Developments in the ecological box modelling of the Curonian Lagoon

Similar documents
Big Bend Model. Wayne Magley Watershed Evaluation and TMDL Section FDEP. March 7, 2016

Hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico: Benefits and Challenges of Using Multiple Models to Inform Management Decisions

CHEMICAL: NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS (read pp in Dodson)

MODELING NUTRIENT LOADING AND EUTROPHICATION RESPONSE TO SUPPORT THE ELKHORN SLOUGH NUTRIENT TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD

Operational System for Coastal Waters of Gdansk Region

Modelling of higher trophic levels with an large ecosystem model: -state of the art -limitations -perspectives. Piet Ruardij

Ecosystems: Nutrient Cycles

Biology. Slide 1 of 33. End Show. Copyright Pearson Prentice Hall

Biology. Slide 1 of 33. End Show. Copyright Pearson Prentice Hall

Nutrient Modeling Capabilities within HEC-RAS. EMRRP Webinar Series

Dynamics of Nutrients Pool in the Baltic Sea Using the Ecosystem Model 3D-CEMBS L. Dzierzbicka-Głowacka and M. Janecki

Ecosystems. Trophic relationships determine the routes of energy flow and chemical cycling in ecosystems.

Scenarios of the Baltic Sea ecosystem calculated with a regional climate model

3 3 Cycles of Matter Slide 1 of 33

3 3 Cycles of Matter

Assessment and Modelling of Baltic Ecosystem Response (AMBER)

Pollutant Types and Sources

Three dimensional modelling of hydrodynamics and dissolved oxygen in Lake Erie using ELCOM- CAEDYM

EUTROPHICATION. Student Lab Workbook

Ecosystem Status Assessment in Korea

COUPLED PHYSICAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL MODELS

OPTION C.6 NITROGEN & PHOSPHORUS CYCLES

UNIT 1 SUSTAINING ECOSYSTEMS

Do Now. Take out your activity you completed on Friday when I wasn t here!

Ecosystems and the Biosphere: Energy Flow Through the Ecosystem and the Recycling of Matter

Cycles of Matter. Slide 1 of 33. End Show. Copyright Pearson Prentice Hall

Determining the f ratio 11/16/2010. Incubate seawater in the presence of trace 15

Nitrogen cycle Important steps

Upper Mississippi River Lake Pepin Modeling Lake Pepin Municipal Sector Meeting August 6, 2008

10/17/ Cycles of Matter. Recycling in the Biosphere. How does matter move among the living and nonliving parts of an ecosystem?

Development of indicators of eutrophication for the Eastern Gulf of Finland

What does each part of the equation mean? q=cm T

Aquatic respiration and ocean metabolism

3 3 Cycles of Matter. EOC Review

LIMNOLOGY. Inland Water Ecosystems. JACOB KALFF McGill University. Prentice Hall. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458

Analysis of the changes in N and P Discharge from Ryaverket Report July 2008

MIKE 11. Reservoir. The Modelling Tool for Optimisation of Reservoir Management, Water Quality Simulation and Impact Assessment WATER & ENVIRONMENT

Modelling Environmental Effects of Marine Renewables. Dr Louise Kregting & Dr Björn Elsäßer

Phytoplankton Blooms in the Baltic Sea Numerical Simulations

WHY DO WE NEED NITROGEN?? Nitrogen is needed to make up DNA and protein!

WILLAMETTE RIVER AND COLUMBIA RIVER WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION MODEL

WaterTech 2015 Total Loading Management Plan - An Integrated Watershed Management Approach. Lily Ma, The City of Calgary April, 2015

WARM UP. What can make up a population?

Lower Cape Fear River Basin Cape Fear DO Issues

Chapter 55: Ecosystems

Modeling Chester River Water Quality...

Basic Ecology Concepts

Eutrophication and the Saltwater Hudson River

SPACE ASSISTED WATER QUALITY FORECASTING PLATFORM

Operational oceanography and the ecosystem approach

Chapter 55: Ecosystems

Peer Review: Conowingo Pond Mass Balance Model Exelon Generation Company, LLC April By:

Lower Kaituna River Maketu Estuary. Water Quality Modelling

Chapter 55: Ecosystems

Nitrogen Cycling, Primary Production, and Water Quality in the New River Estuary. Defense Coastal/Estuarine Research Program (DCERP)

What is the TLI? Lake Rotorua TLI. Monitoring and modelling to support management and policies for Lake Rotorua 19/12/2013 TLI

Szczecin ISBN

Biological Oceanography

Productivity and fisheries. Energy flow. Biological pyramids. Why study production processes?

