U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
WORKING PAPER SERIES
REPORT
ON
GREEN LAKE
KING COUNTY
WASHINGTON
EPA REGION X
WORKING PAPER No, 868
CORVALLIS ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY - CORVALLIS, OREGON
and
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING & SUPPORT LABORATORY - LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
-------
REPORT
ON
KING COUNTY
WASHINGTON
EPA REGION X
WORKING PAPER No, 868
WITH THE COOPERATION OF THE
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
AND THE
WASHINGTON NATIONAL GUARD
JULY, 1977
-------
REPORT ON GREEN LAKE
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
EPA REGION X
by
National Eutrophication Survey
Water and Land Quality Branch
Monitoring Operations Division
Environmental Monitoring & Support Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada
and
Special Studies Branch
Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory
Corvallis, Oregon
Working Paper No. 868
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
July 1977
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Foreword i i
List of Washington 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 10
VI. Appendices 11
-------
ii
FOREWORD
The National Eutrophicatlon Survey was Initiated 1n 1972 1n
response to an Administration commitment to Investigate the nation-
wide threat of accelerated eutrophlcatlon 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 nonpolnt source pollution abatement in lake water-
sheds.
ANALYTIC APPROACH
The mathematical and statistical procedures selected for the
Survey's eutrophlcatlon analysis are based on related concepts
that:
a. A generalized representation or model relating
sources, concentrations, and Impacts can be
constructed.
t
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 eutrophlcatlon 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 1s formatted to provide state
environmental agencies with specific Information for basin
planning [§303(e)], water quality criteria/standards review
[§303(cj], 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.
-------
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 Washington Department of
Ecology for professional involvement, to the Washington National
Guard for conducting the tributary sampling phase of the Survey,
and to those Washington wastewater treatment plant operators who
provided effluent samples and flow data.
Ms. Barbara Blau, Lake Restoration Program, and the staff
of the Washington Department of Ecology, Lake Restoration Program,
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 Howard S. McGee, Adjutant General of Washington,
and Project Officer Colonel Clinton C. Johnson, who directed the
volunteer efforts of the Washington National Guardsmen, are also
gratefully acknowledged for their assistance to the Survey.
-------
iv
LAKE NAME
NATIONAL EUTROPHICATION SURVEY
STUDY LAKES
STATE OF WASHINGTON
American Lake
Banks Lake
Chelan Lake
Diamond Lake
Green Lake
Keechelus Lake
Mayfield Lake
Medical Lake
Moses Lake
Ozette Lake
Sammamish Lake
Lake Whatcom
Lower Granite Reservoir
COUNTY
Pierce
Grant, Douglas
Chelan
Pend Oreille
King
Kittitas
Lewis
Spokane
Grant
Clallam
Ki ng
Whatcom
Garfield, Whatcom
-------
GREEN LAKE
Woodland Park
X Lake Sampling Site
Wash.
.—•"•
Map Location
-------
REPORT ON GREEN LAKE, WASHINGTON
STORET NO. 5305
I. INTRODUCTION
Green Lake was included in the National Eutrophication Survey
(NES) as a water body of special interest to the Washington State
Department of Ecology. Tributaries and nutrient sources were not
sampled, and this report relates only to lake sampling data.
II. CONCLUSIONS
A. Trophic Condition:*
Survey data indicate that Green Lake is eutrophic, i.e.,.
nutrient rich and highly productive. Whether such nutrient
enrichment is to be considered beneficial or deleterious is
determined by its actual or potential impact upon designated
beneficial water uses of each lake. Chlorophyll a_ values in
the lake ranged from 0.4 yg/1 in April to 5.5 yg/1 in July,
with a mean of 3.0 vig/1. Potential for primary productivity
as measured by algal assay control yields was high. Of the
13 Washington lakes sampled in 1975, 3 had higher median total
phosphorus values (0.027 mg/1), 10 had higher median inorganic
nitrogen values (0.050 mg/1) and 5 had higher median ortho-
phosphorus levels (0.009 mg/1) than Green Lake.
*See Appendix C.
-------
Survey limnologists reported some emergent and floating macro-
phytes during the July sampling, and submerged weeds were noted
during October. Ketelle and Uttormark (1971) report that although
Green Lake is naturally eutrophic, the addition of low nutrient
city water to the lake has resulted in improved water quality and
fewer nuisance blue-green algal blooms.
B. Rate-Limiting Nutrient:
The algal assay results indicate that Green Lake was limited
by available phosphorus during the spring (04/01/75) and autumn
(10/29/75) samplings. Lake data suggest nitrogen limitation in
the spring and summer and phosphorus limitation in the fall.
