|
|

About
Lake Data
Secchi
Depth
Trophic State Index
Lake Grades
Chlorophyll
Nutrients
GIS
Aquatic
Plant Surveys
|
|
Trophic
State Index
Eutrophication is the process by which lakes are enriched with nutrients,
increasing the production of rooted aquatic plants and algae. The
extent to which this process has occurred is reflected in a lake's
trophic classification or state:
oligotrophic - nutrient poor and low productivity; high transparency
(deep secchi depth), low chlorophyll-a, low phosphorus
mesotrophic - moderately productive; intermediate clarity,
chlorophyll and phosphorus concentration
eutrophic - very productive and fertile; low clarity/shallow
secchi; high chlorophyll and phosphorus concentrations.
hypereutrophic - extremely productive with noxious surface
scums of algae
CARLSON'S TROPHIC STATE INDEX (TSI)
Trophic State Indices (TSIs) are an attempt to provide a single
quantitative index for the purpose of classifying and ranking lakes,
most often from the standpoint of assessing water quality. In recent
years the Carlson (1977) Index appears to have attained general
acceptance in the limnological community as a reasonable approach
to this problem. This is a measure of the trophic status of a body
of water using several measures of water quality including: transparency
or turbidity (using Secchi disk depth recordings), chlorophyll-a
concentrations (algal biomass), and total phosphorus levels (usually
the nutrient in shortest supply for algal growth).
TSI ranges along a scale from 0-100 that is based upon relationships
between secchi depth and surface water concentrations of algal chlorophyll,
and total phosphorus for a set of North American lakes. Its major
assumptions is that suspended particulate material in the water
controls secchi depth and that algal biomass is the major source
of particulates; The lowest value of zero would correspond to a
secchi depth of 64 meters (greater even than Crater Lake, Oregon
and Lake Tahoe, CA/NV at its clearest back in the 1960's)! A value
of 100 would correspond to a secchi of only 6.4 cm (less than 3
inches- yuck !). A set of equations were then derived to describe
these relationships with higher values corresponding to increased
fertility, that is, more eutrophic. An increase in TSI of 10 units
corresponds to a halving of secchi depth and a doubling of phosphorus
concentration.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) classifies lake water
quality information according to Ecoregions that divide the country
into areas that have similar land use, soils, topography and natural
vegetation (sometimes called "potential" vegetation since people
have often changed what was once present by cutting forests or draining
wetlands for creating farmland). Minnesota includes 7 ecoregions
of which 4 contain 98% of the state's lakes (Fig 1).
NLF - Northern Lakes & Forests
NCHF - North Central Hardwood Forests
WCBP - Western Corn Belt Plains
NGP - Northern Glaciated Plains
Figure
1
The tables
below show the typical water quality conditions associated with
TSI values and a summary of water quality parameters and the range
of TSI values found for Minnesota's ecoregions. Note that the
LAKE ACCESS lakes fall within the North Central Hardwood Forests
Ecoregion (NCHF).
Table
1
|
TSI
(Carlson 1977)
|
|
|
<
30
|
Oligotrophic;
clear water; high DO throughout the year in the entire hypolimnion
|
|
30-40
|
Oligotrophic;
clear water; possible periods of limited hypolimnetic anoxia
(DO =0)
|
|
40-50
|
Moderately
clear water; increasing chance of hypolimnetic anoxia in summer;
fully supportive of all swimmable/aesthetic uses
|
|
50-60
|
Mildly
eutrophic; decreased transparency; anoxic hypolimnion; macrophyte
problems; warm-water fisheries only; supportive of all swimmable/aesthetic
uses but "threatened"
|
|
60-70
|
Blue-green
algae dominance; scums possible; extensive macrophyte problems
|
|
70-80
|
Heavy
algal blooms possible throughout summer; dense macrophyte beds;
hypereutrophic
|
|
>
80
|
Algal
scums; summer fish kills; few macrophytes due to algal shading;
rough fish dominance
|
| |
TSI
- P = 14.42 * Ln [TP] + 4.15 (in ug/L)
TSI - C = 30.6 + 9.81 Ln [Chlor-a] (in ug/L)
TSI - S = 60 - 14.41 * Ln [Secchi] (in meters)
Average TSI = [TSI-P + TSI-C + TSI-S]/3
Note- If the 3 TSI values are not similar to each other, it
is likely that algae may be light- or nitrogen-limited instead
of P-limited or that secchi is affected by erosional silt
particles rather than by algae, or something else. One should
look deeper into the data!
|
Figure 2.
Here's a graphical
presentation of the information in Table 1.
