1 / 24

Climate Change Effects on Phytoplankton Composition in Cannonsville Reservoir

Upstate Freshwater Institute. Climate Change Effects on Phytoplankton Composition in Cannonsville Reservoir Hampus Markensten 1 , Donald C Pierson 2 , Emmet M. Owens 1 , Aavudai Anandhi 3 , Elliot M. Schneiderman 2 , Mark S. Zion 2 and Steven W. Effler 1 Email: hm@upstatefreshwater.org

evelyni
Download Presentation

Climate Change Effects on Phytoplankton Composition in Cannonsville Reservoir

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. Upstate Freshwater Institute • Climate Change Effects on Phytoplankton Composition in Cannonsville Reservoir • Hampus Markensten1, Donald C Pierson2, Emmet M. Owens1, Aavudai Anandhi3, Elliot M. Schneiderman2, Mark S. Zion2 and Steven W. Effler1 • Email: hm@upstatefreshwater.org • 1) Upstate Freshwater Institute • Syracuse, USA • 2) Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) • NYC, USA • 3) Hunter College, Program in Earth and Environmental Sciences City Univ of New York, USA NYWEA 2009

  2. Cannonsville reservoir • Third largest reservoir serving New York City with drinking water. • Mesotrophic with a retention time of 2.6 years and a storage capacity of 373*106  m3 of water (98.5 billion gallons).

  3. Background • Future climate with warmer temperature and changed precipitation pattern increase reservoir water temperatures and affects the nutrient export from the watershed to the reservoirs. • Phytoplankton grows faster in warmer temperature and can obtain larger biomass with more nutrients. • What biological responses in the water reservoirs can be expected in the future?

  4. Objectives • Evaluate the effect on the total phytoplankton biomass and the functional groups from climate change. Method • Model phytoplankton functional groups using a dynamic mass balance water quality model.

  5. Model description PROTECH (Phytoplankton RespOnses To Environmental CHange) What makes algae grow? Light Nutrients Temperature Algae Source: Alex Elliot

  6. 1-D mass balance model using a phytoplankton biologydescripotion based on PROTECH-model (phytoplankton response to environmental change) developed by Colin Reynolds in UK. • Phytoplankton can respond to changes in nutrient, light and temperature byvertical movementsto reach the most favorable depth. • Phytoplanktongrowth ratesare calculated fromsize and volumerelationships that affect nutrient uptake, light harvesting, and temperature dependence. • Eight functional groups of phytoplankton are simulated that differ in theirsurface area/volume, capability tofix nitrogen, use silicaand buoyancy regulation.

  7. Overview of the hybrid 1D model including phytoplankton functional groups

  8. Size and Shape Influences • Growth • Temperature adaptation • Light absorption • Grazing • Passive movement (up or down)

  9. What is different in PROTECH? • Morphological relationships describe growth: r20 Reynolds (1989)

  10. Temperature-sensitivity of growth rate (rθ) as a function of s/v (Reynolds in Sommer 1989)

  11. Light effect on phytoplankton growth (Reynolds in Sommer 1989)

  12. (Reynolds in Sommer 1989) Light saturated growth Ik αr=0.257(M*s/v)0.236 αr Light intensity Ik=rθ /αr

  13. Phytoplankton Functional Groups • Large Filamentous Diatoms – Aulacoseira • Small Diatoms – Stephanodiscus • Small Flagellates – Cryptomonas, Rhodomonas • Large Flagellates – Ceratium • Large Buoyant Colonial Cyanobacteria – Microcystis • Large Buoyant N fixing Cyanobacteria – Anabaena, Aphanizomenon

  14. Main results Air temperature (Co), summary of 9 future (+65yr) scenarios.

  15. Discharge (mm), summary of 9 future (+65yr) scenarios.

  16. Water temperature (Co), Epilimnion Combined watershed and temperature effects Only temperature effect Only watershed effect

  17. SRP (µg l-1), Epilimnion Combined watershed and temperature effects Only temperature effect Only watershed effect

  18. Chlorophyll a (µg l-1), Epilimnion Combined watershed and temperature effects Only temperature effect Only watershed effect

  19. Large Buoyant Nitrogen fixers (µg Chl a l-1) , Epilimnion Combined watershed and temperature effects Only temperature effect Only watershed effect

  20. Large Filamentous Diatoms (µg Chl a l-1) , Epilimnion Combined watershed and temperature effects Only temperature effect Only watershed effect

  21. Epilimnion Base simulation Future simulation (ECHAM A1B +65yr)

  22. Conclusions • Climate may affect phytoplankton, either via in-lake changes in temperature and stratification, or due to altered processes at the catchment level, such as precipitation and temperature driven rates of nutrient export and water discharge. • This study demonstrates that in Cannonsville Reservoir, there is only a slight projected increase in total phytoplankton biomass. • Cyanobacteria biomass projected increase is largely attributable to changes in timing of nutrient export from the catchment. • Diatom biomass stay unchanged in the future scenarios except for a pronounced increase in spring attributed to both temperature- and watershed effects.

More Related