-------
III. LAKE CHARACTERISTICS
A. Lake Morphometry:*
2
1. Surface area: 1.04 km .
2. Mean depth: 3.8 meters.
3. Maximum depth: 8.8 meters.
4. Volume: 3.952 x 106 m3.
B. Precipitation:
1. Year of sampling: 109.6 cm.
2. Mean annual: 90.6 cm.
*0tt, Charles R., I960.
-------
IV. LAKE WATER QUALITY SUMMARY
Green Lake was sampled three times during the open-water season
of 1975 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 v). During each visit, depth-integrated samples were
collected from each station for chlorophyll ^analysis and phyto-
plankton identification and enumeration. During the first and last
visits, 18.9-liter depth-integrated samples were composited for algal
assays. Maximum depths sampled were 5.5 meters at Station 01, and
3.4 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 maximum
depth for each site. Results of the phytoplankton counts and
chlorophyll a_ determinations are included in III-B. Results of the
limiting nutrient study are presented in III-C.
-------
-/ 1/7", )
•r-rsicAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
( 7/13/75 )
( 10/29/75 )
PABA«ETFP
TEMOEU4TIJEE: u^.fi Cr,r,
n , — 1 . = v n E P T '-i 3
UAXDFPTH-*0 ?
DIS?">LVF.O oxYiirf. C'G/! >
n.-i.5 M DE&TH 3
WAX .JFPTWto ?
CONDUCTIVITY (ijMHOC)
O.-l .5 M OEPTH 3
"AX OEPTH"* 7
O.-l .S M OF.PTH 3
MA" DF.PTH»» ?
TOTAL ALKALINITY <"G/L>
O.-l .^ M Lifi-Tri 3
MAX DEPTH** 2
TOTAL P (MG/L)
O.-l .S M DEPTH 3
*A* OF.°TH»* ?.
DISSOLVED OwTHO P (wr,/D
O.-l.- M DEPTH 3
MAX DFPTH»» ?
N02+NO3 ("fi/l )
fl.-l.^ '" TE^TH 3
"A< OFPTH»« 7
AMMONIA (MG/L)
O.-l. 5 M DEPTH 3
MA* OF.PTH** ?
KJELCAHL f-i (MCi/Ll
0.- 1 .S M nE^TH 3
••'•AX OFPTrt«» 2
S'*'' = '
*.'-•- 9. A -<.6
'-).4- 9.6 9.S
11.6- 1?." 11. fc,
! 1 .?- 11 -11 1 1 .t
49.- 50. 50.
52.- «-4. 5S.
7.3- 7.6 7.4
7.3- 7.4 7.4
? 1 . - 2 4 . ? 4 ,
!«.- 24. ?1 .
0.027-0.050 O.mj
^.033-0.05^. n.f<4^
n. 004-n. 009 0 . n n b
o.nos-p.o05 o.oob
(>.0?0-0. 03(i y.n?n
0.0?0-0.0?0 !'.r; °U
0. 0^0-0. 05fl 0 . O^U
0.030-0.03'! 0 . 1 3 0
0.500-1.50!) 0.5mj
2.300-0.510 0.40 (i
( -EU-^)
'1.0- I . 5
'.1- J.4
o.O- l.S
?.l- 3.4
n.O- 1.5
?.l- 3.4
0.0- 1.5
2.1- 3.4
" .0- 1.5
2.1- 3.4
0.0- 1.5
? . ! - 3.4
0.0- 1 .S
? . 1 - 3.4
n.O- 1.5
2.1- 3.4
1.0- 1.5
2.1- 3.4
o.n- i .^
'.1- 3.4
^AN
3 1 * . 2 -
c 1H.3-
3 4.4-
2 rt .H-
3 21 .-
2 20.-
3 7.8-
2 7.7-
3 ??.-
? 22.-
3 O.Ol^-O
2 0.019-0
? 0.013-0
2 0.014-0
3 0.020-0
2 n. 020-0
3 0.030-0
2 0.020-0
3 0. 3 00-0
2 O.?00-0
s*»»
19.2
IB. 4
9.0
9.0
35.
25.
8.1
7.8
26.
23.
.026
.020
.016
.016
.020
.020
.030
.040
.900
.500
= ?
MEDIAN
19.2
1*.3
3.8
3.9
33.
23.
8.0
7.8
23.
23.
