Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Update on Systemwide Benthic Flux Coring and Site Specific Benthic Flux Processes (Methods Comparison).
Update on Systemwide Benthic Flux Coring and Site Specific Benthic Flux Processes (Methods Comparison).
June 24, 2008
Benthic Flux Projects:Benthic Flux Projects:
2 Projects: Systemwide Cores (remote) and Chambers (in situ) vs. Cores (remote) 2 Projects: Systemwide Cores (remote)
and Chambers (in situ) vs. Cores (remote)
Objectives
Provide estimates representative of system-wide benthic nutrient (Nitrogen and Phosphorus) flux rates;
Identify “hot spots” for these fluxes;
Identify processes (and associated methodologies) driving fluxes in this system (i.e. diffusive vs. advective/groundwater).
Objectives
Provide estimates representative of system-wide benthic nutrient (Nitrogen and Phosphorus) flux rates;
Identify “hot spots” for these fluxes;
Identify processes (and associated methodologies) driving fluxes in this system (i.e. diffusive vs. advective/groundwater).
50 Sites for SYSTEMWIDE Core Incubation and 4 Sites for Chamber/Core Incubations of Benthic
Nutrient Fluxes in the SLE
50 Sites for SYSTEMWIDE Core Incubation and 4 Sites for Chamber/Core Incubations of Benthic
Nutrient Fluxes in the SLE
•SLE Benthic Flux Core Sites
•SLE Benthic Flux Chamber/Core Sites
•SFWMD Structure and WQM Sites
Created by Cecilia Conrad
Sediment Chambers/Cores: Incubation DiagramSediment Chambers/Cores: Incubation Diagram
Remotely Incubated Cores
In Situ Chambers
In SituWater Column
68 CPN68 Grain Size
68 Chl a
IncubationWater Column
IncubationPore Water
Core SedimentSurface
Analyses: 54 StationsAnalyses: 54 Stations
~800 dissolved nutrients and gases and particulates
5700 dissolved nutrients/gases
PAR (Sediment Surface)
DepthTemperatureSalinity
500 dissolved nutrients
Sediment CharacteristicsSediment Characteristics
Carbon (umoles/cc)
Fine Grain 0.425-0.075 mm
Very Fine Grain
St. Lucie River Estuary: Light and Sediment Chlorophyll St. Lucie River Estuary: Light and Sediment Chlorophyll
% Transmittance (% Light Sediment Surface)
Sediment Chlorophyll a (ug/cc: 0-1 cm)
Sediment Chlorophyll and CarbonSediment Chlorophyll and CarbonSe
dim
ent
Chl
a (µ
g/cc
)
Sedi
men
t C
arbo
n (m
g/g)
North Fork
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160Carbon Chl a
South Fork Mid Estuary Lower Estuary
Systemwide Fluxes: DOSystemwide Fluxes: DO
DO
Flu
x (m
mol
/m2 /d
)
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
dark light
North Fork South Fork Mid Estuary Lower Estuary
Systemwide Fluxes: AmmoniumSystemwide Fluxes: AmmoniumN
H4
Flux
(µm
ol/m
2 /d)
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200dark light
North Fork South Fork Mid Estuary Lower Estuary
PO4
Flux
(µm
ol/m
2 /d)
Systemwide Fluxes: PhosphateSystemwide Fluxes: Phosphate
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800dark light
North Fork South Fork Mid Estuary Lower Estuary
NO
3Fl
ux (µ
mol
/m2 /d
)
Systemwide Fluxes: NitrateSystemwide Fluxes: Nitrate
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000dark light
North Fork South Fork Mid Estuary Lower Estuary
TDN
Flu
x (µ
mol
/m2 /d
)
Systemwide Fluxes: Total Dissolved NitrogenSystemwide Fluxes: Total Dissolved Nitrogen
North Fork South Fork Mid Estuary Lower Estuary
-20000
-15000
-10000
-5000
0
5000
10000
15000dark light
Systemwide Fluxes: Total Dissolved PhosphorusSystemwide Fluxes: Total Dissolved Phosphorus
TDP
Flux
(µm
ol/m
2 /d)
North Fork South Fork Mid Estuary Lower Estuary
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400dark light
SiO
4Fl
ux (µ
mol
/m2 /d
)
Systemwide Fluxes: SilicateSystemwide Fluxes: Silicate
-10000
-8000
-6000
-4000
-2000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000dark light
North Fork South Fork Mid Estuary Lower Estuary
Comparisons: DO FluxesComparisons: DO Fluxes
Reasonably Good Agreement In the DARK
pp = photoperiod (12h)
DO
Flu
x (m
mol
/m2 /p
p)
North Fork South Fork Mid Estuary Lower Estuary
-20
-10
0
10
20
30SMASTcores HPLcores HPLchmbers
Light and Dark DO FluxesLight and Dark DO Fluxes
DO
Flu
x (m
mol
/m2 /d
