DOCSLIB.ORG

Implementation of Florida's Numeric Nutrient Standards

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Implementation of Florida's Numeric Nutrient Standards Implementation of Florida’s Numeric Nutrient Standards Document Submitted to EPA in Support of the Department of Environmental Protection’s Adopted Nutrient Standards for Streams, Spring Vents, Lakes, and Selected Estuaries April 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose of Document ............................................................................................................ 1 Background ........................................................................................................................... 1 The Hierarchical Approach ..................................................................................................... 1 Nutrient Criteria for Lakes ..............................................................................................................2 Nitrate-Nitrite Criterion for Spring Vents .........................................................................................4 Using Measures of Flora and Fauna and Regional Nutrient Thresholds in Streams ............................5 Stream Definition ...................................................................................................................5 Implementation of NNC in Streams ........................................................................................6 Floral Evaluation for Determining Achievement of NNC ..........................................................8 Evaluating Algal Mats ........................................................................................................... 10 RPS Decision Key................................................................................................................... 10 Evaluating Changes in Species Composition .......................................................................... 11 Algal Species Composition Decision Key ............................................................................... 12 Evaluating the Presence or Absence of Nuisance Macrophyte Growth ................................... 12 LVS Decision Key ................................................................................................................... 13 Evaluating Algal Blooms, Chlorophyll a, and Phytoplankton Taxonomic Data ......................... 14 Chlorophyll/Algal Bloom Decision Key ................................................................................. 15 Floral Measures Summary .................................................................................................... 16 Faunal Evaluation for Determining Achievement of NNC ....................................................... 16 Examples of a Weight-of-Evidence Approach for Determining Achievement of Nutrient Criteria............................................................................................................... 17 Stream Sampling Locations and Other Environmental Considerations ................................... 20 Nutrient Criteria in Estuaries ......................................................................................................... 21 Decision Matrix and Examples for Implementing the Hierarchical Process ............................ 21 Hierarchies 1 and 2 ....................................................................................................................... 24 Examples of Hierarchy 1 ....................................................................................................... 24 Examples of Hierarchy 2 ....................................................................................................... 24 Hierarchy 3...................................................................................................................................25 Examples of Hierarchy 3 ....................................................................................................... 26 ii Waterbody Types and Cases with Insufficient Information ............................................................. 28 Other Components of NNC ............................................................................................................ 28 NNC and Protection of Downstream Waters .................................................................................. 29 Water Quality Modeling ....................................................................................................... 29 Issuance of NPDES Permits ................................................................................................... 29 Evaluation of Trends ............................................................................................................ 30 Trend Test Summary ............................................................................................................ 32 Discussion of TMDLs as NNC ......................................................................................................... 33 Discussion of Site Specific Alternative Criteria as NNC .................................................................... 34 Implementing the NNC Revisions to the Impaired Waters Rule (Chapter 62-303, F.A.C.) ....... 35 Assessment of Estuaries ................................................................................................................ 40 Assessment of Waterbodies with Interpretations of the NNC Expressed as Loads or Delivery Ratios .............................................................................................................................. 41 Impaired Waters Rule Assessment Summary ........................................................................ 