Datasets:
patrickbdevaney
/
mia9

Dataset card Data Studio Files
xet
 Community
1
text
stringlengths
0
6.44k
CHL-a z-scored cumulative sum charts (Z-CUSUM) along nutrient gradients, mimicking
cumulative results of nutrient dose-experiments. This allowed us to identify the
successive phytoplankton biomass (CHL-a) reactions to nutrient enrichment, to select
the main threshold and to assess the potential health status of phytoplankton
communities in the water column.
The calculated thresholds fix the upper limit for mean nutrient concentration
above which a mean NNC would not be considered protective of the actual segment’s
baseline conditions with respect to phytoplankton biomass. Hence, we propose the
development of protective nutrient criteria that include only two limits, Long-Term Limit
(LT-L) and Upper Limit (UP-L). The LT-L is the expected mean nutrient concentration in
vii
a water body at which no adverse effects would be expected or the effects would be
insignificant for the type of designated use. The LT-L is equal to the nutrient threshold.
The UP-L is a nutrient upper bound concentration of the LT-L that accounts for natural
variability in nutrient drivers. The UP-L is the 80th percentile of a normal distribution with
mean equal to the threshold and standard deviation equal to the nutrient’s standard
deviation for the segment under consideration. We suggest the UP-L should not be
breached more than once in a three year period. The selection of the 80th confidence
interval and one- in-three years criteria limits Type I error rates to about 10 percent.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iii
INTRODUCTION 1
SECTION 1: DATA COLLECTION AND QUALITY ASSESSMENT/
QUALITY CONTROL 5
Data Sources 5
Quality Assessment/Quality Control 11
SECTION 2: PARK DESCRIPTION 13
Geology and Soils 15
Water Resources 18
Rainwater 19
Bay waters 24
Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands 26
SECTION 3: STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 28
Summary Statistics 28
Factor Analysis and Clustering 28
Factor Analysis 29
Hierarchical Clustering 31
Clusters Characteristics 36
Freshwater Flow 36
Salinity 37
Temperature 39
Turbidity 39
Nitrite (NO2) 40
Nitrate (NO3) 41
Ammonium (NH4) 42
Total Nitrogen (TN) and Total Organic Nitrogen (TON) 43
Total Phosphorous (TP) 45
Chlorophyll a (CHLa) 46
Total Organic Carbon (TOC) 47
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) 48
Trend Analysis 50
Total Nitrogen 51
Total Phosphorous 51
Total Organic Carbon 53
Chlorophyll a 54
Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen 55
Salinity 56
Dissolved Oxygen 57
ix
Temperature 57
SECTION 4: BOX-MODEL 60
SECTION 5: THREATS TO BISCAYNE NATIONAL PARK RESOURCES 68
Habitat Loss and Impairment 69
Coastal Development 69
Channelization/Sheet Flow Barriers 70
Habitat Fragmentation 71
Power Plants 71
Water Quality 72
Nutrient enrichment 73
Turbidity 74
Microbial contamination 74
Pesticides and herbicides 75
Metals 76
Anti-fouling agents 77
PCBs and PAHs 78
Climate Change 78
Sea Level Rise 79
Ocean acidification 79
SECTION 6: NUMERIC NUTRIENT CRITERIA 82
Segmentation of South Florida Waters 84
Numeric Nutrient Criteria 87
Threshold Analysis 89
Criteria 94
RECOMMENDATIONS 96
REFERENCES 98
APPENDIXES
APPENDIX 1: Cetacean Logic Foundation Box-Model Report
APPENDIX 2: Data Source Description
APPENDIX 3: Master Database
APPENDIX 4: Time-series Analysis with Zcusum Charts
APPENDIX 5: Summary Statistics
APPENDIX 6: Method for Derivation of Protective Numeric Nutrient Criteria
APPENDIX 7: Detection Limits for FIU Biogeochemical data
APPENDIX 8: Biscayne Bay Factor Analysis
APPENDIX 9: Akritas Theil Sen Regression Results
x
LIST OF FIGURES page
Figure 1.1: Location of FIU sampling sites in Biscayne Bay 9
Figure 1.2: Location of DERM sampling sites in Biscayne Bay 9