OCLC18409274
00161
             BACTERIAL WATER QUALITY OF THE SOUTHERN

          NEARSHORE ZONE OF LAKE ERIE IN 1978 AND 1979
                         PREPARED FOR

               GREAT LAKES NATIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE
                      U,  S, EPA, REGION V
                       CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

-------
   BACTERIAL WATER QUALITY OF THE SOUTHERN
NEARSHORE ZONE OP LAKE ERIE IN 1978 AND 1979
                     by
              Ellen T. Stanford
          Water Quality Laboratory
             Heidelberg College
            Tiffin, Ohio  44883
                September  1981
                Final  Report
             Grant  No.  R005350012
            Contract  No.  68-01-5857
       Robert J.  Bowden,  Project Officer
      Great Lakes National  Program Office
               U.S.  EPA,  Region V
               Chicago, Illinois

-------
                                   CONTENTS

                                                                          Page

TABLES  	     i

FIGURES   	    ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  	    vi

PROJECT OBJECTIVES  	     1

INTRODUCTION  	     1

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 	     2

MATERIALS AND METHODS 	     2
   SAMPLE COLLECTION  	     2
   MEDIA AND DILUTION WATER PREPARATION 	     3
   SAMPLE PROCESSING AND COUNTING 	     3
   QUALITY CONTROL  	     4
   VERIFICATION TESTING 	     6
   TREATMENT OF DATA	     6
      Splits and Replicates 	     6
      Comparison of 1979 Cleveland Stations 81, 83 and 89 with Stations
        80 and 88	     7
      Pearson Correlations  	     7
      FC/FS Ratio	     7
      Trophic Status Determination  	     7
      Cruise to Cruise Patterns 	     8

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION  	     8
   QUALITY CONTROL  	     8
   SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL VARIATIONS  	     8
   HISTORICAL TRENDS FOR AEROBIC HETEROTROPHS  	    10
   TROPHIC STATUS   	    10
   STATISTICAL ANALYSES 	    11
      Splits and Replicates 	    11
      Pearson Correlations  	    12
   FECAL COLIFORM/FECAL STREPTOCOCCUS RATION  (FC/FS)  	    13
   A COMPARISON OF SUSPECTED SEWAGE EFFLUENT STATIONS 81, 83 AND 89
     WITH STATIONS 80 AND 88 IN 1979	    14
   POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS OF WATER QUALITY CRITERIA BASED ON FECAL COLIFORM
     CONCENTRATIONS   	    14

LITERATURE CITED  	    17

APPENDIX I - QUALITY CONTROL  	    75

-------
                                     TABLES


Number                                                                       Page

   1     Media preparation 	    20

   2     Organization of the Central Basin stations used to determine
           the cruise-to-cruise patterns for the three bacterial groups   .    21

   3     Statistical analysis of 1978 aerobic heterotroph splits and
           replicates	    22

   4     Statistical analysis for 1979 aerobic heterotroph splits and
           replicates	    23

   5     Pearson correlation coefficients for 1978 heterotrophs and
           selected chemical data  	    24

   6     Pearson correlations for 1979 heterotrophs and selected
           chemical data	    25

   7     Pearson correlations for 1979 Cruise 1 heterotrophs and
           selected chemical data  	    26

   8     FC/FS ratios for 1978 samples containing  fecal streptococci at
           concentrations _> 100/100 ml	    27

   9     FC/FS ratios for 1979 samples containing  fecal streptococci at
           concentrations _> 100/100 ml	    30

   10     Central Basin station rational   	    32

   11     A comparison of  stations 81,  83  and 89 with  stations  80  and 88
           using the t-test and  log    transformed  data from  1979	     33

   12     1978  stations with concentrations _> fecal coliform/100 ml  ....     34

   13     1979  stations with concentrations _> 200 fecal coliforms/100 ml   .     35

   14     Stations  exhibiting  fecal coliform concentrations of  more  than
           1,000 organisms/100 ml	     36

-------
                                     FIGURES

Number                                                                       Page

  la     Location of sampling stations for the Central Basin Nearshore
           Zone in 1978	   37

  Ib     Location of sampling stations for the Central Basin Nearshore
           Zone in 1979	   38

  2      Comparison of the split and replicate sampling programs for
           1978 and 1979	   39

  3      Organization of the Central Basin stations used in determining
           cruise-to-cruise patterns  	   40

  4a     Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 1,
           May 1978   	   41

  4b     Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 2,
           June 1978	   41

  4c     Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 3,
           September 1978	   42

  4d     Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 4,
           October 1978	   42

  5a     Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 1,
           April 1979	   43

  5b     Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 2,
           July 1979	   43

  5c     Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 3,
           August 1979	   44

  5d     Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 4,
           October 1979	   44

  6a     Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map for Cruise  1, May 1978  .   45

  6b     Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map for Cruise  2, June  1978    45

  6c     Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map for Cruise  3,
           September 1978	   46

  6d     Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map for Cruise  4,
           October 1978   	   46

  7a     Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map for Cruise  1, April 1979   47
                                        11

-------
Number                                                                       Page

  7b     Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map for Cruise 2, July 1979    47

  7c     Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map for Cruise 3,
           August 1979	    48

  Id.     Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map for Cruise 4,
           October 1979	    48

  8a     Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise 1,
           May 1978	    49

  8b     Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise 2,
           June 1978	    49

  8c     Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise 3,
           September 1978	    50

  8d     Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise 4,
           October 1978	    50

  9a     Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise 1,
           April 1979	    51

  9b     Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise 2,
           July 1979	    51

  9c     Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise 3,
           August 1979	    52

  9d     Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise 4,
           October 1979	    52

 lOa     Summary of the 1978 aerobic heterotroph data using geometric means   53

 lOb     Summary of the 1979 aerobic heterotroph data using geometric means   53

 lla     Summary of the 1978 fecal coliform data using geometric means  .  .    54

 lib     Summary of the 1979 fecal coliform data using geometric means  .  .    54

 12a     Summary of the 1978 fecal streptococcus data using geometric   .  .    55
           means
 12b     Summary of the 1979 fecal streptococcus data using geometric
           means	    55

 13      Cruise to cruise patterns for  aerobic heterotrophs   	    56

 14      Cruise to cruise patterns for  fecal  coliforms  	    57

 15      Cruise to cruise patterns for  fecal  streptococci   	    58
                                       111

-------
Number                                                                        Page

 16       Summary of the 1978 Central Basin trophic status using geometric
            means of aerobic heterotroph data	    59

 17       Summary of the 1979 Central Basin trophic status using geometric
            means of aerobic heterotroph data	    59

 18a      Cruise 1, 1979, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic
            heterotroph data	    60

 18b      Cruise 2, 1979, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic
            heterotroph data	    60

 18c      Cruise 3, 1979, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic
            heterotroph data	    61

 18d      Cruise 4, 1979, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic
            heterotroph data	    61

 19a      Cruise 1, 1978, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic
            heterotroph data	    62

 19b      Cruise 2, 1978, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic
            heterotroph data	    62

 19c      Cruise 3, 1978, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic
            heterotroph data	    63

 19d      Cruise 4, 1978, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic
            heterotroph data	    63

 20       Relationship between log heterotroph concentrations and cyanide
            concentrations  	    64

 21       Relationship between log heterotroph concentrations and ammonia
            concentrations  	    65

 22       Relationship between log heterotroph concentrations and TOC
            concentrations  	    66

 23       Relationship between log heterotroph concentrations and silicate
            concentrations  	    67

 24       Relationship between log heterotroph concentrations and sulfate
            concentrations  	    68

 25       Relationship between log heterotroph concentrations and DOC
            concentrations  	    69

 26       Application of FC/FS ratio tests to 1978 data	    70
                                        IV

-------
Number                                                                        Page
 27       Application of FC/FS ratio tests to 1979 data	    72




 28       Stations with elevated fecal coliform counts  	    74
                                          v

-------
                               ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
     The author would like to thank Dr.  R.  Peter Richards for his help in  the
statistical portions  of  this report.  Also, Mr. Richard Leslie and Mr.  David
Kuder are to be commended for their  patience  and  the  long  hours  of  work
involved in  generating  the  necessary  computer  programs  used  in the data
analyses.  I wish to thank Mr. Paul Flathman for his assistance in the  actual
sample processing  and  the preliminary data preparation.  The entire staff of
the Water Quality Laboratory, especially Dr. David Baker, Mr. Jack Kramer, =md
Dr. Kenneth Krieger  also  deserve  mention  for  their   unfailing   support,
encouragement, and  advice.   This  study  was  funded  by U.S. EPA grant No.
R005350012 and U.S. EPA contract No.  68-01-5857.
                                       VI

-------
                              PROJECT  OBJECTIVES
     The microbiolog ical -portion of the 1978-1979  Nearshore  Studies  of  the
Lake Erie  Central  Basin  involved  the  enumeration of aerobic heterotrophs,
fec°l coliforms, fecal streptococci, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa  (1978  only).
The purpose  of  the study was to assess present bacteriological water quality
and to provide baseline data for future studies.
                                 INTRODUCTION
     For the  southern  nearshore  zone  of  the  Lake  Erie  Central   Basin,
bacteriological   data  for  aerobic  heterotrophs,  fecal  coliforms,   fecal
streptococci and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (1978 only) were collected during four
cruises each year -- in May, June,  September  and  October  in  1978; and   in
April, July, August, and October in 1979.  Each cruise was intended to provide
data regarding  a  specific aspect of the yearly changes occurring in the lake
as follows:   high  flow  from  the  tributaries  in  the  spring; low  summer
productivity (and  the associated low levels of biomass);  the probable period
for anoxia  in the Central Basin during the summer;  and the extent of recovery
and nutrient regeneration from the sediments in the fall.

     Determination of the aerobic heterotroph populations  in the water  column
has been  considered  useful  in  the  monitoring  and  surveillance  of water
quality; and In general, has been used as an indicator of  pollution  (organic
and inorganic)  and  eutrophication  (Rao and Jurkovic 1977, Bowden 1979).   In
this study, the aerobic heterotroph data was also used to  describe the trophic
status of Lake Erie's Central Basin,  based  on  criteria  employed  with   the
aerobic heterotroph  data   obtained  in  the  1976-1977 study of Lake Michigan
(Bowden 1979).

     The purpose of determining fecal coliform concentrations is to detect  the
presence of fecal pollution, which could also contain Salmonella, Shigella,  or
other waterborne pathogens  which are present in the fecal  material of infected
individuals.  Geldreich  (1970)  conducted  a   study   designed   to   relate
concentrations of  fecal  coliforms  with that of Salmonella.  Although he  was
unable to   formulate  specific  relationships  between  the  two,  Geldreich1s
results served to underscore the existence of health hazards in water degraded
by fecal contamination.

     Fecal  streptococcus concentrations were used along with the corresponding
fecal coliform data to determine possible sources of fecal pollution using  the
fecal coliform/fecal streptococcus ratio (FC/FS) employed  by Geldreich and  his
colleagues  (Geldreich 1966, Geldreich, et al. 1968, 1969).  A  ratio  of   less
than 0.7  implies contamination from domestic animals, whereas a ratio greater
than 4.0 suggests a human source.

     Hoadley (1968) indicated the significance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa as  a
pathogen of man  and  animals,  a spoilage organism and a slime former.   As a
human pathogen, Ps. aeruginosa is responsible for fatal septicemias in Infants

-------
and adult patients  debilitated   by  burns,   malignancies,   or  old  age.   In
addition, it  has been implicated as a possible cause of the high incidence of
otitis externa (outer ear infections) during the swimming  season  (Levin  and
Cabelli 1972).   Sewage represents the major source of Pseudomonas aeruginosa,
and for this reason its isolation from surface waters suggests  the  influence
of man.
                            SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
     The following is a summary of the conclusions reached in  this  study  of
the bacteria of the Central Basin of Lake Erie:

     1.  Using the aerobic heterotroph data, the trophic status of the Central
     Basin can be classified as mostly mesotrophic with  eutrophic  tendencies
     near shore, especially in the harbor and river mouth areas.

     2.  Application of a two-tailed t-test to the aerobic  heterotroph  split
     and replicate data shows that given the methods used in this study, it  Is
     not possible  to  measure small scale differences, on the order of meters
     horizontally, in the bacterial concentrations in the water column.

     ^.  Correlations significant at p  _<_  0.001  exist  between  the  aerobic
     heterotroph data and each of the following chemical parameters:   ammonia,
     TOC, DOC,  silicate  and sulfate.  These correlations indicate the common
     source of the chemical parameters and the aerobic heterotrophs,   i.e.  the
     tributaries of the Central Basin.
                             MATERIALS AND METHODS
 SAMPLE  COLLECTION

     The  eighty-nine  sampling  stations  in  the  Central  Basin   (Figure   1)   were
 divided into  five  areas  of  approximately twenty  stations,  with  each area  being
 sampled on   three   consecutive days  every  cruise.   The microbiological samples
 were collected   in evacuated   standard  300ml  BOD bottles  which  had   been
 autoclaved  for   thirty   mirmtes (Standard  Methods  1975).   A  JZ-Bacteriological
 Water  Sampler was  used.   In the 1978 study,  sodium thiosulfate  solution and/or
 EDTA were added  before  evacuation  to some  sample bottles   (100   mg/1  and  372
 mg/]    of  sample, respectively)   to  remove   chlorine  and    heavy   metals,
 respectively, from samples  suspected  to  contain high  levels   of   these
 substances.   However,   the  levels  of chlorine  and  heavy metals  at the sampling
 locations were  found  in 1978 to be low  enough  to allow the elimination of this
 part of the procedure in  the  1979   study.    The   JZ-Bacteriological  Sampler
 permits the  aseptic   collection of  water  samples  within  the  water column, and
 the use of messengers allows the placement of  several  samplers  on a cable  for
 simultaneous collection  at  various  depths.    Upon  removal from +he sampler
 frame,  the samples were put in an  ice water bath until processed.  All samples
 were processed  within  the   eight-hour  maximum permissible   time,  but   most

-------
samples were processed within an hour after collection.

     Aerobic heterotrophs were sampled at each station  on  three  consecutive
days during  each  cruise,  yielding a total of twelve samples per station per
year.  Fecal coliforms, fecal streptococci and Ps. aeruginosa were sampled  on
one day  out of three for a total of four samples per station per year.  These
three groups were also sampled whenever half an  inch  or  more  of  rain  had
fallen in  the  previous twenty-four hours, in order to observe the effects of
runoff and  sewage  treatment  plant  bypassing  on  fecal   coliform,   fecal
streptococcus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa counts.
MEDIA AND DILUTION WATER PREPARATION

     The media preparation was carried out as  detailed  in  Standard  Methods
(1975) and  presented  in Table 1.  Phosphate buffered dilution water was  also
prepared as per the  instructions in Standard  Methods  (1975),  but  with   the
exclusion of  magnesium sulfate in 1979.  Properly diluted buffer solution was
dispensed into  nine  liter  serum  bottles  (for  use  as  rinse  water)   and
autoclaved for  90  minutes; ninety -nine ml dilution bottles were also  filled
and autoclaved for thirty minutes for use as dilution blanks.  All autoclaving
was carried out as specified in Standard Methods (1975).
 SAMPLE PROCESSING AND COUNTING

     All samples were filtered on a manifold with Hydrosol   filtration   units.
 Before each  day  of sampling began, the Hydrosol funnels were  wrapped  in foil
 and  autoclaved for thirty minutes.

     The samples  were  processed  as   detailed  in   Standard   Methods,   using
 Millipore HA   filters   for   all  four   bacterial  groups  in 1978(Millipore  HC
 filters were used for the fecal  colliform  samples  in  1979).   Four  or  five
 sample volumes,  differing   by   a  factor   of   ten,   were filtered  for  aerobic
 heterotrophs;  and one  to six volumes  for  fecal  coliforms,  fecal   streptococci
 and  PB. aeruginosa,  depending   on  the expected  water  conditions  at  each
 sampling location.

     Samples from harbor and river  mouths  with  high  degrees  of  turbidity
 usually yield  higher bacterial concentrations,  thus  requiring more  dilution  of
 the  samples  to  obtain accurate  counts.  The  sample  volumes  filtered  ranged
 from O.OIul  to 100ml  and  were  transferred  with   1ml  or  10ml  serological
 blow-out pipets, or with 100ml TC graduated cylinders,  depending  on the  volume
 to be transferred.

     After filtration,  the filters were incubated on the  appropriate media  at
 the  temperatures specified for each bacterial type in Standard  Methods  (1975).
 The  aerobic  heterotroph  plates  were  incubated  in  a  growth chamber  in the
 6-quart food keepers used to store the  uninoculated  plates, with  the  addition
 of several   wet  paper  towels   to  supply  the  recommended high humidity.   A
 circulating  water bath  was used  to incubate the  fecal  coliform  plates   which
 were placed  in  water-tight  ¥hirl-Pak bags   before submersion, and dry heat

-------
incubators were used  for the fecal streptococcus and Ps.  aeruginosa plates.