The graphs below show what the secchi, chlorophyll and total phosphorus
(TP) data for Minnesota lakes monitored by the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency look like. They are from the MPCA's
Year 2000 Lake Assessment Report.
| Figure
3a. Log total phosphorus vs log chlorophyll-a scatterplot. Derived
from ecoregion reference lakes summer-mean measurements |
3a
|
| Figure
3b. Total Phosphorus vs Secchi scatterplot. Derived from ecoregion
reference lakes summer-mean measurements. |
3b
|
Note how sensitive
the lower secchi graph (3b) is to increasing TP. As the TP increases
(slides down the curve) from about 10 up to 20 ugP/L (ppb), the
secchi depth, the water clarity, drops off rapidly from about 4.5
meters to less than 3 meters visibility. You should also be aware
that while the drawn line fits the data pretty well, there is still
a lotof scatter in the fitted curve- more than 100% in general,
particularly at higher secchi (more transparent) lakes. The reasons
for this probably are that the algal communities in some of the
monitored lakes are not strictly regulated only by phosphorus; nitrogen
availablility, light, and zooplankton effects can also distort the
simplest view that only phosphorus matters. This effect is also
very striking at very high TP levels where the secchi depth is already
about as low as it can get short of jumping back into the boat.
and the water is now so turbid that algal chlorophyll may actually
be limited by light penetration associated with shading from the
algae themselves (see those data points to the far right of the
line in Figure 3 A ). Another effect often seen in this type of
large data set is that the lakes with the extremly high TP values
(over 300 ugP/L for those outliers in Figure 3A) are often in agricultural
landscapes where stream inflows have a lot of suspended sediment
that clouds the water and also light-limits algal growth. So you
don't get as much algal chlorophyll as you 'd expect fron just looking
at the TP value.
Table 2 shows
how these water quality variables and the TSI differ across Minnesota's
ecoregions. The top line of the table summarizes how limnologists
generally classify lakes according to differences in secchi, chlorophyll
and total -P. The ranges are a result of differences in opinion
and so there is no exact definition of a lake's trophic status based
on just a few parameters. They are very useful guidelines for making
management decisions, setting priorities for funding, and tracking
short- and long-term trends for discovering problems early and assessing
how well lake and watershed restoration programs are working.
.Table
2
|
A comparison
of trophic state indices and values from the various ecoregions
of Minnesota . NLF = Northern Lakes and Forests ecoregion;
NCHF = North Central Hardwood Forest; WCBP = Western Corn
Belt Plains; NGP = Northern Glaciated Plains. (O=oligotrophic,
M = mesotrophic, E = eutrophic). Ecoregion values from Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency*. The Typical values are
the range from the 25th to the 75th
percentile for that Ecoregion*. LAKE
ACCESS lakes are in the NCHF ecoregion.
|
|
|
TP (ug/L)
|
Chl-a (ug/L)
|
Secchi (meters)
|
Carlson TSI***
|
|
TROPHIC STATUS
|
O
|
M
|
E
|
O
|
M
|
E
|
O
|
M
|
E
|
O
|
M
|
E
|
|
STANDARDCRITERIA
**
|
<11
|
11-24
|
>24
|
<3.0
|
3.0-7.0
|
>7.0
|
>4.0
|
2.2-4.0
|
<2.2
|
<35
|
40-50
|
>55
|
|
NLF
|
14-27
|
<10
|
2.4-4.6
|
41-52
|
|
NCHF
|
23-50
|
5-22
|
.......
.... 1.5-3.2
|
49-66
|
|
WCP
|
.65-150
|
30-80
|
.0.5-1.0
|
..67-77
|
|
NGP
|
130-250
|
30-55
|
.0.3-1.0
|
..67-73
|
|
* ecoregion values from Minnesota Lake Water Quality
Assessment Data:1996. MPCA, June 1996
**The standard criteria represent median values calculated
from six review papers from the published scientific literature
(details in Axler, R., C. Rose, and C. Tikkanen. 1991. An
assessment of phytoplankton nutrient deficiency in N. Minnesota
acid-sensitive lakes. Technical. Report NRRI/TR-91/18. 114
p; submitted to Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Air Quality
Division); Axler, R.P., C.Rose and C. Tikkanen. 1994. Phytoplankton
nutrient deficiency as related to atmospheric nitrogen deposition
in northern Minnesota acid-sensitive lakes. Canadian Journal
of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 51:281-1296.
*** from Carlson, R. E. 1977. A trophic state index
for lakes. Limnol. Oceanogr. 22: 361-369.
|
|