*)
-20-10
0102030405060
DarkCores LightCores DarkChambers LightChambers
pp = photoperiod (12h)
North Fork South Fork Mid Estuary Lower Estuary
-6000-5000-4000-3000-2000-1000
010002000
DarkCores LightCores DarkChambers LightChambers
Light and Dark DenitrificationLight and Dark Denitrification
N2
Flux
(µm
ol/m
2 /d*)
pp = photoperiod (12h)
North Fork South Fork Mid Estuary Lower Estuary
Sediment Chlorophyll and CarbonSediment Chlorophyll and CarbonSe
dim
ent
Chl
a (µ
g/g)
* 10
Sedi
men
t C
arbo
n (m
g/g)
High C/High Pheophytin ContentHigh Chl
Sedi
men
t Phe
opyt
in(µ
g/g)
North Fork South Fork Mid Estuary Lower EstuaryHigh C/low Pheophytin Content
High Chl High C/Low Phaeophytin ContentLow Chl
Decreasing C/High Pheophytin ContentLow Chl
QUALITY of Sediment Organic Matter
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500Carbon Chl a Pheophytin
OBJECTIVES:OBJECTIVES:Provide estimates representative of system-wide benthic nutrient (Nitrogen and Phosphorus) flux rates;Provide estimates representative of system-wide benthic nutrient (Nitrogen and Phosphorus) flux rates;
* Represents 1/106 Percent of the System SA
DIN (MT/d)
DIP (MT/d)
DON (MT/d)
DOP (MT/d)
TDN (MT/d)
TDP (MT/d)
Systemwide Average
0.105 0.042 -0.564 0.012 -0.460 0.054
North Fork Average
0.038 0.037 -0.089 -0.001 -0.052 0.037
South Fork Average
0.019 0.005 -0.191 -0.002 -0.171 0.004
Mid-Lower Estuary Average
0.067 0.010 0.021 0.006 0.088 0.017
St. Lucie River and Estuary
South Fork
North Fork
Middle Basin
Lower Basin
Indian River LagoonAtlantic O
cean
N
St. Lucie River and Estuary
South Fork
North Fork
Middle Basin
Lower Basin
Indian River LagoonAtlantic O
cean
N
OBJECTIVES:OBJECTIVES:
Identify “hot spots” for these fluxes; Identify “hot spots” for these fluxes; North ForkSLE41: N OUT
SLE31/SLE33: P OUT
South ForkSLE20: N OUT
SLE42: P OUT
Mid-Lower EstuarySLE2/SLE4: N OUT
OBJECTIVES:OBJECTIVES:Identify processes (and associated methodologies) driving fluxes in this system (i.e. diffusive vs. advective/groundwater).
No Evidence of Advection (only 4 sites)Evidence of Nitrogen FixationLIGHT MATTERS!!!!!Quality/Lability of Sediment Organics MATTERS
Identify processes (and associated methodologies) driving fluxes in this system (i.e. diffusive vs. advective/groundwater).
No Evidence of Advection (only 4 sites)Evidence of Nitrogen FixationLIGHT MATTERS!!!!!Quality/Lability of Sediment Organics MATTERS
What’s Next: Modeling NeedsWhat’s Next: Modeling Needs
Spatial Analyses Of Systemwide Data To Identify Subregions (i.e. minimum number of monitoring stations) Contour Analysis Of Systemwide Data To Determine More Accurate Subregion Load/Removal Rates Temporal Variability: Wet Season Sampling, Selected Monitoring In NON-Drought ConditionsN2 Component – Nitrogen Fixation/DenitrificationDetermine How To Apply Light During Incubation
Spatial Analyses Of Systemwide Data To Identify Subregions (i.e. minimum number of monitoring stations) Contour Analysis Of Systemwide Data To Determine More Accurate Subregion Load/Removal Rates Temporal Variability: Wet Season Sampling, Selected Monitoring In NON-Drought ConditionsN2 Component – Nitrogen Fixation/DenitrificationDetermine How To Apply Light During Incubation
Northern Everglades
River Watershed Research & Water Quality
Monitoring Program
St. Lucie River Watershed
Northern Everglades
River Watershed Research & Water Quality
Monitoring Program
St. Lucie River Watershed
June 2008
Dynamics of the Estuarine Turbidity Maximum (ETM) in the St. Lucie Estuary
Outline
Review : Estuarine CirculationETMsBiological Significance
Results:HydrodynamicsETM and Suspended SedimentDO, Chl a, and Pheophytin
Conclusions
Residual or Net Circulation
Well‐mixed
Partially‐mixed
Salt wedge
OceanRiver
Estuarine Turbidity Maximum Estuarine Turbidity Maximum
RiverOcean
Also called estuarine , gravitational, or density driven circulation
What determines the strength and location of the estuarine turbidity maximum in South Florida Estuaries?
Estuarine Turbidity Maximum Estuarine Turbidity Maximum RiverOcean
•Increased stratification increases estuarine circulation
But..