41 Surface Water Discharge Wastewater Permits ..................................................................... 42 WQBEL Procedures for Each Tier of the Hierarchy ................................................................. 43 Basic Information Needs for Distinguishing Flowing Waters Under 62-302.200(36), F.A.C. .... 49 General Information ..................................................................................................................... 50 Non-Perennial Water Segments .................................................................................................... 50 Vascular Plants as Indicators ................................................................................................ 50 Macroinvertebrates as Indicators ......................................................................................... 51 Tidally Influenced Segments ......................................................................................................... 54 Water Management Conveyances ................................................................................................ 55 Delineation .......................................................................................................................... 56 Primary Water Management Purpose ................................................................................... 56 Physical Alteration that Limits Habitat .................................................................................. 56 Appendix A. Minimally Disturbed and Healthy Streams ................................................................ 58 Table A-1. List of healthy streams (passing SCI) used to inform RPS expectations. ............ 58 Table A-2. List of benchmark streams used to establish RPS and LVS expectations. ................................................................................................................ 64 Table A-3. List of healthy streams (passing SCI) used to inform stream chlorophyll a expectations. .......................................................................................... 65 iii Table A-4. List of benchmark streams used to establish stream chlorophyll a expectations. ................................................................................................................ 73 iv PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT This document describes how numeric nutrient standards in Chapters 62-302 (Water Quality Standards) and 62-303 (Identification of Impaired Surface Waters), Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), are implemented by the Department of Environmental Protection (Department). The major topics include the hierarchical approach used to interpret the narrative nutrient criterion (NNC) on a site-specific basis; a summary of the criteria for lakes, spring vents, streams and estuaries; floral measures and the weight of evidence approach in streams; example scenarios for how the criteria will be implemented in the 303(d) assessment process; and a description of how the Water Quality Based Effluent Limitation (WQBEL) process is used to implement the nutrient standards in wastewater permitting. Finally, because of the complexity associated with assessing nutrient enrichment effects in streams, a summary of the weight-of-evidence evaluation involving flora, fauna, and Nutrient Thresholds is provided. BACKGROUND Nutrients are naturally present in aquatic systems and are necessary for the proper functioning of biological communities. Nutrient effects on aquatic ecosystems are moderated in how they are expressed by many natural factors (e.g., light penetration, hydraulic residence time, presence of herbivore grazers and other food web interactions, and habitat considerations). As a result, determining the appropriate protective nutrient regime is largely a site-specific undertaking, requiring information about ecologically relevant responses. THE HIERARCHICAL APPROACH The NNC in paragraph 62-302.530(47)(b), F.A.C., states that “in no case shall
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Final Report of the Scientific Peer Review Panel on The
    Engineers, FINAL REPORT OF THE SCIENTIFIC PEER REVIEW PANEL ON THE Scientists Planners& www.waterandair.com Environmental DATA AND METHODOLOGIES IN MFL Establishment for the Econfina River Prepared for SUWANNEE RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 9225 CR 49 Live Oak, Florida 32060 Prepared under Contract 03/04-137 By Water & Air Research, Inc. Peer Review Panel Ivan Chou, M.E., P.E. Louis Motz, Ph.D., P.E., D.WRE. Jeffrey Hill, Ph.D. E. Lynn Mosura-Bliss, M.A. December 2015 REAL PEOPLE REAL SOLUTIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Introduction 1 SCOPE OF REVIEW REQUIRED BY THE DISTRICT 2 REVIEW CONSTRAINTS 3 TIMETABLE 3 RESULTS OF PEER REVIEW 4 REVIEW SUMMARY 6 CONCLUSIONS 8 Appendices: Appendix A – Resumes Appendix B – Peer Review Forms Econfina Peer Review Report for SRWMD.docx 1/12/2016 INTRODUCTION The Minimum Flows and Levels (MFL) Program within the State of Florida is based on the requirements of Chapter 373.042 Florida Statutes. This statute requires that either a Water Management District (WMD) or the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) establish minimum flows for surface watercourses and minimum levels for groundwaters and surface waters. The statutory description of a minimum flow is “the limit at which further withdrawals would be significantly harmful to the water resources or ecology of the area” (Ch. 373.042 (1)(a), F.S.). The statute provides additional guidance to the WMDs and DEP on how to establish MFLs, including how they may be calculated, using the “best information available,” to reflect “seasonal variations,” when appropriate. Protection of non-consumptive uses also are to be considered as part of the process, but the decision on whether to provide for protection of non-consumptive uses is to be made by the Governing Board of the WMD or the DEP (Ch.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Preliminary Manatee Mortality Table with 5-Year Summary From: 01/01/2019 To: 11/22/2019
    FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MARINE MAMMAL PATHOBIOLOGY LABORATORY 2019 Preliminary Manatee Mortality Table with 5-Year Summary From: 01/01/2019 To: 11/22/2019 County Date Field ID Sex Size Waterway City Probable Cause (cm) Nassau 01/01/2019 MNE19001 M 275 Nassau River Yulee Natural: Cold Stress Hillsborough 01/01/2019 MNW19001 M 221 Hillsborough Bay Apollo Beach Natural: Cold Stress Monroe 01/01/2019 MSW19001 M 275 Florida Bay Flamingo Undetermined: Other Lee 01/01/2019 MSW19002 M 170 Caloosahatchee River North Fort Myers Verified: Not Recovered Manatee 01/02/2019 MNW19002 M 213 Braden River Bradenton Natural: Cold Stress Putnam 01/03/2019 MNE19002 M 175 Lake Ocklawaha Palatka Undetermined: Too Decomposed Broward 01/03/2019 MSE19001 M 246 North Fork New River Fort Lauderdale Natural: Cold Stress Volusia 01/04/2019 MEC19002 U 275 Mosquito Lagoon Oak Hill Undetermined: Too Decomposed St. Lucie 01/04/2019 MSE19002 F 226 Indian River Fort Pierce Natural: Cold Stress Lee 01/04/2019 MSW19003 F 264 Whiskey Creek Fort Myers Human Related: Watercraft Collision Lee 01/04/2019 MSW19004 F 285 Mullock Creek Fort Myers Undetermined: Too Decomposed Citrus 01/07/2019 MNW19003 M 275 Gulf of Mexico Crystal River Verified: Not Recovered Collier 01/07/2019 MSW19005 M 270 Factory Bay Marco Island Natural: Other Lee 01/07/2019 MSW19006 U 245 Pine Island Sound Bokeelia Verified: Not Recovered Lee 01/08/2019 MSW19007 M 254 Matlacha Pass Matlacha Human Related: Watercraft Collision Citrus 01/09/2019 MNW19004 F 245 Homosassa River Homosassa
    [Show full text]
  • January 4, 2017 Secretary Tom Vilsack
    Thomas 0. Ingram Akerman LLP 50 North Laura Street Suite 3100 Jacksonville, FL 32202-3646 Tel: 904.798.3700 Fax: 904. 798.3730 January 4, 2017 Secretary Tom Vilsack United States Department of Agriculture c/o Jeffrey M. Prieto, General Counsel Room 107W, Whitten Building 1400 Independence Ave, SW Washington, D.C. 20250-1400 Thomas L. Tidwell (via email [email protected] and U.S. Mail) Chief, USDA Forest Service 1400 Independence Ave., SW Washington, D.C. 20250-0003 Re: Rodman Reservoir (a/k/a Lake Ocklawaha), Florida, Petition for Rulemaking, Bruce Kaster and Joseph Little v. Secretary of the Department of Agriculture and Chief of the United States Forest Service Dear Secretary Vilsack and Mr. Tidwell: . I am writing on behalf of our client, Save Rodman Reservoir, Inc. Based in Putnam County, Save Rodman Reservoir has been active for over 30 years in promoting the Rodman Reservoir as an important environmental and recreational resource for north central Florida. Among other functions, shallow water bodies remove nutrients, superior to flowing streams. Urbanization and other manmade changes to the Ocklawaha basin have contributed to increased nutrient concentrations in the river, and increased concern for excessive nutrient loading in the St. Johns River system downstream. Flows from Lake Apopka upstream have been managed through an upstream dam and a chemical treatment system to attempt to reduce nutrient flows downstream. To counter increased nutrient concentrations in the St. Johns River, the State of Florida has worked in recent decades to create tens of thousands of acres of shallow water reservoirs in areas feeding the St.
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive River Management Plan
    September 2011 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WEKIVA WILD AND SCENIC RIVER SYSTEM Florida __________________________________________________________________________ The Wekiva Wild and Scenic River System was designated by an act of Congress on October 13, 2000 (Public Law 106-299). The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 USC 1247) requires that each designated river or river segment must have a comprehensive river management plan developed. The Wekiva system has no approved plan in place. This document examines two alternatives for managing the Wekiva River System. It also analyzes the impacts of implementing each of the alternatives. Alternative A consists of the existing river management and trends and serves as a basis for comparison in evaluating the other alternative. It does not imply that no river management would occur. The concept for river management under alternative B would be an integrated program of goals, objectives, and actions for protecting and enhancing each outstandingly remarkable value. A coordinated effort among the many public agencies and entities would be needed to implement this alternative. Alternative B is the National Park Service’s and the Wekiva River System Advisory Management Committee’s preferred alternative. Implementing the preferred alternative (B) would result in coordinated multiagency actions that aid in the conservation or improvement of scenic values, recreation opportunities, wildlife and habitat, historic and cultural resources, and water quality and quantity. This would result in several long- term beneficial impacts on these outstandingly remarkable values. This Environmental Assessment was distributed to various agencies and interested organizations and individuals for their review and comment in August 2010, and has been revised as appropriate to address comments received.