Appendix D: CE-QUAL-W2 Modeling Report

Mike Deas and I.E. Sogutlugil Watercourse Engineering, Inc nd Street, Suite B Davis, CA 95616

Biogeochemical Cycles

Biogeochemical fluxes in scenario simulations for the Baltic Sea in the period with Saint-Petersburg Baltic Eutrophication Model (SPBEM)

Application of the 3D model ELCOM CAEDYM to estimate phosphorus load reduction needs for Lake Wister, OK

Acidity and Alkalinity:

A limnologist s approach to numerical lake modeling: A case study at Lake Wister, OK

Water quality modelling to support the operation of the Kakhovka Reservoir, Dnieper River, Ukraine

Table of Contents. Table of Figures

Jeffrey Polovina 1, John Dunne 2, Phoebe Woodworth 1, and Evan Howell 1 Julia Blanchard 3

Nutrient Cycling. Hydrologic (Water) Cycle. Nitrogen Cycle: Atmospheric Gases

11/9/2010. Stoichiometry of POM and DOM. DOC cycling via DO 14 C Williams, Oeschger, and Kinney; Nature v224 (1969)

Ecosystems. Physical Laws Law of Conservation of Energy - Energy can not be created or destroyed, only transformed. Chapter 55: Ecosystems. Fig. 55.

Long-term Predictions of Phosphorus Dynamics in Kranji Reservoir

Southern California Bight 2008 Regional Monitoring Program: Volume VIII. Estuarine Eutrophication

ECOSYSTEMS. Follow along in chapter 54. *Means less important

1. Energy to do work 2. Raw material to build/repair things (nutrients)

Studying organisms in their environment

Dynamic Coupling of Hydrodynamic and Ecological Models

Redwood Shores Lagoon August Monthly Water Quality Monitoring Report

The Carbon Cycle. Goal Use this page to review the carbon cycle. CHAPTER 2 BLM 1-19 DATE: NAME: CLASS:

Feedback mechanisms between cyanobacterial blooms, transient hypoxia and benthic phosphorus regeneration in shallow coastal environments

How Ecosystems Work Section 2. Chapter 5 How Ecosystems Work Section 2: Cycling of Materials DAY 1

Coolwater Fry Culture in Ponds. Chris Hartleb Department of Biology Northern Aquaculture Demonstration Facility Aquaponics Innovation Center

A Carbon Budget in Tokyo Bay

4/13/2015. The Biosphere

Nutrient Cycles How are nutrients recycled through ecosystems?

Primer on Pond & Lake Ecology & Watershed Dynamics

Ecosystems and Nutrient Cycles Chapters 3

Physics, Chemistry, and Biology in Ponds and Lakes

Physics, Chemistry, and Biology in Ponds and Lakes

Chapter Two: Cycles of Matter (pages 32-65)

5.0 PHYTOPLANKTON PHYSIOLOGY. Luke Twomey Christopher P. Buzzelli Hans W. Paerl. 5.1 Introduction

Redwood Shores Lagoon November 2016 Monthly Water Quality Monitoring Report

Redwood Shores Lagoon February 2019 Monthly Water Quality Monitoring Report

Autotrophs vs. Heterotrophs

2.2 Nutrient Cycles in Ecosystems Name: Date: (Reference: BC Science 10 pp. 68 to 91) Block: NUTRIENT CYCLING IN THE BIOSPHERE. nutrients: aka.

Support Project of Total Pollutant Load Control System ( TPLCS ) introduction

Summary. 3 1 What Is Ecology? 3 2 Energy Flow. Name Class Date

Nutrient Response to Sewage Abatement in Hong Kong

Redwood Shores Lagoon May 2017 Monthly Water Quality Monitoring Report

Transcription:

Developments in the ecological box modelling of the Curonian Lagoon /9/9, Klaipeda Dr. Ali Ertürk Istanbul Technical University Department of Environmental Engineering INTRODUCTION 1

What is ESTAS? EcoSystem and TRansport Simulator A box model for aquatic ecological simulations Can handle spatial (vertically and horizontally) and temporal variations Horizontal Boxes (Cells) Cell 7 Cell 8 Cell 1 Cell Cell 3 Cell 5 Cell 6 Cell

1 Horizontal Boxes for the Curonian Lagoon Ecological Model km 11 13 3 5 6 7 8 9 1 1 1 15 16 Vertical Boxes (Layers) Cell 1 Cell Cell 3 Cell 5 Cell 6 A Cross Section A Through A-A Layer 1 Layer Layer 1 Layer Layer 3 Layer Layer 1 Layer Layer 3 Layer Layer 1 Layer 1 Layer Layer Layer 3 Layer 3 Layer Layer Layer 5 Layer 5 3