•Increased stratification decreases sediment resuspension
•Tidal energy (Spring vs. Neap tides)•Freshwater flow•Wind mixing•Bottom sediment type
(Doering and Chamberlain, 1999)
Can we quantify these relationships?
•Gradients in stratification
•Shallow bathymetry
•Shoal areas and secondary circulation
Other factors may produce ETMs, and sometimes secondary ETMs
Distance from mouth of York R
, 2003
(Scully and Friedrichs, 2002)
How does SIPS affect Sediment Transport?
Sediment resuspension greater during flood and higher into the water column
What are estuarine aggregates?What are estuarine aggregates?
Aggregates, or flocs, are complex matrices of microbial organisms, organic material, inorganic material, and interflocspaces or pores
(Droppo, 2001)
1 µm.
(Rogerson et al., 2003)
NUTRIENTSNUTRIENTS
NET SEAWARD FLOWNET SEAWARD FLOW
Nursery “Hotspot”Nursery “Hotspot”
(Peebles, 2006)
LISST100x
Methods •Profiles with Seabird 19+ CTD and attached OBS
•Profiles with Sequoia Science LISST 100X
•YSI deployed at bottom and surface for DO, pH and to provide realtime estimates of salinity to guide location of profiles.
oin St Lucie from fresh to 5 pptwhen possible, regular intervals
•Pumped samples with Geosubpump attached to CTD
St. Lucie Results
Figure DS1. Map of dry season, spring tide transects. Red box denotes location of North fork transects. Green box denotes location of Old South Fork transects. Yellow box denotes location of South Fork transects.
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Flow
at G
ordy
(cfs
)
date
Spring
Spring
Neap
Neap
Survey Dates and Flow
(Flow over St Lucie Lock and Dam was zero for entire period)
Wet Spring
Figure WS11. Wet season, spring tide temperature profile. Transect A’. Black lines denote salinity contours.
North Fork
Figure WS12. Wet season, spring tide turbidity profile. Transect A’. Red lines denote salinity contours.
North Fork
Figure WS17. Wet season, spring tide temperature profile. Transect B. Black lines denote salinity contours.
South Fork
Figure WS18. Wet season, spring tide turbidity profile. Transect B. Red lines denote salinity contours.
South Fork
Figure WS25. Wet season, spring tide turbidity profile. Transect C. Red lines denote salinity contours.
Figure WS31. Wet season, spring tide turbidity profile. Transect D. Red lines denote salinity contours.
Figure WS44. Wet season, spring tide turbidity profile. Transect F. Red lines denote salinity contours.
Significantly advecteddownstream
South Fork
Wet Neap
Figure WN5. Wet season, neap tide turbidity profile. Transect A. Red lines denote salinity contours.
North Fork
Figure WN9. Wet season, neap tide particle size distribution profile. Transect A. Triangles denote location of each profiling cast.
North Fork
Figure WN13. Wet season, neap tide turbidity profile. Transect B. Red lines denote salinity contours.
South Fork
Figure WN17. Wet season, neap tide particle size distribution profile. Transect B. Triangles denote location of each profiling cast.
South Fork
1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.81.02
1.04
1.06
1.08
1.1
1.12
1.14x 106
Agg
rega
te D
ensi
ty (g
m-3
)
log10( D50 (μm))
Figure WN43. Wet season, neap tide plot of estimated aggregate density by aggregate size.
1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
ws
(mm
s-1
)
log10( D50 (μm))
Figure WN44. Wet season, neap tide plot of estimated settling velocity by aggregate size.
Dry Neap
Figure DN29. Dry season, neap tide turbidity profile. Transect D. Red lines denote salinity contours.
Old South Fork
Figure DN33. Dry season, neap tide particle size distribution profile. Transect D. Triangles denote location of each profiling cast.
Figure DN37. Dry season, neap tide turbidity profile. Transect E. Red lines denote salinity contours.
South Fork
Dry Spring
Figure DS21. Dry season, spring tide turbidity profile. Transect C. Red lines denote salinity contours.
Residual or Net Circulation
Well‐mixed
Partially‐mixed
Salt wedge
OceanRiver
Residual or Net Circulation
Classification
Dissolved Oxygen
Chlorophyll a
Phaeophytin
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 74.5
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
7.5
8
km
DO
(mg
l-1)
DO, 080403North Fork, Going Downstream, Transect A
botsfc
Figure DS6. Dry season, spring tide dissolved oxygen concentration profile. Transect A. Blue line denotes bottom values and red line denotes surface values.
North Fork, Partially Mixed
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Chl
a ( μ
g l-1
Chlorophyl and PhaeophytinOct. 25, 2007,North Fork, Going Downstream, Transect A
botsfc
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 40
1
2
3
4
5
Km
Pha
e ( μ
g l-1
botsfc
Figure WS9. Wet season, spring tide a) chlorophyll a and b) phaeophytin concentration profiles. Transect A. Blue line denotes bottom values and red line denotes surface values.
a)
b)
North Fork, Salt Wedge condition
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 71
2
3
4
5
6
Chl
a ( μ
g l-1
Chlorophyl and PhaeophytinOct. 25, 2007, SLE, South Fork, Going Upstream, Transect F
botsfc
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 72
3
4
5
6
7
Km
Pha
eo ( μ
g l-1
botsfc
Figure WS48. Wet season, spring tide a) chlorophyll a and b) phaeophytin concentration profiles. Transect F. Blue line denotes bottom vand red line denotes surface values.