     Plates were  selected  for  enumeration  according  to  Standard  Methods
(1975).  Counting  was  accomplished  at  15X  using  a  Swift  Stereo  Ninety
microscope, a fluorescent  illuminator,  and  a  hand  tally.   When  counting
aerobic heterotroph  colonies, the fluorescent illuminator was placed at a low
angle so that the smaller colonies were made more visible by  shadow  casting.
The fecal  coliform,   fecal  streptococcus,   and  Ps. aeruginosa  plates  were
counted with the  illumination  nearly  perpendicular  to  the  plate.   After
counting was  completed, the bacterial concentration at each sampling location
was calculated by converting the plate counts to standard recording  units
bacteria/ml for  aerobic  heterotrophs  and bacteria/100ml for the other three
groups.

        aerobic heterotrophs:

              bacteria/ml = (colony plate count)/(ml sampled)

        fecal coliform, fecal streptococcus and Ps. aeruginosa:

              bacteria/100ml =  (colony plate  count/ml  sampled) x 100.

     The  sample processing  and  counting procedures  used  in the 1979  study  were
basically the same as  those detailed  above  for  the   1978   study,   with   some
significant  exceptions.   First   of all, the  manifold  containing the Hydrosols
was modified  to allow  the  removal  for sterilization of  both  the   funnel   and
filter receptacle  sections   of  each Hydrosol  (instead  of  just  the  funnel
section);  also, two more  spaces  for Hydrosols were  constructed,  allowing   the
simultaneous  use  of   11  Hydrosols.   Millipore   HA filters were  used  for the
aerobic heterotroph and  fecal  streptococcus  samples, but Millipore HC   filters
were used  for   the   fecal   coliform   samples.   The   other  major  difference
associated with   the   sample   processing  involved   the  pipetting  of   sample
volumes.   ?or  the  1979  study,  Eppendorf 1000ul (#22  35 080-3)  and  100ul  (#22
35 050-1) micro  pipets with disposable sterile   tips   (Brinkmann  Instruments,
Inc.,  Westbury,   N.Y.)   replaced  the  Corning 1.0ml pipets  used in the  1978
 study.
 QUALITY CONTROL

      The quality control procedures utilized in  the  1978  and  1979  studies
 differed   from  each  other  in  several  respects.   Both  studies  included
 verification testing for the fecal  bacteria  but  the  rest  of  the  quality
 control for 1978 focused on colony-counting accuracy;  whereas that of the 1979
 study focused  on  membrane  filter  contamination.   To  obtain  a measure of
 reproducibility in the 1978 study,  the  same  analyst  recounted  arbitrarily
 selected plates.   Calculations were then made to determine if the counts were
 within 5%.  Plates were also randomly chosen  and  counted  by  two  different
 analysts and checked for agreement within 10$.  The percent variation of these
 colony counts was calculated using the following relationship:

-------
         % variation = (count #2 - count #1  / arithmetic mean) x 100.

     Before sampling began each day on the 1979 cruises, an uncovered plate of
Plate Count Agar was set  out  in  the  microbiology  laboratory  for  fifteen
minutes as  a means of determining the ambient, air quality.  At the  end  of the
time period, the plate was placed in the 35 C incubator for  48  hours   before
counting.

     The sterility of the rinse water and Hydrosols was  tested  by  analyzing
rinse water  samples  four times each day—before the first and after the last
samples each day,  and  twice  during  the  day.   The  sterility  tests  were
accomplished by rinsing each Hydrosol twice with sterile rinse water, and then
plating the filters.

     Throughout the four cruises in 1979, procedural modifications   were  made
in an  effort  to  obtain  the  most accurate means of sterility testing.  The
incubation temperature for the sterility plates was changed from 35  C to 20  C
for the  Hydrosols  used  to filter the aerobic heterotrophs and to  44.5 C for
those used for the fecal bacteria, in order to correspond to the  temperatures
used for  the actual samples.  The same reasoning was employed in the decision
to change the plating medium from Plate  Count  Agar  to  M-FC  agar for  the
Hydrosols used to filter the fecal bacteria samples.

     In an effort to rid the Hydrosols of residual bacteria from samples  with
high bacterial  concentrations  a Millipore Ultraviolet Sterilizer was used to
irradiate the Hydrosols used for aerobic heterotroph samples.   Each Hydrosol
was irradiated  for  three  minutes  after  approximately  every  four   sample
bottles.  The Hydrosols  used  for  fecal  coliform  and  fecal  streptococcus
samples were  not  subjected  to irradiation in order to save some time  in the
processing procedure.  The sterility test results (see Appendix) confirmed the
lack of carryover within  these  groups.   To  help  keep  sample  water  (and
bacteria) from  adhering  to  the  sides  of  the  Hydrosols, the funnels were
sprayed with silicone spray and polished before the start of each cruise.

     Another aspect of quality control involved the use of split and replicate
samples as a means of indicating the precision of the sampling and   processing
methods.  Before  the  start  of  each cruise, two stations from each sampling
area were designated as replicate stations.  These stations remained the  same
for each  of  the  three successive days of an area, but they were changed for
each cruise.  For Cruises 1  and 2 in the 1978 study, all  sampling   depths  of
each replicate station were replicated; however, only one depth was  replicated
during Cruises 3 and 4 in 1978 and all cruises in 1979.

     Split samples  were  obtained  by  processing  three  identical  sets  of
identical dilution  series from a single sample.  During the 1978 cruises, the
microbiological samples which were split were different from those   that  were
replicated, but  in the 1979 study,  each replicate sample was also split three
ways.  Figure 2 shows the relationships between splits and replicates for both
years of the study.   Due to the relatively small volume of water collected  by
the   JZ-Bacteriological  Sampler,  only  aerobic  heterotroph  samples   were
replicated and split; fecal coliform, fecal streptococcus, and  Ps.  aeruginosa
samples were only replicated.

-------
VERIFICATION TESTING

     Ten percent of the samples from Cruises 1-4 in 1978 and Cruise 1 in  1979
were verified  for  fecal  coliform and fecal streptococcus bacteria, and five
percent from Cruises 2-4 in  1979.   Since  the  Ps. aeruginosa  samples  were
collected only at industrial stations, most of the colonies were verified.

     Several criteria  were  involved  in  the  selection  of   stations    for
verification.  First  of  all,  whenever  possible the stations to be verified
were selected from known areas of pollution,  such  as  river  mouths,  harbor
areas, and  sewage  outfalls.   Also,  an  attempt was made to verify the same
stations for both fecal coliforms and fecal  streptococci,  so  that  a  FC/FS
ratio could be calculated and an estimate of the pollution source made.

     During each cruise, colonies from the stations selected for  verification
were transferred  from  the membrane filters, after counting, to Nutrient Agar
slants and allowed to grow at ambient temperature  for  several  days,  before
refrigeration until  the verification testing was performed.  The verification
procedures are detailed in Standard Methods (1975) for fecal  coliform,  fecal
streptococcus,   and  Ps. aeruginosa  bacteria.   Percent   verification    was
calculated as follows:

                               % verification =
                 (^positive colonies/#colonies verified) x  100.

The  results  of  the verification testing were used   to  correct   the   bacterial
concentrations  only  for verified  samples.
 TREATMENT  OF  DATA
 Splits  and  replicates

      The aerobic  heterotroph  split  and  replicate data were divided into  three
 groups  based  on the  average number  of bacteria present at each station:

      1 .   stations with <_ 100  bacteria/ml
      2.   stations with between 100  and  1000 bacteria/ml and
      3.   stations with >_ 1000 bacteria/ml.

 The absolute  value of  the difference between  the  two  replicates  for  each
 replicated  station  was  calculated, and  in  the  same  way, the differences
 between the three pairs of split data were  calculated.   A  two-tailed  t-test
 was then used to  determine whether  the  mean differences between the replicates
 in each  group were  equal to  the mean differences between splits.  The results
 of the t-test showed if the differences  in  bacterial  concentration  in  the
 water column  (measured  by  the  replicates) were large enough to be detected
 given the error in the method (measured by split differences).

-------
Comparison of 1979 Cleveland stations 81,  83 and 89 with stations 80 and 88

     In 1978, results from some of the chemistry data suggested that the  area
off the western end of the Cleveland breakwall might be the site of an outfall
of some  sort  (Richards 1980).  Further investigation uncovered the existence -
of a sewage outfall in the vicinity — from  Cleveland's  Westerly  Wastewater
Treatment Plant  —  which  led  to  the  relocation of stations 81, 83 and 89
(Figures 1a and 1 b),  in order to sample the area affected by this outfall.

     A two-tailed t-test was utilized in comparing these three  stations  with
two reference  stations  nearby  (80 and 88) which were not affected by sewage
effluent.  The t-test was  used  on  all  three  bacterial  parameters  (fecal
coliforms, fecal  streptococci  and  aerobic  heterotrophs)  to  determine the
similarity of the bacterial concentrations from the two groups of stations.
Pearson Correlations


     An SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social  Sciences)  computer  program
for generating  Pearson  correlation  coefficients (Nie, et al. 1975) was used
with the aerobic heterotroph  data  to  determine  any  correlations  existing
between the heterotroph data and any of the chemical parameters.


FC/FS Ratio

     At stations where  more  than  100  fecal  streptococci  per  100ml  were
detected, fecal coliform/fecal streptococcus (FC/FS) ratios were calculated  to
ascertain the  source  (human  vs. nonhuman)  of  the fecal pollution at these
stations.  The following criteria were employed in these   source  estimations:
(Geldreich 1966)

          1.  A ratio of less than  or  equal  to  0.7  indicates  a  nonhuman
              source,

          2.  the source is undetermined for a ratio between 0.7 and 4.0,  and

          3-  a ratio of 4.0 or greater indicates a human  source.


Trophic Status Determination

     The aerobic heterotroph data was used to determine the trophic status   of
Lake Erie's Central Basin by classifying each station in the following manner:
(Bowden 1979)

                inshore(bacteria/ml)   offshore(bacteria/ml)

eutrophic (E)            _>. 200°               > 200
mesotrophic (M)      120 ~ M < 2000       20 <~M < 200
oligotrophic (0)         < 120                < 20

-------
Cruise to Cruise Patterns

     As a means of graphically demonstrating the cruise to cruise patterns  of
aerobic heterotroph, fecal coliform and fecal streptococcus data, the stations
were divided into three groups based on their location:

     1.  offshore:  stations _>. 3.3km from shore.

     2.  onshore:  stations <_ 3-3km from shore and not at a  river  or  harbor
         mouth.

     3.  harbors and river mouths.

Table 2 contains a list  of  stations  falling  into  each  category  and  the
locations of  the  stations are shown in Figure 3.  For each group of stations
for each cruise, the mean, range and standard error  of  the  log  transformed
data for each of the three bacterial groups were determined and  plotted.  This
procedure was followed for both 1978 and 1979.
                            RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
QUALITY CONTROL

     Much of  the  quality  control  data  is   not   directly    relevant    to
interpretation of  the  environmental  data.   These  quality control  data  are
presented in the Appendix.  The results of the split and  replicate  testing   is
presented in the statistical analysis section of  this report.
SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL VARIATIONS

     For  each cruise,  the data for aerobic heterotrophs,  fecal   coliforms  and
fecal  streptococci  were  used   to construct  isopleth maps  (Figures  4  to  9) to
show the  spatial distribution  of  each   bacterial   group.    For  the   aerobic
heterotrophs, where  each   cruise included three measurements at each  station,
geometric means were used.   In Figures 10-12  the  geometric  means of  all four
cruises for 1978 and for 1979 were used  to plot isopleths.

     The  cruise to cruise changes at  the nearshore,  offshore  and  river  mouth
and harbor areas for each bacterial group are shown in  Figures  13 -  15.   These
plots  include  the geometric means, the  ranges, the numbers of  samples and the
standard  errors.  For  aerobic heterotrophs  the highest   concentrations   were
found  during  the  first  cruise each year.   The second  and  third cruises had
lower  heterotroph concentrations with the  first   cruise  each  year   showing
increased concentrations  over   the third cruise.   This pattern was  present in
all  three areas.  A similar pattern was  present both years for fecal  coliform
and  in  1979  for fecal streptococci.  The fecal streptococci did not show this
pattern  in 1978 when only small  concentration differences existed between  the
cruise.

-------
     The four cruises each year were  timed  to  coincide  with  the  temporal
variations in  the  lake.   The  first  and  last cruises would be expected to
produce high bacterial concentrations  due  to  the  spring  runoff  and  fall
nutrient regeneration,  respectively.   The  summer  cruises (Cruises 2 and 3)
were scheduled to coincide with the periods of  low  summer  productivity  and
associated low levels of biomass.

     Aerobic heterotrophs such as Alcaligenes, Caulobacteria, Chromobac terium ,
Flavobacterium , Leptospira, Micrococcus , Proteus, Pseudomonas , and others  are
naturally occurring  aquatic  bacteria  (Scarpino  1 971 ) that are important in
aquatic food chains.  These bacteria degrade dead algae and  organic  detritus
with the  production of carbon dioxide and inorganic nutrients such as ammonia
and phosphate.  A positive correlation is typically found between the  average
rates of  phytoplankton  productivity  (i.e. biomass production) and bacterial
numbers and production (Vetzel 1975).  Menon and his colleagues  (1972)  found
in   their  studies  of  Lake  Erie  phytoplankton  and  bacteria   that   the
phytoplankton cycle in the Central Basin is of a bimodal structure, with peaks
in early May and late October.  The heterotrophic bacterial  cycle  has  peaks
near the  ends  of  the  plankton  blooms.   In  this study aerobic heterotroph
concentrations were highest in the spring, with  another smaller  increase   in
the fall  (Figure
      Although  fecal bacteria  are   not   endemic   to   the   lake,   their  natural
 habitat being  primarily  the intestinal  tract  of  warm-blooded  animals including
 man,  the   temporal patterns of  the fecal  coliforms  and fecal  streptococci show
 bimodal peaks  similar  to  those  of  the  aerobic heterotrophs   (Figures  14  and
 15).   High  concentrations  of  fecal   coliforms and  fecal   streptococci are
 expected  during  the spring runoff  and  during  storm  events.  During periods  of
 high  flow,   many municipal treatment plants must bypass  some  of their combined
 sanitary-stormsewer water, thus dumping untreated sewage  into   the  receiving
 waters.   In  the summer,  flows   are   lower  and  the   treatment  plants  can
 effectively  treat  their sewage   before   release;   also,  for  more   remote
 treatment plants,  past  treatment  discharge must travel  much  farther.  Both of
 these conditions serve to substantially reduce  the  amount of   fecal  pollution
 in the water discharged  into  the  receiving stream or lake.

      It is evident from  Figures 4  through 15  that   the   aerobic  heterotroph,
 fecal coliform  and  fecal streptococcus  bacteria are  spatially and temporally
 variable. As  expected,  the spatial distributions of the fecal   coliforms  and
 fecal streptococci  are  very  similar,  but slightly  different  from those of the
 aerobic heterotrophs,  due to  their differences  in origin. Fecal coliforms and
 fecal streptococci  originate  in   sewage; whereas   aerobic   heterotrophs  are
 endemic to  water  and  soil   (Scarpino  1971, ReVelle  and EeVelle 1974).  The
 stations  with  the greatest concentrations for all three  groups   coincide  with
 the areas nearest the shoreline,  especially  near the  river mouths.  Municipal
 discharges contribute  dissolved and suspended solids,  oxygen- consuming organic
 matter, oils,  toxic substances, bacteria  and  nutrients  to the tributaries  and
 to   the   lake  in  general.    These   substances serve   as    substrates   for
 heterotrophic  bacterial  degradation and encourage the  growth  of these bacteria
 in discharge areas.  A great  number of heterotrophs are  also  brought into  the
 lake  via   agricultural  runoff  carried  into the lake  by the tributaries (UC
 1971 ).

-------
     The spatial distributions of fecal coliforms and fecal  streptococci  are
almost identical  to each other, with the concentrations of fecal streptococci
usually being less than those of the fecal coliforms by about a factor of ten.
The mouths of the Rocky and Cuyahoga Rivers were  the  sites  of  the  highest
concentrations (100  to  1000  bacteria/100ml) of the fecal coliform and fecal
streptococcus bacteria; and fecal coliforms  were  found  in  the  10  to  100
bacteria/100ml range  at  the  mouths  of  Euclid  Creek  and  the Chagrin and
Ashtabula Rivers, as well as at station 94, which is the discharge site  of  a
pipe of  unknown  contents  below  a  high-rise  apartment complex east of the
Cleveland breakwall.  Other areas of high concentrations  of  fecal  coliforms
and fecal  streptococci  (10  to 100 bacteria/100ml) were usually found inside
the Cleveland breakwall and at the mouths of the Vermilion,  Black  and  Grand
Rivers; and sometimes in the vicinity of Arcola, Wheeler and Cowles Creeks.
HISTORICAL TRENDS FOR AEROBIC HETEROTROPHS
     Prior to this study, little work had been done with aerobic  heterotrophs
in Lake  Erie  with the exception of two studies by Rao and Burnison  (1976)  in
1967 and 1970.  In their work Rao and Burnison  used  a  standard   pour   plate
count incubated  at 20 C (Menon, et al. 1967) and a membrane  filtration  count,
also incubated at 20 C, (Van Otterloo, et al. 1968)  for  the   enumeration   of
aerobic heterotrophs.   Because  the  methods  used  by  Rao  and Burnison are
different from those used in this study,  direct  comparisons   (i.e.  numerical
comparisons) with  the  data  collected  in  this  study  were  not  possible.
However, it  is  possible  to  compare  the   aerobic  heterotroph  distribution
patterns in  general.