What is ESTAS? ESTAS is a computer program implemented in FORTRAN. It is an open source program. It is free for everybody. Works in sub-daily temporal resolution for years or even decades. How does ESTAS simulate water quality and Aquatic Ecology? ESTAS Model Inputs Geometry Flow field Settling field Meteorology User defined time series Ecology and Water Quality Kinetics Specific Inputs ESTAS SIMULATION ENGINE TRANSOPORT Advection Diffusion Settling of solids ECOLOGY and WATER QUALITY KINETICS SOLVER ESTAS Model Results

ESTAS ESTAS Model Inputs Geometry Flow field Settling field Meteorology User defined time series Ecology and Water Quality Kinetics Specific Inputs ALUKAS ESTAS SIMULATION ENGINE TRANSOPORT Advection Diffusion Settling of solids SOLVER ECOLOGY and WATER QUALITY KINETICS ESTAS Model Results What is ALUKAS? Advanced Level nutrient Kinetics for Aquatic ecosystems A pelagic NPZD (Nutrient, Phytoplankton, Zooplankton, Detritus) model for water quality kinetics and ecological modelling. Is a module that can be integrated to ESTAS and other transport models. 5

ALUKAS State Variables Summary Nutrients: N, P and Si compounds Dissolved oxygen Organic / detritus Three groups of phytoplankton: Diatoms, and others) One group of zooplankton Water quality variables Ecological variables Processes Related to Nutrient Cycles Other planktonic algae based dissolved organic External labile dissolved organic Zooplankton Diatoms based dissolved organic Ammonia nitrogen based dissolved organic Nitrification Zooplankton based dissolved organic Nitrate nitrogen Denitrification Ammonia preference factors External refractory dissolved organic Other planktonic algae Phosphate phosphorus Diatoms Inorganic Available silicon Reaeration 6

Processes Related to Plankton Dynamics Phosphate phosphorus Available silicon Ammonia nitrogen Ammonia preference factors Nitrate nitrogen Diatoms Excretion Diatoms based dissolved organic Photosynthesis Death Dissolved oxygen Inorganic Diatoms based particulate detritus Photosynthesis Excretion based dissolved organic Other planktonic algae Death Other planktonic algae based particulate detritus Death based particulate detritus Photosynthesis Excretion Other planktonic algae based dissolved organic Zooplankton based dissolved organic Excretion Food preference factor Grazing Zooplankton Zooplankton based particulate detritus Death Processes Related to Non-Living Organic Matter Cycle Reaeration Photosynthesis Photosynthesis Photosynthesis Phosphate phosphorus Available silicon Ammonia nitrogen Zooplankton Nitrification Zooplankton based dissolved organic Excretion Dissolution Dissolved oxygen Inorganic Zooplankton based particulate detritus based dissolved Excretion organic Death Dissolution Other Other planktonic planktonic algae based Dissolution algae Excretion dissolved organic Death based particulate detritus Other planktonic algae based particulate detritus Grazing Grazing Diatoms Excretion Death Diatoms based dissolved organic Death Dissolution Diatoms based particulate detritus External labile dissolved Dissolution organic External refractory dissolved Dissolution organic External labile particulate detritus External refractory particulate detritus Grazing Grazing 7

Results that can be obtained with ESTAS/ALUKAS Temporal variation of water quality and ecological variable for each box Temporal variation of each process simulated by ALUKAS for each box Additional information (such as driving variables) for higher level food web calculations/models Which Questions Could Be Answered with ESTAS/ALUKAS? Response of Water Quality (Nutrients, Organic Matter and Dissolved Oxygen) to external forcing Trophic status of aquatic ecosystems and nutrient criteria development Internal response of aquatic ecosystems (such as change in the primary production, accumulation of autochthonous organic matter, etc.) to external forcing Changes in plankton group composition The limiting factor for eutrophication (nutrients, etc.) 8

Nutrient Criteria Development Historical Information Describing Trends Reference Condition - TP - TN - Algal biomass - Water clarity - Other variables Models Describing System Dynamics Assessment by Regional Technical Assistance Group (RTAG) - Evaluation for downstream effects NUTRIENT CRITERIA Ecoregion/Coastal Province Evaluation Regional Technical Assistance Group Variables & Method Selection Existing Databases Sampling Design & New Data Collection Physical Classification Develop Reference Conditions Consider Additional Elements Criteria Development Data Analysis Nutrient criteria development procedure recommended by USEPA (adapted form USEPA, 1) APPLICATION TO THE CURONIAN LAGOON 9