South Fork, Well mixed condition
(1993)
Conclusions:
•The density structure in the North Fork usually resembled a partially mixed estuary, however, during strong tidal flow and freshwater discharge it more closely resembled a salt wedge
•The density structure in the South Fork varied from well and partially mixed during the wet season to strongly stratified during the dry season
•The Old South Fork was completely fresh during the wet season and partially mixed during the dry season
Conclusions, cont.:
•ETMs were found to be produced from convergence of barotropic and baroclinic flows at the extent of the salinity intrusion, and also in regions of strong longitudinal density gradients.
•ETMs were often found in the fresh well mixed regions of the estuaries and probably consisted of small, easily resuspended primary aggregates
•Estimated settling velocities were an order of magnitude smaller than in the Caloosahatchee River, probably related to the abundance of small primary aggregates in the freshwater regions
•The most significant variation in particle size is related to salinity
June 24, 2008
Phytoplankton Limiting Nutrients and Species Composition for the St. Lucie Estuary
Coastal Ecosystems Division
Phytoplankton Limiting Nutrients and Species Composition for the St. Lucie Estuary
Coastal Ecosystems Division
PurposePurposeThe purpose of this study is to determine spatial and temporal patterns in the abundance and composition of the phytoplankton community in relation to nutrient elements (N, P, Si) and variability in salinity, temperature and light availability. In order to evaluate the potential responsiveness of the phytoplankton community to changes in nutrient load, the nutrient limiting status of the community was determined in controlled bioassay experiments.
The purpose of this study is to determine spatial and temporal patterns in the abundance and composition of the phytoplankton community in relation to nutrient elements (N, P, Si) and variability in salinity, temperature and light availability. In order to evaluate the potential responsiveness of the phytoplankton community to changes in nutrient load, the nutrient limiting status of the community was determined in controlled bioassay experiments.
St. Lucie Estuary, Limiting NutrientsSt. Lucie Estuary, Limiting Nutrients
Journal of Environmental Monitoring
Temporal and spatial variations of nutrients in the Ten Mile Creek of South Florida, USA and effects on phytoplankton biomass
Yuangen Yang,ab Zhenli He, Youjian Lin, Edward J. Phlips, Jinyan Yang, Guochao Chen,Peter J. Stoffellaa and Charles A. Powell
“Principal component analysis and the ratios of DIN/DP and TN/TP in the water suggest that N is the limiting nutrient factor for phytoplankton growth in the TMC”
Journal of Environmental Monitoring
Temporal and spatial variations of nutrients in the Ten Mile Creek of South Florida, USA and effects on phytoplankton biomass
Yuangen Yang,ab Zhenli He, Youjian Lin, Edward J. Phlips, Jinyan Yang, Guochao Chen,Peter J. Stoffellaa and Charles A. Powell
“Principal component analysis and the ratios of DIN/DP and TN/TP in the water suggest that N is the limiting nutrient factor for phytoplankton growth in the TMC”
IFAS Ten Mile Creek and North Fork Narrows Sampling Stations
IFAS Ten Mile Creek and North Fork Narrows Sampling Stations
St. Lucie Estuary Limiting Nutrient Sampling Locations
St. Lucie Estuary Limiting Nutrient Sampling Locations
MethodsMethods
The five sites were sampled for phytoplankton weekly from April 22 through September 28, 2007. Temperature, DO, and salinity were measured at the surface and near the bottom at each site. Light attenuation was determined by measuring light flux at depth intervals with quantum PAR probes (Li-cor).Water samples for chemical and phytoplankton analysis were collected with a vertical integrating sampling tube that captures water from the surface to within 0.1 m of the bottom
The five sites were sampled for phytoplankton weekly from April 22 through September 28, 2007. Temperature, DO, and salinity were measured at the surface and near the bottom at each site. Light attenuation was determined by measuring light flux at depth intervals with quantum PAR probes (Li-cor).Water samples for chemical and phytoplankton analysis were collected with a vertical integrating sampling tube that captures water from the surface to within 0.1 m of the bottom
Methods (Cont.)Methods (Cont.)
• Nutrient limitation/growth bioassay experiments for phytoplankton were performed on a monthly basis for the five specified sampling sites.
• Nutrient limitation/growth bioassay experiments for phytoplankton were performed on a monthly basis for the five specified sampling sites.
