| Lake Pontchartrain Basin: Bottom Sediments and Related Environmental Resources |
Table B3. Station class codes used for EPA EMAP data
in "GEN_CMMNTS" field in sediment database
| Table B3 refers to the selection process for USEPA EMAP
stations. It may be noted that the EMAP monitoring concept called for
stations whose positions were selected in statistically random ways,
permitting the agency to compare regional areas in a statistically
conformable way. Many of the EMAP stations were resampled in successive
years and therefore reveal spatial variability (Macauley and Summers,
1998).
Also, see http://www.epa.gov/emap/html/dataI/estuary/data/ for further information regarding the EMAP program. |
| Code | Explanation |
| BASE | Stations that were randomly selected based on EMAP sampling design (grid). |
| INDEX | Stations that were paired with small estuary and tidal river base sites. They were intended to represent the area of sediment deposition with the estuary or river. Not random. |
| ITE | Indicator Testing and Evaluation Sites - only for 1991. Selected specifically to test indicators' ability to discriminate between degraded and reference sites. |
| SUPPL | Stations that were randomly selected by using the EMAP grid design and reducing it to fit within a single estuary. |
| QA/QC | The replicate sampling of a base station (exact location) within a short time span. (Collection methods quality reference.) |
| REP-91 | Between-year replicates of 1991 base sites. These 1991 sites were sampled every year to represent variation and long term trends. (No within-year replicates, see next definition.) |
| REP-92 REP-93 REP-94 |
Randomly selected sites that are "near-by" to one another to evaluate variability within a given area (for example, within a hexagon or small estuary). Used to test the EMAP design. |
| VARIANCE | Trend sites selected to evaluate variation and long term trends (selected in addition to the REP-91 sites). |
EPA Disclaimer: "Although the data described in this article have been funded wholly or in part by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its EMAP Estuaries Program, it has not been subjected to Agency review, and therefore does not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency and no official endorsement should be inferred."
Back to Appendix B |
Forward to Table B4 |
