Algal Monitoring on the Red River of the North

Assessing the Effects of Eutrophication

March 4, 2015

Julie Blackburn, Tony Miller and Bruce Wilson (RESPEC)

AcknowledgementsInternational Joint Commission

International Red River Board (IRRB)

IRRB Water Quality Committee

Environment and Climate Change Canada

North Dakota Department of Health

Manitoba Department of Conservation and Water Stewardship

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

RED RIVER CONUNDRUM

Typical river - growing season nutrient-algal

responses (phosphorus/chlorophyll-a, diel DO,

CBOD5

…not noted

Suspect: turbidity/light limitation

Red River Elevation Shifts

LAND COVER

From: http://climatechangeconnection.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/NelsonWatershed.jpg

RED RIVER PARTICLE SIZES AND

SEDIMENTATION

Red River has very small particle sizes (< silts & clays)

Sedimentation of clays can take days with no flow.

Sedimentation is reduced by low temperatures

Above Graphic from Prof. John Gulliver, UM/SAFL.

RRN at Fargo

90% < 62 um = fine-grained sediments

PROJECT GOAL

Develop stressor-response

model to investigate the

relationships among

nutrients, suspended

sediment and the biological

response in the Red River of

the North.

Modified Heiskary et al. Conceptual Model

IDENTIFYING OTHER BIOLOGICAL

RESPONSES

Fisheries data limited.

– Further complicated by ~ 500 dams in basin

Macroinvertebrate data limited

– Assessments difficult in large rivers

Algal data limited (seston, periphyton)

PLAN B

– Summer monitoring of phytoplankton, physical-chemical and

periphyton by Partnering Agencies over summer 2015. Experts

Panel reiterated need. Project managers:

– Mike Ell (NDDH)

– Nicole Armstrong (Manitoba CWS)

– Jim Ziegler (MPCA)

Periphyton Sampling

• Periphyton and phytoplankton collected at 30 sites along the Red (23 US/7 Manitoba)

• Periphytometers deployed ~ 1 month (~mid-July-mid-August)

• Water sample collected for nutrient analysis

• Samples analyzed (seston and periphyton)

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

TN

TP

TSS

WATER QUALITY SNAPSHOT

Water Quality

• Headwaters rapidly increasing gradient of nutrients and TSS

• Middle Reach: consistently high nutrients and high TSS

• Mouth: High nutrients but low TSS

• 3 Red River “zones” identified

RESULTS OF ANALYSIS

Periphyton

• NMS (Non-metric Multidimensional Ordination) ordination

of site level community metrics also delineate river into 3

“zones”

84RD008

84RD011

15RD069

15RD068

15RD067

15RD066

84RD022

15RD06505RD030

84RD027

05RD047

94RD01815RD059

15RD058

84RD037

15RD057

15RD05615RD05515RD054

84RD042

15RD052

06RD008

84RD047

MB05OCS0

MB05OCS0

MB05OCS0

MB05OJS0

MB05OJS0

MB05OJS0

MB05OJS1

0 40 80

0

20

40

60

NMS of Nutrient and Saprobity Metrics

Axis 1

Axis

2

0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Chloro-a

TSSHeadwater ReachShorter residence time?

Mouth Reach

Middle Reach

PERIPHYTON AND TSS

P Chla: 150 mg/m2 “nuisance level” (Welch et al., 100mg/m2 as nuisance)

Periphyton

PHYTOPLANKTON

Phytoplankton

• 52% of stations ~ or > 20µg/L chlorophyll-a (nuisance level for lakes in MN)

• One station > 30 µg/L (severe nuisance for lakes in MN)

• Blue-green algae can be a dominant component of these algal communities

0.0000

0.0050

0.0100

0.0150

0.0200

0.0250

0.0300

0.0350

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

84

RD

00

8

84

RD

01

1

15

RD

06

9

15

RD

06

8

15

RD

06

7

15

RD

06

6

84

RD

02

2

15

RD

06

5

05

RD

03

0

84

RD

02

7

05

RD

04

7

94

RD

01

8

15

RD

05

9

15

RD

05

8

84

RD

03

7

15

RD

05

7

15

RD

05

6

15

RD

05

5

15

RD

05

4

84

RD

04

2

15

RD

05

2

06

RD

00

8

84

RD

04

7

MB

05

OC

S0

07

MB

05

OC

S0

33

MB

05

OC

S0

04

MB

05

OJS

057

MB

05

OJS

004

MB

05

OJS

074

MB

05

OJS

128

Cyanobacteria %

Phytoplankton Bio-volume (mL/L)

Water SampleChlorophyll (mg/L)

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

84

RD

00

8

15

RD

06

7

15

RD

06

6

84

RD

02

2

15

RD

06

5

05

RD

03

0

84

RD

02

7

94

RD

01

8

15

RD

05

8

84

RD

03

7

15

RD

05

7

15

RD

05

6

15

RD

05

5

84

RD

04

2

15

RD

05

2

84

RD

04

7

5O

CS

00

7

5O

CS

03

3

5O

CS

00

4

5O

JS

057

5O

JS

004

5O

JS

074

5O

JS

128

TN

TP

TSS

Peri. Chloro

• Headwater and mouth reaches show strong dichotomy• Headwater has low TSS, moderate nutrients, and “balanced” periphytic algal community

• Mouth has low TSS, high nutrients, with algae dominated by tolerant periphytic groups

• Results provide a framework for determining nutrient thresholds

• River zones– TSS lower Headwaters & Mouth.

• Mouth peak Pchla > 150 mg/m2

– High TSS along Mid Zone sites

• Effects of organic loading are apparent through saprobity metrics– Diatom metrics for saprobity

• Dominance shift downstream from a group that prefers DO at 70-85% saturation at the headwater to one that thrives in 10-25% after Fargo

• Low Dissolved Oxygen data availability to evaluate?– Potential for high oxygen depletion rates (>0.25 mg/m3/day)?

SUMMARY OF RESULTS

DIATOM NUTRIENT TOLERANCE

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Head Mid Mouth

% Nutrient Tolerance

STATISTICAL ANALYSES BEING

COMPLETED

Statistical Approaches

Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling (NMS)

Redundancy Analysis (RDA)

Non-parametric Multiplicative Regression (NPMR)

Linear regression

Final report being prepared

Thank You!