Mean (yellow) and Standard Deviations (white) of Nutrient Concentrations
Mean (yellow) and Standard Deviations (white) of Nutrient Concentrations
Site7 8 9 10 11
TN 0.968 1.074 0.859 0.632 0.538(0.325) (0.290) (0.271) (0.249) (0.215)
NO2,3 0.032 0.045 0.040 0.022 0.021(0.041) (0.049) (0.042) (0.025) (0.025)
NH4 0.125 0.241 0.183 0.122 0.060(0.148) (0.297) (0.151) (0.053) (0.037)
TP 0.208 0.218 0.183 0.095 0.044(0.057) (0.048) (0.056) (0.041) (0.029)
SRP 0.153 0.160 0.131 0.062 0.021(0.056) (0.044) (0.055) (0.033) (0.018)
Si 1.64 2.21 1.67 1.02 0.59(1.09) (1.21) (0.63) (0.23) (0.26)
Site7 8 9 10 11
TN 0.968 1.074 0.859 0.632 0.538(0.325) (0.290) (0.271) (0.249) (0.215)
NO2,3 0.032 0.045 0.040 0.022 0.021(0.041) (0.049) (0.042) (0.025) (0.025)
NH4 0.125 0.241 0.183 0.122 0.060(0.148) (0.297) (0.151) (0.053) (0.037)
TP 0.208 0.218 0.183 0.095 0.044(0.057) (0.048) (0.056) (0.041) (0.029)
SRP 0.153 0.160 0.131 0.062 0.021(0.056) (0.044) (0.055) (0.033) (0.018)
Si 1.64 2.21 1.67 1.02 0.59(1.09) (1.21) (0.63) (0.23) (0.26)
Mean (yellow) and Standard Deviation. (white)
Mean (yellow) and Standard Deviation. (white)
Site7 8 9 10 11
CHLa 14.55 14.69 12.95 7.46 3.37(9.10) (14.18) (9.33) (4.70) (2.10)
TURB 7.46 10.55 10.35 7.40 5.60(3.25) (3.93) (6.93) (3.43) (2.11)
CDOM 63.7 75.2 53.6 32.1 13.7(40.1) (47.4) (33.3) (22.2) (6.9)
Ke 2.852 3.487 3.104 2.381 1.375(0.971) (1.139) (0.902) (0.908) (0.763)
SECCHI 0.61 0.77 0.62 0.86 1.57(0.31) (1.03) (0.27) (0.25) (0.82)
Site7 8 9 10 11
CHLa 14.55 14.69 12.95 7.46 3.37(9.10) (14.18) (9.33) (4.70) (2.10)
TURB 7.46 10.55 10.35 7.40 5.60(3.25) (3.93) (6.93) (3.43) (2.11)
CDOM 63.7 75.2 53.6 32.1 13.7(40.1) (47.4) (33.3) (22.2) (6.9)
Ke 2.852 3.487 3.104 2.381 1.375(0.971) (1.139) (0.902) (0.908) (0.763)
SECCHI 0.61 0.77 0.62 0.86 1.57(0.31) (1.03) (0.27) (0.25) (0.82)
Results of Limiting Nutrient BioassaysResults of Limiting Nutrient Bioassays
SitesDate 7 8 9 10 11
5/2/2007 N N N U NPSi Si N
5/29/2007 N U N N NPN Si Si
6/25/2007 N U U N NPP N N
7/23/2007 N U U U UN N N NP
8/27/2007 U U U U PN N N N Si
9/25/2007 U U U U UN N N N NSi
SitesDate 7 8 9 10 11
5/2/2007 N N N U NPSi Si N
5/29/2007 N U N N NPN Si Si
6/25/2007 N U U N NPP N N
7/23/2007 N U U U UN N N NP
8/27/2007 U U U U PN N N N Si
9/25/2007 U U U U UN N N N NSi
Chlorophyll a (Chl) concentrations over the study period at the five sampling sites.
Chlorophyll a (Chl) concentrations over the study period at the five sampling sites.
