River: Lufilyo Date: 28:6:03 Type of Sample: Day Drift Current Speed: O.8m/Sec Duration: 10 min Area of Net Mouth Submerged: 0.0625m2 Taxon DD1 DD2 DD3 Total Mean DDI EPH EMEROPTERA Centropfilum E36 1 0 1 2 0.666667 0.02 Centropfilun E58 0 2 0 2 0.666667 0.02 A{robaetodes 1 0 0 1 0.333333 0.01 Centropfilum 8153 7 0 3 10 3.333333 0.11 Caenomeda 0 0 1 1 0.333333 0.01 TRICHOPTERA Leptoceri4ae T34 1 0 3 4 1.333333 0.04 l--leracteJ t aa 1 0 0 1 0.333333 0.01 DIPTERA gmuhum damnosum 7 13 20 40 13.33333 0.44 Ceratopogonrdae 1 0 0 1 0.333333 0.01 Po/;,pe,/ilum CCB 0 0 15 15 5.0000 0.17 ..hrronomrnr (L51 6 3 0 I 3.0000 0.10 Chr ronomin i (formosipennisl) CC52 0 0 13 13 4.333333 0.'14 Cryptochr ronomcrs CC15 9 0 15 24 8.0000 0.27 I --..)te nocnrronomus LL'|6 0 0 7 7 2.333333 0.08 Tan)Aarsus CTTI 0 10 0 10 3.333333 0.11 Crthocladius CO6 37 33 25 95 31.66667 1.06 Cncotopus CO7 5 0 0 5 1.666667 0.06 Cncotopus ksantuensts 1 18 I 28 9.333333 0.31 C*hocladiin ae CO13 27 0 0 27 9.0000 0.30 ChnotanypusCTPT 8 6 0 14 4.666667 0.16 Nanoc/adus 0 22 I 31 10.33333 0.34 lfieru sp 0 1 1 2 0.666667 0.02 lyra lidae 1 0 0 1 0.333333 0.01 COLEOPTERA lmrdae C9O 5 0 1 6 2.0000 0.07(Omotonust') C72 1 0 0 1 0.333333 0.01 Hydracarrna 1 1 0 2 0.666667 0.02 ip,d.t 0 1 0 1 0.333333 0.01IOIAL 120 110 123 353 117.6667 3.92 28 Appendix 2b: River: Lufilyo Date: 28:6:03 Type of Sample: Night Drift Current Speed (m/Sec): 0.8 Area of Net Submerged:0. 0625 m' Duration: 5 min Taxon ND1 ND2 ND5 ND4 ND5 ND6 Total Mea n NDI PLECOPTERA Neoperla spro ooooo o oooo ,4 00C)0 1 0000 1 0000 o oooo 6 0000 '1 0000 o07 EPH EMEROPTERA Centroptrlum E31 o oooo o oooo ooooo ooooo 5 000C) o oooo 5 000C) o.8333 o06 Centropttlum 836 5 C)00C) O OOCD 2 C)0C)0 ooooo ooooo 1 0C)0c) 8 0C)0C) 1.3333 o09 Ceotroptr/unt Ei8 ooooo o oooo o oooo 7 0000 o oooo 4 0000 11 0000 1 8333 o12 Alrohaetodes ooooo ooooo o oooo o oooo 1 0C)C)0 o oooo 1 0000 o.1667 o01 Centroffilum E153 3 C)C)C)C) I OOOO 3 C)oC)C) 1,1C)C)C)C) 4 OC)C)C) ,4 0000 36CCC,o 6.OOOO o40 Centropfilum E/58 o oooo o oooo o oooo ooooo ooooo 2 0000 2 C)0C)0 o.3333 o02 ClenonteJa l C)C)OO OCDOO o oooo ooooo ooooo ooooo 1 C)C)C)C) o 1667 o01 TRICHOPTERA Cheumatopsyche falcrfera 1 0000 o oooo o oooo ooooo 1 00C)C) ooooo 2 0000 o 5333 o02 itactobra T31 ooooo ooooo ooooo 2 0000 o oooo ooooo 2 00c)C) o.3333 o.o2 Leptocen.lae Tii 5 0000 1 0000 2 c)000 .1 C)oc)C) o oooo ooooo 12 00C)c) 2.OOOO o13 Ceraclea133 HyJroptrl4 724 ooooo ooooo 2 C)000 2 0000 ooooo o oooo 4 0000 o 6667 o04 Chrmata 716 o oooo o oooo o oooo ooooo t oooo ooooo 1 0000 o.1667 o01 Ecnomu> 728 ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo 1 0C)00 .1 00C)0 o.1667 o.01 DIPTERA 5rntrtltrnt Jamnosum 9 0C)00 