1 / 39

Determining Microcystis bloom trigger points in the Maumee and Sandusky ecosystems

Determining Microcystis bloom trigger points in the Maumee and Sandusky ecosystems. Joe Conroy 1,2 , Darren Bade 3 , Bill Edwards 4 , Doug Kane 5 , Theo Gover 1 , Kyla Hershey 1 , and David Culver 1.

azure
Download Presentation

Determining Microcystis bloom trigger points in the Maumee and Sandusky ecosystems

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Determining Microcystis bloom trigger points in the Maumee and Sandusky ecosystems Joe Conroy1,2, Darren Bade3, Bill Edwards4, Doug Kane5, Theo Gover1, Kyla Hershey1, and David Culver1 1 –Dept. of EEOB, The Ohio State University, 2 – Current affiliation: Inland Fisheries Research Unit, DOW, ODNR, 3 – Dept. of Biol. Sci., Kent State University, 4 – Dept. of Biology, Niagara University, 5 – Nat. Sci. and Math. Division, Defiance College

  2. Problem: Where & When do blooms start? Lake ?   Bays ?   Space Rivers ? ? ? Tribs Early spring Late summer Time

  3. Roadmap • Part I: Determining bloom trigger points • Methods: measuring pools and process • Results: quantifying Microcystis abundance • Part II: Coupling social-ecological dynamics • Methods: modeling interactions • Results: interpreting complexity • Extensions: moving the problem upstream

  4. Roadmap • Part I: Determining bloom trigger points • Methods: measuring pools and process • Results: quantifying Microcystis abundance • Part II: Coupling social-ecological dynamics • Methods: modeling interactions • Results: interpreting complexity • Extensions: moving the problem upstream

  5. Methods: Sampling locations

  6. Methods: Sampling locations

  7. Methods: Data Collection

  8. Field Sampling Methods: Data Collection

  9. Laboratory Analysis Field Sampling Methods: Data Collection

  10. Roadmap • Part I: Determining bloom trigger points • Methods: measuring pools and process • Results: quantifying Microcystis abundance • Part II: Coupling social-ecological dynamics • Methods: modeling interactions • Results: interpreting complexity • Extensions: moving the problem upstream

  11. Roadmap • Part I: Determining bloom trigger points • Methods: measuring pools and process • Results: quantifying Microcystis abundance • Part II: Coupling social-ecological dynamics • Methods: modeling interactions • Results: interpreting complexity • Extensions: moving the problem upstream

  12. Results: Microcystis trigger points

  13. Results: Microcystis trigger points

  14. Results: Microcystis trigger points

  15. Results: Microcystis trigger points

  16. Results: Microcystis trigger points • 1970 cyanobacterial biomass = 1 g m-3 • April tributary Microcystis biomass = 0.00–0.85 g m-3 • Only four samples without Microcystis!

  17. Roadmap • Part I: Determining bloom trigger points • Methods: measuring pools and process • Results: quantifying Microcystis abundance • Part II: Coupling social-ecological dynamics • Methods: modeling interactions • Results: interpreting complexity • Extensions: moving the problem upstream

  18. Roadmap • Part I: Determining bloom trigger points • Methods: measuring pools and process • Results: quantifying Microcystis abundance • Part II: Coupling social-ecological dynamics • Methods: modeling interactions • Results: interpreting complexity • Extensions: moving the problem upstream

  19. Transient social-ecological stability: the effects of invasive species and ecosystem restoration on nutrient management compromise in Lake Erie 1 –Dept. of FABE, The Ohio State University, 2 – Current affiliation: Dept. of Oceanogr. & Coastal Sci., Louisiana State University, 3 – Dept. of Agr., Env., & Devel. Econ., The Ohio State University, 4 – Dept. of EEOB, The Ohio State University, 5 – Current affiliation: Inland Fisheries Research Unit, DOW, ODNR Eric Roy1,2, Jay Martin1, Elena Irwin3, Joe Conroy4,5, and David Culver4 Published in: Ecology & Society 15(1): article 20 2010. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss1/art20/

  20. Methods: Modeling interactions

  21. Methods: Modeling interactions Ecological Model Social Model

  22. Methods: Manipulations • Model calibrated & validated for Sandusky Bay • Few dreissenid mussels in Sandusky Bay • Large historical wetland at river-bay confluence 1. Simulated expansion of dreissenids into the bay • Consumptive effect ( phytoplankton,  clarity =  benefits) • Set MCF (Mussel Consumption Factor = 1.25) • Excretory effect ( PP,  clarity =  benefits) • Set MEF (Mussel Excretory Factor > 1.00) 2. Simulated wetland restoration • Mitigating effect ( P-load,  PP,  clarity =  benefits) • Reduce P-load 12%

  23. Roadmap • Part I: Determining bloom trigger points • Methods: measuring pools and process • Results: quantifying Microcystis abundance • Part II: Coupling social-ecological dynamics • Methods: modeling interactions • Results: interpreting complexity • Extensions: moving the problem upstream

  24. Roadmap • Part I: Determining bloom trigger points • Methods: measuring pools and process • Results: quantifying Microcystis abundance • Part II: Coupling social-ecological dynamics • Methods: modeling interactions • Results: interpreting complexity • Extensions: moving the problem upstream

  25. Results: Benefits through time

  26. Results: Benefits through time

  27. Results: Benefits through time

  28. Results: Benefits through time

  29. Results: Benefits through time

  30. Results: Benefits through time

  31. Results: Benefits through time • ML, Be, Bp • MEF,  Benefits • Add wetlands,  Benefits • Compromise reached over 50 y • Social-ecological feedbacks

  32. Roadmap • Part I: Determining bloom trigger points • Methods: measuring pools and process • Results: quantifying Microcystis abundance • Part II: Coupling social-ecological dynamics • Methods: modeling interactions • Results: interpreting complexity • Extensions: moving the problem upstream

  33. Roadmap • Part I: Determining bloom trigger points • Methods: measuring pools and process • Results: quantifying Microcystis abundance • Part II: Coupling social-ecological dynamics • Methods: modeling interactions • Results: interpreting complexity • Extensions: moving the problem upstream

  34. Where & When do blooms start? • Microcystis present in 0.3-m deep, 1st-order streams • Biomass  in main-stem rivers, bays, and the open lake • Microcystis occurs by late April (at least) • Microcystis abundant through October (at least) • Current Microcystis biomass = 1970’s Cyanobacteria

  35. Where & When do blooms start?

  36. Where & When do blooms start? Lake  ?   Bays  ?   Space Rivers ?   ? ?  Tribs Early spring Late summer Time

  37. Solving the Microcystis problem • People-ecosystem interactions important! • Interactions between user groups also important Ecological Model Social Model

  38. Acknowledgements • Key personnel: • OSU: Amanda Martyn • KSU: Curtis Clevinger, Heather Kirkpatrick, Moumita Moitra • NU: Ashley Bantelman • Funding sources: • Ohio Lake Erie Protection Fund • Ohio Sea Grant College Program

  39. Questions?

More Related