0102030405060
4/20
/07
5/5/
075/
20/0
76/
4/07
6/19
/07
7/4/
077/
19/0
78/
3/07
8/18
/07
9/2/
079/
17/0
7
7891011
Chl
a , µ
g l-1
Partial light extinction coefficients: Kc represents the contribution of colored dissolved organic matter (CDOM), Kp represents the
contribution of phytoplankton, and Kt represents the contribution of non-algal suspended solids
012345
4/22
/07
5/2/
07
5/29
/07
6/25
/07
7/23
/07
8/27
/07
9/25
/07
K tK pK c
012345
4/22
/07
5/2/
07
5/29
/07
6/25
/07
7/23
/07
8/27
/07
9/25
/07
K tK pK c
S ite 7
S ite 8
Part
ial L
ight
Ext
inct
ion
Coe
ffici
ents
, m-1
012345
4/22
/07
5/2/
07
5/29
/07
6/25
/07
7/23
/07
8/27
/07
9/25
/07
K tK pK c
S ite 9
Partial light extinction coefficients: Kc represents the contribution of colored dissolved organic matter (CDOM), Kp represents the
contribution of phytoplankton, and Kt represents the contribution of non-algal suspended solids
012345
4/22
/07
5/2/
07
5/29
/07
6/25
/07
7/23
/07
8/27
/07
9/25
/07
KtKpKc
012345
4/22
/07
5/2/
07
5/29
/07
6/25
/07
7/23
/07
8/27
/07
9/25
/07
KtKpKc
Part
ial L
ight
Ext
inct
ion
Coe
ffici
ents
, m-1
Site 11
Site 10
Biovolume of major algal groups over the study period at the five sampling sites. Diatoms, dinoflagellates, cyanobacteria
Biovolume of major algal groups over the study period at the five sampling sites. Diatoms, dinoflagellates, cyanobacteria
Biovolume of major algal groups over the study period at the five sampling sites. Diatoms, dinoflagellates, cyanobacteria
Status of Project
Samples were collected from October 2007 to May 2008
Data presently being compiled and will be incorporated into Northern Everglades St. Lucie
Estuary Plan
T
Status of Project
Samples were collected from October 2007 to May 2008
Data presently being compiled and will be incorporated into Northern Everglades St. Lucie
Estuary Plan
T
June 24, 2008
St. Lucie River Watershed Research and Water Quality Monitoring Plan Research Projects
St. Lucie River Watershed Research and Water Quality Monitoring Plan Research Projects
St. Lucie Research ProjectsSt. Lucie Research Projects
Nutrient BudgetDissolved Oxygen DynamicsLow Salinity Zone - Nursery Function
Nutrient BudgetDissolved Oxygen DynamicsLow Salinity Zone - Nursery Function
St. Lucie #1 Estuarine Nutrient Budget
St. Lucie #1 Estuarine Nutrient Budget
A well constrained nutrient budget is an important aspect of TMDL/BMAP implementation and assessment. Nutrient budgets assist with determining appropriate nutrient reduction approaches and with evaluating and optimizing project effectiveness. This project will construct nutrient budgets of nitrogen and phosphorus for the St. Lucie Estuary. Terms in the nutrient budget will be determined by a variety of methods: Input, Cycling, Output.
A well constrained nutrient budget is an important aspect of TMDL/BMAP implementation and assessment. Nutrient budgets assist with determining appropriate nutrient reduction approaches and with evaluating and optimizing project effectiveness. This project will construct nutrient budgets of nitrogen and phosphorus for the St. Lucie Estuary. Terms in the nutrient budget will be determined by a variety of methods: Input, Cycling, Output.
Structures S-80, S-48,S-49, Gordy Road
Tidal Basin Surface FlowsGround WaterPoint Sources
Atlantic OceanAtmospheric DepositionNitrogen Fixation
Primary ProductivityWater Column RespirationOrganic Matter DegradationBenthic Nutrient Flux
DenitrificationExport to OceanBurial in SedimentsBiomass
MigrationHarvesting
Cycle OutputsInputs
Estuarine Nutrient Budget - NitrogenEstuarine Nutrient Budget - Nitrogen
St. Lucie #1 Estuarine Nutrient Budget
St. Lucie #1 Estuarine Nutrient Budget
INPUTSINPUTSStructures…………… Data Available (could be better)
Tidal Basin -Surface Flows….. Modeling Project (Storm Water
Event data needed) Ground Water….. Modeling Project (data
analyses needed)
Atlantic Ocean……………. Modeling Project
Atmospheric Deposition…. Data Available
Nitrogen Fixation………… New Measurements
St. Lucie #1 Estuarine Nutrient Budget
St. Lucie #1 Estuarine Nutrient Budget
Primary Productivity………………. New Measurements
Water Column Respiration……….. New Measurements
Organic Matter Degradation……… New Measurements
Benthic Nutrient Flux……………… One time Dry Season Data Exist, Need More
St. Lucie #1 Estuarine Nutrient Budget
St. Lucie #1 Estuarine Nutrient Budget
CYCLECYCLE
Denitrification…………… Some Data Exist/ Need More
Export to Ocean………… Modeling Project
Burial in Sediments…….. Some Sedimentation Rate Data Exist
BiomassMigration……… Data????Harvesting……. Data ???
OUTPUTSOUTPUTS
St. Lucie #1 Estuarine Nutrient Budget
St. Lucie #1 Estuarine Nutrient Budget
St. Lucie #2 Dissolved Oxygen Dynamics
St. Lucie #2 Dissolved Oxygen Dynamics
In order to determine if proposed TMDLs for nutrients will improve DO concentrations in the St. Lucie Estuary it is necessary to identify the important factors that control dissolved oxygen and how they interact to exert that control. The St. Lucie Estuary has been listed as impaired for dissolved oxygen and nutrients. This study will examine the role of internal and external factors in determining the concentration of dissolved oxygen.These include stratification, algal blooms, sediment oxygen demand, and BOD loading.