Data Sources Lithuanian Marine Research Centre Lithuanian Meteorology Centre Institute of Botany, Vilnius Coastal Research and Planning Institute Data Sources 1

Model Setup and Validation Hydrodynamic linkage of ESTAS with SHYFEM 1 3 ESTAS Boundary 1 ESTAS Boundary ESTAS Boundary 3 km 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 1 13 1 ESTAS Boundary 15 16 11

Calibration and Validation of ESTAS/ALUKAS, Simulated Observed NH (gn.m -3 ) Model Results Data,3,5,,15,1,5, 1 3 5 6 7 8 NH (gn.m -3 ),15,1,5, 1999,6 Simulated Observed NO3 (gn.m -3 ) 1,,8,6,, Model Results Data NO3 (gn.m -3 ),,, 1 3 5 6 7 8, 1999 Calibration and Validation of ESTAS/ALUKAS,8 Simulated Observed PO (gp.m -3 ) Model Results Data,1,1,1,8,6,,, 1 3 5 6 7 8 PO (gp.m -3 ),6,,, 1999 Dissolved Oxygen (g.m -3 ) Model Results Data 16 1 1 1 8 6 1 3 5 6 7 8 Dissolved Oxygen (g.m -3 ) 1 1 1 8 6 Simulated Observed 1999 1

Total Phytoplankton (gc.m -3 ) 3,5 3,,5, 1,5 1,,5, Calibration and Validation of ESTAS/ALUKAS Model Results Data 1 3 5 6 7 8 Total Phytoplankton (gc.m -3 ) 3,,5, 1,5 1,,5,, Simulated Observed 1999 Simulated Observed Greens (gc.m -3 ) Model Results Data, 1,5 1,,5, 1 3 5 6 7 8 Greens (gc.m -3 ),3,,1, 1999 Goodness of Fit after Calibration and Validation (Zemlys et al., 8) ALUKAS Image adapted from Arhonditis et al. (). 13

Example Results: PO-P POP (gp.m -3 ) POP (gp.m -3 ) POP (gp.m -3 ) POP (gp.m -3 )..1 Cell 1 6 8 Cell 5..1 6 8 Cell 9..1 6 8 Cell 13..1 6 8 POP (gp.m -3 ) POP (gp.m -3 ) POP (gp.m -3 ) POP (gp.m -3 )..1 Cell 6 8 Cell 6..1 6 8 Cell 1..1 6 8 Cell 1..1 6 8 POP (gp.m -3 ) POP (gp.m -3 ) POP (gp.m -3 ) POP (gp.m -3 )..1 Cell 3 6 8 Cell 7..1 6 8 Cell 11..1 6 8 Cell 15..1 6 8 POP (gp.m -3 ) POP (gp.m -3 ) POP (gp.m -3 ) POP (gp.m -3 )..1 Cell 6 8 Cell 8.1.5 6 8 Cell 1..1 6 8 Cell 16..1 6 8 Example Results: Total Phytoplankton-C Cell 1 3 1 6 8 Cell 5 6 8 Cell 9 3 1 6 8 Cell 13 6 8 Cell 6 8 Cell 6 3 1 6 8 Cell 1 3 1 6 8 Cell 1 6 8 Cell 3 6 8 Cell 7 3 1 6 8 Cell 11 6 8 Cell 15 6 8 Cell 6 8 Cell 8 3 1 6 8 Cell 1 6 8 Cell 16 6 8 1

Scenarios Related to Nutrient Input Variation Nitrogen and Phosphorus Inputs Considered 15

What happens to the Nutrients?.16.1 N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased Basic simulation, N and P not changed N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased Basic simulation, N and P not changed.16.1 N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased Basic simulation, N and P not changed N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased Basic simulation, N and P not changed Ammonia nitrogen (gn.m -3 ).1.1.8.6. Ammonia nitrogen (gn.m -3 ).1.1.8.6.... 6 8. 6 8 What happens to the Nutrients?.5 N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% N increased, P 5% P increased 5% increased Basic N and P not changed Basic simulation, N and P not changed.5 N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% N decreased, 5% increased, P 5% P 5% increased decreased Basic and P not changed Basic simulation, N and P not changed Phosphate phosphorus (gp.m -3 )..15.1.5 Phosphate phosphorus (gp.m -3 )..15.1.5. 6 8. 6 8 16