     Rao and Burnison  found a decline in heterotrophs in the  offshore  regions
of the  Central  Basin from  June to October, 1967, and from May to  November,
1970.  The results from this study show a similar decline from  May  to  August,
1978, and  from  April  to  August,  1979  but then an  increase from  August  to
October for  both years (Figure  13).  The difference in  the  fall concentrations
may be due to  the difference in station locations  between   the  two   studies.
The area  sampled by Rao and Burnison (1976) was located out  in the open lake,
whereas the  sampling stations in this study  were within five  miles   of  shore.
The studies   from  all four years (1967, 1968, 1978, 1979)  found consistently
high aerobic  heterotroph   densities  in  the  Central   Basin  inshore  areas,
especially in  the vicinity  of Cleveland.
 TROPHIC STATUS


      Figures 16 and 17  summarize  the  trophic   status  for  1978  and  1979,
 respectively,  using  data  on  aerobic  heterotrophs.    The  Central  Basin is
 mesotrophic offshore with definite eutrophic tendencies near shore.  The  sets
 of individual   cruise maps from the two years (Figures 18 and 19) support this
 assessment and serve to show the areas of consistent eutrophy in the areas  of
 the river mouths.  The first cruise data from 1979 gives a much more eutrophic
 picture due  to  the  spring runoff with its resulting high concentrations for
                                        10

-------
all three of the bacterial groups sampled.

     The division of the stations into two groups by their distance from shore
and the application of different trophic criteria to these groups resulted  in
some of the borderline stations being inconsistently classified in relation to
nearby stations.   For  example,  station  77  (Cruise 3, 1979, Figure 19c) is
classified as  oligotrophic  (< 3-3km  from  shore  and  _< 120   bacteria/ml).
However, the  other  nearby  stations 72, 73 and 76 are mesotrophic due to the
fact that they are greater than 3.3km from shore and have concentrations of 20
to 200 bacteria/ml.  Similar inconsistencies existed for stations 77, 124  and
130 (Cruise 2, 1978); 100 and 112 (Cruise 2, 1979); and station 112 (Cruise 4,
1979).  Aside from the above-mentioned distortion, the Central Basin nearshore
region is  mesotrophic  with  eutrophic areas in the vicinity of the tributary
mouths and/or harbors.  This assessment of the Central  Basin  trophic  status
agrees with  the  overall  mesotrophic-eutrophic  assessment arrived at by the
International Lake Erie Water Pollution Board (1969) using their categories of
morphometry, transparency, nutrient concentrations, nutrient  loading,  oxygen
present in  the hypolimnion, phytoplankton, zooplankton, bottom fauna and fish
production.
STATISTICAL ANALYSES
Splits and Replicates


     Most of the statistical tests commonly used with bacterial data  assume   a
normal distribution.   However,  raw  bacterial  data   is   often   not normally
distributed and  must  be   transformed    (Kaper,    et   al.  1978; Ashby   and
Rhodes-Roberts 1976; Palmer, et al. 1976;  Pipes, et  al.  1977).  In this study,
a  log  transformation was used for the aerobic heterotroph,  fecal  coliform and
fecal streptococcus data.  In addition, 1  was  added   to   all  of  the   fecal
coliform and  fecal  streptococcus  data   prior  to  transformation in order  to
eliminate zero values.

     Two-tailed t-tests were used to compare differences between   splits  with
differences  between  replicates  in  the  aerobic   heterotroph  data set   to
determine if small-scale differences in bacterial concentration in  the   water
column (measured  by  replicate differences) were large  enough to  be  detected,
given the error in the method (measured by split differences).  The  results  of
the t-tests are shown in Tables 3 and 4 for  all  three  levels  of   bacterial
concentration in  1978  (Table  3),  the   means of the  differences between the
replicates are significantly greater  than the  corresponding  means of the
differences of  the  splits, implying that small-scale variations  in  the  water
column can be detected.  Taking into account the  increased   accuracy of the
microbiological methods  employed  in  1979,  resulting  from  the refinement  of
processing methods in general (such as the substitution  of  Eppendorf  0.1ml and
0.01ml automatic pipets for the Corning pipets), it  would be  expected that the
results of the t-tests would  show  an  even  larger difference   between the
differences of the splits and the differences of the replicates.
                                       11

-------
     That this is not so (Table 4) is probably due in part to  the  fact  that
the general  sampling  techniques  were also improved during the 1979 cruises.
Improved accuracy in taking the replicate sample,  shown  by  the  much  lower
means of  the  differences of the replicates in 1979 as compared to 1978, more
than balanced the corresponding improvement in the microbiological methods, as
measured by the differences of the splits.  This  combination  of  factors  is
responsible for  the lower values obtained with the 1979 data.  In effect, the
1979 sampling  program  assessed  smaller  scale  differences  than  the  1978
program.  Samples  were  drawn  in  1979  from a water mass small enough to be
considered homogeneous in the statistical sense.
Pearson Correlations
     Theoretically there should be some  degree  of  correlation  between   the
aerobic heterotroph  data  and some chemical data parameters, especially forms
of nitrogen and phosphorous  (i.e. ammonia,  nitrate-nitrite,  TKN,  TP,  TSP,
SRP).  Tables  5 and 6 indicate the degree of correlation between the  1978  and
1979 aerobic heterotroph data and the  corresponding  chemical  data   for   the
following  parameters:   pH,  conductivity,  alkalinity,  turbidity,  suspended
solids, chlorophyll, pheophytin, TSP, TP, SRP, TKN, ammonia,  nitrate-nitrite,
silicate,  chloride, sulfate, cyanide, TOC and DOC.  The  same  calculations were
made using the  Cruise  1  data  from  1979 (Table 7),  in  an effort to obtain
better correlation  coefficients  by  removing   an   extraneous    source    of
variability (seasonal  effects).

     The highest correlation coefficients for 1978 data  (Table  5) were   for
nitrate-nitrite,   r=0.1752; DOC,    r=0.1271; conductivity,     r=0.1157;  TP,
r=0.1130;  TKN, r=0.1098; pheophytin, and  ammonia,  r=0.1010.   However,   these
coefficients  are   so   small  that, even  though the significance  levels (p)  are
satisfactory,  very little  correlation  exists.   The   results with  the   1979
heterotroph data   were somewhat more meaningful, with  the  highest  coefficients
being:  TOC,   r=0.4198; ammonia,   r=0.4019; sulfate,    r=0.3247;     silicate,
r=0.3210;  TKN, r=0.2888; and chloride, r=0.2818  (Table  6).

      Table 7  shows the correlation data  for the  first  cruise  in  1979   and   the
 results were   by far  the highest  of  the  three  data  sets (1978,  1979 and Cruise
 1,  1979),  with   the   highest   r  values   for    cyanide,    r=0.8034;  ammonia,
 r=0.7480;  TOC,    r=0.6241; silicate,   r=0.5382;  sulfate,  r=0.5276; and   DOC,
 r=0.3532.  To determine the  extent   of   correlation,   computer-drawn  scatter
 plots were  generated   for these  parameters (Figures 20 through 25).   From the
 scatter  plot  for cyanides, in  Figure 20,  it is  apparent that  there is no  real
 correlation  between   cyanide  concentrations  and   aerobic  heterotrophs.   The
 scatter  plot  shows two outlier points   which  caused  the   high  r  value  for
 cyanide.   This result  is  as expected due to the  fact that  cyanide is generally
 considered to  be  detrimental to living organisms.   The scatter plots for the
 other parameters mentioned above  (Figures  20  through  25)   show  that  some
 correlation exists.    All of these  parameters (ammonia, TOC,  silicate, sulfate
 and DOC)   enter the  lake  via  the  tributaries,  as  do  a  large  number  of
 heterotrophs.  Thus  it  appears  that  the  correlations  between the aerobic
 heterotroph data and the data for these chemical parameters  are primarily  the
 result of their common sources.
                                        12

-------
FECAL COLIFORM/FECAL STREPTOCOCCUS RATIO (PC/FS)


     When sufficient concentrations of fecal  streptococci  (_>_ 100/100ml)   are
present, the  fecal  coliform/fecal streptococcus ratio (FC/FS) can be used  to
estimate the pollution source.  The FC/FS ratio is only an estimate and   there
are several precautions which should be taken into consideration when using  it
(Bordner, et  al. 1978):   1)  Samples should be taken as close as possible to
the pollution source in order to minimize the effects of fecal bacteria's  low
survival rate outside the intestinal tract, and 2) mixed pollution sources  are
very difficult to analyze via the FC/FS ratio.

     In this study, the samples were seldom if ever  taken close to a pollution
source, and as a result most of them represent mixed pollution sources,   which
are very  difficult  to  analyze.  In spite of these problems, the FC/FS ratio
was used to give a general idea of the sources of the fecal pollution found  at
the stations for which FC/FS ratios could be calculated.  Figures 26a and  2?a
show the  locations  of  the  samples  in 1978 and 1979 with  100 or more fecal
streptococci/100ml, and Tables 8 and 9 give the FC/FS ratio for each of   these
samples.  In 1978 these stations occurred in seven different  groups around  the
mouths  of   each  of  the  major tributaries (see Figure 26a).  When the  ratios
were calculated, 49% of the  samples  had  a  FC/FS  ratio  _<0.7,  implying  a
nonhuman origin; 33$ yielded ratios between 0.7 and  4.0, and  were therefore of
undetermined origin; and  18$  of  the  samples gave a ratio 2.4-0 indicating a
probable human pollution source.

     In comparison, 53$ of the 1979 samples gave  ratios  2.4«0  anc*  16$  gave
ratios £0.7.   However,  the  percent  of samples between 4.0 and 0.7 was very
similar for the  two years (33$ in  1978 and 31$ in 1979)  (Tables 8 and 9).  The
1979 samples with more  than 100 fecal streptococci/100ml were primarily  from
the Cleveland  area,  especially   in the vicinity of the mouth of the Cuyahoga
River.  Most of  the other stations were located at the other  tributary   mouths
(see Figure 27a), and  a few were  located farther from shore.  The much  larger
percentage  of samples with FC/FS   ratios  of  over   4.0  in   1979  was   almost
entirely due  to samples taken on  the first cruise (see Table 8), during which
all of  the  bacterial counts were higher than for the other 1979  cruises,  due
to the  spring runoff.

     Of the stations with usable ratios (_<0.7 2.4-0), twenty-three have   ratios
greater than  4.0  (Figures 26b-d and 27b-d), which implies fecal contamination
of human origin; and forty-two have ratios less than 0.7,  implying  nonhuman
sources.  The rationale for each sampling location (Herdendorf 1978), as given
in Table  10  was  used  to determine possible sources for the fecal pollution
found at these stations.  A number of stations with  ratios  >_4.0   (Figure  26d
and 27d)  are  located  in the vicinity of discharges from industrial or  sewage
outfalls, where  one would expect to find high FC/FS  values.   Also,  some  of the
stations are designated as problem pollution areas   (Table  10); therefore,  a
great deal  of   pollution  in  general would be expected.  Other stations with
high FC/FS  ratios were  located in  close proximity to tributary mouths.
                                       13

-------
     Most of the stations with ratios of less than 0.7 (Figures 26b  and  27t>)
are in  the  vicinity  of  river  or creek mouths, thus these samples probably
contain organisms  from  a  variety  of  locations  within   the   tributaries
themselves, as well as from the lake.  This results in a great deal of mixing,
which makes  it  difficult  to determine the source of the pollution.  Another
problem involved in the use of the FC/FS ratio is the relative  die-off  rates
of fecal coliforms and fecal streptococci.  McFetter and his colleagues (1974-)
have shown  that  fecal  coliform  bacteria  as  a  group tend to die off more
quickly than fecal streptococci, which will affect the FC/FS ratio over  time.
More specifically,  the  survival  times  decrease  in  the  following manner:
enterococci (streptoccal bacteria from the intestinal material of  animals)   >
fecal coliforms  >  Streptococcus  bovis  and  Streptococcus eguinea.  Feachem
(1974) has expanded this relationship and  drawn  conclusions  concerning   the
change of  the  FC/FS  ratio  over  time for human and nonhuman sources.  When
enterococci are  the  predominant  fecal  streptococci,  as  in  human   fecal
material, the  FC/FS  ratio  will  tend  to  fall over time; whereas, in fecal
material where S^. bovis and _S. equines are the dominant fecal streptococci, as
in cattle and pig fecal  material,  the  ratio  will  tend   to  increase.   In
general, the  farther  from  shore a sample is, the lower the FC/FS ratio will
be.  In nearshore areas, ratios between 4.0 and 0.7  may  still  be   of  human
origin, due  to  the  phenomenon  of  die-off  in fecal bacteria.  Despite  the
rather substantial limitations of the FC/FS ratio in this particular  study, it
can  still be useful in drawing very general conclusions concerning the origins
of fecal pollution at the  stations sampled.
 A  COMPARISON OF SUSPECTED SEWAGE EFFLUENT  STATIONS  81 ,  83  AND 89 WITH STATIONS
 80 AND 88  IN 1979.
      Stations 81, 83 and 89  in  the   Cleveland   area  were  moved  in  1979  to
 positions  in the   vicinity   of  a   sewage  outfall  from Cleveland's Westerly
 Wastewater Treatment Plant (Figure  1b)  in order to  monitor the quality of  the
 water affected  by the  treatment plant discharge.  Two other Cleveland stations
 (80  and  88) were chosen for  comparison with the three new stations in order to
 show statistically   that   the  bacterial   concentrations at 81 ,  83 and 89 were
 from a different source than those  at other stations located approximately the
 same distance from  shore  and in the same  general  area.

      Table 11 gives the t-values for comparison of  aerobic heterotroph,  fecal
 coliform and fecal  streptococcus concentrations at  81 , 83 and 89 with those at
 80 and  88.  The   t-values   are  high with achieved significance levels of <
 0.001.  These results  lend  statistical validity to  the conclusions  which  can
 be drawn  from   the raw data itself (Figure 10):   a 10- to 100-fold difference
 exists between  the  geometric  means  of  the  aerobic  heterotroph  data  from
 stations 81 , 83 and 89 and  those from stations 80 and 88.
 POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS OF WATER QUALITY CRITERIA BASED ON FECAL COLIFORM
 CONCENTRATIONS
                                        14

-------
     The Ohio EPA has set standards for fecal coliform bacteria in  Lake  Erie
of no  more  than  200  bacteria  per  100ml  of sample based on at least five
samples in a thirty-day period,  and not exceeding 400 per 100ml in over 10$ of
the samples (OAC 3745-1).  However, certain nearshore areas have been exempted
from this standard, and all of the stations with 2.  200  fecal  coliforms  per
100ml are  located  in these exempted areas.  For this reason, and because the
stations in this study were not  sampled at least five times  in  a  thirty-day
period, it  cannot  be stated that any of the stations in Tables 12 and 13 are
definitely in violation of water quality standards.

     Nevertheless, Tables 12 and 13 and Figure 28 do  serve  to  indicate  the
areas of  major  fecal  pollution in the Central Basin of Lake Erie.  Table 14
give the stations that showed concentrations of fecal coliforms of over  1,000
per 100ml  during  one  or  more of the four cruises each year.  The increased
number of stations with over 1,000 fecal coliforms per 100ml of sample in 1979
is due in part to the timing of the first cruise of 1979.  The  1978  sampling
season was  begun  in  late  May,  after most of the spring runoff had already
occurred; however, the 1979 season began about a month earlier, in April, when
the runoff was taking place.  Despite these differences between the two years,
Figure 28 shows the same general trouble spots, the most serious of  which  is
the mouth of the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland Harbor.
                                       15

-------
                         Literature Cited
American Public Health Association.  Standard Methods for the Examination
   of Water and Wastewater, 14th ed.  American Public Health Assoc., Inc.,
   Washington, D.C., 1975.

Ashby, R. E. and M. E. Rhodes-Roberts.  The use of analysis of variance
   to examine the variations between samples of marine bacterial popu-
   lations.  J. Appl. Bact., 41:439-451, 1976.

Brodner, R., J. Winter and P. Scarpino.  Microbiological Methods for
   Monitoring the Environment — Water and Wastes.  EPA—600/8-78-017,
   U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1975.   196 pp.