In order to determine if proposed TMDLs for nutrients will improve DO concentrations in the St. Lucie Estuary it is necessary to identify the important factors that control dissolved oxygen and how they interact to exert that control. The St. Lucie Estuary has been listed as impaired for dissolved oxygen and nutrients. This study will examine the role of internal and external factors in determining the concentration of dissolved oxygen.These include stratification, algal blooms, sediment oxygen demand, and BOD loading.
St. Lucie #2 Dissolved Oxygen Dynamics
St. Lucie #2 Dissolved Oxygen Dynamics
Dissolved Oxygen DynamicsDissolved Oxygen Dynamics
Out-gassingWater Column RespirationOrganic Matter DegradationSediment Oxygen Demand
Dissolved OxygenChlorophyll aLight Extinction
Sinks
ConcentrationTime Series
AerationRiverine LoadOceanic LoadPhotosynthesis
Sources
Physics
TransportMixingStratification
Aeration………………… No data – Literature Value/ ModelWatershed Load..…….. Need Measurements, Watershed Model AvailableOceanic Load…………. Need Concentrations, 3D Model Needs CalibrationPhotosynthesis………. Need Measurements
Transport……….. Hydrodynamic Model AvailableMixing…………… Hydrodynamic Model AvailableStratification…… Hydrodynamic Model Available
Out-Gassing……………………. Literature Value/ ModelWater Column Respiration….. Need MeasurementsOrganic Matter Degradation… Need Measurements/Literature ValueSediment Oxygen Demand….. Need Measurements
Dissolved Oxygen................... Need MeasurementsChlorophyll a………………….. Need MeasurementsLight Extinction……………….. Need Measurements
SOURCES
PHYSICS
SINKS
CONCENTRATION TIME SERIES
St. Lucie #2 Dissolved Oxygen Dynamics
St. Lucie #2 Dissolved Oxygen Dynamics
St. Lucie #3 Low Salinity Zone
St. Lucie #3 Low Salinity Zone
One of the goals of the St. Lucie River Watershed Protection Plan is to minimize the occurrence of undesirable salinity ranges in the St. Lucie Estuary:Constructing and operating facilities designed to store and subsequently release freshwater to the estuary. One of the primary ecological services provided by an estuary isto serve as a nursery area, occurring in low salinity zones, for early life stages of important fish and shell fish. This project examines the effects of freshwater discharge on production of fish larvae in the low salinity zone of the St. Lucie Estuary. Results of this study will be used to refine flow and salinity envelopes and to provide guidelines for delivery of freshwater to the St. Lucie Estuary.
One of the goals of the St. Lucie River Watershed Protection Plan is to minimize the occurrence of undesirable salinity ranges in the St. Lucie Estuary:Constructing and operating facilities designed to store and subsequently release freshwater to the estuary. One of the primary ecological services provided by an estuary isto serve as a nursery area, occurring in low salinity zones, for early life stages of important fish and shell fish. This project examines the effects of freshwater discharge on production of fish larvae in the low salinity zone of the St. Lucie Estuary. Results of this study will be used to refine flow and salinity envelopes and to provide guidelines for delivery of freshwater to the St. Lucie Estuary.
Low Salinity Nursery ZoneLow Salinity Nursery Zone
Water QualityFreshwater InflowNutrients, ColorTurbidity, Salinity,Temp, DO, TSS
Time SeriesMeasurements
Watershed LoadOceanic LoadPrimary Productivity(Color, Turbidity, Chla)
Sources Physics
TransportMixingStratification
BiotaPhytoplanktonChlorophyll aZooplanktonLarval/Juvenile Fish, SpawningBenthic Fauna
St. Lucie #3 Low Salinity Zone
St. Lucie #3 Low Salinity Zone
Freshwater Inflow…… Measure/ ModelNutrients, ColorTurbidity, Salinity, MeasureTemp, DO, TSS
PhytoplanktonChlorophyll a Measure TimeZooplankton Series AlongLarval & Juvenile Fish, Spawning Salinity GradientBenthic
St. Lucie #3 Low Salinity Zone
St. Lucie #3 Low Salinity Zone
Riverine Load..………… Need Measurements, Watershed Model AvailableOceanic Load………….. Need Concentrations and Hydrodynamic ModelPrimary Productivity…. Need Measurements (Color, Turbidity, Chlorophyll a)
Transport……….. Hydrodynamic ModelMixing…………… Hydrodynamic ModelStratification…... Measure or Model
SOURCES
PHYSICS
WATER QUALITY
BIOTA
Proposed Three Year Projects (Rough Annual Cost Estimate)Watershed load - $150,000
Measurement at Structures Stormwater Event Based MeasurementGround Water Measurement Data Analyses
Internal Load/Benthic Fluxes - $150,000Nutrient Flux, SOD, Denitrification, Sediment Burial
Primary Productivity - $100,000Primary Productivity, Photosynthesis, Water Column Respiration, Organic Matter Degradation, Algal Blooms
Biomass - $100,000Phytoplankton, Chl-a, Zooplankton, Larval & Juvenile Fish, Benthic
Time Series Concentration Measurement - $100,000Color, Turbidity, Light, DO, Nutrients, TSS, BOD, Salinity
Modeling Tools - $150,000Ecological Responses – Seagrass Model , WQ cycling, Watershed Load, Oceanic Loads, Export to Ocean, Physics, Stratification, Transport, Mixing, Sediment Resuspension.