    [Show full text]
  • Prohibited Waterbodies for Removal of Pre-Cut Timber
    PROHIBITED WATERBODIES FOR REMOVAL OF PRE-CUT TIMBER Recovery of pre-cut timber shall be prohibited in those waterbodies that are considered pristine due to water quality or clarity or where the recovery of pre-cut timber will have a negative impact on, or be an interruption to, navigation or recreational pursuits, or significant cultural resources. Recovery shall be prohibited in the following waterbodies or described areas: 1. Alexander Springs Run 2. All Aquatic Preserves designated under chapter 258, F.S. 3. All State Parks designated under chapter 258, F.S. 4. Apalachicola River between Woodruff lock to I-10 during March, April and May 5. Chipola River within state park boundaries 6. Choctawhatchee River from the Alabama Line 3 miles south during the months of March, April and May. 7. Econfina River from Williford Springs south to Highway 388 in Bay County. 8. Escambia River from Chumuckla Springs to a point 2.5 miles south of the springs 9. Ichetucknee River 10. Lower Suwannee River National Refuge 11. Merritt Mill Pond from Blue Springs to Hwy. 90 12. Newnan’s Lake 13. Ocean Pond – Osceola National Forest, Baker County 14. Oklawaha River from the Eureka Dam to confluence with Silver River 15. Rainbow River 16. Rodman Reservoir 17. Santa Fe River, 3 Miles above and below Ginnie Springs 18. Silver River 19. St. Marks from Natural Bridge Spring to confluence with Wakulla River 20. Suwannee River within state park boundaries 21. The Suwannee River from the Interstate 10 bridge north to the Florida Sheriff's Boys Ranch, inclusive of section 4, township 1 south, range 13 east, during the months of March, April and May.
    [Show full text]
  • The Caloosahatchee River Estuary: a Monitoring Partnership Between Federal, State, and Local Governments, 2007–13
    Prepared in cooperation with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the South Florida Water Management District The Caloosahatchee River Estuary: A Monitoring Partnership Between Federal, State, and Local Governments, 2007–13 By Eduardo Patino The tidal Caloosahatchee River and downstream estuaries also known as S–79 (fig. 2), which are operated by the USGS (fig. 1) have substantial environmental, recreational, and economic in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Lee value for southwest Florida residents and visitors. Modifications to County, and the City of Cape Coral. Additionally, a monitor- the Caloosahatchee River watershed have altered the predevelop- ing station was operated on Sanibel Island from 2010 to 2013 ment hydrology, thereby threatening the environmental health of (fig. 1) as part of the USGS Greater Everglades Priority Eco- estuaries in the area (South Florida Water Management District, system Science initiative and in partnership with U.S. Fish and 2014). Hydrologic monitoring of the freshwater contributions from Wildlife Service (J.N. Ding Darling National Wildlife Ref- tributaries to the tidal Caloosahatchee River and its estuaries is uge). Moving boat water-quality surveys throughout the tidal necessary to adequately describe the total freshwater inflow and Caloosahatchee River and downstream estuaries began in 2011 constituent loads to the delicate estuarine system. and are ongoing. Information generated by these monitoring From 2007 to 2013, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in networks has proved valuable to the FDEP for developing total cooperation with the Florida Department of Environmental Protec- maximum daily load criteria, and to the SFWMD for calibrat- tion (FDEP) and the South Florida Water Management District ing and verifying a hydrodynamic model.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Minimum Flows for the Lower Peace River and Proposed Minimum Flows Lower Shell Creek, Draft Report
    Recommended Minimum Flows for the Lower Peace River and Proposed Minimum Flows Lower Shell Creek, Draft Report November 30, 2020 Recommended Minimum Flows for the Lower Peace River and Proposed Minimum Flows for Lower Shell Creek, Draft Report November 30, 2020 Yonas Ghile, PhD, PH, Lead Hydrologist XinJian Chen, PhD, PE, Chief Professional Engineer Douglas A. Leeper, MFLs Program Lead Chris Anastasiou, PhD, Chief Water Quality Scientist Kristina Deak, PhD, Staff Environmental Scientist Southwest Florida Water Management District 2379 Broad Street Brooksville, Florida 34604-6899 The Southwest Florida Water Management District (District) does not discriminate on the basis of disability. This nondiscrimination policy involves every aspect of