U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
               NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
                        WORKING PAPER SERIES
                                             REPORT
                                              ON
                                           GRAND LAKE
                                           CHICOT COUNTY
                                            ARKANSAS
                                           EPA REGION VI
                                        WORKING PAPER No, 488
     CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
                                 and
    ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
T?TG.P.O. 699-440

-------
                             REPORT
                               ON
                           GRAND LAKE
                          CHICOT COLM1Y
                            ARKANSAS
                          EPA REGION VI
                      WORKING PAPER No,
   WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF POLLUTION
       CONTROL AND ECOLOGY
             AND THE
     ARKANSAS NATIONAL GUARD
          JANUARY, 1977

-------
                               CONTENTS

                                                       Page
Foreword                                                ii
List of Arkansas Study Lakes                            iv
Lake and Drainage Area Map                               v
Sections
  I. Introduction                                        1
 II. Conclusions                                         1
III. Lake Characteristics                                3
 IV. Lake Water Quality Summary                          4
  V. Literature Reviewed                                 9
 VI. Appendices                                         10

-------
                                  ii


                               FOREWORD
     The National Eutrophicatlon Survey was Initiated  in  1972  in
response to an Administration commitment to investigate the  nation-
wide threat of accelerated eutrophication to freshwater lakes  and
reservoirs.

OBJECTIVES

     The Survey was designed to develop, in conjunction with state
environmental agencies, information on nutrient sources,  concen-
trations, and impact on selected freshwater lakes as a basis for
formulating comprehensive and coordinated national, regional,  and
state management practices relating to point source discharge
reduction and nonpoint source pollution abatement in lake water-
sheds.

ANALYTIC APPROACH

     The mathematical and statistical procedures selected for  the
Survey's eutrophication analysis are based on related  concepts
that:

     a.   A generalized representation or model relating
          sources, concentrations, and impacts can be
          constructed.

     b.   By applying measurements of relevant parameters
          associated with lake degradation, the generalized
          model can be transformed into an operational
          representation of a lake, its drainage basin, and
          related nutrients.

     c.   With such a transformation, an assessment of the
          potential for eutrophication control can be  made.

LAKE ANALYSIS

     In this report, the first stage of evaluation of  lake and
watershed data collected from the study lake and its drainage
basin is documented.  The report is formatted to provide  state
environmental agencies with specific information for basin
 flanninq [§303(e)], water quality criteria/standards review
 §303(c)], clean lakes [§314(a,bj], and water quality  monitoring
[§106 and §305(b)] activities mandated by the Federal  Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.

-------
                                 iii
    Beyond the single lake analysis, broader based correlations
between nutrient concentrations (and loading) and trophic condition
are being made to advance the rationale and data base for refine-
ment of nutrient water quality criteria for the Nation's freshwater
lakes.  Likewise, multivariate evaluations for the relationships
between land use, nutrient export, and trophic condition, by lake
class or use, are being developed to assist in the formulation
of planning guidelines and policies by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency and to augment plans implementation by the states.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

    The staff of the National Eutrophication Survey (Office of
Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)
expresses sincere appreciation to the Arkansas Department of Pollution
Control and Ecology for professional involvement, to the Arkansas
National Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the
Survey, and to those Arkansas wastewater treatment plant operators
who provided effluent samples and flow data.

    The staff of the Water Division of the Arkansas Department
of Pollution Control and Ecology provided invaluable lake documentation
and counsel during the Survey, reviewed the preliminary reports
and provided critiques most useful in the preparation of this Working
Paper series.

    Major General Thomas C. Armstrong, the Adjutant General of
Arkansas, and Project Officer Colonel Lavaun M. James, who directed
the volunteer efforts of the Arkansas National Guardsmen, are also
gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.