100000 9 C)oC)C) 17 000C) 15 0000 13 0000 73 000C) 12.1667 o81 letatopogonrdae ooooo ooooo o oooo o oooo 2C,C,00 2 000C) ,4 0000 o 6667 c04 Nrlodorum sp o oooo o oooo o oooo ooooo 1 00C)0 ooooo 1 C)C)C)C) o.1667 o.01 CCB 1 0C)00 ooooo o oooo 5 C)C)00 2 C)000 ooooo I OOOO 1.3333 o.o9 (-hIonomrnr CC5l 1,i oooo 6 0000 ooooo ooooo n nnnn 6 C)000 26 C)C)00 4 3333 o29 Chttonomrnr 1 for mosrpenars/) CC52 ooooo ooooo 6 C)C)00 o oooo o oooo 6 0C}C)0 1 0000 c07 5tenochtonomus CC'16 o oooo o oooo I OOOO ooooo ooooo ooooo 8 C)c)c)o 1.3333 o.o9 Crthocladrus CO6 12C,C,C,} 9 C)C)00 5 0C)00 13 C)000 58 OOOO 5 000C) 1000000 16.6667 111 Crtcotopus CO7 ooooo ooooo o oooo o oooo 36 0000 o oooo 36 0000 6 0000 o40 OfthochJrnae CO1O ooooo ooooo o oooo I OOOO 6 0C)0C) o oooo 1.i oooo 2.3333 o16 C rr.-o top u s h sa n t u e n s t s 5 C}C)c)c) 7 CCCo 4 C)C)C)C) I OOOO I OOOO 25 C)OC)C) 55 0C)00 9.1667 o61 Crthocladrinae CO13 10 C)C)C)C) 7 00C)C) 5 0000 ooooo ooooo 22CCCo 44C,ooo 7 3333 o.49 Crtnohnvpus CTPT o oooo 2 C)C)C)C) o oooo ooooo ,1 C)C)C)C) 3 C)C)C)C) 9 C)C)C)C) 1 5000 olo NenochJtus o oooo o oooo ooooo o oooo 1 0000 o oooo 1 C)C)C)O o 1667 o01 lthent sp ooooo 3 0000 2 000C) ooooo 1 000C) o oooo 6 0C)00 1 0000 o07 LEPI DOPTERA Pyra lrdae 1 00C)0 3 0C)00 1 C)000 o oooo f-ioooo 2 C)C)C)C) 21 C)000 3.5000 o.23 COLEOPTERA Elmrdae C9O o oooo 2 C)C)C)O ooooo 2 C)C)oC) 2 c)00C) ooooo 6 C)C)C)C) 1 0000 o.o7 E/ntdae ( Omotonus/) C72 H1Jrcv'attts C)O o oooo o oooo o oooo ooooo 1 C)C)C)C) o oooo 1 C)C)C)C) o 1667 o01 Hydatrcus (C31) sp o oooo o oooo o oooo 1 00C)0 ooooo ooooo 1 oC)C)C) o 1667 o.01 Hydracarina o oooo o oooo 1 C)C)00 2 0000 ooooo 1 C)c)00 4 0C)00 o.6667 o.o4 IOTAL 65.0000 58.0000 52.0000 86.0000 164.0000 91.0000 516.0000 86.0000 5.73 29 Appendix 2c River: Lufilyo Type of Sample: Surber Date ofCollection 281h. June 2003 Area of Surber: o 0225m2 faxon Surber 1 Surb€r 2 Surber 3 Surber 4 Surber 5 Surber 6 Total Mean Oensity iponqrlrrdre 0 0000 1 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 'I 0000 0 1667 000 Ncmrtodr 0 0000 0 0000 1m00 3 @O0 0 0000 1 0000 5 0000 0 8333 000 SLgochtctr 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 2 0000 1 0000 3 0000 0 5000 000 lollem boh 0 00@ 0 00m 0m@ 3 0000 0 0000 0 0000 3 0000 0 5000 000 EPH EMEB.OPTERA Centtofirlum spl 0 0000 39 0000 0 0000 4 0000 0 0000 0 0000 43 0000 7 1667 000 Ccnttogtrlum rpl 2 0000 1 0000 0 m00 2 omo 51 mm 6 0000 62 00@ 1 0 3333 000 icntroptrlum sp 3 0 0000 0 0000 3 m00 00m 3 0@0 0 0000 6 0000 1 0000 000 Baetrs sp (rnd<t ) 0 omo 't 0000 0 0000 1 0000 0 0000 0 0000 2 0000 0 3333 000 46ohreto{es sp 3 0000 15 0000 6 0000 13 0000 107 0000 1 7 0000 1 61 0000 000 C horotcrpes 0 0000 0 00m 0 0000 