0.020
0.019
0.016
0.015
0.020
0.020
0.030
0.030
0.600
0.350
MAX
OEPTH
WANGF;
(METE
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
o.o-
2.1-
o.o-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
HS)
1.5
5.5
1.5
5.5
1.5
5.5
1.5
5.5
1.5
S.5
1.5
5.5
1.5
5.5
1.5
5.5
1.5
5.5
1.5
5.5
N*
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
?
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
RANGE
12.2- 12.3
12.2- 12.3
9.8- 10.4
9.8- 9.8
31.- 34.
31.- 32.
7.1- 7.2
7.1- 7.1
19.- 21.
20.- 22.
0.023-0.036
0.028-0.070
0.005-0.010
0.002-0.009
0.060-0.060
0.060-0.060
0.0«0-0.080
0.070-0.090
0.200-0.200
0.200-0.300
= 2
MEDIAN
12.2
12.2
10.0
9.8
32.
32.
7.1
7.1
20.
21.
0.026
0.049
0.006
0.005
0.060
0.060
0.080
0.080
0.200
0.250
MAX
DEPTH
PANGE
(METEPS)
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
0.0-
2.1-
1.5
3.4
1.5
3.4
1.5
3.4
1.5
3.4
1.5
3.4
1.5
3.4
1.5
3.4
1.5
3.4
1.5
3.4
1.5
3.4
SeCCHI DI=C
1.?-
2.7- 2.7 2.7
2.4- 2.4 2.4
MAXIMUM Ot-T~: .lA-'^LKO AT EACH
s = ,MO. OF StTtS CAMPLED ON THI1^ HATE
-------
B. Biological Characteristics:
1. Phytoplankton -
Sampling
Date
04/01/75
07/18/75
10/29/75
Dominant
Genera
1. Asterionella
2. Aphanizomenon
3. Fragilaria
4. Flagellate
5. Centric Diatom
Other genera
Total
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Microcystis
Oscillatoria
Cyclotella
Chroomonas
Closterium
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Other genera
Total
Asterionella
Chrysophytan
Anabaena
Fragilaria
Aphanizomenon
Other genera
Total
Algal
Units
per ml
3,960
2,487
1,301
287
57
192
8,284
341
341
189
114
38
37_
1,060
676
204
157
157
94
158
1,446
-------
2. Chlorophyll a_ -
Sampling Station Chlorophyll a_
Date Number (yg/1)
04/01/75 01 0.6
02 0.4
07/18/75 01 2.0
02 5.5
10/29/75 01 4.5
02 4.9
-------
C. Limiting Nutrient Study:
1. Autoclaved, filtered, and nutrient spiked
a. 04/01/75
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.05 P
0.05 P + 1.0 N
1.00 N
b. 10/29/75
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
0.009
0.059
0.059
0.009
Spike (mg/1)
Control
0.05 P.
0.05 P + 1.0 N
1.00 N
Ortho P
Cone, (mg/1)
0.010
0.060
0.060
0.010
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.044
0.044
1.044
1.044
Inorganic N
Cone, (mg/1)
0.140
0.140
1.140
1.140
Maximum yield
(mg/1-dry wt.)
0.8
3.6
20.6
0.8
Maximum yield
(mg/1-dry wt.)
2.9
6.1
30.5
3.5
-------
2. Discussion -
The control yields of the assay alga, Selenastrum capri-
cornutum. indicate that the potential for primary productivity
in Green Lake was moderate during spring sampling (04/01/75)
and high at the time of autumn sample collection (10/29/75).
In both assays, a significant increase in yield over that of
the control occurred when phosphorus was added alone and in
combination with nitrogen, indicating phosphorus limitation.
The addition of nitrogen alone did not produce a significant
growth increase beyond that of the control.
The mean inorganic nitrogen to orthophosphorus (N/P)
ratios in the lake data were approximately 11/1, 3/1, and 24/1
in the spring, summer, and fall, respectively, suggesting
primary limitation by nitrogen in the spring and summer, and
phosphorus limitation in the fall (a mean N/P ratio of 14/1
or greater generally reflects phosphorus limitation).
-------
10
V. LITERATURE REVIEWED
Ketelle, Martha J. and Paul D. Uttormark. 1971. Problem Lakes in
the United States. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Project
#16010EHR. University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.
Ott, Charles R. 1960. A Study of the Environmental Factors
Affecting the Eutrophication of Green Lake. MS Thesis, Civil
Engineering Department, University of Washington, Seattle,
Washington.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1975. National Eutrophi-
cation Survey Methods 1973-1976. Working Paper No. 175.
National Environmental Research Center, Las Vegas, Nevada, and
Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory, Con/all is,
Oregon.