-------
                                      IV
                       NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
                                 STUDY LAKES
                              STATE OF ARKANSAS
LAKE NAME
Beaver
Blackfish
Blue Mountain
Bull Shoals

Catherine
Chicot
DeGray
Erli ng
Grand
Greer's Ferry
Hamilton
Millwood

Nimrod
Norfork
Ouachita
Table Rock
     COUNTY
Benton, Carroll, Washington
Crittenden, St.  Francis
Logan, Yell
Baxter, Boone, Marion
(Taney, Ozark in MO)
Garland, Hot Spring
Chicot
Clark, Hot Spring
Lafayette
Chicot
Van Buren, Cleburne
Garland
Hempstead, Howard, Little River,
Sevier
Perry, Yell
Baxter, Fulton (Ozark in MO)
Garland, Montgomery
Boone, Carroll (Barry,
Taney in MO)

-------
GRAND  LAKE
X Lake Sampling Site
             !Km

-------
                    REPORT ON GRAND LAKE,  ARKANSAS
                            STORE! NO.  0509

I.   INTRODUCTION
          Grand Lake was included in the National  Eutrophication
     Survey (NES) as a water body of special  interest to the
     Arkansas Department of Pollution Control  and  Ecology.   Tribu-
     taries and nutrient sources were not sampled, and this report
     relates only to the data obtained from lake sampling.
II.  CONCLUSIONS
     A.   Trophic Condition:*
               Grand Lake is considered eutrophic, i.e., nutrient
          rich and highly productive, on the basis of Survey data
          and field observations.  Whether such nutrient enrich-
          ment is to be considered beneficial  or deleterious is
          determined by its actual or potential impact upon desig-
          nated beneficial water uses of the lake.
               Chlorophyll a^ levels ranged from 30.2 yg/1  in the
          spring to 103.0 yg/1  in the summer with  a mean of 62.9  yg/1.
          Mean Seechi disc visibility was  51.6 cm  (20 inches).  Of
          the 16 Arkansas lakes sampled in 1974, 2 had greater median
          total phosphorus levels, 15 had  greater  median inorganic
          nitrogen values, and  2 had greater median orthophosphorus
          levels than Grand Lake.
*See Appendix C

-------
          Survey limnologists reported an algal  bloom during autumn
     sampling and many submerged, emergent and floating aquatic mac-
     rophytes along the shoreline areas during all  three sampling
     seasons.
B.    Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
          Algal assay results indicate that Grand Lake is limited
     by available nitrogen.  Spikes with nitrogen alone or nitrogen
     and phosphorus simultaneously resulted in increased assay
     yields.  The addition of orthophosphorus alone did not produce
     a growth response.  The ratios of total inorganic nitrogen to
     orthophosphorus (N/P) in the lake data further substantiate
     nitrogen limitation.

-------
III.  LAKE CHARACTERISTICS
     A.    Lake Morphometry:*
                                     f\
               Surface area:   5.67 km .
          2.   Mean depth:   2.1  meters.
          3.   Maximum depth:   4.0 meters.
          4.   Volume:  12.088 x 106 m3.
     B.    Precipitation:
          1.   Year of sampling:  161.3  cm.
          2.   Mean annual:   160.3 cm.
*Woomer, 1974

-------
IV.   LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
          Grand Lake was sampled three times during the open-water
     season of 1974 by means of a pontoon-equipped Huey helicopter.
     Each time, samples for physical and chemical  parameters were
     collected from two stations on the lake and from a number of
     depths at each station (see map, page i).   During each visit,
     depth-integrated samples were collected from each station for
     chlorophyll a^ analysis and phytoplankton identification and
     enumeration.  During the first visit, 18.9-liter depth-integrated
     samples were composited for algal assays.   Maximum depths sampled
     were 2.4 meters at Station 01 and 1.5 meters at Station 02.  For
     a more detailed explanation of NES methods, see NES Working Paper
     No. 175.
          The results obtained are presented in full in Appendix B and
     are summarized in III-A for waters at the  surface and at the maxi-
     mum depth for each site.  Results of the phytoplankton counts and
     chlorophyll ^determinations are included  in III-B.  Results of
     the limiting nutrient study are presented  in III-C.