1 0000 0 0000 0 0000 1 0000 0 1667 000 TT,ICHOPTEB.A Hydropsychrdac (rndet) 0 0000 2 0000 0 0m0 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 2 0000 000 Hydropsychry'lc T31r 0 0000 4 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 4 0000 0 6667 000 Lcpto(.ildac T34 U UUUU 5 0000 73 0000 0 0000 4 0000 1 0000 83 0000 000 frrchoptcra (rndet) 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 o moo 000m 3 0000 3 0000 0 5mo 000 t-lydropt'ldac (l ndst) 2 0000 2 0m0 1 m00 2 0000 I 0000 3 0000 19 0000 3 1667 0@ Hy.la,pth sp o 0000 0 0000 0 0000 1 0000 0 0000 0 0000 I 0000 0 1667 000 Orfhotrchn 7A9 0 0000 0 0000 4 0m0 3 0000 0 0000 0 0000 7 0000 1 1667 000 DIPTERA tmuhum damnosum 2 0000 13 0000 0 0000 3 00@ I 0000 82 0000 109 0000 18 1667 000 Psychodrdre o 0000 0 0000 0 0000 1 0000 0 0000 0 0000 1 0000 0 1667 000 0 0000 0 0000 2 0000 0 0000 I 0000 0 0000 10 0000 1 6667 000 Chronomrnr (lndet,) 5 0000 1 1 0000 '17 0000 15 0000 I 0000 16 0000 73 0000 121667 000 CnTtochntnomus CC17 1 0000 0 0000 1 0000 0 00m 0 0000 0 00@ 2 0000 U SJJ 000 tltttot h I ronom u 5 LLJ ;i 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 1 0000 U UUW 1 0000 0 1667 000 Ctyptochronomus CCB 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 1 0000 0 0000 1 0000 0 1667 000 Tanr4asus CITI 0 0000 0 oo00 0 m00 0 0000 2 0000 0 0000 2 0000 000 Tant4aEus angustus 0 0@0 0 0000 3 0000 0 0000 6 0@0 5 omo 14 0000 000 finyhrsrnr rndet 9 0000 0 0000 16 0000 0 @00 ?nlm 2 0000 29 0000 4 8333 000 ranyttRu3 CTT8 0 0000 1 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 1 0000 0 1667 000 )rthochdrrnrc (rnd<tO 34 0000 25 0000 22 0000 2 0000 2 0000 25 0000 1100000 000 Crycc,top us q ua d n A sc ra { u s 0 moo 't1 0000 0 0000 0 0000 1 0000 0 0000 12 0000 2 00@ 000 Cncotol.u5 CO; 0 0000 0 0000 3 0000 8 0000 6 0000 0 0000 17 0000 2 8333 000 CttcolopLt\ COl 3 0000 12 0000 24 0000 5 0000 8 0000 2 0000 s4 0000 I 0000 000 Cacotofus COs 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 14 0000 2 0000 2 0000 1 8 0000 3 0000 000 Orthoc/adrus COo 0 0000 10 moo 73 00m 73 0000 0 0000 4 0000 160 0000 26 6667 000 Crrcott-fus COI 0 m00 3 0000 0 0000 20 0000 1 0000 0 0000 24 0000 4 0000 000 Clcolopus CCP 42 0000 2 0000 3 0000 19 0000 12 0000 0 0000 78 0000 13 0000 000 Crthochdrnrc CO1O 80 0000 2 0000 't3 0000 13 0000 2 0000 1 0000 111 0000 18 5000 000 C n c.