Bowden, Robert.  Private communication, 1979.

Campbell, N. J., J. P. Bruce, J. F. Hendrickson, P. M. Higgins, C.
   Pemberton, Jr., W. A. Steggles and J. R. Vallentyne  (eds.)  Report
   to the IJC on the Pollution of Lake Erie, Lake Ontario and the  Inter-
   national Section of the St. Lawrence River.  International Lake Erie
   Water Pollution Board and the International Lake Ontario - St.  Lawrence
   River Water Pollution Board, Vol. 1 and 2, 1969.

Feachem, R.  An improved role for faecal coliform to  faecal streptococci
   ratios in the differentiation between human and non-human pollution
   sources.  Water Res., 9:689-690, 1975.

Geldreich,  E. E.  Sanitary Significance of Faecal Coliforms in the En-
   vironment.  Water Pollut. Control Res. Ser. Publ.  No. WP-20-3,  U. S.
   Department of the Interior, 1966.

Geldreich,  E. E.  Applying bacteriological parameters to recreational
   water quality.  J. Am. Water Wks. Assoc., 62:113-120, 1970.

	.  Fecal Coliform and Fecal Streptococcus Density Relation-
    ships in Waste Discharges  and Receiving Water.   In:   CRC Critical  Reviews
    in Environmental Control,  1976, p.  349.

	, L. C. Best,  B. A. Kenner and  D. J.  Van Donsel.   J. Water
    Pollut. Control Fed., 40:1861-1872.   1968.

Geldreich, E. E. and B. A. Kenner.  Concepts of  faecal  streptococci in
    stream pollution.  J. WPCF, 41:R336-R352, 1969.

Green, B. L., E. Clausen and  W. Litsky.  Comparison of  the  new Millipore
    HC with conventional membrane filters for the enumeration of fecal
    coliform bacteria.  Appl.  Microbiol.  30(4):697-699.   1975.

Herdendorf, C. E.  Lake Erie  Nearshore Surveillance Station Plan for  the
    United States.  CLEAR Tech. Report  No. 77,  Ohio  State University,
    Center for Lake Erie Area  Research, Columbus, Ohio,  1978.

Hoadley, A. W.  On the significance of Pseudomonas  aeruginosa in surface
    waters.  New Engl. Water Wks. Assoc., 82:99-111,  1968.

                                  17

-------
                          Literature Cited
International Joint Commission.  Pollution of Lake Erie, Lake Ontario
   and the International Section of the St. Lawrence River.  1971,
   105 pp.

Kaper, J. B., A. L. Mills and R. R. Colwell.  Evaluation of the accuracy
   and precision of enumerating aerobic heterotrophs in water samples by
   the spread plate method.  Appl. Environ. Microbiol.,  35(4):756-761,
   1978.

Levin, M. A. and V. J. Cabelli.  Membrane filter technique for enumeration
   of Pseudomonas aeruginosa.  Appl. Microbiol., 24:864-870, 1972.

Lin, S. D.  Evaluation of Millipore HA and HC membrane filters for the
   enumeration of indicator bacteria.  Appl. Microbiol. 32(2)-.300-302,
   1976.

McCoy, Elizabeth and Wm. B. Sarles.  Bacteria in lakes: populations and
   functional relations.  In: Eutrophication: causes, consequences,
   correctives.  Proceedings of a  Symposium, National Academy of  Sciences,
   Washington, D. C., 1969.

McFetters, G. A., G. K. Bissonnette, J. J. Jezeski, C. A.  Thomson and
   D. G,  Stuart.  Comparative survival of indicatior bacteria and enteric
   pathogens in well-water.  Appl. Microbiol.,  27(5)823-829,  1974.

Menon, A. S., A. Jurkovic, W. Winter, and B. J. Dutka.  Bacteriological
   study  of Lake Erie conducted for the Advisor Board on Water Pollution,
   IJC, MS Rep. No. 67-19, 1967.

Nie, N. H., C. H. Hull, J. G. Jenkins, K.  Steinbrenner  and D. H.  Brent.
   SPSS:  Statistical Package for the Social  Sciences, 2nd  Ed.  McGraw-Hill,
   Inc.,  New York,  1975.  675 pp.

Ohio EPA  Water Quality  Standards.  Chapter  3745-1  of the Administrative
   Code.

Palmer, P. E., R. D. Methot, Jr.  and J. T.  Staley.  Patchiness in the
   distribution of  planktonic heterotrophic  bacteria  in lakes.  Appl.
   Environ. Microbiol.,  31 (6):1003-1005,  1976.

Pipes,  W. O., P. Ward and  S. H. Ann.  Frequency distributions for coliform
   bacteria  in water.   J. Amer. Wt. Wks.  Assoc.,  69:664-668,  1977.

Rao,  S.  S.  and B. K. Burnison.  Bacterial distributions in Lake Erie  (1967,
   1970).  J. of the Fisheries  Research Board  of  Canada,  33:(3)574-580.
   1976.

Rao,  S.  S.  and  A.  A. Jurkovic.  Note: Differentiation of  the trophic
    status of the Great  Lakes by means of  Bacterial Index  Ratio.   J.  Great
   Lakes  Res.,  3:323-326,  1977.

Reid,  G.  K.   Ecology  of Inland Waters and Estuaries.   Van Nostrand  Rein-
   hold Co.,  New York,  1961.   375 pp.

                                   18

-------
                         Literature Cited


ReVelle, Charles and Penelope ReVelle.  Sourcebook on the Environment —
   The Scientific Prospective.  Houghton-Mifflin Co., Boston, Mass., 1974.

Richards, R. P.  Personal communication, 1980.

Scarpino, R. V.  Bacterial and Viral Analysis of Water and Waste Water.
   In:  Water and Water Pollution Handbook, Ch. 13, Vol. 2, L. L. Ciarccio,
   Ed.  Marcel Dekker, New York, 1971.

Sladek, K. J., R. V. Suslairch, B. J. Sohn and F. W. Dawson.  Optimum
   membrane structures for growth of coliform and fecal coliform organisms.
   Appl. Microbiol. 30:685-691.  1975.

Sokal, R. R. and F. J. Rohlf.  Biometry — The Principles and Practices of
   Statistics in Biological Research.  W. H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco,
   1969.  776 pp.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1975.  Interim Primary Drinking
   Water Standards.  Fed. Reg. 40  (51):11990, March 14, 1975.

Van Otterloo, H. R., P. Collins and B. J. Dutka.  Bacteriological Study
   of Lake Ontario, Lake Erie, Lake Huron and Lake Superior; conducted for
   the Advisory Board on Water Pollution, IJC, MS Rep. No. KR-68-3, 1968.

Wetzel, Robert G.  Limnology.  W. B. Saunders Co., Phila., Pa., 1975.
                                 19

-------
Table 1.   Media Preparation.   Except where noted, all media were prepared as
             directed on the container.
   Bacteria
Year
Medium
Filter
Comments
Aerobic heterotrophs

Fecal coliforms




Fecal streptococci


Ps. aeruginosa
both   Plate Count Agar   Millipore HA

1978   M-FC broth

1979   M-FC agar
                Millipore HA

                Millipore HC
both   KF Streptococcus
       agar

1978   M-PA agar
                Millipore HA
                Millipore HA
              No rosolic
              acid*
              Synthesized
              as per Standard
              Methods  (1975)
*Rosolic acid was omitted from the M-FC agar in the belief that its presence was
 not crucial.  Also, this omission permitted the autoclaving of the medium, which
 in turn prolonged the storage life of the poured plates.
                                    20

-------
Table 2.   Organization of the Central Basin stations used to determine
             the cruise-to-cruise patterns for the three bacterial groups.
Offshore
LV



CW





CE




FP


AS







52
63
67

72
73
74
78
82

93
97
100
101

107
112

125
131
135





Onshore
LV 51
53
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
64
68
69

CW 70
71
77
79
80
88

CE 92
94
95
96
99
102
FP 103
104
106
108
109
110
111
115
116
118
119
120
121
122

AS 124
127
128
129
130
134
136
137
138
139

Harbors and River Mouths
LV 54
55
65
66

CW 75
76

CE 84
85
86
87
90
91
98

FP 105
113
114
117

AS 123
126
132
133

                                   21

-------
Table  3.     Statistical analysis of 1978 aerobic heterotroph splits and
                replicates.  The data has been log   transformed.


           Number    Mean of      Standard               Degrees of    2-Tail
          of Cases   Differences  Deviation  *T-value     Freedom    Probability
                                of Differences

Splits
Replicates
For stations
25 0.1921
34 0.5032
2
with < 10 bacteria/ml
0.222 2.82 44.75
0.588

0.007
2 3
For stations with between 10 and 10 bacteria/ml
Splits
Replicates

Splits
Replicates
39 0.1634
69 0.03925
For stations
35 0.1686
43 0.8863
0.219 3.03 97.15
0.558
with > 10 bacterial/ml
0.258 5.52 52.31
0.803
0.003

<0.001
*SPSS separate variance estimate for use when variances are not equal
     (Nie, et al. 1975).
                                     22

-------
Table 4.     Statistical analyses for 1979 aerobic heterotroph splits and
                replicates.  The data has been login transformed.


           Number     Mean of    Standard              Degree of      2-Tail
          of Cases  Differences  Deviation   *T-value   Freedom     Probability
                               of Differences

Splits
Replicates
For stations
59 0.1320
10 0.1397
2
with < 10 bacteria/ml
0.223 0.12 14.03
0.182

0.907

2 3
For stations with between 10 and 10 bacteria/ml
Splits
Replicates

Splits
Replicates
259 0.1233
62 0.1637
For stations
194 0.1267
39 0.1645
0.144 1.40 74.53
0.215
with >_ 10 bacteria/ml
0.149 0.80 42.18
0.288
0.164


0.428

*SPSS separate variance estimate for use when variances are not equal
    (Nie, et al.  1975).
                                     23

-------
Table 5.    Pearson correlation  coefficients  for  1978 heterotrophs  and
               selected  chemical data.
Chemical Parameter
TKN
NH,,
3
NO-NO.,
2 3
sio2
Cl
so,,
4
TOG
DOC
Conductivity
Alkalinity
Suspended Solids
Chlorophyll
Pheophytin
TSP
TP
SRP
pH
Coefficient (r)
.1098
.1010

.1752

.0709
.0841
.0908

.0290
.1271
.1157
.0979
-0.0046
-0.0195
.1020
.0341
.1130
.0125
-0.0530
Cases
1456
1390

1444

1410
1415
1417

267
269
1462
1438
262
472
471
1461
1461
1443
1462
*Signif icance (p)
0.001
0.001

0.001

0.008
0.002
0.001

0.637
0.037
0.001
0.001
0.941
0.672
0.027
0.192
0.001
0.635
0.043
*The closer p is to 0, the better the correlation between the 2
    parameters being considered.
                                 24

-------
Table 6.    Pearson  correlations  for  1979 heterotrophs  and  selected
               chemical  data.
Chemical Parameter
pH
Conductivity
Alkalinity
Turbidity
Suspended Solids
Chlorophyll
Pheophytin
TSP
TP
SRP
TKN
NH
3
N02-N03
SiO
2
Cl
S°4
TOG
DOC
Coefficient (r)
-0.2387
.1082
.1330
.1376
.2151
-0.0041
0.0269
.2324
.2573
.2471
.2888
.4019

.2030
.3210

.2818
.3247
.4198
.3028
Cases
2049
2043
2038
2009
383
1389
1702
2047
2053
2051
2049
2050

2051
2049

2050
2050
396
396
*Significance (p)
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.879
0.268
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001

0.001
0.001

0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
*The closer p is to O, the better the correlation between the 2
   parameters being considered.
                                 25

-------
Table 7.    Pearson correlations for 1979 Cruise 1 heterotrophs and
               selected chemical data.
Chemical Parameter
pH
Conductivity
Alkalinity
Turbidity
Suspended Solids
Chlorophyll
Pheophytin
TSP
TP
SRP
TKN
NH_
3
NO-NO.,
2 3
sio2
Cl
S°4
Cyanide
TOC
DOC
Coefficient (r)
-0.3529
0.2473
0.1701
0.0191
0.0728
-0.0163
-0.0837
0.3362
0.2197
0.3965
0.2223
0.7480

0.0481

0.5382
0.5028
0.5276
0.8034
0.6241
0.3532
Cases
522
516
519
505
96
163
176
518
522
521
520
521

521

520
520
521
25
96
96
Significance (p)
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.334
0.240
0.418
0.135
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001

0.137

0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
                                  26

-------
Table  8.     FC/FS ratios for 1978 samples  containing fecal  streptococci at concentrations ^ 100/100  ml.
Station
LV 51
54
60
62
64
65
67
CW 70
74
75

77
78
79

80

81
83


89
CE 85





86


Level
S
S
S
S
B
S
S
S
B
S
S
B
S
S
S
S
B
B
S
M
B
B
S
S
S
B
B
B
S
S
S
Date
780617
780830
780830
781010
780830
780830
780520
780620
780620
780524
780620
780902
780524
780524
780620
780524
780524
780524
780524
780524
780524
780902
780623
780905
781016
780623
780905
781016
780527
780623
781016
Fecal Coliforms
Per 100 ml
54
44
2
72
4
78
1
43
0
15,000
500
8
2
370
45
270
190
1
35
6
0
3
2,700
940
5,600
1,100
780
7,800
700
720
940
Fecal Streptococci
Per 100 ml
190
120
140
160
440
290
130
100
180
22,000
270
120
210
130
130
190
100
150
290
130
160
650
470
100
1,000
130
130
1,100
100
100
330
FC/FS > 4.0
0.28
0.37
0.014
1.1
0.0091
0.27
0.0077
0.43
0
0.68
1.8
0.066
0.0095
2.8
0.35
1.4
1.9
0.0067
0.12
0.046
0
0.0046
5.7 X
9.4 X
5.6 X
8.5 X
6.0 X
7.1 X
7.0 X
7.2 X
2.8
4.0 > FC/FS > 0.7 < 0.7
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X








X

-------
      Table 8 continued.
to
oo
Station
CE 86


87

91

94


95


96
98

100

102

103
104
105
106

107

108
111

Level
S
B
B
B
S
B
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
B
S
S
S
B
S
B
S
S
S
B
B
S
B
S
S
B
Date
780623
780905
781016
780527
780527
780527
780623
780623
780905
781016
780527
781016
780527
780623
780905
781016
780527
780905
780905
780623
780908
780908
780908
780626
781019
780908
780908
780908
780626
780908
Fecal Coliforms
Per 100 ml
150
1,400
1,300
250
410
110
49
3,600
710
2,800
70
460
48
20
34
1,400
15
0
0
7
173
195
130
200
0
0
2
50
3
2
Fecal Streptococci
Per 100 ml
100
120
260
120
160
120
180
180
189
200
310
100
120
540
120
180
320
130
220
150
140
240
160
280
540
440
110
480
240
180
FC/FS >_ 4.0
1.5
12 X
5.0 X
2.1
2.6
0.92
0.27
20 X
3.0
14 X
0.23
4.6 X
0.40
0.037
0.28
7.6 X
0.047
0
0
0.047
1.2
0.81
0.81
0.71
0
0
0.018
0.10
0.013
0.011
4.0 > FC/FS > 0.7
X


X
X
X


X








X
X

X
X
X

X
X




< 0.7






X



X

X
X
X

X


X



X


X
X
X
X

-------
Table 8 continued .
Station
FP 111
112
113


114

115

116
117
118
119
120
121
AS 126
128

131

132




133
134
135
138

Level
B
B
S
SR
B
B
B
S
B
B
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
B
B
S
SR
S
B
B
S
B
B
S
B
Date
781019
780908
780626
780626
781019
780530
780626
780908
780908
780626
780908
780626
780908
780626
780530
780911
780602
781022
780911
781022
780602
780602
780911
780602
780911
780911
781022
780911
780911
780911
Fecal Coliforms
Per 100 ml
13
1
460
250
400
2
4
1
28
0
69
3
14
0
0
9
160
120
20
2
780
680
200
300
310
4
0
3
4
1
Fecal Streptococci
Per 100 ml
110
320
860
360
150
470
130
140
140
130
130
310
430
180
250
150
140
790
100
283
140
170
130
130
140
310
130
310
170
170
FC/FS > 4.0
0.12
0.0031
0.54
0.69
2.7
0.0043
0.031
0.0071
0.20
0
0.53
0.010
0.033
0
0
0.060
1.1
0.15
0.20
0.0071
5.6 X
4.0 X
1.5
2.3
2.2
0.019
0
0.010
0.024
0.0059
4.0 > FC/FS > 0.7 < 0.7
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X


X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

-------
      Table  9.    FC/PS  ratios  for  1979  samples containing  fecal  streptococci at concentrations _> 100/lOOml
00
o
Station
LV 65