-------
11
VI. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
CONVERSION FACTORS
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS
Hectares x 2.471 = acres
Kilometers x 0.6214 = miles
Meters x 3.281 = feet
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
-------
STORE! RETRIEVAL OATF 76/11/16
NATL FUTROPHIC4TIO^ SURVEY
EPA-LAS VEGAS
530501
47 45 5?.0 122 20 15.0 3
GREEN LAKE
53033 WASHINGTON
0015 FEET DEPTH CL«SS 00
75/04/01 10 45
10 45
10 45 0011
75/07/18 08 35 0000
08 35 0005
na 35 001«
75/10/29 12 35 0000
12 35 0007
00010
DATE TI»*E OEPT^1
FPOM OF
TO DAY FFET CFNT
9.6
9.5
9.4
19.2
19.2
18.4
12.3
12.3
1 1 .6
11.6
1 1.8
9.0
4.4
9.0
9.8
9.8
00300 00077 00094
oo TRANSP CNDUC
cECCHI FIELD
INCHES MICRO!
108
96
14
VY
IHO
49
50
64
35
33
25
32
32
00400
PM
su
7.60
7.40
7.35
8.10
R.OO
7.70
7.20
7.15
00410
T ALK
CAC03
M&/L
24
24
24
23
22
22
19
20
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.050
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.040
0.080
0.090
00^25
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.500
0.500
0.500
0.600
0.300
0.200
0.200
0.200
006TO
N02&N03
N-TOTAL
MG/l
0.020K
0.030
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.020K
0.060
0.060
00671
PHOS-OIS
O«TMO
MG/L P
0.005
0.009
0.005
0.016J
0.016J
0.014J
0.005
0.002
DATE TIME DEPTi-'
FRO" OF
TO DAY FF.ET
75/04/01 10 45 0000
10 45 0005
10 45 0011
75/07/18 08 35 0000
08 35 000^
PR 35 001P
75/10/29 12 35 0000
12 35 0007
0665
S-TOT
/L P
0.027
0.050
0.056
0.019
0.0?0
0.019
0.023
0.028
32217
CHLRPHYL
A
DG/L
0.6
2.0
4.5
00031
INCDT LT
REMNING
PERCENT
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
J VALUE KNOWN TO BE ESTIMATED
-------
STORET ^RETRIEVAL D«TE
NATL FUTROPrtlCATION S'IRVEY
E.PA-LAS VEGAS
DATE
FPOK
TO
75/04/01
75/07/18
75/10/29
TIME DEPTH
OF
OAY FEET
11 15 0000
11 15 0007
08 20 0000
06 20 0007
12 15 0000
12 15 0005
12 15 0011
00010
WATEP
TFMP
CENT
9.6
9.6
18.?
18.3
12.2
12.?
1?.2
530502
47 40 25.0 122 20 29.0 3
GREEN LAKE
53033 WASHINGTON
131191
11EPALES
00300
DO
"G/L
12.0
11.2
8.8
«.8
10.0
10.4
9.8
00077
THANSP
SECCHI
INCHED
54
108
96
00094
CNOUCTVY
FIELD
MICPOMHO
50
52
21
20
34
31
31
noil
00400
PH
su
7.35
7.40
7.80
7.85
7.15
7.10
7.10
211
i FEET OE»TH CLASS
00410
T ALK
CAC03
MG/L
21
18
26
23
20
21
22
00610
NH3-N
TOTAL
MG/L
0.030
0.030
0.030
0.020
0.080
0.080
0.070
1202
On
00625
TOT KJEL
N
MG/L
0.500
0.300
0.900
0.500
0.200
0.200
0.300
006^0 f>0671
N02&NO3 PHOS-niS
N-TOTAL ORTHO
MG/L MG/L P
0.020K
0.020K
0.020
0.020K
0.060
0.060
0.060
0.004
0.005
0.013J
0.016J
0.010
0.006
0.009
DATE
TO
OF
DAY
75/04/01 11 15 0000
11
75/07/18 08 20 0000
08 20 0007
75/10/29 12 15 0000
12 15
12 l^
EPTH
EET
0000
0007
ooon
0007
ooon
0005
0011
00665
«>HOS~TOT
MG/L P
0.033
0.033
0.026
0.020
0.036
0.026
0.070
32217
CHLftPHYL
A
UG/L
0.4
5.5
4.9
00031
INCDT LT
RFMNING
PERCENT
K VALUE KNOWN TO BE LESS
THAN INDICATED
J VALUE KNOWN TO BE ESTIMATED
-------
APPENDIX C
PARAMETRIC RANKINGS OF LAKES
SAMPLED BY NES IN 1975
STATE OF WASHINGTON
Mean or median values for six of the key parameters evaluated
in establishing the trophic conditions of Washington lakes sampled
are presented to allow direct comparison of the ranking, by parameter,
of each lake relative to the others. Median total phosphorus, median
inorganic nitrogen and median dissolved orthophosphorus levels are
expressed in mg/1. Chlorophyll a_ values are expressed in yg/1.