-{o I u s k 11 ntue ns ts 9 0000 28 0000 0 0000 6'1 0000 3 0000 0 0000 101 0000 16 8333 000 Crthocladrrnrc Co13 2 00m 2 0000 11 0000 4 00@ 0 0000 3 00m 22onfo 3 6667 000 N'aoocladtus sp 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 5 0000 1 0000 0 0000 6 0000 1 0000 000 Ablsbepylq p1c1ps: 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 2 0000 2 0000 0 3333 000 Procladrur CTP+ 18 0000 5 0000 0 0000 11omo 20 0000 7 0000 61 0000 10 1667 000 Ianypus fuscurl 0 0000 0 0@o 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 2 0000 2 0000 000 hnypodrnrc (lndet ) 2 0000 0 0000 1 0000 0 00@ 1 @00 0 0000 4 0000 0 6667 000 rrpu lidrc s 0000 s5 0000 0 0000 0 0000 55 0000 11 0000 126 0000 21 0000 000 frbrordtc 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 1 1 0000 0 0000 11 0000 1 8333 000 )ptcr. (lnd<t) 0 0000 0 0000 1 0000 2 0000 0 0000 0 0000 3 0000 0 5000 000 30 LEPIDOPTEN.A Pyrr[dac 0 0000 1 0000 0 0000 0 0@0 0 0000 0 0000 1 0000 0 1667 000 MEGATOPTET.A 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 @00 1m@ 0 0000 1 0000 0 16675tsyrdae 000 TOTA L 21 9.00 25t.00 278.00 289.00 340.00 r96.00 r573.@ 2€2.17 0.00 J1 Appendix 3a APPENDIX 3: DATABASE ON RIVER MBAKA River Mbaka fype of Sample: Day Drift (Pre-Treatment) Duration: 5min Current Speed:0. 65 m/Sec Time of Sampling: '1500 hr Area of Net Mouth Submerged = 0.0625 m2 Date: 1 7:03 Taxon Drift 1 Drift 2 Drift 3 Total Mean DI Centroptilum E31 1 0 2 3 1 1.7094E-05 Caenomedea 0 0 1 1 0.333333 5.69801E- 06 Tncorl4hus sp 0 0 1 1 0.333333 s 69801 E- 06 Neoperla sp 0 3 1 4 1.333333 22792E-6 Leptoceridae T34 0 2 2 4 1.333333 2.2792E-05 C heu matopsyche ta lcifera 0 2 0 n 0.666667 1.1396E-05 9mu/ium damnosum 0 E 0 5 1 666667 2.849E-05 Stenochironomus CC16 0 I 7 16 5.333333 9 11681E- 05 PolypedlumCCB 3 0 I 11 3.666667 6.26781 E- 05 Crthocladiinae CO13 0 4 6 10 3.333333 5 69801 E- 05 Crthocladiinae COlO 1 5 6 12 4 6.83761 E- 05 TOTAL 3 21 20 44 2.5 0.0004 32 Appendix 3b: River: Mbaka Dale:117 I 03 Type of Sample: Night Drift (Pre-Treatment) Time of Sample: 21:00 hr Duration:5 min Current Speed (m/Sec) = 0.65 Taxon Drift1 Dritl2 Drift 3 Total Mean DI EPHEMEROPTERA Thraulus sp 0 2 0 2 0.6667 0.05 Tricorythus sp 1 1 4 6 2.0000 0.16 Ephoron sp 0 0 1 1 0.3333 0.03 Choroterpes 0 0 1 1 0.3333 0.03 Caenodes 0 4 0 4 1.3333 0.11 Adenophlebordes E9 0 0 1 1 0.3333 0.03 Centroptilum E31 0 12 10 22 7.3333 0.60 Centroptilum E36 7 5 12 6.0000 0.49 Centroptilum E158 0 0 6 6 2.0000 0.16 Caenomedea E154 0 0 1 1 0.3333 0.03 PLECOPTERA Neoperla adusta 2 2 0 4 1.3333 0.11 TRICHOPTERA Che um atopsyche falcifera 2 1 1 4 1.3333 0.11 Philopotamidae (Chimana ) T 16 0 1 0 1 0.3333 0.03 Ecnomidae T28 0 0 1 1 0.3333 0.03 Leptoceridae T34 0 o 7 16 5.3333 0.44 D!PTERA Ceratopogonidae 1 1 1 3 1.0000 0.08 Polypedilum CC9 5 10 15 7.5000 0.62 Simulium damnosum s.l. 7 8 6 21 7.0000 0.57 Orthocladius CO10 0 6 3 I 3.0000 0.25 C ricoto p u s kisanfuensis 1 1 1.0000 0.08 Cryptochironomus CC13 0 0 I I 2.6667 0.22 Orthocladius CO13 3 I 2 13 4.3333 0.36 Nilodorum CC51 0 