Lake Erie Monitoring
Justin ChaffinStone Laboratory and Ohio Sea Grant
The Ohio State University
WLEB Leadership Team MeetingJune 11, 2014
Groups monitoring the western basin
All groups collect water sample to determine water quality of Lake Erie and to gain a better
understanding of how the system works.
LAKE BOTTOM OR THERMOCLINE
OEPA NearshoreUSGS Sandusky
ODNR
Univ ToledoUSGS Ann ArborOSU Stone Lab
FishingCharter
Boats
Water Collection Methods
LAKE BOTTOM OR THERMOCLINE
OEPA Nearshore(most samples)
USGS SanduskyODNR
Univ ToledoUSGS Ann ArborOSU Stone Lab
FishingCharter
Boats
1 meter, pooled
Mid depth, pooled
1 meter above bottom, pooled
Surface to2x Secchi depth
Surface to1 meter above sediments
(up to 8 meter)
Surface to 2 meter
Sampling equipment
LAKE BOTTOM OR THERMOCLINE
OEPA NearshoreUSGS Sandusky
ODNR
Univ ToledoUSGS Ann ArborOSU Stone Lab
FishingCharter
Boats
Van Dorn Sampler Integrated Tube Samplers
Photo Credit: Justin Chaffin
The study of limnology (inland waters) began in late 1800s. The methods used by researchers reflected the needs of
certain projects or sampling equipment available. Scientists independently created monitoring projects using their
“favorite” water sampling method. Thus, there is no standard method for collecting a water sample.
Why the different methods?
LAKE BOTTOM OR THERMOCLINE
OEPA Nearshore(most samples)
USGS SanduskyODNR
Univ ToledoUSGS Ann ArborOSU Stone Lab
FishingCharter
Boats
Sampling methods pros and cons
USGS SanduskyODNR
Univ ToledoUSGS Ann ArborOSU Stone Lab
FishingCharter
Boats
LAKE BOTTOM OR THERMOCLINE
Pros: Represents most of the water column.Easier than tube sampler.
Cons: Misses surface scum.Need equal volumes of each sample
Pros: Best represents entire water column.
Cons: Bulky samplers in deep water. Scums diluted.
Pros: Easy
Cons: Over estimates surface scum compared to water column.
Pros: “photic zone”
Cons: Samples differ among sites.Composition point differs among phytoplankton.Dependent on sunlight.Turbid waters resultin a shallow sample.
OEPA Nearshore(most samples)
Sampling Frequency
LAKE BOTTOM OR THERMOCLINE
OEPA NearshoreUSGS Sandusky
ODNR
Univ ToledoUSGS Ann ArborOSU Stone Lab
FishingCharter
Boats
One a month Every-other weekGrid sample Jun& Sept
Every-other weekEvent-based
Every-other weekEvent-based
Water Quality Analyzes
LAKE BOTTOM OR THERMOCLINE
OEPA NearshoreUSGS Sandusky
ODNR
Univ ToledoUSGS Ann ArborOSU Stone Lab
FishingCharter
Boats
TP,Chlorophyll aDRP (SRP),Nitrate,Microcystin,Phytoplankton
TP,Chlorophyll aPhytoplankton
TP,Chlorophyll aDRP (SRP),TDP,Nitrate,Nitrite,Silicate,Ammonium,Total Kjeldahl N,Microcystin**,Phytoplankton,Microcystis biovolume
TP,Chlorophyll aDRP (SRP),Nitrate,Microcystin,Phytoplankton
*Different analysis methods** UT does not regularly measure Microcystin
Total Phosphorus (TP) a measure of lake productivity potential.Chlorophyll a is a surrogate of phytoplankton biomass
Water Quality Analyzes
LAKE BOTTOM OR THERMOCLINE
OEPA NearshoreUSGS Sandusky
ODNR
Univ ToledoUSGS Ann ArborOSU Stone Lab
FishingCharter
Boats
TP,Chlorophyll a*DRP (SRP),Nitrate,Microcystin,Phytoplankton
TP,Chlorophyll a*Phytoplankton
TP,Chlorophyll a*DRP (SRP),Nitrate,Microcystin,Phytoplankton
*Different analysis methods
TP,Chlorophyll a*DRP (SRP),TDP,Nitrate,Nitrite,Urea, TDN,Ammonium,Total Kjeldahl N,Silicate,Total SS, NVSS,Microcystin,Phytoplankton,Microcystis biovolume
A Bayesian Hierarchical Modeling Approach for Comparing Water Quality Measurements from
Different Sources
• Song Qian and Thomas Bridgeman– University of Toledo
• Other team members:– OSU Stone Lab, USGS, Univ. Michigan, Ohio EPA, Ohio
DNR, Heidelberg University• Funded by University of Michigan Water Center,
Graham Sustainability Institute• Ohio EPA provided funding in 2013 & 2014• Ohio Sea Grant/ Stone Lab REU program