CW 71
* 72
75


76


79
81



82

83



89



CE 84

Level
S
B
BR
S
S
S
S
S
S
SR
B
S
S
B
S
B
S
BR
S
B
S
BR
S
B
S
B
S
B
Date
790425
790425
790425
790422
790422
790422
790829
791015
790422
790422
790422
790422
790422
790422
790829
790829
790422
790422
790422
790422
790829
790829
790422
790422
790829
790829
790825
790825
Fecal Coliforms
Per 100 ml
960
1,100
1,200
6.7
1.3
320
10,000
11,000
13
13
19
3,500
1,900
9,900
5,800
6,900
2.7
6.7
4,800
7,500
1,500
1,600
3,400
6,800
4,400
4,500
3,600
3,600
Fecal Streptococci
Per 100 ml
150
170
130
130
370
180
1,900
150
8,700
6,100
220
680
1,300
9,100
290
260
160
210
3,600
7,600
120
110
2,400
6,200
240
250
150
220
FC/FS
6.4
6.5
9.2
0.05
0.004
1.8
5.3
73.3
0.002
0.002
0.09
5.2
1.5
1.1
20.0
26.5
0.02
0.03
1.3
0.99
12.5
14.5
1.42
1.10
18.3
18.0
24.0
16.4
> 4.0 4.0 > FC/FS > 0.7 <0.7
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

-------
 Table 9 continued.
Station
CE 85



86



87

94

95
98

* 100
FP 103
104
105
113



114

117
122
AS 132


Level
S
S
B
B
S
B
S
B
S
B
S
S
S
S
S
B
S
S
S
S
B
S
B
S
B
S
S
S
B
B
Date
790419
790825
790825
791011
790419
790419
791011
781011
790419
790419
790825
791011
790825
790825
791011
790419
790416
790416
790416
790416
790416
791007
791007
791007
791007
790416
790416
790413
790413
790713
Fecal Coliforms
Per 100 ml
34,000
3,900
2,800
1,600
5,800
8,400
1,700
5,400
10,000
5,100
1,200
3,500
1,300
14,000
7,000
0
3,200
8,400
740
580
580
4,800
5,400
3,400
2,100
810
17
1,800
730
1,600
Fecal Streptococci
Per 100 ml
780
290
220
100
260
520
140
190
220
220
500
110
190
1,000
440
140
1,800
1,400
340
250
310
1,800
1,800
230
660
220
580
950
3,000
170
FC/FS
43.6
13.4
12.7
16.0
22.3
16.2
12.1
28.4
45.5
23.2
2.4
31.8
6.84
14.0
15.9
0
1.78
6.0
2.2
2.3
1.9
2.7
3.0
14.8
3.2
3.7
0.03
1.9
0.24
9.4
> 4.0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X


X





X





X
4.0 > FC/FS> 0.7 < 0.7










X




X
X

X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X

* Offshore stations

-------
 Table  10.    Central Basin Station Rational  tadapted -from Herdendorf 19Vfc

 Station           Rationale              Station           Rationale
 LV 51    BR, HF, NS, ST, TO
    52    CF, ND, TN
    53    BR, HF, IM, NI
    54    DC, DS, HA, MT, NS, PP, TN
    55    NI, TO
    56    NI, TN
    57    ND, TM, TN
    58    BR, HF, NS, TO
    59    ND, TO
    60    BR, NB, NS, TN
    61    NI, TO
    62    ND, TN
    63    HF, IM, NI
    64    HF, IM, NI
    65    DC, DS, HA, NS, TO
    66    DC, DP, HA, NI, TN
    67    ND, TM, TN
    68    HF, NS, TO
    69    ND, TO
CW  70    NB, NS
    71    HF, NS, TN
    72    IM, NI, TN
    73    NI, TN
    74    ND, TM, TO
    75    DC, HA, MT, NS, PP, TO
    76    DC, HA, NI, TO
    77    NI, TO
    78    ND, TO
    79    BR, HF, NS, TO
    80    HF, NI, TO
    81    ND, TN
    82    IM, ML, TM, TO
    83    IM, ML, TM, TO
    88    ND, TM, TO
    89    ND, TM, TO
   *81    DS, HF, NI
   *83    DS, HF, NI
   *89    DS, HF, NI
 CE 84    DS, HA, NS, PP
    85    DC, DP, HA, MT, NS, PP, TN
    86    DC, HA, NI, TO
    87    DC, HA, NS, PP, TO
    90    DC, HA, NS, PP
    91    DC, DP, HA, NS, PP
    92    ND, TO
    93    ND, TN
            CE  94   HF, NS, TO
                95   HF, NI, TO
                96   ND, TN
                97   ND, TO
                98   DS, NB, NS, ST, TO
                99   NI, TN
               100   ND, TO
               101   IM, ML, TO
               102   NB, NI
            FP 103   BR, NB, NS
               104   DP, NS, TN
               105   BR, DC, HA, MT, NS, WL
               106   NI, TM, TO
               107   ND, TN
               108   NB, NS
               109   BR, HF, NS, TO
               110   HF, IM, NI, TO
               111   HF, NI, TO
               112   CF, NS, TO
               113   DC, DS, HA, MT, NS, PP, TN
               114   DC, DP, HA, NI, TO
               115   ND, TN
               116   ND, TM, TN
               117   DC, HA, NI, PP
               118   HF, NI
               119   HF, NS, TO
               120   ND, TM, TO
               121   DP, II, NB
               122   IM, NB, NS
            AS 123   NS, ST, TO
               124   NI, TO
               125   ND, TO
               126   BR, NB, NS, ST
               127   NB, NS
               128   BR, HF, NS, TN
               129   HE, IM, NI, TN
               130   HF, NI, TO
               131   ND, TO
               132   DC, DS, HA, MT, NS, PP, TN
               133   DC, HA, NI, TN
               134   ND, TO
               135   ML, TM, TN
               136   DP, HF, NS
               137   NB, NS, TO
               138   ND, TO
               139   NB, NS
 *1979 positions  for these  stations.
 Rationale  Code   (Herdendorf  1978)
    Code
                                      Rationale
     BR
     CF
     DC
     DP
     DS
     HA
     HF
     II
     IM
     ML
     MT
     NB
     ND
     NI
     NS
     PP
     ST
     TM
     TN
beach, recreational
commercial fishing grounds
dredged channel
discharge, power plant or industrial
discharge, sewage treatment plant
harbor area
harbor flanks
intake, industrial
intake, municipal
offshore or main lake
major tributary mouth
nearshore, between major harbor areas
nearshore, deep or outer position
nearshore, intermediate depth
nearshore, shallow or inner position
known pollution problems
small tributary mouth
transect, main lake connection
transect, nearshore
                                32

-------
Table 11.    A comparison of stations 81, 83 and 89 with stations 80 and 88
                using the t-test and logln transformed data from 1979.
Number of Standard
Cases Mean Deviation *T-value
Heterotrophs
81, 83, 89 115 4.07 0.743 7.14
80, 88 46 3.12 0.774
Fecal Streptococci
81, 83, 89 27 1.66 1.361 3.84
80, 88 16 0.4614 0.672
Fecal Coliforms
81, 83, 89 27 2.67 1.094 5.05
80, 88 16 1.26 0.731
Degrees of 2-Tail
Freedom Probability

80.01 <0.001


40.04 <0.001


40.29 <0.001

*SPSS separate variance estimate for use when variances are not equal
    (Nie, et al. 1975).
                                     33

-------
Table 12.   1978 stations with concentrations > 200 fecal coliforms/100 ml
Station
LV

CW


CE
















FP





AS


54 S
65 S
75 S
79 S
80 S
84 S
B
85 S
B
86 S
B
87 S
B
90 S
SR
91 S
B
92 B
94 S
95 S
B
98 S
106 BR
113 S
SR
B
114 S
B
132 S
SR
B
Cruise I


15000
370
270
400

210
270
700
590
250
410
310
260











280

780
680
300
Cruise II Cruise III
411
280
500 300



270
2700 940
1100 970
720 1600
1400
390
620





3600 710



200
460
250



200

310
Cruise IV

240
200




5600
7800
940
1300


230

540
580
200
2800
460
710
1400



400

470



                                    34

-------
Table 13.
Station
LV 53 S
54 S
65 S
B
BR
66 S
B
CW 75 S
76 B
79 S
81 S
B
83 S
B
BR
88 S
B
89 S
B
CE 84 S
B
85 S
B
86 S
B
87 S
B
90 S
B
91 S
B
94 S
95 S
B
BR
98 S
99 B
FP 103 S
104 S
105 S
108 S
109 S
111 B
113 S
B
FP 114 S
B
115 B
117 S
AS 123 S
132 S
B
1979 stations
Cruise I

720
960
1100
1200
1200
800
320

3500
1900
9900
4800
7500

300
330
3400
6800
480
550
34000
530
5800
8400
10000
5100
1800
1500

540





200
3200
8400
740
1800
440

580
580
270
280

810
210
1800
730
with concentrations
Cruise II


390






600

300
310





400




240









470





640




310

200



500
1600

Cruise III
240
210
600




10000


5800
6900
1500
1600
1600


4400
4500
3600
3600
3900
2800
3400
810
2200
2700
800
990
550
660
1200
1300
900
510
14000














260
280
coliforms/lOOml
Cruise IV



360



11000
980
240









550
1100
1000
1600
1700
5400
270
300
210
380


3500



7000






460
4800
5400
3400
2100
250
440

260
410
35

-------
Table 14.    Stations exhibiting fecal coliform concentrations of more
               than 1,000 organisms/lOOml.
1978 Station
CW 75 S
CE 85 S
B
86 S
B
94 S
1979 LV 65 B
BR
66 S
CW 75 S
79 S
81 S
B
83 S
B
BR
89 S
B
CE 84 S
B
85 S
B
86 S
B
87 S
B
90 S
B
94 S
95 S
98 S
FP 103 S
104 S
108 S
113 S
B
114 S
B
AS 132 S
B
Concentrations exhibited
15,000
2700
1100
1600
1400
3600
1100
1200
1200
10,000
3500
1900
9900
4800
7500
1600
3400
6800
3600
3600
34,000
2800
5800
8400
10,000
5100
1800
1500
1200
1300
14,000
3200
8400
1800
4800
5400
3400
2100
1800
1600

5600
7800

1300
2800



11,000

5800
6900
1500
1600

4400
4500

1100
3900 100C
1600
3400 170C
5400
2200
2700


3500

7000









                                 36

-------
Figure  la.  Location of sampling stations for the  Central Basin Nearshore
              Zone in 1978.
                                   Rocky River I Lakewood
                                                           Cuyahoga R
         N
                                                 Geneva
                                                  The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                       , ,Cowles Cr
                                             Wheeler Cr
                                            Scale in miles
                                         0510
                                    37

-------
      Figure  Ib.  Location of sampling stations  for  the Central Basin Nearshore
                     Zone in 1979.
                                            TT1

                                         Rocky River "1 Lakewood
60.
                                                                 Cuyahoga R
                N
            ,01
                                                        Geneva-On-
                                                         The-Lake       Ashtabula R

                                                               Howies Cr
                        w.
  Scale in miles

0       5       10
                                            38

-------
    Figure 2.  Comparison of the split and replicate  sampling programs  for  1978  and  1979.

                                                        1978
                     REPLICATES

                  CRUISES 1 and 2
    SPLITS

CRUISES 1-4
*LEVI'.7,
                     2 STATIONS EACH DAY
                                                      BR
                                                                   *S3    S2
                                                                                   2 STATIONS EACH DAY
                     MR
                  CRUISES 3 and 4
                                                                   *LEVEL THAT WAS SPLIT VARIED.
                     2 STATIONS EACH DAY
 *NUMBER OF LEVELS DEPENDED ON THE DEPTH OF THE PARTICULAR STATION.

**THE LEVEL TO BE REPLICATED WAS SELECTED WHEN THE REPLICATE STATIONS
    WERE SELECTED - ONE SURFACE AND ONE BOTTOM REPLICATE EACH DAY
     (FOR CRUISES 3 AND 4).
                                                    1979 - ALL CRUISES

                                                   REPLICATES AND SPLITS

                                                    2 STATIONS EACH DAY
                     *LEVEL
                                **SR    REPLICATE
                    SPLITS  A
                      *NUMBER OF LEVELS DEPENDED ON THE DEPTH OF THE PARTICULAR STATION.

                     **THE LEVEL TO BE REPLICATED WAS SELECTED WHEN THE  REPLICATE STATIONS WERE
                       SELECTED — ONE SURFACE AND ONE BOTTOM REPLICATE  EACH  DAY.
                                                       39

-------
Figure 3.
  Organization of the Central Basin stations used  in determining cruise-to-cruise
     patterns
                                      Rocky River 1 Lakewood
                                                               Cuy-ihoya R
            N
AshMbula R
                                                     Geneva-On-
                                                      The-lake
                                                Scale in miles

                                             0        h       10


                                             Key:

                                             IS  offshore

                                              •  onshore

                                             (•)  river and harbor mouths

                                              )(  not included in this analysis
                                       40

-------
Figure  4a.

Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 1, May, 1978
Figure 4b.

Aerobic heterotroph  concentration isopleth map for Cruise 2, June, 1978
                                                                    ,,000
                                                                  ioga
          N
                                                                  _ —  - — -'00
                                                   Geneva-On-        _
                                                    The-Lake       AshMbula R
                               'Giand R       Scale in miles

                                            O       '.       10
                                                            10

-------
Figure 4c.
Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 3, September,  1978
                                                                  Figure  4d.

                                                                  Aerobic  heterotroph concentration  isopleth map for Cruise 4, October, 1978
                                                               yahoga R
          N
J(3fand R       Scale in miles

             0510
                                                                                                                               Cuyahoga R
                                                                                                          N
                                                                                                                                                   Genevd-On-
                                                                                                                                                    The-Lake
                                                                                                                                                        _, .Cov/ies
                                                                                                                                               Wheetoi Ci
                                                                                                                                     R       Scale in miles
                                                                                                                                           o       o        10

-------
 Figure  5a.

Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 1, April, 1979
                                                           Figure  5b.

                                                           Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 2, July,  1979
                                                             Cuyahoga R
          N
                                               Wheeler Cr
R       Scale in miles

      0^10
                                                                                                                                                                         Euclid
                                                                                                                                                                           Euclid C(
                                                                                                                                                             Cuyahoga R
                                                                                                           N

''"" i/'
*» ' ,^ .
,'~ 'if-
:^A
*.~^ j^
Geneva-On-
\The-Lake
\ ^.Cowles
s '*
- " ^*°°
" • ,^-
-,•£?£?*
Ashtabula
N ^O

Asntribui>i
Cr
                                                                                                                                                   Geneva-On
                                                                                                                                                    The-Lake       Ashtabuia R

                                                                                                                                                        , ,Cowles Cf

                                                                                                                                               Wheeler Cr
                                                                                                                               'Grand R       Scale in miles

                                                                                                                                           0        5       10

-------
Figure  5c.

Aerobic heterotroph concentration  isopleth map for Cruise 3, August,  1979
                                                              uyahoga R
                                                  Geneva-On-
                                                    The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                         .Cowles Cr
                              ) Grand R       Scale in miles

                                           0       5       10
Figure  5d.

Aerobic heterotroph concentration isopleth map for Cruise 4, October/ 1979
                                                                                                                                                            Cuyahoga R
                                                                                                         N
                                                  Geneva-On
                                                   The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                        f Bowles Cr
                                              Wheeler Cf
                   Harbor  C^ Grand R       Scale in miles
                                           P^™-^^*—^™^
                                          0        5
(0
                                                                                                          ' CrMfjnn R

-------
Figure 6a.
Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map for Cruise  1, May,  1978
Figure 6b.
Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map for Cruise 2, June, 1978
                                                              Cuy.ihoga R
          N

-------
Figure 6c.
Fecal coliform conce  tration  isopleth map for Cruise 3, September,  1978
Figure 6d.
Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map for  Cruise 4, October, 1978
                                                                          Euclid Cf
                                                             Cuy.ilioga R
         N
                                                   Geneva-On-         _
                                                    The-Lake       Ashidbuia R
                                                                Ct
                              'Grand R       Scale in miles
                                           0       5       10
                                                                                                                                                             Cuy.ihoga R
                                                                                                         N
                                                  Geneva-On-
                                                   The-Lak»       Ashtabula R
                                                                Ci
                                             Wheeiei Ci
                             Grand R       Scale in miles
                                         0       ft       10

-------
Figure 7a.
Fecal coliform  conce  tration isopleth map for Cruise  1, April, 1979
                                     Figure 7b.

                                     Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map  for Cruise 2, July, 1979
                                                 Geneva-On
                                                  The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                      _ ,Cowles Cr
                                             Wheeler Cr
10
                                                                                                        N
                                                                                                                                                          Cuyahoga R
                                                                                      Geneva-On-
                                                                                       The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                                                           , ,Cowles Cr
                                                                                  Wheeler Cr
                                                                                                                            Grand R       Scale in miles
                                                                                                                                        fxm=^c^m=3m=
                                                                                                                                        0       5       10

-------
Figure 7c.