18 0 18 6.0000 0.49 Clinotanypus CTPT 1 0 0 1 0.3333 0.03 OLEOPTERA Dytiscidae (Hydaticus) C31 0 2 0 2 0.6667 0.05 Elmidae C90 1 0 4 5 1.6667 0.14 118 1 0 0 1 0.3333 0.03 0 1 0 1 0.3333 0.03 Hydrophilidae (indet) 0 2 0 2 0.6667 0.05 Eerosus C64 0 0 1 1 0.3333 0.03 Total 26 88 69 183 61.0000 5.01 33 Appendix 3c Type of Sample: Day Drift (Post Treatment) Date of Sample: 2 July 2003 Time of Sample: 15.00 hr Duration: 5 Min Current Speed = 0.73m/Sec Area of Net Mouth Submerged: 0.0625m2 Taxon D1 o2 D3 Total Mean DI EPHEMEROPTERA / hraulus 13 25 41 79 26.3333 1.92 Centroptilotdes E36 30 19 38 87 29.0000 2.12 Lhoroteryes L/ 0 30 21 51 17.0000 1.24 Centropt/um E38 0 22 0 22 7.3333 0.54 Caenomedea 0 24 18 42 14.0000 1.02 r1/enophlebofies 20 0 20 40 13.3333 0.97 El53 0 0 23 23 7.6667 0.56 PLECOPTERA Neoper/a sp 19 0 0 19 6.3333 0.46 TRICHOPTERA StacobiaISl 8 13 0 21 7.0000 0.51 ^ ,tUrthotilchB 159 0 18 0 18 6.0000 0.44 Ecnomrdae T3O I 0 0 I 3.0000 0.22 Leptoceridae 0 ndet.) I34 20 0 38 58 19.3333 1_41 C h e t t ma to psyc h e fa lq le ra 0 0 18 18 6.0000 0_44 Ecnomidae T2B 0 0 21 21 7.0000 0.51 Hydrop1hT24 0 0 9 9 3.0000 0.22 DIPTERA SirnuLum damnosums.l 303 450 62 815 271 6667 19.85 Ceratopeg1n*7U, 0 0 5 5 1.6667 0.12 Nilodorum CC5O 0 8 0 8 2.6667 0.19 *,'l r\ ilodoru m LL) I 30 0 0 30 10.0000 0.73 Polypedilcrm CC8 0 12 25 37 12.3333 0.90 Iitictoc h i ro no m us C_C49 0 19 0 19 6.3333 0.46 itenochrronomus CC16 0 16 19 35 11.6667 0.85 3(hocladius CO6 0 0 34 34 11.3333 0.83 Orthocladrnae COlO 60 23 15 98 32.6667 2.39 Cn'cotop u s kisa n tuensts 80 27 9 116 38.6667 2.82 Orthocladiinae CO15 0 33 32 65 21.6667 1.58 Cl r nota nypu s CTPT 0 23 7 30 10.0000 0.73 COLEOPTERA Elmidae C9O 0 4 0 4 1.3333 0.10 PotamodFes C11B 0 0 11 11 3.6667 0.27 H vd raca ri na 6 0 I 15 s.0000 0.37 Tota I 598 766 475 1839 613 44.79 34 Appendix 3d: River: Mbaka Type of Sample Nrght Dnfl (Post Treatment) Date of Sample: 2 7 03 Duratron of Sample: 5 mrn Trme of Sampling: 21.00hr Current 0 73mlSec LEPIDOPTER,A Taxon Drift'l Dtfit2 Drift 3 Total Mean ot EPH EMEROPTERA Ephoron sp '14 2 7 23 7.6667 0.56 lenttogtrlum E 38 5 79 84 42.0000 3.07 3entrogtrlor{es E56 36 20 16 72 24.0000 175 Chorote7,es 13 0 0 13 4 3333 o32 A{ronurus 18 0 13 31 1 0 3333 0.75 8 17 25 12.5000 0.91 C,tenoJe: 14 12 19 45 15 0000 1.10 ftrcon,(hus 0 5 0 5 1 6667 o.12 A./enophlefude: 0 12 0 12 4.0(x)0 0.29 Cf,enome,leJ 0 16 0 16 5.3333 0.39 Thntthr 0 5 11 16 E aaaa 0.39 tentpPttlutn L lJ) 0 0 8 8 2 6667 0.19 P LECOPTE RA ,\'eopcrll spro 22 10 21 53 17.6667 129 TRICHOPTERA Hydroptrla T2.i 18 9 0 27 9.0000 0.66 Leptocer r{qe T34 30 25 594 649 216 3333 15.81 C h eu rn a top s y c h e fi I c fe 11 141 15 0 156 s2.0000 3.80 