-------
      LAK.C.
       CODE
A..   PH/SICAL AND CHEMICAL CHAKACTEH I ST ICS
             (DtG CENT
O.-l.-i M 'l
DISSOLVED OXYGEN  (MG/'_>
0.-1.5 M uEPTH
MAX DEPTH**
CONDUCTIVITY  
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH**

DISSOLVED U^TriO P  (MG/L)
O.-l.S M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH**

N02+N03  
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX OEPTH**

AMMONIA  (MG/L)
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH**

KjELOAHL N  (MG/L)
0.-1.5 M DEPTH
MAX DEPTH**
( 3/26/74 )
Soo* - 2
N* JANGE MEDIAN
6
i
4
a
6
2
2
4
a
4
'LI
4
a
4
4
a
4
2
12.2- 12.3
12.2- 12.2
10.8- 11.0
lO.fci- 11.0
158.- 158.
158.- 158.
8.3- 8.5
8.3- 8.5
96.- 98.
96.- 97.
0.069-0.101
0.069-0.101
0.027-0.030
0.028-0.030
0.0 10-0.040
0.030-0.030
0.040-0.070
0.040-0.070
0.900-1 .400
0.900-1 .000
12. a
12.2
10.9
10.9
158.
158.
8.5
8.4
97.
97.
0.098
O.OH5
0.029
0.029
0.030
0.030
0.045
O.OSb
1.000
0.95U
(METE
0.0-
1.5-
0.6-
1.5-
0.0-
l.b-
0.0-
1.5-
n.o-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
( 6/ 4/74
hS) N* P.ANGE -"EuIAN
l.b
1.5
l.b
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
l.b
l.b
l.b
1.5
l.b
1.5
l.b
1.5
1.5
l.b
4
2
1
0
4
4
a
4
a
4
2
4
a
4
2
4
4
2
26.0- 27.2
26.0- 26. b
13.0- 13.0
ooooo-ooooo
236.- 247.
243.- 247.
H.2- 9.1
8.2- 9.0
«9.- 95.
91.- 9b.
0. 073-0. 120
O.OS1-0.088
0.018-0.025
0.019-0.025
0.070-0. 140
0.070-0.080
0.050-0.090
0.050-0.090
1 . 100-1 .800
1.200-1.300
26.6
26.3
13.0
ooooo
245.
8.9
8.6
91.
0.084
0.084
0.020
0.022
0.080
0.075
0.060
0.070
1.250
1.250
MAX
DEPTH
P.ANGE
(METEP.S) N*
0.0-
1.2-
1.5
1.5
0.0- 0.0
oooo-ooooo
0.0-
1.2-
0.0-
1.2-
0.0-
1.2-
0.0-
1.2-
0.0-
1.2-
0.0-
1.2-
0.0-
1.2-
0.0-
1.2-
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
4
2
4
2
2
1
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
2
4
2
( 10/16/74 ]
S«»o = 2
*aNGE MEDIAN
le. 6- 19.1
18.5- 19.1
b.6- 7.9
6.6- 7.6
Ibl.- 161.
161.- 161.
7.h- 7.9
7,-y- 7.<»
94.- 97.
95.- 95.
0.120-0.136
0.120-0.134
0.014-0.021
0.014-0.015
O.U20-0.020
0.020-0.020
0.040-0.080
0.030-0.040
1.200-3.000
1.100-1. POO
18. 1
18.8
7.3
7.1
161.
161.
7.9
7.9
95.
95.
0.125
0.127
0.015
0.014
0.020
0.020
0.040
0.035
1.400
1.150
i
MAX
DEPTH
RANGE
(METEOS)
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
0.0-
1.5-
1.5
2.4
1.5
2.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.4
1.5
2.4
1.5
2.4
1.5
2.4
1.5
1.5
2.4
1.5
2.4
SECCHI  DISC
                            0.6-   0.6
                                         0.6
                                                                0.5-  0.6
                           0.5
2    0.4-  0.5
0.4
                            N = NO. OF SAMPLED
                             MAXIMUM DEPTH SAMPLED AT EACn SITE
                            » 5 = NO. OF SITES SAMPLED ON THIS DATE

-------
B.   Biological Characteristics:

     1.   Phytoplankton -
          Sampling
          Date

          03/26/74
          06/04/74
          10/16/74
Dominant
Genera

1.   Nitzschia
2.   Stephanodiscus
3.   Flagellates
4.   Chlamydomonas
5.   Melosira

    Other genera

         Total

1.   Dactylococcopsis
2.   Stephanodiscus
3.   Merismopedia
4.   Microcystis
5.   Lyngbya

    Other genera

         Total

1.   Dactylococcopsis
2.   Oscillatoria
3.   Centric Diatom
4.   Microcystis
5.   Merismopedia

    Other genera

         Total
  Algal
  Units
  per ml

  4,635
                                                            3
                                                            2,
                                                            2,
                                                            1,
    813
    467
    093
    794
  8,298

 23,100

 52,408
 23,206
 16,165
 11,472
 10,429

 39,112

152,792

  3,523
  3,030
  2,924
  2,537
  2,008

  3.171

 17,193

-------
2.    Chlorophyll  a -
Sampling
Date
03/26/74

06/04/74

10/16/74

Station
Number
01
02
01
02
01
02
Chlorophyll a
(yg/D
30.2
36.3
103.0
103.0
55.7
49.0
Limiting Nutrient Study:

1.    Autoclaved,  filtered,  and nutrient spiked -  03/26/74

                    Ortho P        Inorganic N    Maximum Yield
     Spike (mg/1)   Cone, (mg/1)    Cone,  (mg/1)   (mg/l-dry wt.)

     Control           0.020          0.039             3.8
     0.05 P           0.070          0.039             3.3
     0.05 P + 1.0 N   0.070          1.039            29.3
     1.00 N           0.020          1.039            13.2

-------
                               8
2.   Discussion -
          The control yield of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
     cornutum, indicates that the potential  for primary production
     was high on Grand Lake during the spring sampling period.
     The lake was nitrogen limited at that time as indicated by
     the increased yield of the test alga in response to an addi-
     tion of nitrogen.  Spikes with nitrogen and phosphorus simul-
     taneously resulted in maximum yield.  Spikes with ortho-
     phosphorus alone did not produce a response significantly
     beyond the control yield.
          The autumn algal assay results are not considered reliable
     because of a significant change in the nutrient levels between
     the time the sample was collected and the assay was begun.
          The mean total inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus
     ratios (N/P) in the lake data were 3/1  in the spring, 8/1
     in the summer and 4/1 in the fall, suggesting primary limi-
     tation by nitrogen (an N/P ratio of 14/1 or greater generally
     reflects phosphorus limitation).

-------
V.   LITERATURE REVIEWED

     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1975.  National  Eutro-
       phication Survey Methods 1973-1976.  Working Paper No.  175.
       National Environmental Research Center, Las Vegas, Nevada,  and
       Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory,  Corvallis,
       Oregon.

     Woomer, Neil.  1974.   Personal Communication (morphometry data of
       Arkansas water bodies).   Department of Pollution Control  and
       Ecology, Little Rock, Arkansas.

-------
                                 10





VI.  APPENDICES
                       APPENDIX  A



                   CONVERSION FACTORS

-------
                CONVERSION FACTORS





Hectares x 2.471 = acres



Kilometers x 0.6214 = miles



Meters x 3.281 = feet


                         -4
Cubic meters x 8.107 x 10   = acre/feet



Square kilometers x 0.3861 - square miles



Cubic meters/sec x 35.315 -- cubic feet/sec



Centimeters x 0.3937 - inches



Kilograms x 2.205 = pounds



Kilograms/square kilometer x 5.711 ~ Ibs/square mile

-------
        APPENDIX B



PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL DATA

-------
 vi'C-AS
                                                                     0 ? 0 '-i 0 1
                                                                    33 03  OS. (I  Ovl  11  SO.O
                                                                    Ob
                                                                    1 Jt^-'.LcS
                                                                    3
                                                                                               .1202
                                                                                           000-1
                                                                                                        Uti-1
uaTE
FPOv
TO
74/03/26


74/Oh/04

74/10/16



DATE
FOO«
TO
7«/03/26

74/06/04


74/10/16


TI"
UF
£ ut.-T'-


.JAY FEET
10
10
10
10
10
10
1"
10

'£.->
?:-•
?.*>
30
30
2S
p-;
^ ~

TI'iE ..
Or
DAY
10
1 0
10
10
10
10
10
10

1
25
?S
30
30
30
25
25
25
OOO.i
0 0 0 -x
on,,-,
(ior,o
0 0 0 T
ooon
noo=i
n o o «

