Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review
description
Transcript of Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review
![Page 1: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri
Volunteer Program Review
Daniel V. ObrechtAnthony P. Thorpe
John R. JonesDepartment of Fisheries and Wildlife
SciencesUniversity of Missouri
![Page 2: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
LMVP Background• Program was created in 1992• Coordinated by the University of Missouri
Limnology Lab• Funding:
US EPA Region VII through the Missouri Department of Natural Resources has provided partial funding for this project under Section 319 of the Clean Water Act
![Page 3: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
LMVP Goals
1. Determine current water quality in Missouri lakes
2. Monitor for changes in water quality over time
3. Educate the public about lake ecology and water quality issues
![Page 4: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Parameters Monitored• Total Phosphorus (5 – 85 μg/L)• Total Nitrogen (200 – 1400 μg/L)• Algal Chlorophyll (3 – 50 μg/L)• Suspended Solids (0 – 20 mg/L)• Secchi Transparency (20 – 230 inches)
![Page 5: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Volunteer Sampling Protocol• Composite surface samples• April – September sampling season• 8 samples, once every three weeks• Volunteers process samples at home
and store everything in freezer (samples are analyzed at the University)
![Page 6: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
University Monitoring
• Statewide Lake Assessment Project– 3 or 4 composite surface samples mid-May
to mid-August• Table Rock Lake Long-Term Monitoring
– 5 or 6 epilimnetic composite samples May through September
• Lake of the Ozarks Long-Term Monitoring– 4 composite surface samples in July and
August
![Page 7: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Is Volunteer Data Quality Data?
1. Comparison of annual geometric mean values
2. Comparison of long-term geometric mean values
3. Split Samples4. Evaluation of chlorophyll filter
replication
![Page 8: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Comparison of annual geometric mean values
29 lakes
41 lake-sites
178 lake-site/years
At least 3 samples from both Volunteer and University
Analyzed using Mann-Whitney Test with significance level set at 0.05
![Page 9: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Total Phosphorus
164 comparisons (92%) were not significantly different
0 20 40 60 80University
0
20
40
60
80
Volu
ntee
r
1:1 line
![Page 10: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Total Nitrogen
167 comparisons (94%) were not significantly different
100 500 900 1300University
100
500
900
1300
Volu
ntee
r 1:1 line
![Page 11: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Chlorophyll
171 comparisons (96%) were not significantly different
0 10 20 30 40 50University
0
10
20
30
40
50
Volu
ntee
r
1:1 line
![Page 12: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
0 5 10 15University
0
5
10
15
Volu
ntee
r
Inorganic Suspended Solids
116 comparisons (99%) were not significantly different
n = 117
1:1 line
![Page 13: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Secchi
166 comparisons (93%) were not significantly different
0 50 100 150 200University
0
50
100
150
200
Volu
ntee
r
1:1 line
![Page 14: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Should we be concerned that 5% of the comparisons were
significantly different?
![Page 15: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Comparison of long-term geometric mean values
11 lakes
23 lake-sites
4 to 10 years of data per lake-site
Analyzed using Mann-Whitney Test with significance level set at 0.05
![Page 16: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Total Phosphorus
no significant differences
0 20 40 60University
0
20
40
60
Volu
ntee
r
1:1 line
![Page 17: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Total Nitrogen
no significant differences
200 400 600 800 1000 1200University
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Volu
ntee
r
1:1 line
![Page 18: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Chlorophyll
no significant differences 0 10 20 30 40
University
0
10
20
30
40
Volu
ntee
r
1:1 line
![Page 19: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Inorganic Suspended Solids
no significant differences 0 2 4 6
University
0
2
4
6
Volu
ntee
r
1:1 line
![Page 20: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Secchi
no significant differences
0 50 100 150University
0
50
100
150
Volu
ntee
r
1:1 line
![Page 21: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Split SamplesDifference in processing and storage include:Hand pump vs. vacuum
Frozen TP bottles vs. refrigerated tubes
Volunteers generally process samples quicker
18 lakes 27 lake-sites
Analyzed using Paired T-Test on log transformed data with significance level set at 0.05
![Page 22: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Total Phosphorus
0 50 100 150 200University
0
50
100
150
200
Volu
ntee
r
no significant difference
1:1 line
![Page 23: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Total Nitrogen
500 900 1300 1700University
500
900
1300
1700
Volu
ntee
r
no significant difference
1:1 line
![Page 24: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Inorganic Suspended Solids
0 5 10 15University
0
5
10
15
Volu
ntee
r
no significant difference
1:1 line
![Page 25: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Chlorophyll
0 10 20 30 40University
0
10
20
30
40
Volu
ntee
r
significant difference
1:1 line
![Page 26: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
0 20 40 60
0
20
40
60
University
Volu
ntee
r
Chlorophyll1:1 line
![Page 27: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Evaluation of filter replication
Two chlorophyll filters processed from each sample
![Page 28: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Evaluation was made using the following criteria:
Percent difference was calculated using:((M – m) / m) x 100 where M is maximum CHL value and m is minimum CHL value If filter pair averaged < 5.0 μg/L the formula was altered to: ((M – m) / 5) x 100
< 5% = Excellent < 10% = Good< 15% = Fair> 15% = Poor
![Page 29: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
University Volunteer
77% Excellent 74%16% Good 15%4% Fair 5%3% Poor 6%
n = 4035 n = 3947
![Page 30: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Summary• Volunteer and University annual geometric
means do not differ in majority of cases – given the slight differences in site locations and natural variation in parameters, some differences should be expected
• Long-term geometric means (4+ years) do not differ
![Page 31: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Summary• Split samples for phosphorus and inorganic
suspended solids showed no differences. Nitrogen was not statistically different, though outliers were present. Chlorophyll was statistically different, though results may be anomaly.
• Volunteer chlorophyll filter replication is extremely comparable to University results
![Page 32: Evaluation of Volunteer Data – The Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program Review](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022070502/56814c1e550346895db92004/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
The Missouri DNR uses LMVP data for 305b reporting. Currently Missouri does not have nutrient
criteria, so volunteer data has not been used for 303d listing.