EFFECTS OF EXHAUST FROM TWO-CYCLE OUTBOARD ENGINES
RENSSELAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
PREPARED FOR
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER
JULY 1974
-------
^ TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Pleat nod Itutmcttoiu on the reverse before complet*"*>
i. REPORT NO.
EPA-670/2-74-063
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
2.
EFFECTS OF EXHAUST FROM'I^CYCLE OUTBOARD ENGINES
3.
PB 233 567
5. R
Issuing Date
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHORISI
William W. Shuster, Lenore Clesceri,
Shigeru Kobayashi, and William Perrotte
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND AOORESS
Division of Bio-Environmental Engineering
.tensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Troy, New York 12181
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1BB038
11. CONTRACT/GWWWNO.
15020 HKQ
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
National Environmental Research Center
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
A combined laboratory and field study has been made to determine the extent of
pollution arising from the operation of two-cycle outboard engines in an ollgotrophic/
mesotrophic lake. The fate of the exhaust products discharged to a lake environment
has been studied. Three bays having different boat usage were compared.
Attempts have been made to examine the quantities of exhaust products found in
the water column, the water surface, and 1n the bottom sediments. The role of such
mechanisms as microbial decomposition, evaporation, and adsorption has been studied.
Results of these studies have shown very low levels of hydrocarbons, other than from
atural sources, in sediments and the water column. Somewhat greater quantities
were found in surface films. The microbiological studies and evaporative studies
Indicate that these mechanisms play a significant role in the dispersion of engine
exhaust products.
The relatively low levels of exhaust products found appear to be related to
both purification mechanisms and to low levels of boating stress. Such indicators
as surface film concentrations and threshold odor numbers follow boating usage
patterns rather closely 1n the bays studied.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATl Field/Group
*Exhaust emissions, *Hydrocarbons,
Limnology, *0utboard engines, Evaporation,
Adsorption
Surface films, Lake
George
13B
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
UNCLASSIFIED
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
UNCLASSIFIED
EPA Form 2220-1 (1-73)
305
-------
REVIEW NOTICE
The National Environmental Research Center -
Cincinnati has reviewed this report and approved
its publication. Approval does not signify that
the contents necessarily reflect the views and
policies of the U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency, nor does mention of trade names or com-
mercial products constitute endorsement or recom-
mendation for use.
ii
-------
FOREWORD
Man and his environment must be protected from the adverse
effects of pesticides, radiation, noise and other forms of
pollution, and the unwise management of solid waste. Efforts
to protect the environment require a focus that recognizes the
interplay between the components of our physical environment --
air, water, and land. The National Environmental Research
Centers provide this multidisciplinary focus through programs
engaged in
o studies on the effects of environmental
contaminants on man and the biosphere, and
o a search for ways to prevent contamination
and to recycle valuable resources.
Research studies on effective waste management of trans-
portation and recreational sources have involved the development
of technology for the economic treatment of wastewaters (including
bilge and ballast discharges) from watercraft. Emphasis of
investigations have been on treatment effectiveness, operation
and maintenance requirements, safety aspects, and overall costs.
A. W. Breidenbach, Ph.D.
Director
National Environmental
Research Center, Cincinnati
ill
-------
CONTENTS
Section
IV
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
XII
XIII
XIV
XV
XVI
Summary and Conclusions
Recommendations
Introduction
Water Quality Measurements Including Hydrocarbon
Analyses
Microbiological Studies
Effect of Outboard Engine Exhausts on
Phytoplankton
A Study of the Macro-Benthic Invertebrates in
Three Embayments of Lake George, New York
Adsorption of Exhaust Products on Bottom
Sediments
Tank Tests for Collecting Exhaust Products
Threshold Odor Number Tests
Evaporation Studies
Study of Currents
Statistical Analysis of Data
Acknowledgements
References
Appendices
Page No.
1
i u
67
101
171
185
187
207
232
241
272
273
280
Preceding page Wank
-------
FIGURES
. Page No.
1 Outline Map of Lake George Showing the Three Bays
Under Investigation 7
2 Sketch of Dunham Bay Showing Location of Sampling
Stations . 8
3 Sketch of Echo Bay Showing Location of Sampling
Stations 9
4 Sketch of Smith Bay Showing Location of Sampling
Stations 11
5 Surface Film Sampler 16
6 Surface Film Levels of Hydrocarbons in Dunham
Bay, Stations 1 and 2 34
7 Surface Film Levels of Hydrocarbons in Dunham
Bay, Station 3 35
8 Surface Film Levels of Hydrocarbons in Echo Bay 3fa
9 Surface Film Levels of Hydrocarbons in Smith Bay 37
10 Metabolite Toxicity Test 49
11 Sediment Storage Study - 24 hours 52
12 Sediment Storage Study - 48 hours 53
13 Sediment Storage Study - 216 hours 54
14 Sediment Storage Study - 336 hours 55
15 Endogenous Respiration - Dunham Bay, Station 4 56
16 Substrate Respiration - Dunham Bay, Station 4 57
17 Endogenous Respiration - Comparative Study '•>'<:
18 Endogenous Respiration - Comparative Study VJ
19 Endogenous Respiration - Comparative Study bO
20 Heterotrophic Potential - Water 63
vi
-------
I3age No.