To maintain consistent rank order with the preceding parameters,
the mean Secchi disc depth, in inches, is subtracted from 500.
Similarly, minimum dissolved oxygen values are subtracted from 15
to create table entries.
-------
LAKE DATA TO BE USED IN RANKINGS
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
5301 AMERICAN LAKE
5302 BANKS LAKE
5303 CHELAN LAKE
5304 DIAMOND LAKE
5305 GREEN LAKE
5306 KEECHELUS LAKE
5307 MAYFIELO LAKE
5308 MEDICAL LAKE
5309 MOSES LAKE
5310 07ETTE LAKE
5311 SAMMAMISH LAKE
5312 WHATCOM LAKE
5313 LOWER GRANITE RESERVOIR
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
0.027
0.021
0.005
0.014
0.027
0.007
0.014
0.275
0.115
0.010
0.015
0.009
0.033 .
MEDIAN
INORG N
0.105
0.040
0.070
0.060
0.050
0.040
0.100
0.225
0.150
0.110
0.210
0.320
0.150
500-
MEAN SEC
343.000
364.533
111.900
303.667
415.000
280.250
402.000
401.714
463.600
403.333
374.000
288.000
435.500
MEAN
CHLORA
4.822
7.373 ,
0.905
14.537
2.983
1.400
4.250
16.425
29.060
1.225
7.290
3.422
•4.875
15-
MIN DO
15.000
10.800
6.400
14.200
10.600
9.200
10.600
15.000
14.600
7.200
14.600
10.800
7.200
MEDIA
DISS ORTH
0.007
0.007
0.003
0.010
0.009
0.00?
0.007
0.166
0.038
0.009
0.006
0.009
0.022
-------
PERCENT OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES (NUMBER OF LAKES WITH HIGHER VALUES)
LAKE
CODE LAKE NAME
5301 AMERICAN LAKE .
5302 BANKS LAKE
5303 CHELAN LAKE
5304 DIAMOND LAKE
5305 ,GREFN LAKE
5306 KEECHELUS LAKE
5307 MAYFIELD LAKE
5308 MEDICAL LAKE
5309 MOSES LAKE
5310 07ETTE LAKE
5311 SAMMAMISH LAKE
5312 WHATCOM LAKE
5313 LOWER GRANITE RESERVOIR
MEDIAN
TOTAL P
29 (
42 <
100 <
6? (
29 1
92 1
62 1
0 1
8 1
75 I
50 i
83
17
: 3)
5)
; 12)
: 7)
! 3)
[ 11)
! 7)
: 0)
[ 1)
I 9)
( 6)
( 10)
( 2)
MEDIAN
INORG N
50 <
100 <
67 1
75 1
83 1
92 1
58 I
8 1
29 I
42 i
17
0
29
: 6)
: 12)
: 8)
I 9)
I 10)
: ID
1 7)
! 1)
! 3)
( 5)
( 2)
( 0)
( 3)
500-
MEAN SEC
67 (
58 I
100 (
75 1
17 1
92 1
33 I
42 1
0 1
25 I
50 i
83
8
I 8)
; 7>
: 12)
: 9)
! 2)
[ 11)
1 4)
! 5)
I 0)
[ 3)
( 6)
( 10)
( 1)
MEAN
CHLORA
50 (
25 (
100 <
17 <
75 (
83 1
58 1
8 1
0 1
92 I
33 i
67
42
I 6)
: 3)
: 12)
: 2)
[ 9)
: 10)
[ 7)
[ 1)
I 0)
[ 11)
t 4)
( 8)
( 5)
15-
MIN DO
4 1
46 (
100 (
33 (
62 1
75 1
62 1
4 (
21 1
87 1
21 i
46 <
87
1 ,0)
; 5)
! 12)
! 4)
! 7)
1 9)
t 7)
[ 0)
E 2)
[ 10)
t 2)
( 5)
( 10)
MEDIAN
DISS OPTHO
58 1
71 1
92 1
25 1
46 1
100 I
71 1
0 I
8 I
33 i
S3
46
17
: 7)
i ft)
! 11)
I 3)
t 5)
t 12)
[ -P)
! 0)
I 1)
t 4)
( 10)
( 5)
( 2)
------- |