JtPTH h

-PET
0000
ooo--
oouo
0 0 0 *
ooos
0000
OOOT
OOOM
• ,.- MO
..art -v
Tc ."•*-
c -r N r
1?.2
i2.x
1C.?
c!7.x
26.0
!«.«
In. 6
lo.b
OObfcS
-n()S-TOT

MG/L P
0 .100
(i . Oh ^
(l.l Truivs^ CMlXiCTVY f.n 1 iL". NM3-N TOT K-JtL NO?KN03 "^"$-015
-tCCr.1 FJ
Mfa/l. I.vC-itS M]
24
lO.o
1 .') . c
16

7.6 IB
7.0
7.6
32217 00031
CHLtipH>L iMCijr Lf
A tiE^NlNG
UG/L ^E«CE'MT
30.2

1 0 3 . 0
1.0

SS.7
1.0

[ELu C4C03 TOTAL N N-TOTSL O^THO
[C'r")fHO S'.i MG/L MG/L ~iG/L Mb/L «i 0.050 1.400 0.040 0.030
1-iB
15H 8.3S 97 0.040 0.900 0.030 0.028
23o H.60 89 0.060 1.800 0.140 0.021
247 8.20 95 0.090 l.x.OO 0.080 0.025
7. Mb 94 0.080 3.000 0.020 0.014
7.77 97 0.040 1.200 0.020K 0.021
7.f<4 V-} 0.030 1.100 0.020 O.Olb












K VALUE  KNOWN TO BE LESS THAN   	
          INDICATED

-------
NATL
           [EviL j-Ti
                                                                   Ob0902
                                                                  33 04 45.0 091 1? tO. 0
DATE
FfiO'-1
TO
74/03/2*
74/0^/04
74/10/l(f
OF
10
10
I"
11
11
10
10
45
45
00
00
50
50
FEnT
000"
000?
0 0 0 S
OOOit
0004
0000
00!) •?
                        13.3
                        1^.3
                        1<^
                        26.7
                        a^.s
                        19.1
                                                                                       211120*
                                                                                      0007 FEET
                                                                                                 L»t"Tr-
3 i"J 1 u
^ rtK
I*--'*'
c?.vr
0 0 .1 0 0
1)0

M j/L
y is u / /
T K A N S ^
StCCHl
IfvCnclS
000-'''
CNGUCTVY
FIELD
MIOO*HO
00400
Pn

Si'
JO* 10
T ALK
CAC03
Mu/L
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
00h2b
VOT KJtL
N
HG/L
00630
N02f-N03
N-TOTAL
MG/L
00671
PHOS-OIS
O^Ti-iO
MG/L P
                                   11.u
                                   ll.i
                                   13.u

                                   7.6
158
15B
                                               14
                                                                 «.S5
                                                                             96
                                                                                    0.040
                                                                                              1.000
                                                                                                        0.030
                                                                                                                  0.037
15H
241
243
161
161
ft. 50
9.10
9.05
7.95
7.67
96
90
91
94
95
0.070
0.060
0.050
0.040
0.040
1.000
1.100
1.300
1.600
1 .200
0.030
o.oeo
0.070
0.020
0.030
0.030
0.016
0.019
0.017
0.014
                      OOfobfe     32217
  DATE   TIME DEPTH PHOS-TOT  ChLRPHYL
  FRO«    OF                     A
   TO    DAY  FEET   »tj/L P     UG/L

74/03/26 10 45 OOun    0.097      36.3
         10 45 0005    0.101
74/06/04 11 00 0000    0.073     103.0
         11 00 0003
         11 00 0004    0.081
74/10/1P 10 50 0000    0.1?9      49.0
         10 50 0003
         10 50 0005    0.120
                                          00031
                                        INCOT LT
                                             1.0
                                             1.0