Fecal coliform concentration  isopleth map for Cruise 3, August,  1979
Figure 7d.

Fecal coliform concentration isopleth map for Cruise 4, October, 1979
                                                                        Euclid Cr
          N
                                                  Geneva-On-
                                                   The-Lake       Asruabula R
                                                        Cowles Cr
                              Grand R       Scale in miles
                                                          10
                                                                                                                                  Rocky River 1 Lakewood
                                                                                                                                          '  '            >Cuyahoga R
                                                  Geneva-On-
                                                   The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                       , ,Cowles Cr
                                             Wheeter Cr
                              Grand R       Scale in miles
                                           a
                                         0510

-------
Figure 8a.

Fecal streptococcus  concentration isopleth map for Cruise  1, May, 1978
Figure 8b.

Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise 2,  June, 1978
                                                            Cuy-jiioga R
         N
                                                  Geneva-On-
                                                   The-L«k»        Ashtabuia R
                                                         Cowtes Or
                                  0»T»
                                                            Cuyalioga R
                                                                                                         N
                                                  Geneva-On-
                                                   The-L*k«       Ashtabuia R
                                                         Cowies Ci
                                                                                                                             'Grand R       Scale in miles

                                                                                                                                         0       5       10

-------
Figure 8c.
Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise 3, September, 1978
Figure 8d.
Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise  4, October, 1978
                                                    Genewa-On-         —
                                                    The-Lak«       Ashtabula R
                               Giand R       Scale in miles
                                            0       ft       10
                                                                                                          N
                                                                                                                                                             Cuyahoga R
                                                                                                                                                   Geneva-On-
                                                                                                                                                    The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                                                                                                                         , ,Cowles Cr
                                                                                                                                               Wheeler O
                                      Arcola Cr

                              Grand R        Scale In miles
                                                                                                                                                            10

-------
Figure 9a.
Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise  1,  April  1979
Figure  9b.
Fecal  streptococcus concentration isopleth map  for Cruise 2, July, 1979
                                                  Geneva-On-
                                                  The-Lake       Ashtnbula R
                             >Grand R       Scale in miles
                                         0510
                                                                                                                                                          Cuyahoga R
                                                                                                        N
                                                  Geneva-On-
                                                   The-Lake       Asht.ibula R
                                                                Cr
                                              Wheeler Cr
                             'Grand R       Scale in miles
                                          0510

-------
Figure  9c.

Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise 3, August, 1979
Figure  9d.

Fecal streptococcus concentration isopleth map for Cruise 4,  October,  1979
                                                            Cuyahoga R
                             'Grand R       Scale in miles

                                          0       5       10
                                                                                                                                                           Cuyahoga R
                                                                                                        N
                                                                                                                                                Geneva-On-
                                                                                                                                                 The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                                                                                                                     , Cowles Cr
                                                                                                                                            Wheeler Cr
                             'Grand R       Scale in miles

                                         0510

                                A/o DATA

-------
Figure 10a.

Summary:   Summary of the 1978 aerobic heterotroph  data using geometric means
Figure  lOb.

 Summary:  Summary of the 1979 aerobic heterotroph data using geometric means
                                                            Cuy-itioga R
          N
                                                   Geneva-On-
                                                   The-Lake       AsWabuia R
                                                           10
                                                                                                                                                            Cuyahoga R
                                                                                                         N
                                                                                                                             'Grand R       Scale in mllet

                                                                                                                                          0       5       10

-------
Figure lla.

Summary of the 1978 fecal coliform data using geometric means
                                                                        Euclid
                                                                          Euclid Cr
                                                            Cuy.ilioga R
         N
              Geneva-On-
               The-Lake       Asht.ibula R
R       Scale in miles

      0       '•>       10
                                                            Figure  lib.

                                                            Summary of 1979 fecal coliform data using geometric means
                                                                                                                                                            Cuyahoga R
                                                                                                         N
                                                                                                                                                 Geneva-On
                                                                                                                                                  The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                                                                                                                      „ ,Cowles Cr

                                                                                                                                             Wheeler Cr
                                                                                                                            'Grand R       Scale in miles

                                                                                                                                         0510

-------
Figure 12a.

Summary:  Summary of the 1978 fecal streptococcus  data using geometric means
                                                                                                        Figure 12b.

                                                                                                        Summary:  Summary of the 1979 fecal streptococcus data using geometric means
                                                                    Cuyahoga R
Ol
Ul
                  N
                                                                   10
                                                                                                                                                                    Cuyahoga R
                                                                                                                  N
                                                                                                                                                          Geneva-On
                                                                                                                                                           The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                                                                                                                               , ,Co\«les Cr

                                                                                                                                                      Wheeler Cr
                                                                                                                          FHarbo? (-^ Grand R       Scale in miles
                                                                                                                                                                  10

-------
 Figure 13.  Cruise to cruise patterns for aerobic heterotropha.


                                NEARSHORE  STATIONS
7.a_
 1 .1
•£


*«
I5i

a-
XHt
i


*
45
*
I-
1.34-
fr
VI*
4

	 1 	 1 	 1 	 1 	 1 	 1 —

t- •«
141

i. *



•-

	 1
   1076.
                                            1878.
                                             YEAR
                                                                                      taea.
                                  OFFSHORE  STATIONS
a. a.
G.B.
L
J3.0-
S
J


t . e.


i





}
rf






>•
(«V3 i




^ 4
4.


4j

»•
'**

§.






•• ••
ITJ?" 
-------
  Figure 14.  Cruise  to cruise patterns for  fecal coliforms.



                                NEAR8HORE STATIONS
 5.1
 4.0. .
   .0. .
£l.0--
  ).O_ .
                                        no
                                                           14
                                                                       •E3-
                                                                          ^5
                                                                              U
    ia?e.
                                            i a7a .
                                            YEAR
                                                                                    1880.
 C.I
 4.0..
  1.0. .
                                OFFSHORE STATIONS
.0.
.0.
•E

}
<•
4
4T 8
•E
1.
f
*
31 *

* *
37
•E
••
}•
35
1 878 . 1 878 . | 880
YEAR
  S.I
  4.0. .
    . 0. .
                         RIVER  MOUTH  AND  HARBOR  STATIONS
                       35
                                                                      53
    1878.
                                            1878.
                                            YEAR
                                                                                    1880.
                                      57

-------
   [•'iquio>  1 rj .   I l
 G . 0_
 4.0-.
S3 . 0_ _
,,,1  .0-.
  0.0--
    1978.
                      to cruiie patterns for fecal st rfptococ-ci .


                                     NEARSMORE  STATIONS
                           •7*
                                                   1878.
                                                   YEAR
                                                                                                  t 380 .
    5.0__
                                        OFFSHORE STATIONS
    4.0..
   E3 . 0_ .
o
o
_J
0.0_



i


H
¥S

I
} t
3Q

I -f
r T.
^

I i
J
fo

}
3/7
14--
37 »(.
i i i t i i i
~r~ i 	 » '" T 	 	 T 	 — i 	 -~i 	 — 	 "-- -T"
1870. 1878.
YEAR


i-
35
1980
                              RIVER MOUTH  AND  HARBOR STATIONS
O . Kf—
4.0.
5«3 . 0_
a.
.i
-j.
•ij
3'-e-
0.0_
18"



{






*J
t
31



i r
} t
L


\ i
7



}•
3-fc

'8 1 878 .
YEAR



1






3-

i


r
t
J
33



i I
} L
3t




}
J
31


                                                                                                    1980.
                                                  58

-------
Figure 16.

Summary of the 1978 Central Basin trophic status using geometric means of
   aerobic heterotroph data
                                                                       o
Figure 17.

Summary of the 1979 Central Basin trophic status using geometric means of
   aerobic heterotroph data
                                                    Geneva-On
                                                     The-Lake        Ashtabula R
                                                         ,,Copies Ci
                                               Wheeler Ci
                                Grand R       Scale in miles
                                                           •
                                            0       f>       10
                                                   Geneva-On
                                                    The-Lake
                                                        _ .Cowles Cr
                                               Wheeler Cr
                               Grand R       Scale in miles
                                                          •
                                           0510
             Trophic status codes,  (Bowden 1979)
             E = eutrophic:   stations < 3.3km from shore,  j^ 2000 bacteria/ml;
                              stations >_ 3.3km from shore,  ^ 200 bacteria/ml.

             M = mesotrophic: stations < 3.3km from shore,  120 _ 3.3km from shore,  20 < M <200 bacteria/ml.
             O = oligotrophic: stations < 3.3km from shore, < 120 bacteria/ml;
                               stations >^ 3.3km from shore, _< 20 bacteria/ml.
            Trophic status codes,  (Bowden  1979)
            E = eutrophic:   stations <  3.3km  from  shore, j> 2000 bacteria/ml;
                             stations _>3.3kK  from  shore, j> 200 bacteria/ml.

            M = mesotrophic: stations  <3.3k»-from  shore, 120 _  3.3tan  from  shore, 20 3.3km from shore, < 20 bacteria/ml.

-------
Figure  18a.
Cruise 1, 1979, trophic status isopleth map using  aerobic heterotroph data
                                                                   Figure  18b.
                                                                    Cruise 2, 1979, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic  heterotroph data
                                                    Geneva-On-
                                                    The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                                 Cr
                                                                           Euclifi Ci
' Grand R        Scale in miles

             0510
                                                                                                                                        R       Scale in miles

                                                                                                                                              0510
             Trophic status codes,  (Bowden 1979)

             E  = eutrophic:    stations  <3.3km from shore,  >^ 2000  bacteria/ml;
                              stations >_ 3.3km from shore,  ^ 200 bacteria/ml.

             M  = mesotrophic:  stations  <3.3km from shore,  120 < M  <2000 bacteria/ml;
                              stations _>3.3km from shore,  20 < M <200  bacteria/ml.
             O  = oligotrophic:  stations < 3.3km from shore, _< 120  bacteria/ml;
                               stations > 3.3km from shore, < 20 bacteria/ml.
                                                                                 Trophic status codes, (Bowden 1979)
                                                                                 E = eutrophic:   stations <  3.3km from shore, >_ 2000 bacteria/ml;
                                                                                                  stations >_ 3.3km from shore, >_ 200 bacteria/ml.

                                                                                 M = mesotrophic: stations <  3.3km from shore, 120 _ 3.3km from shore, 20 < M <200 bacteria/ml.

                                                                                 0 = oligotrophic: stations < 3.3km from shore, _<  120 bacteria/ml;
                                                                                                   stations > 3.3km from shore, <  20 ba^toria/ml .

-------
 Figure  18c.
Cruise 3, 1979, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic heterotroph data
                                                                                     Figure 18d.
                                                                                     Cruise 4, 1979, tropic status isopleth map using aerobic heterotroph data
                                                                           Euclid Ci
                                                              Cleveland


                                                             Cuy.ihoga R
                                       y •
                       Rocky River 1 Lakewood
                                                   Geneva-On-
                                                    The-Lake
                                                         f ,Cowles Cr
                                               Wheeler Cr
                               Grand R        Scale in miles
                                                            10
                                                                                                                                         Geneva-On-
                                                                                                                                          The-Lake        Ashtabula R
                                                                                                                                                Cowles Cr
                                                                                                                    'Grand R       Scale in miles

                                                                                                                                 0510
Trophic status codes, (Bowden 1979)
E = eutrophic :   stations  <3.3km from shore,
                 stations j> 3.3km from shore,
                                                            2000 bacteria/ml;
                                                            200 bacteria/ml.
             M  = mesotrophic:  stations  <3.3km  from shore, 120 < M <2000 bacteria/ml;
                              stations _>3.3km  from shore, 20 <  M <200 bacteria/ml.

             0  = oligotrophic:  stations <  3.3km from shore, < 120 bacteria/ml;
                               stations^  3.3km from shor", •' °" vi-.-t-"-i - '-.1
Trophic status codes,  (Bowden 1979)
E = eutrophic:   stations  < 3.3km from shore,  > 2000 bacteria/ml;
                 stations  >^ 3.3km from shore, _> 200 bacteria/ml.

M = mesotrophic: stations < 3.3km from shore, 12C< M < 2000 bacteria/ml;
                 stations _> 3.3km from shore, 20 
-------
Figure 19a.
Cruise 1, 1978, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic heterotroph data
 Figure  19b.
Cruise 2, 1978, trophic status  isopleth map using  aerobic  heterotroph data
                               rGrand R        Scale in miles

                                            0        5       '0
             Trophic status codes,  (Bowden  1979)
             E = eutrophic:   stations  <3.3km  from  shore, ^ 2000 bacteria/ml;
                              stations >_  3.3km  from  shore, >_ 200 bacteria/ml.

             M = mesotrophic: stations <  3.3km  from  shore, 1203.3km  from  shore, 20 < M <200 bacteria/ml.

             0 = oligotrophic:  stations < 3.3km from shore, _<  120 bacteria/ml,
                                stations > 3.3km from shore, <  20 bacteria/ml.
                                                                                                                                           --•---©•     ') ««r^ Cleveland
                                                                                                                                                             X
                                                                                                                      Lorain           Rocky River 1 Lakewood
                                Grand R        Scale in miles
                                                    ?
                                            0       f)
             Trophic status codes,  (Bowden 1979)
             E = eutrophic:   stations < 3.3km from shore, ^ 2000 bacteria/ml;
                              stations > 3.3km from shore, > 200 bacteria/ml.
             M
                 mesotrophic: stations < 3.3km from shore, 120  3.3fcm from shore, 20 < M <200 bacteria/ml.
             O = oligotrophic: stations < 3.3km from shore, _< 120 bacteria/ml;
                               stations > 3.3km from shore, < 20 bacteria/ml.

-------
 Figure  19c.
Cruise 3,  1978, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic  heterotroph  data
                                                                    Figure 19d.
                                                                   Cruise 4, 1978, trophic status isopleth map using aerobic heterotroph data
                                                                                                                                           0
                                                    Geneva-On-
                                                     The-Lak»       Ashiabula R
                                                           Cowies Cr
/Grand R        Scale in miles

             0        S       10
             Trophic status codes, (Bowden 1979)
             E = eutrophic:   stations  <3.3km from shore,  >_ 2000 bacteria/ml;
                              stations _>3.3)on from shore,  2. 200 bacteria/ml.
             M = mesotrophic: stations <  3.3km from shore,  120 < M <2000 bacteria/ml;
                              stations _>3.3km from shore,  20< M <200 bacteria/ml.
             O = oligotrophic: stations < 3.3km from shore, _< 120 bacteria/ml;
                               stations > 3.3km from shore, < 20 bacteria/ml.
                                                                                                                       Geneva-On
                                                                                                                        The-Lake       Ashtabuia R
                                                                                                                            _, ,Cowles C
                                                                                                                   Wheeler C
                                                                                                                                 'Grand R       Scale in miles

                                                                                                                                              0       ')       10
                                                                                Trophic status codes, (Bowden 1979)
                                                                                E = eutrophic:   stations < 3.3km from shore, > 2000 bacteria/ml;
                                                                                                 stations >^ 3.3km from shore, _> 200 bacteria/ml.
                                                                                M = mesotrophic: stations < 3.3km from shore, 120  3.3km from shore, 20  3.3km from shore,<  20 bacteria/ml.