Cr"thotrrchra T5O 3 0 0 3 1.0000 o07 Ecnomqs T28 7 0 16 23 7.6667 056 SQctobra T51 0 13 0 13 4 3333 o32 Hy{roTtrlrdqe ln{<t) 0 0 7 7 o17 Chtmarra petn 0 0 8 I 2.6667 0.'t9 leraclea T22 0 0 3 3 1 0000 0.07 DIPTERA Sntu/rcr nt,l7 rnnosu m s / 10 13 31 54 18.0000 132 le14topogoor{1e 3 3 5 11 3.6667 o.27 Polvpellurn CCB 0 20 0 20 6.6667 0.49 5teno;hrronornus CCl6 94 15 0 109 36.3333 265 Sygtochrrooomus CC18 0 0 32 32 10.6667 0.78 Nr/olorun CC51 0 0 1U 'tu 61.3333 448 Ortho;l1tlu:CO6 12 0 46 58 19.3333 1 .41 ctrhocfi.lrrnle CO1O 13 18 24 55 18.3333 1.34 Crthocladrrnae CO13 93 0 0 93 31.0000 226 ChnobnvpusCTPT 0 0 59 59 19.6667 1.44 I 7 5 13 25 8.3333 061 NATA tdae O 10 8 3 0 11 3.6667 o27 CoenSgrrrd4eO 11 0 7 0 7 2.3333 0.17 COLEOPTER.A Eubrtanax C2O6 't2 0 0 12 4 0000 0.29 Hy{ toph rlr!qe 2 0 0 2 0.6667 005 c90 0 t 11 14 4.6667 o.34 H EMIPTERA Plerdae 2 0 0 2 0 6667 0.05 Eutymetr; H 11 5 0 6 11 3.6667 o.27 MroonecQ sp 4 0 0 4 1.3333 010 fota I 594 218 1213 2055 6-85.(xrco 50.05 35 Appendix 3e River Mbaka Time: 15.00 hr Type of Sample: Day Drift(Post Treatment) Duration: 5 min Area of Net Submerged = 0.0625 m2 Current Speed = 0.40 m/Sec. Date of Sample: 3:7:03 CC49 LEPIDOPTERA 10 Taxon Drift 1 Drift 2 Drift 3 Total Mean DI EPH EM EROPTERA Caenome,Jea 4 4 4.00 0.53 I nrJufttS 3 3 3.00 0.40 PLECOPTERA 0.00 Neoper/a spro 6 6 6.00 0.80 TRICHOPTERA Cheumatopsyche rtb/era 13 13 13.00 1.73 Ecnomus T3O 3 3 3.00 0.40 Ecnomus T2B 5 5 5.00 0.67 Hydroptilid3e I ndet) 3 3 3.00 0.40 Leptocerrdae T34 I 8 8.00 1.07 Simulium damnosum s.l. 15 15 15.00 2.00 Ceratopegeni4,. 2 2 2.00 0.27 Orthocladinae COlO 8 I 8.00 1.07 10 10.00 1.33 Pytalidae 8 8 8.00 1.07 COLEOPTERA Elmidae C9O I 8 8.00 1.07 Total 96 96 96.00 12.80 36 Appendix 3f: River Mbaka Type of Sample: nrght Drtfi Date of Sample 3 7 03 Duration of Sample 5 min Trme of Sampling: 21.00hr CurrentSpeed=04m/Sec faxon Orift 1 Otifi.2 Drift 3 Total Mean DI EPH EMEROPTERA Ephonn sp 3 1 0 4 1 3333 0.18 Centroptrlum E 58 0 8 0 8 2.6667 036 Centro7trlor{es E35 0 3 0 3 1.0000 0.13 Caenode: 2 6 0 8 2.6667 036 Cf,enorneJeJ 2 4 4 10 3.3333 044 Thnulu: 0 3 10 3.3333 o.44 PLECOPTERA ,\'eoperll 4.1p 0 3 6 9 3 0000 0.40 TRICHOPTER.A Leptocendae T34 7 14 9 30 10.0000 1.33 Cheurnabpsyche 6bfera 6 , 13 22 0.98 f tthotrrchra T5O 0 1 0 1 0.3333 0.04 Ecnomus T28 0 2 5 7 2 3333 0.31 Ecnomus T3O 0 0 3 3 1 0000 013 fr t;enodes T15 0 1 0 1 0.3333 004 DIPTERA 5trrurh rn,t:lrnnosrrn : / 10 0 15 25 I 3333 111 Ceratopogon t{qe 2 2 2.0000 0.27 rolypc4tlum LC6 0 9 0 9 3 UDO 0.40 5knochmtnonus CC16 0 8 0 8 2.6667 0.36 lhrronomrntLL4Y '13 16 10 39 13.0000 1.73 Ofthocla,!rtrCO6 7 0 0 7 2 3333 031 OrthoclaJmae COIO I 8 7ffi7 1.O2 Cu:otopus krAnfuensr 0 6 0 6 2 