-------
         APPENDIX C

PARAMETRIC RANKINGS OF LAKES
   SAMPLED BY NES IN 1974

     STATE OF ARKANSAS

-------
L A * F C> A T A  TO  a. t USED IN 3 A <•," [ M3 >

LAK>i
COOii  LA•_ •<  L i < t

0502  HLAC
0.12,
1.42.
O.nb*
'''."IS
0.129
0. 162
0.119
0.154
0.101
0.024
0.040
0.039
0.015
0.115
0.022
0.012
M t 0 I A N
0.331
1.470
0.160
0.360
0. ISO
0.450
0.130
0. 120
0.090
0.130
(1.120
0.160
0.320
0.155
0.350
0.140
500-
* E A N >?£C
Mb. 667
"96. 1 2b
4-*4.000
343.969
451.667
486.000
419.050
454.667
47Q.667
426.111
466.77ft
469.000
356.321
389. 144
410.776
370.875
MEAN
J • *"* ^ i
19.77b
6.9S3
3.995
14.042
13.722
12.300
13.3K9
62.867
10.669
14.967
15.033
3.441
4.34*
9.103
3.762
15-
MIN oo
14.910
12.000
14.600
15.000
11 .HOO
14.HOO
15.000
14.600
8.400
14.4QO
9.800
B.800
15.000
15.000
15.000
15.000
-EOI
0.006
0.0^0
o.oio
C.004
0.006
0.0*9
0.004
0.020
0.021
0.006
0.00«
O.OOh
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.004

-------
  OF LAKES *ITH
                              VALUES  (NUM«F~ QK
                                              S wITh HIGME>
CODE




05H1




050?




OS03




0504




050?




0506




0507




0508




050"




0510




0511




0512




0513
0515




0516
LAKE NAME



3EAi/E- LAKE




8LACKFISM LA"E



HLUE MOUNTAIN LA*!-




BULL SHOALS LAKE



LAKE CATHERINE



LAKE CHICOT



DEG«AY R£SEnv/OIR



LAKE ERLING



Gi-JAND LAKE



LAKE HAMILTON



MILLWOOD LAKE




NIMPOO LAKE



NOPKOLK LAKE




LAKE OUACH1TA



TABLE ROCK LAKE




GREEK'S LAKE
TOTAL H>
6^
n
20
QO
.7
7
73
27
n
51
33
40
BO
40
63
100
( 9)
( 0)
( 3)
( 13)
( 7)
( 1 )
( 11)
( 4)
( 2)
( 8)
( 5)
( 6)
( 12)
( 13)
( 9)
( IS)
MEDIAN
27
0
47
13
40
7
77
90
100
77
90
53
13
60
20
67
< 4)
( 0)
( 7)
< 2)
( 6)
( 1)
( 11)
( 13)
( 15)
( 11)
( 13)
( 8)
( 5)
( 9)
( 3)
( 10)
500-
*EAN SEC
07
0
13
100
47
7
60
40
20
53
33
27
93
80
73
87
( 10)
( Oi
( 2)
( IB,
( 7)
( 1 )
( 9)
( 6)
( 3)
( 8)
( 5)
( 4)
( 14)
( 1?)
( 11)
( 13)
MEAN
CHLOi-!A
87
7
«7
80
27
33
47
40
0
53
20
13
100
73
60
93
( 13)
( 1 >
( 10)
( 12)
( 4)
( 5)
( 7)
( 6)
( 0)
( 8)
( 3)
( 2)
( 15)
( 11)
( 9)
( 14)
15-
MJN DO
40
73
57
17
80
47
17
57
100
67
87
93
17
17
17
17
( 6)
( 11)
( 8)
( 0)
( 12)
( 7)
( 0)
( 8)
( 15)
( 10)
( 13)
( 14)
( 0)
( 0)
( 0)
( 0)
MEDIAN
DISb 0UTHQ
oJ (
0 (
27 (
93 (
63 (
7 (
93 (
20 (
13 (
63 (
33 (
47 (
80 (
63 (
40 (
93 <
«)
0)
4)
13)
ft)
1)
13)
3)
?)
«>
5)
7)
12)
fl>
M
13)

-------