Response of Chesapeake Bay to Nutrient Load Reductions

作者: C. F. Cerco

DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1995)121:8(549)

关键词: EstuaryBiomass (ecology)HydrologyEutrophicationSpring bloomAnoxic watersPhosphorusBayNutrientEnvironmental science

摘要: A eutrophication model package was employed to examine the response of mainstem Chesapeake Bay nitrogen and phosphorus load reductions. In addition sensitivity analyses, bay examined under limit-of-technology nutrient controls all-forest conditions. Scenarios were run in a time-variable mode for minimum 10 years. Decade-long simulations required achieve near-complete Analyses indicated that primary effect limitation algal biomass during spring bloom upper summer. Nitrogen limited primarily lower bay. more effective than limiting production reducing anoxic volume. Limit-of-technology reductions, average hydrologic conditions, improved summer-dissolved oxygen by ≈0.5 gm m\u–³ reduced volume 40%. Anoxia largely absent all-forest, conditions but persisted wet, highly stratified

参考文章(13)
F.A. Richards, B.H. Ketchum, A.C. Redfield, The influence of organisms on the composition of sea-water symposium on experimental and efficient algorithms. ,vol. 2, pp. 26- 77 ,(1963)
Albert Y. Kuo, Kyeong Park, Mohamed Z. Moustafa, Spatial and temporal variabilities of hypoxia in the Rappahannock River, Virginia Estuaries. ,vol. 14, pp. 113- 121 ,(1991) , 10.2307/1351684
W.R. Boynton, W.M. Kemp, C.W. Keefe, A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF NUTRIENTS AND OTHER FACTORS INFLUENCING ESTUARINE PHYTOPLANKTON PRODUCTION Estuarine Comparisons#R##N#Proceedings of the Sixth Biennial International Estuarine Research Conference, Gleneden Beach, Oregon, November 1–6, 1981. pp. 69- 90 ,(1982) , 10.1016/B978-0-12-404070-0.50011-9
TC Malone, LH Crocker, SE Pike, BW Wendler, Influences of river flow on the dynamics of phytoplankton production in a partially stratified estuary Marine Ecology Progress Series. ,vol. 48, pp. 235- 249 ,(1988) , 10.3354/MEPS048235
WR Boynton, WM Kemp, Nutrient regeneration and oxygen consumption by sediments along an estuarine salinity gradient Marine Ecology Progress Series. ,vol. 23, pp. 45- 55 ,(1985) , 10.3354/MEPS023045
TR Fisher, ER Peele, JW Ammerman, LW Harding, Nutrient limitation of phytoplankton in Chesapeake Bay Marine Ecology Progress Series. ,vol. 82, pp. 51- 63 ,(1992) , 10.3354/MEPS082051
Mark C. Jenkins, W. Michael Kemp, The coupling of nitrification and denitrification in two estuarine sediments1,2 Limnology and Oceanography. ,vol. 29, pp. 609- 619 ,(1984) , 10.4319/LO.1984.29.3.0609
Billy H. Johnson, Keu W. Kim, Ronald E. Heath, Bernard B. Hsieh, H. Lee Butler, Validation of Three‐Dimensional Hydrodynamic Model of Chesapeake Bay Journal of Hydraulic Engineering. ,vol. 119, pp. 2- 20 ,(1993) , 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1993)119:1(2)
S. R. COOPER, G. S. BRUSH, Long-Term History of Chesapeake Bay Anoxia Science. ,vol. 254, pp. 992- 996 ,(1991) , 10.1126/SCIENCE.254.5034.992