-------
i- '_ T r '- '  1 - „ i- h i . A I i

(CRIMIGN  DATE  = 36/24/K. )
                                                                       i i:;
FILE    elCFl
SUBFILE    YS2
3CATTEKGPAr OF    (DO«N)  CYANIDE                                        (ACROSS)  LGHETER
                   1.624C3    2.26796    2.711fc9    3.15583    3.eT-97fc    4.04J69    4.4876?   4
                                                                                 93156
                                                                                          5.3731°    5.81942
„




0




0




0




0




0




0




n
>j




0




0




J
.04430




.03960




.03520




.03080




.02640




.02200




.01760




.01320




.008&C




.00440




. j o z : :
+
i
i
i
i
4
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I
4.
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I
4-
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
1 *
I
4 *
* +
I
I
I
1
+
I
1
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
* *
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
*
I
* 1
* I
I
+
1
I
I
• I
+
* I
* I
* * I
I
* * 4
I
I
* » « ]
* I
* 2 * * * 4
             1.60236   2.04b99   2.H8993    2.933Ffc    3.17779    i.82173   4.2E5f-6
                                                                                              5.59746

-------
:,: T i L *  r

F I LE    bICFIL   (CPE.iTIC'f, UATL = 36/24/fc')
SUBFILE   YR2
SCATTERGRAH OF    (DCW,\>  \H3
                 1.62403   2.267'?o   2.7118?
                                                                                                 ACE:
                                                               (ACROSS) LGI-FTER
1




1




1




1




1




0




0




0




0




0




0
.917CG




.72530




.533^-0




.34190




.15020




.95850




.76680




.57510




.38340




.19170




. 3 0 0 u 0
. »- 	 - + ---.
I
I
I
I
•*.
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
*
1
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
•f
I
I
I
I
4-
I
I
I
1
+
I
I
I



I
I
* I
I
+
1
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
* +
. I
I
I
* I
+
* * I
I
I
I
+
* I
I
* * * * I
* I
* +
* I
* * I
* 1
* * I
* +
* I
» * 1
***** I
* * I
* ***** +
**»*23* I
****222 I
2 1* *32**2 **2 * I
** * *2 432* **22 2*2*2**** » I
* * 2 32 * *****37*42* * +
»2* * * t> 22 2*2*32623634*2 22** * I
* 2* * * 22 2*2 ?*2322 *2 2*» »22*4****** *»*2 *** I
** * 2**2*2f-?33b243262***33*** 4* 2* ** *? *** 1
»332ba3444^_ . 24^ 2_65_5
-------
s: T T L ^  -1.: T '  "c

FILE    rJCFIL    (CREAT10'  CATf  = 06/?t/bC)
SUBFILE    YH2
           f  OF    (DC.fO  TOC
                   1.824C2   2.26756   2.71189
  7O Q "* *"* ~"i   •*•
 * •-: " u i- J   *
6.71EOC
6.14600   *
5 . 5 7 4 T C
5.00200
4.430CC
3.85600
3.286CO   *
                                                3.15583    3.59976
                                                                                     11:2:
                                                                      (ACROSS)  LGHUER
                                                                      4.04369   4
                                                                                                rci/ij/r,i
                                                                                            4.93156   ? . i 7 5 4 9   5.61=42
+
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
+
T
I
T
J.
I
I
I
I
I
4
I
I * *
J * * * *
I * *
I
I
I *
I *
+ * *
I ** *
J * * * *
I * * * *
T * * * *
«. * * *
J * * * * *
I * * * * * * *
J * *** ***
J * * * * *
+ ****** *
J *****
I * * * *
T * * * *
I » * * * ?*
+ * * * *
I * * *
1 *
I * *
I
•#• *
* 4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
4-
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
*
   2.11200






   1.573CO   »
             *
             1.602C6    2.C4599    2.46993   2.93366
                                                     3.77779   3.P2173   t.2
                                                                                      4.7P959    5.15352
                                                                                                             . 59716    6.041;

-------
(Ti
'T
.L
IF
iT
C
~>




5




1




1




3




2




2




1



1



0



0
L *\ f- L 0 T
b IOF
ILE Y
TERGKAP
.80000




.22100




.61200




.06300




.1B400




.90500




.32600




.71700



.16800



.58900



.C 1 000
SOFHLTE-CTRC,L"SLAT^ 1 1 : T c : i C ta/ll/»-l '""AGE
IL (CREATION CATL = 06/21/80)
R?
OF (DOWN) SI02 (ACROSS) LbHETER
1.82103 2.2£796 2.71189 3.15583 3.5Q97f 1.31269 1.18762 1.93156 5.3751C
•+• *
I
I
I
I *
4
I ** "
I
I
1 *
4 *
I *
I
1 *
I *
4
I *
I * * *
J ******
I * *
4 * * *
J * * * *
I *
I * *
I * * *
4 «
J * * * *
I * * * *
f * * * *
I * *
4 * * * * *
I **2******
j ******
j ** *2****
j * ********
4 **23**** ***** *
1
1 o
I * * * *2* 2 ** * * * 2 * *** **2*2
4 * * ** 3 3 2*2 *** 21 * 3 2** * ! *
1 ** . * 2* 2222**2* * 2 *22*2 *2* 2** * , * * *
I ** 2* 2 * 22*2* 2 2 *?»* **»»*»*. 6* 2
I ** * 2 3*«»*35*2 22 3 22* 1** * * 2 * *
4 *? * 2 *22 2**** *** 2** 2**2 *** *3*** * ' *
I *** 2 * * * * * *
I? » * 2 * * *
I * * * * *
4 * *
1
5.tl912
* 4
I
I
I
«I
4
I
I
I
I
* 4
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I
4
1
I
I
I
4
1
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
1
4
T
i
I
+
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
4
•-4----4 .
                1.60206   2.01599   2.18593   2.93566   3.37779   3.62173   1.265f6   1.7G°f<;    5.1^352   5.59716   6.01139





       Figure  23.   Relationship between log heterotroph concentrations  and silicate concentrations.

-------
00
     FILE   EIOFIL    1C RE. 4 T ION uATt  =  Ot/24/eC)
     SUBFILE    Y«2
     SCATTERGRAM  CF    (DOWM)  S04                                            (ACROSS)  LGHETEP
                       1.82403   2.26796    2.71189    3.155R3    3.T:997f    4,04369    4.4t7fc2    4.93156    5.27549    5.81942
F 2. 00030




75.380GC




68.760 CC




62.14000




55.52000




48.90COO




42.28000




35.66000




29.04000



22.420CC



15.30UC I
<»
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
+
I
I

I
4-
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I
+
I
I
I
I * *
* . 2*
I
I *
I
1
+
* +
1
* I
1
I
*
I
1
I
* * I
* +
I
* * I
* I
I
*
I
I
* * l
* I
* *
* * I
I
* I
* * I
* * t
* I
* * * I
* * I
* * * * J
* +
* * * I
* * * I
* * 2 ** »** I
**** ? ***** J
* **** ***** 2 * * * *

* 2» *? * ? *****3 C **2 * * I
* 2 2 2 * ** 2 8**3** * ** * I
* * * 2 * * 5* *?3*23*2* 2 * * * * I
f



** * ***3*22* **4*3 2 34* * * * * +


****** I
* •*•
                  1.60206    2.34599    2.4P993   2.^3366    3.37779    3.^2173    4.2bS66    4.7C9E9    5.1525J

-------
VO
F
ILE: BIOF
JL (CREATION DATE = Cfc/Pt/feC)

SUBFILE YR?
s





















































CATTERGRA1

7.790CO




7.19600




6.606CO




6. 014CC




5.42200




4.83000




4.23800




3.64600




3.0b400




2.46200




1.870 DC

OF (DOWN) DOC tACPOSS) LGhETfR
1.82403 2.?6796 2.71189 3.15583 3.59976 4.04369 4.4P762 4.93156 5.37549
4 *
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
1
I *
4
I
I
I »
I
4 *
I * *
I
I * *
1 * * *
4 * *
I *
I
I * * *
I
+ *
I * * **2 *
I *
I
I * 2
4 * **
J * * * *
J ** ***** *
J * * * * * *
1 *
4 * * *
I « *
I **
I 2 * * * *
1 ** *
4 *
I »
J * * * * *
I * * * * *
I *
4 * * * *
I * *
I * *
I * *
T *
4 •
1.60206 2.04599 2.46993 2.S33B6 3.37779 3.^2173 4.26566 4.739ir.« 5.15352 5.59'

5,81942
+
1
I
1
1
4
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
1
+
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I
*
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
I

Jtt: t . 0 4 1 0 9
      Figure  25.   Relationship  between  log heterotroph  concentrations and DOC concentrations.

-------
Figure  26.   Application of FC/FS  ratio  tests  to  1978 data.
 Stations with a fecal streptococcus concentration >^ 100/lOOml, 1978
                                                                                       tations with a fecal col i form/fecal streptococcus ratio  < 0.70,
                                                                                                                                                 1978
                                    0
          ©   ©   •
                  Lorain
                                                       Cuyahoga R
         N
                 ©
                                              Geneva-On-
                                               The-Lake      Ashtabula R
                                                    Cowles Cr
                                         Scale in miles

                                       0      5      10
                                                                                                                                                jhoga R
N
                                    Geneva-On
                                     The-Lake      Ashtabula R
                                         , ,Cowles C<

                                Wheeler Cr
                        R      Scale in miles

                             0510

-------
Figure  26.   Application  of  FC/FS ratio tests to  1978 data.



Stations with a fecal coliform/fecal streptococcus ratio between 4.0 and 0.70
   (4.0> FC/FS > 0.70), 1978
                                                                              Stations with a fecal coliform/fecal streptococcus ratio > 4.0,  1978
                                                        Euclid


                                       .©   *.   *     \Euclid Cr
                                             s
                                             \,
                                              Cleveland

                            —  >          ^
                       Rocky River 1 Lakewood
                                             Cuyahoga R
N
                                              Geneva-On-
                                               The-Lake       Ashtabula R

                                                    Cowles Cr
                           'Grand R      Scale in miles

                                       0      5      10
                                                                                                                                     Cuyalttga R
                                                                                      N
                                                                                                                           Geneva-On-
                                                                                                                            The-Lake       Ashtabula R

                                                                                                                                   owtes Cr

                                                                                                                       Wheeler Cr
                                                                                                        'Grand R      Scale in mites

                                                                                                                    0      5      10

-------
 Figure  27.    Application  of FC/FS ratio tests to 1979 data.
a.  Stations with a fecal streptococcus concentration  > 100/100ml, 1979
b.  Stations with a fecal coliform/fecal streptococcus ratio < 0.70, 1979
                                                        Cuyahoga R
            N
                                               Geneva-On-
                                                The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                     .Cowles Cr
                             'Grand R      Scale in miles
                                        0      5      10
                                                         Cuyahoga R
            N
                                               Geneva-On-
                                                The-Lake      Ashtabula R
                                                     .Cowles Cr
                                            Wheeler C<
                             'Grand R      Scale in miles
                                        0       5      10

-------
   Figure 27.   Application of  FC/FS  ratio tests to  1979 data.
c.  Stations with a fecal colifono/fecal streptococcus ratio between 4.0 and 8.70
       (4.0>PC/PS >0.70, 1979)
                                                                                     d.  Stations with a fecal coliform/fecal streptococcus ratio > 4.0, 1979
                                                          Cuyahoga R
             N
                                                 Geneva-On
                                                  The-Lake      Ashtabula R

                                                     f ,Cowles Cr

                                             Wheeler Cr
                              'Grand R       Scale in miles

                                          0      5      10
                                                                                                                                               Cuyahoga R
N
                                    Geneva-On
                                     The-Lake      Ashtabula R

                                         _, .Cowles Cr

                                 Wheeler Cr
                  /Grand R      Scale in miles

                             0       5      10

-------
   Figure  28.    Stations with  elevated fecal  coliform counts.
a. Stations with a fecal coliform concentration > 200/lOOml,  1978
                                                                   Stations with a  fecal coliform concentration > 200/lOOml, 1979
                                                            Cuy.idoga R
            N
                                                  Geneva-On-
                                                   The-lake      Ashtabula R
                                                        .Cowles Cr
'G'and R       Scale in miles
            0      r)      10


      ffi^  stations >^ 1000  fecal coliforms/lOOml

       ©  stations >  200 fecal coliforms/lOOml
                                                                                                          N
                                                                                                                                                          Cuyahoga R
                                                                                                                 Geneva-On
                                                                                                                  The-Lake      Ashtabula R
                                                                                                                      , ,Cowles Cr
                                                                                                             Wheeler Cr
                                                                                                                                    'Arcola Cr
                                                                                                                                    ^*
                                                                                                                            > Grand R      Scale in miles
                                                                                                                                                       10
                                                                                                                                   <5^  stations >_ 1000 fecal coliforms/lOOml

                                                                                                                                     stations >_ 200 fecal coliforms/lOOml

-------
  APPENDIX I
QUALITY CONTROL
      75

-------
                         APPENDIX I - QUALITY CONTROL
Ambient air quality

     The results of the ambient air quality test (Table 1 ) show that on 72$ of
the 60 sampling days, the bacterial count was <_ two organisms in  15  minutes,
which indicates  that  there  was  very  little  contamination  of the aerobic
heterotroph samples from airborne organisms in the laboratory.  The counts  on
the other days were between three and eight organisms, with one plate of fifty
due to water being dripped on the plate.
Sterility

     Tables 2 through 5 shows the results of the 1979  sterility   testing,   as
well as the conditions under which the tests were conducted.  The  best  results
were obtained  during  the  last  half  of Cruise 3 and all of Cruise 4, which
represent the effective standardization of the methods used for  this   quality
control procedure.

     The M-FC agar used for the fecal coliforms  is   somewhat  less  selective
than the  KF-Streptococcus agar used for the fecal streptococcus samples.   The
high counts on the aerobic heterotroph control plates in Cruise 1, as compared
to mostly zero counts for Cruises 3 and 4, clearly indicate the importance   of
frequent use  of  UV sterilization to prevent carryover contamination from  one
sample  to the next.


HC vs.  HA Millipore filters

     For the  1979 study,  fecal   coliforms  were  processed   on  Millipore   HC
filters, instead  of the Millipore HA filters used previously.  Sladek  and  his
colleagues  (1975) did a study  to  determine  the optimum membrane structure   for
enumerating   fecal  coliforms,   and  the  Millipore  HC   filter   meets  their
specifications.  The pores of  the HC filter are  funnel-shaped,  with  a  2.4um
surface opening   diameter tapering  to a  pore diameter of  0.7um, which  is fecal
coliform retentive.  A study of  the membrane recovery of  six   different  types
of membrane   filters  by Green,  et  al.  (1975)  supports  the findings  of  Sladek,
et al.  (1975) by showing Millipore  HC   filters   to   be   superior   to   Gelman,
 Johns-Manville,  Sartorius, Millipore HA  and Schleicher and Schuell filters.

      The 2.4um  surface opening of the Millipore  HC  filter seems to be  the  key
 characteristic  that  improves  the  recovery  of fecal  coliforms on these  membrane
 filters.   Sladek  and  his  co-workers  (1975)  theorized  that the larger surface
 openings of the  HC  filters  allow bacteria  to be  held  below the  level   of  the
 medium, thus   preventing   the   occurrence   of  a  hypertonic solution around the
 bacteria (which  would  result  in plasmolysis  and  death),  especially  at  the
 elevated  incubation  temperature  (44.5   degrees  G)  used for fecal  coliforms.
 The larger surface  opening  also  allows  an  increase  in the  flow  rate  through
 the membrane   and  an  increased  diffusion rate of the medium to  the membrane
 surface.   In this study the only disadvantage  associated  with the use  of  the
 Millipore  HC  filters was that  the plates could not  be successfully transported

                                        76

-------
before counting,  due to the resultant spreading and smearing of the colonies.

     Lin (1976) also found the Millipore HC filter to be superior   to  the  HA
filter for  enumeration  of fecal coliforms, and he extended his evaluation of
the two types of filters to include total coliforms  and  fecal  streptococci.
The HC  filters showed no appreciable increase over the HA filters  in recovery
for total  coliforms  and  fecal  streptococci; therefore,  the  Millipore  HC
filters were  used  in this study for only the fecal coliform enumeration, and
HA filters were used for  the  aerobic  heterotroph  and  fecal  streptococcus
analyses.
VERIFICATION TESTING
     The results of the fecal coliform and  fecal  streptococcus  verification
testing are  presented  in  Figures  1  through 4 and Tables 6  through  9.   The
stations chosen for verification were usually river mouth  or harbor   stations,
where the  likelihood  of  obtaining the twenty to twenty-five  colonies needed
for verification was greatest.  These also would be  most   likely  to   contain
false positive  organisms (both fecal coliforms and fecal  streptococci) due to
the substantial amounts of pollution present in these areas.

     In 1978, 164  fecal  coliform  colonies  were  tested  with  94.6$  being
positive for  fecal coliforms; of the 1016 colonies tested  in 1979,  85.2$ gave
positive results.  In 1979 the fecal coliform medium  (M-FC  agar) was made  up
without the  addition  of  rosolic acid, allowing the medium to be autoclaved,
and it is possible that this omission contributed to  the   much  lower  percent
verification in 1979, as the purpose of this agent is to  inhibit the growth of
non-coliforms.

     The percent of the organisms verified which  gave  positive  results  for
fecal streptococci  in  1978 was 11.2%, considerably  lower than that for fecal
coliforms (94.6$); in contrast, the percent verifications  for the  1979  fecal
coliform and  fecal  streptococcus  samples  were  almost   equal:    85.2$  for
coliforms and 85.7$ for streptococci).  Of the eight  samples   which did  not
verify 100$  in  1978 (Table 8), three had 0$ verification due  to the presence
of very small, poorly developed pink colonies which tested  negative  for  fecal
streptococci.  These  false  positive colonies appeared on plates for stations
57, 72 and 73, (bottom, surface and bottom  replicate  levels,  respectively),
from the  Vermilion, Cleveland West and Cleveland East areas (see Figure 1  for
station positions).  No further work was done to determine the  identity of the
small pink colonies, and the only factor all three occurrences  seemed to  have
in common was their presence at stations away from shore.   On the basis of the
verification tests  at  these  three  stations, these very small pink colonies
were not counted when they were encountered in other  samples.