0000 0.27 f,rthocladrrnae CO15 0 2 0 2 0.6667 0.09 Atherrx sp 0 0 2 0 6667 0.09 LEPI DOPTERA Pyra lrdae 0 0 8 I 2.6667 0.36 COLEOPTERA H y{ ropb rL{qe 0 0 3 1.0000 0.13 Elmrdae C9O 4 8 17 5.6667 076 Elmrdae C118 0 I 0 8 2.6667 036 H EMIPTERA Plea sp 2 0 0 2 0.6667 0.09 Ptsces 0 1 0 1 0.3333 fotr I 66 115 97 274 92.6667 12.36 37 004 Appendix 39 Pre-Trealmenl Surber Nemaloda EPH EMER.OPTERA Baetrdae River Mbaka lpinda 2 Baettdae Baetrdae Baetrdae Baetldae Baetrdae Ade hlehordes E9 E11 Notoou trrs T Ct Neu rocaents (tndet ) Baettdae/ PLECOPTERA TRICHOPTERA ae (lnd<t) Orthotr rchra 139 ODONATA Lrbellulrdae O.ir5 O3+ D IPTE R.A 5tmultum (damnosum) Lhilonomlnr LL5 L,)lronornrnr CC5 ChrronomrnrC.iO Lhilonomrnr LL4/ Chtronomrnr CC49/ Lhrronomlnt LL5L) Ta Ta retntCTT4 Na noclad rus Co1 c03 co.i co5/ Orthocladrus CO5 co7 Ct krsaDtuensrs (CO12) ttnae COl5 Ahla crPl Procladrus CTP.I Ta CTP5/ Ta Iacustns (CTP6) Other Dr Taxon Surber 1 Surber 2 Surbe13 Surbe14 Surber 5 fotal Mean Density 0.00 0.0( 00c 1.0c 0.oc 1.00 02c 883 0.00 0.0( 0.0c 00c 2.ff 2.00 0.4c 17.78 2.00 100 28 0C 00c 0.0( 31 00 6.2C 275.56 6.00 0.00 12 0C 3.0c 0.0( 21.O4 4.2C 186 67 >tium E27 1.00 30.0( 0.m 0.0c 33.0( 64.00 12.8C 568.8S 18.00 0.0c 11.0C 204 0.0( 31.00 6.2C 275.5e 100 4.U 12.N 5.0c 1.0( 23.00 4.6C 204 44 1.00 2.Ot 1.00 00c 00( 4.00 0.8c 35.56 0.00 12.OC 0.00 0.00 0.0c 12.00 2.4C 106.67 0.00 00c 0m 14.00 00c 14 00 28C 124 44 roba<todes E.i6 1 .0( 00c 000 1.00 00c 200 o4c 17 7t roroterpes sp 400 3.0c 6.00 10.0c 00c 23 00 4.6C 204.44 200 4.0( 200 0.00 00c 800 16C 71.11 4.00 15.0C 600 22.N 4.0c 51.00 10.2C 453 3: 0.0( 4.0c 2.OA 700 0.oc 13.0( 26C 'l 15.5€ 0.0( 00c 000 000 3.0c 3.0( 06c 26.6i 0.00 10c 000 4.00 0.0c 5.00 10c 44.44 0.0( 0.0c 204 000 1.OC 3.0c 06c 26 6i :PhemerO 0.0c 0.0c 15.00 1.00 0.oc 16 0C 3.20 142.22 0.0c 3.0c 400 0.00 10c 8.0c 160 71.11 6,0c 12.O4 12.OO 16 00 3.00 49.0t 9.80 43s.56 00c 2.N 2.X 0.00 1.00 5.OC 1.00 44.44 00c 100 00c 100 000 2tr 0.40 17 78 00c 0.00 0.0( 1.00 100 2.0c 0.40 17.78 (rLdae TI.i/ 00c 000 00c 2.00 000 20c 040 17 78 0.m 0.00 0.0( 2.OO 0.fi 2.m 040 17.78 0.00 000 20c 000 0.0( 2.OA 0.4( 17 78 1.00 000 0.0c 0.00 00( 100 o2( 8.89 0.00 1.00 10c 0.00 0.0( 2.04 04c 17 78 000 1.0( 2.N 3.OC 00c 6.00 1.2C E1 aa 2.00 2.Ot 400 40c 20c 14 00 2.8C 124.44 0.00 10( 100 0.00 2.OC 4.00 0.8c 35.56 0.00 1.0c 4.00 0.m 0.0c 5.0( 1.00 44.44 3o( 5.0c 000 0.00 0.00 8oc 1.60 71 11 0.0c 1.0c 000 000 2.OA 3.0c 060 26.67 1.0c 20c 6.00 10.00 1.00 20.0c 400 177 78 00c 0.00 0.00 000 100 1.0c 0.20 8.89 1.m 0.00 1.OC 23.m 2.O0 27.O4 540 240.O4 700 17.00 0.0c 0.00 4U 28m 5.6( 248.89 1.00 000 10.0c 0.00 10( 12 00 2 4(. 