Proposed Three Year Projects (Rough Annual Cost Estimate)Watershed load - $150,000
Measurement at Structures Stormwater Event Based MeasurementGround Water Measurement Data Analyses
Internal Load/Benthic Fluxes - $150,000Nutrient Flux, SOD, Denitrification, Sediment Burial
Primary Productivity - $100,000Primary Productivity, Photosynthesis, Water Column Respiration, Organic Matter Degradation, Algal Blooms
Biomass - $100,000Phytoplankton, Chl-a, Zooplankton, Larval & Juvenile Fish, Benthic
Time Series Concentration Measurement - $100,000Color, Turbidity, Light, DO, Nutrients, TSS, BOD, Salinity
Modeling Tools - $150,000Ecological Responses – Seagrass Model , WQ cycling, Watershed Load, Oceanic Loads, Export to Ocean, Physics, Stratification, Transport, Mixing, Sediment Resuspension.
St. Lucie Research Projects
St. Lucie Research Projects
1_SLEBenthicFlux-Jun08RWQMPMEETING_COMPRESSEDUpdate on Systemwide Benthic Flux Coring and Site Specific Benthic Flux Processes (Methods Comparison).2 Projects: Systemwide Cores (remote) and Chambers (in situ) vs. Cores (remote)50 Sites for SYSTEMWIDE Core Incubation and 4 Sites for Chamber/Core Incubations of Benthic Nutrient Fluxes in the SLESlide Number 4Slide Number 5Sediment CharacteristicsSt. Lucie River Estuary: Light and Sediment Chlorophyll Sediment Chlorophyll and CarbonSystemwide Fluxes: DOSystemwide Fluxes: AmmoniumSystemwide Fluxes: PhosphateSystemwide Fluxes: NitrateSystemwide Fluxes: Total Dissolved NitrogenSystemwide Fluxes: Total Dissolved PhosphorusSystemwide Fluxes: SilicateComparisons: DO FluxesLight and Dark DO FluxesLight and Dark DenitrificationSediment Chlorophyll and CarbonOBJECTIVES:OBJECTIVES:OBJECTIVES:What’s Next: Modeling Needs
2_SLE ETM NEEP 061808Slide Number 1Slide Number 2Slide Number 3Slide Number 4Slide Number 5Slide Number 6Slide Number 7Slide Number 8Slide Number 9Slide Number 10Slide Number 11Slide Number 12Slide Number 13Slide Number 14Slide Number 15Slide Number 16Slide Number 17Slide Number 18Slide Number 19Slide Number 20Slide Number 21Slide Number 22Slide Number 23Slide Number 24Slide Number 25Slide Number 26Slide Number 27Slide Number 28Slide Number 29Slide Number 30Slide Number 31Slide Number 32Slide Number 33Slide Number 34Slide Number 35Slide Number 36Slide Number 37Slide Number 38Slide Number 39Slide Number 40Slide Number 41Slide Number 42Slide Number 43Slide Number 44Slide Number 46Slide Number 47Slide Number 48
3_June24SLE-Limiting Nutrient 061908Slide Number 1PurposeSt. Lucie Estuary, Limiting NutrientsIFAS Ten Mile Creek and North Fork Narrows Sampling StationsSt. Lucie Estuary Limiting Nutrient Sampling Locations MethodsMethods (Cont.)Mean (yellow) and Standard Deviations (white) of Nutrient ConcentrationsMean (yellow) and Standard Deviation. (white)Results of Limiting Nutrient BioassaysChlorophyll a (Chl) concentrations over the study period at the five sampling sites. Partial light extinction coefficients: Kc represents the contribution of colored dissolved organic matter (CDOM), Kp represents the contribution of phytoplankton, and Kt represents the contribution of non-algal suspended solids Partial light extinction coefficients: Kc represents the contribution of colored dissolved organic matter (CDOM), Kp represents the contribution of phytoplankton, and Kt represents the contribution of non-algal suspended solids Slide Number 18
4_June24SLE-RWQMPMEETING_ResearchTopicsSlide Number 1St. Lucie Research ProjectsSt. Lucie �#1 Estuarine Nutrient BudgetSt. Lucie �#1 Estuarine Nutrient BudgetSlide Number 5Slide Number 6Slide Number 7St. Lucie�#2 Dissolved Oxygen DynamicsSt. Lucie�#2 Dissolved Oxygen DynamicsSt. Lucie�#2 Dissolved Oxygen DynamicsSt. Lucie�#3 Low Salinity ZoneSt. Lucie�#3 Low Salinity ZoneSt. Lucie�#3 Low Salinity ZoneSt. Lucie�Research Projects