     In 1979 two of the stations  verified  for  fecal  streptococci gave  0$
verification, but  unlike  the  1978  samples with 0$ verification,  these 1979
samples had colonies which appeared to be perfectly normal  fecal streptococcus
colonies.  The two stations where this occurred were 98S  (surface samples)   at
the mouth  of Euclid Creek and 106S at the mouth of the Grand River. There is
a substantial amount of pollution at the mouth of Euclid  Creek  at station  98,

                                       77

-------
which increases  the  chances of picking up false positive organisms for fecal
coliforms as well as for fecal streptococci.  However,  station  106  is  some
distance from  the  mouth  of  the  Grand  River,  making the above conjecture
unlikely for this station.
PSEUDOMONAS AEBUGINOSA DATA
     Samples for Pseudqmqnas aeruginosa were processed in 1978 for each of the
stations designated as "industrial"stations:  stations 65, 66,  84,  85,  86,
87, 88,  90, 91, 92, 132 and 133.  These stations were located in all sampling
areas where industrial discharges into the lake were present.  The Pseudomonas
data were not included in any of the data analysis for two major reasons:1)
The M-PA  agar  (standard Methods 1975) used for isolation and enumeration was
not selective   enough  to  allow  reliable   identification    of   Pseudomonas
aeruginosa  colonies  and  2) the number of Paeudomonas isolated (even assuming
that all of the Pseudonomas - like colonies were actualy  Ps.  aeruginosa,  was
too small to be significant for purposes of analysis.
                                        78

-------
Figure 1.

Stations verified for fecal coliforms - 1978
Figure 2.
Stations verified for fecal coliforms - 1979
                                                           Cuyahoga R
          N
                                                 Geneva-On-
                                                  The-Lake      Ashtabula H
                                                        owles Cr
                                            Wneeler Cr
                  Fairport'
                  Harbor (v^> Grand R       Scale in miles
                                                        10
                                                                                                                                                          Cuyahoga R
                                                                                                       N
                                                  Geneva-On-
                                                   The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                       . jCowles Cr

                                             Wheeler C'
                             'Grand R       Scale in miles

                                         0        5       10

-------
Figure 3.
Stations verified for fecal streptococci - 1978
Figure 4.
Stations verified for fecal streptococci - 1979
                                                           Cuyatioga R
          N
                                                 Qeneva-On
                                                  The-Lake       Ashtabula R
                                                      , ,Cowles Cr
                                             Wheeler Cr
                             >Grand R       Scale in miles
                                         0       5       10
                                                                                                        N
                                                                                                                                                           Cuyahog«j R
                                                  Geneva-On
                                                   The-Lake       Asht.ihula R
                                                      _^ .Ccwles C
                                             Wheeler C
                             'Grand R       Scale in miles
                                         0510

-------
Table 1.    1979 daily ambient air quality test results
Run/Area

1 LV
2 LV
3 LV
1 CW
2 CW
3 CW
1 CE
2 CE
3 CE
1 FP
2 FP
3 FP
1 AS
2 AS
3 AS

1 LV
2 LV
3 LV
1 CW
2 CW
3 CW
1 CE
2 CE
3 CE
1 FP
2 FP
3 FP
1 AS
2 AS
3 AS
Count/15 minutes
Cruise I
0
3
1
1
4
0
1
1
6
0
0
0
1
0
0
Cruise III
2
2
4
2
1
6
3
4
2
8
5
5
1
1
2
Run/Area Count/15 minutes
Cruise II
1 LV
2 LV
3 LV
1 CW
2 CW
3 CW
1 CE
2 CE
3 CE
1 FP
2 FP
3 FP
1 AS
2 AS
3 AS
Cruise IV
1 LV
2 LV
3 LV
1 CW
2 CW
3 CW
1 CE
2 CE
3 CE
1 FP
2 FP
3 FP
1 AS
2 AS
3 AS

1
0
1
1
0
0
2
3
0
50*
0.71**
3
0
0
2

1
5
4
2
0
2
0
2
3
1
1
1
2
0
2
 * water dripped on plate.
** length of test = 21 mins.
                                81

-------
Table 2      Sterility control - Cruise  I.
                                              1979.
Funnel #


1
2
3
Day /Area
























+UV


-t-UV



+UV












1 AS



2 AS



3 AS
1 FP



2 FP



3 FP
1 CE



2 CE



3CE


1 CW



2 CW



3 CW



1 LV



2 LV
3 LV
0
1
6
1
0
1
2
0
1
23
27
48
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
1
1
21
117
15
1
8
50
100
0
20
5
3
0
0
50
50
5
0
0
0
2
0
0
3
1
3
3
3
3
9
4
4
8
75
3
1
0
33
3
11
0
0
0
1
1
0
4
0
0
5
7
19
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
4
0
26
57
12
0
24
33
100
1
13
0
2
0
0
50
25
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
9
0
1
5
4
0
9
40
21
2
0
0
19
0
23
4
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
60
7
13
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
12
36
84
0
14
30
100
0
12
17
5
1
1
50
50
0
9
0
7
1
4
1
0
1
5
1
1
0
7
1
3
35
1
0
1
0
9
6
17
4
5
6
7
8
9 10 11
Colonies/Plate
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
7
14
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
3
0
17
27
40
1
6
100
100
0
3
0
3
0
1
23
25
0
1
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
1
3
1
7
40
3
0
1
0
6
2
18



1




0
3
12
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
23
108
51
1
100
100
100
0
10
0
1
0
1
7
12
0
1


0
1


7
50
50
30
0
14
7
50








0
57
14
31







0
15
47
17







1
1
5
25








1
6
3
4
6
0*
7
40
14 25
2 0
4 0
9 1
30 11
75 75
17 100
100 75








0
8
6
29







0
6
50
12







0
4
40
25








0
50
3
4
7
0*
1
15
3
0
2
2
19
75
100
TNTC








0
4
0
13







0
17
51
16







0
3
20
50








5
50
12
30
4
0*
2
40
0
0
1
2
3
TNTC**
TNTC
TNTC








12
25
327







0
14
39
7







4
5
20
50








5
50
12
30




3
TNTC
100
TNTC
            f 2°°C Wlth  aer°bio "eterotrophs.
            1  - 5  sterilized with UV light after approximately every  4  sa-nple  bottles.


                                                       82

-------
 Table   3.     Sterility control - Cruise  II.   1979.
1
Day /Area
1 AS 0
0
0
0
2 AS 0
1
1
1
3 AS 0
0
1
400
1 FP 0
0
0
0
2 FP 0
0
5
0
3 FP 1
0
0
0
1 CE 1
2
67
0
2 CE 0
1
2
1
3 CE 0
8
0
11
+UV 1 CW 1
0
37*
1
+UV 2 CW o
3
11*
0
+UV 3 CW 0
0
0
0
+UV 1 LV 0
0
1
0
+UV 2 LV 0
0
0
0
+UV 3 LV 0
0
3
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
400
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1*
0
2
45
1
0
10
1
0
0
TNTC**
59
10
1
0
1
0
0
0
100*
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
3
0
0
0
500
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1*
0
7
29
1
0
3
0
0
0
4
71
8
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
Funnel #
456 7 89
Colonies/plate
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
200
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
4
24
1
0
4
0
0
0
0
18
4
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0







00 0 00
25* 20* 0 10* 22*
10* 66* 3* 93 73
50 6 16* 30 50*
0
0
1

0
0
0
0
oo o oo
0 17* 2* 2* 29*
8* 1* 1* 1*
	 23* 25 4* 9*


36
0
1
13

1
00 0 00
TNTC 11 7 16 50
	 30 25 20 40
5 TNTC TNTC 100 30
0



0
3


00 0 01
22* 3* 02
40* TNTC 20* 3
7 	 	 1
0



oo o oo
0 100 20* 15* 20
200 30* 25* 150
	 100 4 1 30
0



10








0
3
6*
2








0
30*
5*
28*








0
40
12
50








0
0
25*
17*




0
30
100
19




11




















0
2*
1*
1*








0
13
6
100








0
0
34*
45*




0
21
6*
3




Incubation temperature - 20°C.
Medium - plate count agar,   Millipore HA filters.
** Too numerous to count.
 * Colonies around edge of filter.
 + Hydrosols 1-5 sterilized with  UV light after approximately every 4th sample bottle.


                                                          83

-------
Table 4.	Sterility controls — Cruj.se III.  1979.
1
Day /Area
+ 1 AS 0
0
1
0
2 AS 0
0
0
0
3 AS 0
0
0
0
1 FP 0
0
4*
0
2 FP 0
0
0
0
3 FP 0
0
0
0
1 CE 0
0
2
15
2 CE 2
0
1
1
3 CE 0
0
1
0
1 CW 1
0
16
3
2 CW 0
0
1
10
3 CW 1
116
2
5
1 LV 0
6
6
0
2 LV 0
0
0
0
3 LV 0
0
45
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
4
0
0
0
1
0
75*
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
3
1
7
1
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
10
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Funnel #
456 7 89
Colonies/plate
0
7 0
0
1
000 0 00
0 50* 24* 2 3 16
0 	 100 200 1 7
0 	 40* 100* 1 6
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
001 0 00
0 	 30 TNTC** 20* 30*
1 — 50 100* 6* 100
0 — TNTC TNTC* 200 50
2
0
0
0 0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0++ 0 00
0 	 2 2 00
0—0 0 00
o—o o oo
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
300 0 00
100 0 00
0 	 0 1 00
o — o o oo
0 0
0 0
0 0
2
10 11




0
2
18 0
4 5




















0
1 1
15 5
50 50*












0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0




0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0




  Incubation temperature - 20°C.
  Medium - plate count agar, Hillipore HA  filters except where otherwise  indicated.
  ** Too numerous to count.
  * Colonies around edge of filter.
  ++ Plates 6-11: H8 filters on M-FC agar incubated at 44.5°C.
  + Hydrosols 1 - 5 UV sterilized for all areas.

                                                        84

-------
Table 5
              Sterility controls — Cruise IV.   1979.
1
Day/Area
+UV I AS 0
0
0
0
2 AS 0
0
1
0
3 AS 0
0
1
0
1 FP 0
0
5
0
2 FP 0
0
1
0
3 FP 0
3
1
1 CE 0
12*
12*
17*
2 CE 0
8
0
7
3 CE 0
1
0
0
1 CW 0
0
5
12
2 CW 0
0
23
25
3 CW 1
1
0
0
1 LV 0
0
0
0
2 LV 0
0
1
0
3 LV 0
0
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
5
0
1
0
0
1
5
0
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
5
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
o
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
Funnel #
456 7
Colonies/plate
0 0
1
0
0 0
0 0
0
0
0
0 0 0++ 0
0 	 0 0
0—0 0
1—0 0
0 0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0
0
0 0
000 0
1 	 3 0
100 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
000 0
0 00
1 21
0 0 10 4
0 0
0 0
0
0
0 1
0
0
0
010 0
0 00
2 00
1 00
0 0
0 0
0
0
000 	
000 0
0 00
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
0
89 10 11








00 00
00 00
00 00
00 00








00 00
00 00
00 00








0000
0000
0001
1101








0000
0000
0000
0000





0000
0000
0 0




        Colonies around edge of plate
        Medium for plates 1-5Q- Plate count agar with Millipore HA filters
        Incubation temp. - 20 C
        Plates 6-11: Millipore HC filters on M-FC agar incubated at 44.5° C.
        Funnels 1-5 UV sterilized after approx. every 4 sample bottles for all areas.

                                                         85

-------
Table  6.
Verification of fecal coliform colonies, 1978.
Station
*LV 54 S
LV 63 B
LV 65 B
LV 68 S
CW 75 S
CW 79 S
*CW 80 B
*CE 85 B
CE 95 S
*CE 98 S
CE 102 B
FP 113 B
*AS 127 SR
AS 128 S
AS 129 B
*AS 135 B
Date
781010
781010
781010
781010
781013
781013
781013
781016
781016
781016
781016
781019
781022
781022
781022
781022
FC/100 ml
8700
37
120
130
200
74
34
7800
460
1370
69
400
28
120
18
18
# of colonies
subjected to ver.
15
10
10
10
10
9
15
8
8
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
% Verification
100
100
100
100
90
89
100
100
75
80
80
100
100
100
100
100
 *Fecal  streptococci  also  verified at this station.
                                         86

-------
 Table 7.
               Verification of 1979  fecal coliform colonies.
   Station
                     Date
                                       FC/100 ml
       # Colonies
Subjected to Verification
% Verification

LV 51 S
54 S
65 S
68 S
CW 70 S
75 S
79 S
81 S
CE 85 S
94 S
98 S
FP 103 S
105 S
108 S
113 S
AS 123 S
126 S
132 S
139 S

*+LV 52 S
+ 54 S
65 S
CW 75 S
+ 83 S
CE 85 S
98 S
FP 105 S
113 S
AS 126 S
132 S

LV 65 S
+ 68 S
+ CW 76 S
81 S
CE 85 S
94 S
FP 104 S
113 S
AS 126 S
132 S

LV 54 S
65 S
CW 75 S
89 S
CE 85 S
98 S
FP 113 S
+ 116 S
AS 126 S
132 S

790425



790422



790419


790416



790413




790724


790722

790719

790716




790831

790829

790825

7 9082 3

790819


791017

791015

791011

791007

791004

CRUISE I
67
720
960
19
14
320
3500
1900
34000
140
18
3200
740
1800
580
210
170
1800
24
CRUISE II
84
45
390
190
310
110
9.4
640
6.5
13
500
CRUISE III
600
14
80
5800
3900
12000
92
48
32
260
CRUISE IV
48
360
11000
130
1000
7000
4800
13
55
260

15
10
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20

5
17
19
20
20
20
20
20
22
16
24

25
4
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
25

24
25
25
22
20
21
19
13
25
25

67
80
40
90
80
95
95
90
90
95
85
95
100
100
80
90
90
75
70

100
100
89
80
100
95
20
100
54
94
92

92
100
96
92
88
100
84
88
56
100

83
84
92
91
85
95
95
23
100
88
*Offshore stations;  all others are nearshore.
+Not verified for FS.
                                                    87

-------
Table 8,
Verification of fecal streptococcus colonies, 1978.
Station
    Date
FS/100 ml
  # of colonies
subjected to ver.
                                                              % verification
*LV 54 S
LV 57 B
LV 62 S
CW 70 S
CW 72 S
*CW 80 B
CE 86 S
CE 100 B
*CE 85 S
CE 93 BR
*CE 98 S
FP 103 S
FP 104 S
FP 105 S
FP 108 S
FP 114 S
FP 121 S
FP 111 B
FP 114 B
*AS 127 SR
*AS 135 B
781010
781010
781010
781013
781013
781013
780905
780905
781016
781016
781016
780908
780908
780908
780908
780908
780908
781019
781019
781022
781022
28
451
155
5
TNTC
28
23
130
1000
TNTC
180
140
240
160
480
69
67
110
98
39
60
15
15
13
10
10
10
3
6
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
100
** 0
85
10
** 0
100
100
67
100
** 0
100
100
100
80
100
80
100
100
100
100
100
 ** Plate contained numerous,  small,  poorly-developed pink colonies.
  * Fecal coliforms also verified at  this station.
 TNTC too numerous to count.
                                        88

-------
Table 9.
             Verification  of 1979  fecal  streptococcus colonies.
Station

LV 51 S
54 S
65 S
68 S
CW 70 S
75 S
79 S
81 S
CE 85 S
94 S
98 S
FP 103 S
105 S
108 S
113 S
AS 123 S
126 S
132 S
139 S

+ LV 51 S
65 S
+*CW 73 SR
75 S
CE 85 S
98 S
FP 105 S
+ 106 S
113 S
AS 126 S
132 S

+ LV 54 S
65 S
+ CW 75 S
81 S
CE 85 S
94 S
FP 104 S
113 S
113 SR
AS 126 S
132 S

LV 54 S
65 S
CW 75 S
89 S
CE 85 S
98 S
FP 113 S
+ 118 S
AS 126 S
132 S
Date

790425



790422



790419


790416



790413




790724

790722

790719

790716


790713


790831

790829

790825

790823


790819


791017

791015

791011

791007

791004

FS/100 ml

2.1
88
150
8
8
180
680
1300
780
20
0
1800
340
74
250
79
71
3000
17

7
25
2.7
12
20
2.7
95
0
5
4
23

29
13
1900
290
290
500
31
11
4
27
25

4
24
150
17
91
440
1800
75
35
35
# Colonies
Subjected to Verification
CRUISE I
11
10
25
23
2
22
24
23
25
2
17
24
24
24
22
25
25
25
25
CRUISE II
18
25
23
12
20
8
19
6
3
7
23
CRUISE III
22
19
25
25
20
21
23
16
4
25
23
CRUISE IV
5
25
23
25
25
25
24
25
24
24
% Verification

9.1
80
100
34.8
100
86.4
100
100
100
100
0
100
54.2
91.7
100
92
96
100
92

33
96
4.4
100
100
38
95
0
100
86
96

100
95
100
100
100
100
100
94
100
100
100

100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
96
100
"Offshore stations;  all  others  are  nearshore.
+Not verified for FC.
                                                    89

-------