the District’s functions, including access to and participation in the District’s programs, services, and activities. Anyone requiring reasonable accommodation, or who would like information as to the existence and location of accessible services, activities, and facilities, as provided for in the Americans with Disabilities Act, should contact Donna Eisenbeis, Sr. Performance Management Professional, at 2379 Broad St., Brooksville, FL 34604-6899; telephone (352) 796-7211 or 1-800- 423-1476 (FL only), ext. 4706; or email [email protected]. If you are hearing or speech impaired, please contact the agency using the Florida Relay Service, 1-800-955-8771 (TDD) or 1-800-955-8770 (Voice). If requested, appropriate auxiliary aids and services will be provided at any public meeting, forum, or event of the District. In the event of a complaint, please follow the grievance procedure located at WaterMatters.org/ADA. i Table of Contents Acronym List Table......................................................................................................... vii Conversion Unit Table ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2001 SWFWMD Land Acquisition Plan
    Five-Year Land Acquisition Plan 2001 SWFWMD i Land Acquisition Five-Year Plan 2001 Southwest Florida Water Management District Five-Year Land Acquisition Plan 2001 If a disabled individual wishes to obtain the information contained in this document in another form, please contact Cheryl Hill at 1-800-423-1476, extension 4452; TDD ONLY 1-800-231-6103; FAX (352)754-68771 ii Table of Contents Table of Contents Introduction and History 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1 Save Our Rivers 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1 Preservation 2000 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1 Florida Forever 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 3 Selection and Evaluation Process 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 5 Less-Than-Fee Acquisitions 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 10 Partnerships 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 13 Surplus Lands111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 16 Land Use/Management Activities111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 17 Management Planning 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 17 Land Use Implementation 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
    [Show full text]
  • Alafia River Paddling Trail Guide
    F ll o r ii d a D e s ii g n a tt e d «¬580 P a d d ll ii n g T r a ii ll s ¤£92 Tampa ¯ L ii tt tt ll e M a n a tt e e R ii v e r Old Tampa Bay ¨¦§275 «¬676 Hillsborough Bloomingdale ¤£92 Bay Riverview MacDill AFB Gibsonton Boyette 301 92 ¤£ Kenneth City ¤£ ¤£41 )"672 Apollo Beach St Petersburg Tampa Bay )"672 Gulfport L ii tt tt ll e M a n a tt e e R ii v e rr P a d d ll ii n g T rr a ii ll M a p St. Petersburg Beach «¬674 Ruskin Wimauma ¨¦§75 Sun City )"579 HILLSBOROUGH MANATEE ¤£41 675 Gillette )" Parrish «¬62 275 Rubonia ¨¦§ )"683 ¤£301 Memphis Palmetto Ellenton Anna Maria M an atee River Bradenton Holmes Beach «¬64 ¤£41 Samoset Designated Paddling Trail Cortez South Bradenton ¤£301 Wetlands «¬70 ¬70 Water Bayshore Gardens « Designated Paddling Trail Index 0 2.5 5 10 Miles Bullfrog Creek L ii tt tt ll e M a n a tt e e R ii v e rr P a d d ll ii n g T rr a ii ll Scrub Wolf Branch 1 2 T H 19TH AVE S T 11TH AVE T E C 7TH AVE 3 Bahia Beach O 0 T R Coastal Restoration H D Sun City Center SHELL POINT RD S T Ruskin 2 1 1 5 S T T H 2 674 S 7 41 S T T Cockroach Bay Preserve T H State Park S T 14TH AVE 6 3 T 6 H T H S Gulf City T S T 1 S T S T 21ST AVE 75 2 Access Point 1: US 301 Bridge 4 T H N: 27.6715 W: -82.3525 S Little T Man atee Riv Riverside er UNIVERSAL DR Club Access Point 5: Wildcat Park N: 27.6760 W: -82.4361 Sun City STEPHENS RD Little Manatee River Conservation Area Little Manatee River State Park Access Point 4: 24th Street Access LIGHTFOOT RD Upper Little Manatee River Conservation Area N: 27.6647 W: -82.4022 301 W IL Sundance
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Public Workshop for Minimum Flows and Levels Priority Lists and Schedules for the CFWI Area