105.67 0.00 300 0.0c 100 0.0( 4.00 08c 35.56 500 1.00 0.00 3.0c 2.OC 11.00 2.2C 97.78 600 0.0( 1.00 0.0c 00( 700 1.4C 62.22 200 26.0C 16 00 30.00 11.0C 85.0( 17 0e 755.55 500 00c 6.00 1.0c 00c 12 00 24C 106 6i 000 00c 0.00 1.00 00c 1.00 o.2c 88S 2.OC 10.0c 5.00 600 40c 27.N 5.40 240.OC 00c 20c 200 1.00 0.00 5.0c 1.00 44 44 2.OC 000 3.Ot 12.00 0.00 17.0C 340 151.11 70c 0.0c 000 000 6.00 13.0C 260 1 15.56 00c 1.00 0.0( 2.OO 000 30c 0.60 26.67 0.0c 0.00 00( 0.00 1.00 1.0c o20 889 COLEOPTERA 38 -beumatopsyche sp tnrdae C58 Elmrdae C59 Llm ae C9O raca fl na 0do.od o d 1.d o.d l.d o.2d 8.Be 10d e.0d 4od 3ool 1 od 1s od 3.6d 160.00 o0d 1d o.od 1 ool o od 2 od o.4d 17 ta fotal 179.0q93.00i 1m.0q 193.001 88.0q 736.001 117.2q 6il2.22 2 17 39 1 Appendix 3h River Mbaka Type of Sample: Surber Date: 3rd. July 2003 Time: 10hr. (Post Treatment) Area of Surber=0.0225m2 Taxon Surber 1 Surber 2 Surber 3 Surber 4 Surber 5 Surber 6 IL, IAL MEAN Density Hydracarina 0 1 1 0 I 0 300 0.50 2222 PLECOPTERA Neoperla spio 0 1 3 0 1 2 7.00 117 51 85 EPH EMEROPTERA Caenomedea sp 1 I 4 I 4 13 38.00 633 281.48 A{ronurus sp 0 2 0 0 0 2 4.00 067 29 63 AdenophlebonJes sp 0 0 0 31 0 0 31.00 5.17 229 63 Centroptrloides E56 0 0 0 0 1 0 1.00 017 741 Centropfilum E15B 0 1 0 0 0 0 1.00 017 7.41 Tncory4hus sp El 0 0 0 0 0 10 10.00 167 74 07 TRICHCPTERA C h e u m a to psyc h e sp (T34) 3 27 20 12 37 75 174.OO 29 00 1 288.89 Ecnomus spT11 0 0 0 0 1 0 1.00 017 7.41 Ecnomrdae T35 0 0 0 0 1 0 100 0.17 7.41 Orthotnchia spG5O) 0 0 0 0 0 3 300 0.50 2222 DIPTERA Ceratopogel',14u. 0 1 o 2 0 0 9.00 150 66.67 Psychodidae 0 0 5 11 n 0 16.00 2.67 118.52 gmuhum damnosum 1 5 4 11 0 8 29 00 4.83 214 81 Po/ypedlum CC5 11 0 n 0 0 0 11.00 183 81.48 Polype,/ilum CCB 0 15 7 14 38 7 81.00 13.50 600 00 Strctochrronomus CC49 0 0 I 0 n n 900 1.50 66.67 It/anocladius CO1 0 0 0 1 n 4 500 0.83 37.04 C n cotop u s q u4 d n {a sc r at u s rcO2, 0 0 0 0 0 19 19.00 3.17 140.74 CncotopusCO4 0 0 0 12 0 0 12.00 200 88.89 C ricotop u s kisa n t u e n s is (CO1 2) 0 0 0 3 0 n 3.00 0.50 22.22 C n cotop u s q u ad ri rt sc t atu s rcO2) 0 24 0 n 0 n 24 00 4.00 177 78 Crthocladrinae CO13 1 1 1 3 0 1 700 1.17 51.85 Ablabesmyia spCTP3 0 0 n 6 0 0 6.00 100 44 44 TANYPUS CTP6 I 0 n 0 0 0 8.00 1.33 59.26 Atherrx sp 0 0 0 J 0 0 3.00 050 2222 Tipu lidae 0 0 0 0 0 2 2.00 033 14.81 LEPIDOPTERA Pyra/i,{ae 0 0 2 0 0 0 2.00 033 14.81 T 40 CDONATA Phaon spO.26 0 0 0 0 0 1 1.00 017 7.41 COLEOPTERA Hy.lrowtus (C2O) 0 0 0 0 0 2 200 0.33 14 81 Elmrdae C9O 3 5 5 4 9 18 44.00 7.33 325.93 Elmt{ae C117 0 0 0 1 0 0 100 0.17 741 Potamoisttessp C11B 0 1 4 3 0 I 16.00 2.67 118.52 Berosus C 6,/ 0 0 2 0 0 0 200 0.33 14 81 HEMIPTERA Conxidae H26 0 0 2 0 0 0 2.O0 033 14 81 rOTAL 28 92 75 't25 93 175 588.00 98.00 4355.55120 {1