Preliminary results from light attenuation sensors on the Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery ...
Download
1 / 23

Ru Morrison, UNH Phil Trowbridge, NH DES Tom Gregory, UNH Mike Novak, UNH - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 166 Views
  • Uploaded on

Preliminary results from light attenuation sensors on the Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay. Ru Morrison, UNH Phil Trowbridge, NH DES Tom Gregory, UNH Mike Novak, UNH. 2006. 2007. Discharge ft 3 /s. Great Bay Coastal Buoy Climatology Visualization. Salinity (psu).

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Ru Morrison, UNH Phil Trowbridge, NH DES Tom Gregory, UNH Mike Novak, UNH' - cecily


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Preliminary results from light attenuation sensors on the Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

Ru Morrison, UNH

Phil Trowbridge, NH DES

Tom Gregory, UNH

Mike Novak, UNH

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


NHEP TAC Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

December 7 2007


NHEP TAC Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

December 7 2007


2006 Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

2007

Discharge ft3/s

Great Bay Coastal Buoy Climatology Visualization

Salinity (psu)

Plots available real time at http://www.cooa.unh.edu/data/buoys/great_bay/

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Univariate regression of kd vs water quality parameters
Univariate Regression of Kd vs. Water Quality Parameters Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

Kd vs Chlorophyll-a

Kd vs TSS

Kd vs Salinity (CDOM)

N = 184

R2 = 0.07

N = 176

R2 = 0.13

N = 209

R2 = 0.54

Phil Trowbridge, NHDES

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Multivariate regression of kd vs water quality parameters
Multivariate Regression of Kd vs. Water Quality Parameters Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

Multivariate Regression of Kd vs. TSS, Chla, and Salinity (CDOM)

TSS and Salinity are significant, R2 = 0.61, n=176

Phil Trowbridge, NHDES

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Buoy light attenuation measurements
Buoy Light Attenuation Measurements Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

  • Surface Irradiance (Hyperspectral 350 nm – 800 nm)

  • Subsurface Irradiance (1.1 m)

  • FLNTUS – Chlorophyll and Turbidity

  • FLCDS – CDOM

And much more……

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Over 9000 data points so to this year Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Provisional buoy relationship par
Provisional Buoy relationship –PAR Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

Kd(PAR) = 0.3561 + 0.0083.CDOM + 0.0152.Chl + 0.0737.NTUS

r2 = 0.94, N=3371

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Buoy spectral attenuation
Buoy – Spectral Attenuation Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

Gallegos, 2001

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Contributions to k d par
Contributions to Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay Kd(PAR)

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Sources of variability turbidity
Sources of Variability - turbidity Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

Turbidity = 10(1.03 + 0.087.Wind - 0.041.Salinity)

r2 = 0.75, N=207

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Sources of variability cdom
Sources of Variability - CDOM Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Sources of variability chlorophyll
Sources of variability - chlorophyll Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

Nitrate (µmol / L)

Chlorophyll-a (mg / m3)

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


NHEP TAC Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

December 7 2007


Sources of variability chlorophyll1
Sources of variability - chlorophyll Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

NO3 = 19.0 - 1.59.Chl-a

r2 = 0.90, N = 69

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Spatial variability
Spatial variability Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

  • EPA grant with NHEP

  • Expand results from Great Bay Buoy with hyperspectral imagery

  • SpecTIR collected imagery (2 flights between end of July and end of October)

  • Grab samples and spatial survey underneath with multiple partners

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Flow thru data
Flow thru data Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


NHEP TAC Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

December 7 2007


NHEP TAC Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

December 7 2007


NHEP TAC Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

December 7 2007


How much light does eelgrass need
How much light does eelgrass need? Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

Median survival depth = 1.72 m

Median Kd(PAR) = 0.88 m-1

Median survival depth = 2.31 m

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements Great Bay buoy and hyper-spectral imagery of Great Bay

Thanks to:

  • All those who collected the historical data

  • Dave Shay and the faculty and staff of Jackson Estuarine Laboratory

  • Chris Hunt and Shawn Shelito for help with the flow through measurements

  • The captain and crew of the R/V Gulf Challenger

  • Rich Lagan and Jon Pennock, University of New Hampshire

  • Darrell Adams, Cyril Dempsey, and all at Satlantic Inc.

  • Andrew Barnard, Ian Walsh, Alex Derr, Ron Zaneveld and all at WET Labs, Inc.

  • NOAA for the funding

  • NHEP and NHDES

NHEP TAC

December 7 2007


ad