.8.7 Wet year Dry year.6.5..3..1 N 5% increased, P not changed N 5% increased, P not changed N not changed, P 5% increased N not changed, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% decreased, P not changed N 5% decreased, P not changed N not changed, P 5% decreased Ammonia nitrogen (gn.m -3 ) N not changed, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased Basic simulation N and P not changed Wet year Dry year 15 Difference of ammonia nitrogen from basic simulation (%) 1 5-5 -1-15 - N 5% increased, P not changed N 5% increased, P not changed N not changed, P 5% increased N not changed, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% decreased, P not changed N 5% decreased, P not changed N not changed, P 5% decreased N not changed, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased -5-3 17

.6.5 Wet year Dry year Nitrate nitrogen (gn.m -3 )..3..1 N 5% increased, P not changed N 5% increased, P not changed N not changed, P 5% increased N not changed, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% decreased, P not changed N 5% decreased, P not changed N not changed, P 5% decreased N not changed, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased Basic simulation N and P not changed 6 Wet year Dry year Difference of nitrate nitrogen from basic simulation (%) - - N 5% increased, P not changed N 5% increased, P not changed N not changed, P 5% increased N not changed, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% decreased, P not changed N 5% decreased, P not changed N not changed, P 5% decreased N not changed, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased -6-8 18

.9.8.7.6.5..3..1 Wet year Dry year N 5% increased, P not changed N 5% increased, P not changed N not changed, P 5% increased N not changed, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% decreased, P not changed N 5% decreased, P not changed N not changed, P 5% decreased N not changed, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased Basic simulation N and P not changed Phosphate phosphorus (gp.m -3 ) 1 Wet year Dry year 8 Difference of phosphate phosphorus from basic simulation (%) 6 - - -6 N 5% increased, P not changed N 5% increased, P not changed N not changed, P 5% increased N not changed, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% increased, P 5% increased N 5% decreased, P not changed N 5% decreased, P not changed N not changed, P 5% decreased N not changed, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased -8 19

8 Average deviation for the wet year Average deviation for the dry year Average deviation for the wet year Average deviation for the dry year Wet year is based on 1999 Dry year is based on Deviation of the yearly average of results from the basic simulation (%) 6 - - -6 Ammonia nitrogen Nitrate nitrogen Phosphate phosphorus Dissolved oxygen Greens Diatoms Total phytoplankton Zooplankton Dissolved organic Particulate detritus -8 6% What happens to phytoplankton? Nitrogen changed only Greens Diatoms N 5% increased, P not changed % 35% N 5% increased, P not changed 3% % 8% Basic Simulation % N 5% increased, P not changed 3% 8% 38% Basic Simulation 37% 5% N 5% increased, P not changed 3% 3% 3% N 5% decreased, P not changed 5% % N 5% decreased, P not changed 6% 33% N 5% decreased, P not changed 5% 5% N 5% decreased, P not changed 8% 5% 1% 53% % 5% 33% % 8%

What happens to phytoplankton? Phosphorus changed only Greens Diatoms N not changed, P 5% increased 16% N not changed, P 5% increased 16% 8% Basic Simulation % N not changed, P 5% increased 7% 8% 38% Basic Simulation 37% 5% N not changed, P 5% increased 8% 7% 57% 7% 7% 55% 37% 66% 37% 38% N not changed, P 5% decreased 33% N not changed, P 5% decreased 7% 3% N not changed, P 5% decreased 7% 3% N not changed, P 5% decreased 17% % 39% 9% 39% 3% What happens to phytoplankton? Nitrogen and phosphorus increased Greens Diatoms N 5% increased, P 5% increased 15% N 5% increased, 5% increased 15% 8% Basic Simulation % N 5% increased, P 5% increased 7% 8% 38% Basic Simulation 37% 5% N 5% increased, P 5% increased 7% % 3% 55% 3% 1% 63% 5% 1% N 5% increased, P 5% increased 1% N 5% increased, 5% increased 1% N 5% increased, P 5% increased 6% N 5% increased, P 5% increased 6% 53% 33% 1% 61% 33% 5% % 5% 1

What happens to phytoplankton? Nitrogen and phosphorus decreased % Greens Diatoms N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased 3% N 5% decreased, 5% decreased 31% 3% 36% 8% Basic Simulation % N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased 8% % 38% Basic Simulation 37% 5% N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased % 6% 3% 6% N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased 3% 3% 33% N 5% decreased, 5% decreased 33% 38% 8% N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased % 3% N 5% decreased, P 5% decreased 3% 8% 3% 8% 5% 9%