    Joint Public Workshop for Minimum Flows and Levels Priority Lists and Schedules for the CFWI Area St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) September 5, 2019 St. Cloud, Florida 1 Agenda 1. Introductions and Background……... Don Medellin, SFWMD 2. SJRWMD MFLs Priority List……Andrew Sutherland, SJRWMD 3. SWFWMD MFLs Priority List..Doug Leeper, SWFWMD 4. SFWMD MFLs Priority List……Don Medellin, SFWMD 5. Stakeholder comments 6. Adjourn 2 Statutory Directive for MFLs Water management districts or DEP must establish MFLs that set the limit or level… “…at which further withdrawals would be significantly harmful to the water resources or ecology of the area.” Section 373.042(1), Florida Statutes 3 Statutory Directive for Reservations Water management districts may… “…reserve from use by permit applicants, water in such locations and quantities, and for such seasons of the year, as in its judgment may be required for the protection of fish and wildlife or the public health and safety.” Section 373.223(4), Florida Statutes 4 District Priority Lists and Schedules Meet Statutory and Rule Requirements ▪ Prioritization is based on the importance of waters to the State or region, and the existence of or potential for significant harm ▪ Includes waters experiencing or reasonably expected to experience adverse impacts ▪ MFLs the districts will voluntarily subject to independent scientific peer review are identified ▪ Proposed reservations are identified ▪ Listed water bodies that have the potential to be affected by withdrawals in an adjacent water management district are identified 5 2019 Draft Priority List and Schedule ▪ Annual priority list and schedule required by statute for each district ▪ Presented to respective District Governing Boards for approval ▪ Submitted to DEP for review by Nov.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Resources of Duval County, Florida
    Water Resources of Duval County, Florida By G.G. Phelps U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 93-4130 Prepared in cooperation with the City of Jacksonville, Florida Tallahassee, Florida 1994 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. For additional information Copies of this report can be write to: purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Center Suite 3015 Open-File Reports Section 227 N. Bronough Street Box 25286, MS 517 Tallahassee, FL 32301 Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 II CONTENTS Contents Introduction ...............................................................................................................................................1 Purpose and Scope.....................................................................................................................................1 Study Area and Population........................................................................................................................2 Water Use in Duval County ......................................................................................................................4 The Hydrologic Cycle ...............................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Accumulating Drifting Macroalgae on a Shallow-Water Sediment System: an Experimental Study
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Published January l Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1 Impact of accumulating drifting macroalgae on a shallow-water sediment system: an experimental study Kristina Sundbackl, Benno Jonssonl**, Per ~ilsson~,*, Inger Lindstroml ' Department of Marine Botany, University of Goteborg, Car1 Skottbergs Gata 22, S-413 19 Goteborg, Sweden Department of Zoology, University of Goteborg. PO Box 25059, S-400 31 Goteborg, Sweden ABSTRACT: Using an outdoor flow-through experimental set-up consisting of twelve 30 1 containers, effect of accumulation of drifting filamentous macroalgae on a shallow-water sediment system was studied for 3 wk after the addition of 0.9 (low dose) and 1.8 kg fresh wt m-' (high dose) of filamentous red algae. Estimates of structural changes were based on relationships between numbers and biomass of bacteria, autotrophic microflora, ciliates and meiofauna and their qualitative composition. Effects on the functional level were assessed by measuring primary productivity, changes in carbon pools, as well as oxygen and nutrient flux. The low-dose treatment did not significantly alter the composition or patterns of primary productivity and nutrient fluxes when compared with the control (no addition). The high-dose addit~ondecreased the abundance of microalgae, cil~atesand me~ofauna,whereas no clear trend was seen for bacteria relative to the control. From the oxygen flux values it was apparent that the systems in control and low-dose containers were autotrophic (P > R), whereas in the high-dose treatments the oxygen concentration fell sharply, exhibiting a net oxygen consumption most of the time due to fast m~neralizationof the macroalgal biomass.
    [Show full text]