21 Heterotrophic Potential - Sediment 64
22 Heterotrophic Potential - Sediment 65
14
23 Effect of Crankcase Drainage on C Uptake by
Indigenous Algae - Dunham Bay - 7/27/72 89
14
24 Effect of Oil-Gas Mixture on C Uptake by Indigenous
Algae - Echo Bay - 9/14/72 90
14
25 Effect of Oil-Gas Mixture on C Uptake by Indigenous
Algae - Dunham Bay - 9/14/72 91
26 Growth Curves for Microcystis aeruginosa 96
27 Growth Curves for Anabaena flos-aquae 97
28 Growth Curves for Selanastrum Capricornutum 98
29 Comparison of Average Number of Taxa and Average Number
of Organisms per Dredge Haul for Each Station 120
30 Percent Composition of Dominant Orders of Macro-Benthos
in Smith Bay 130
31 Percent Composition of Dominant Orders of Macro-Benthos
in Echo Bay 131
32 Percent Composition of Dominant Orders of Macro-Benthos
in Dunham Bay 132
33 Populations of Polypedilium in Three Bays (Feb.-May) 134
34 Populations of Polypedilium in Three Bays (June-July) 135
35 Populations of Polypedilium in Three Bays (Aug.-Sept.) 136
36 Populations of Procladius in Three Bays (Feb.-May) 137
37 Populations of Procladius in Three Bays (June-July) 138
38 Peculations of Procladius in Three Bays (Aug.-Sept.) 139
39 Populations of Hyalella in Three Bays (Feb.-May) 140
40 Populations of Hyalella in Three Bays (June-July) 141
41 Populations of Hyalella in Three Bays (Aug.-Sept.) 142
vii
-------
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
Populations of Caenis in Three Bays (Feb. -May)
Populations of Caenis in Three Bays (June-July)
Populations of Amnicola in Three Bays (Feb. -May)
Populations of Amnicola in Three Bays (June-July)
Populations of Amnicola in Three Bays (Aug. -Sept.)
24 Hour TLcn for Gammarus fasciatus
48 Hour TLcn for Gammaruis fasciatus
24 Hour TLcn for Amnicola limnosa
48 Hour TLrrt for Amnicola limnosa
Jar Test Apparatus
Soil Sampling Apparatus
Analytical Procedure
Exhaust Products Adsorbed in Sediments vs Amount
of Products on Water Surface
Gas Chromatogram of Sample 4A
Gas Chromatogram of Sample 7A
Relative Amounts of N-Alkanes in Various Natural
Products
Threshold Odor Number - Dunham Bay, Station No. 1
Threshold Odor Number - Dunham Bay, Station No. 3
Threshold Odor Number - Echo Bay, Station No. 1
Threshold Odor Number - Echo Bay, Station No. 2
Threshold Odor Number - Smith Bay, Station No. 1
Threshold Odor Number - Smith Bay, Station No. 2
Threshold Odor Number - Smith Bay Tap Water
Evaporation Test Apparatus
Page No.
143
144
145
146
147
159
160
161
162
173
174
175
178
179
180
184
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
208
viii
-------
Page No.
66 Cumulative Percent Evaporation - 5°C, 15°C, 25°C
Gasoline 217
67 Cumulative Percent Evaporation - 10°C, 20°C, 30°C
Gasoline 218
68 Cumulative Percent Evaporation - 5°C, 15°C, 25°C
Exhaust Products 219
59 Cumulative Percent Evaporation - 10°C, 20°C, 30°C
Exhaust Products 220
70 Cumulative Percent Evaporation - 5°C, 15°C, 25°C
Gasoline Plus Oil 221
71 Cumulative Percent Evaporation - 10°C, 20°C, 30°C
Gasoline Plus Oil 222
72 Cumulative Percent Evaporation - Straight Oil 223
73 Cumulative Evaporative Flux - 5°C, 15°C, 25°C
Gasoline 224
74 Cumulative Evaporative Flux - 10°C, 20°C, 30°C
Gasoline 225
75 Cumulative Evaporative Flux - 5°C, 15°C, 25°C
Exhaust Products 226
76 Cumulative Evaporative Flux - 10°C, 20°C, 30°C
Exhaust Products 227
77 Cumulative Evaporative .Flux - 5°C, 15°C, 25°C
Gasoline Plus Oil 228
78 Cumulative Evaporative Flux - 10°C, 20°C, 30°C
Gasoline Plus Oil 229
79 Cumulative Evaporative Flux - Straight Oil 230
80 Sketch of Smith Bay with Sighting Points 236
81 Sketch of Echo Bay with Sighting Points 237
82 Sketch of Dunham Bay with Sighting Points 238
83 Current Indicator 240
84 Log(Phytoplankton) vs Column Temperature for Echo
Bay, Stations 2 and 1 244
ix
-------
Page No.
85 Log(Phytoplankton) vs Column Temperature for
Dunham Bay, Stations 3 and 2 245
86 Log(Phytoplankton) vs Julian Date for Echo Bay,
Station 2, Model 1 251
87 Log(Phytoplankton) vs Julian Date for Echo Bay,
Station 1, Model 1 252
88 Log(Phytoplankton) vs Temperature for Echo Bay,
Stations 2 and 1, Model 1 253
89 Log(Phytoplankton) vs Dissolved Oxygen for Echo
Bay, Station 1, Model 1 254
90 Log(Phytoplankton) vs Julian Date for Echo Bay,
Station 2, Model 2 258
91 Log(Phytoplankton) vs Julian Date for Echo Bay,
Station 1, Model 2 259
92 Log(Phytoplankton) vs Surface Temperature for
Echo Bay, Station 2, Model 2 260
93 Log(Phytoplankton) vs Surface Temperature for
Echo Bay, Station 1, Model 2 261
94 Log(Phytoplankton) vs Dissolved Oxygen(Surface)
for Echo Bay, Stations 2 and 1, Model 2 262
95 LogCColumn Microorganisms) vs Julian Date for Echo
Bay, Station 2, Model 3 267
96 LogCColumn Microorganisms) vs Julian Date for Echo
Bay, Station 1, Model 3 268
-------
TABLES
Page No.
1 Boat Usage on Lake George 12
2 Water Quality Data - Dunham Bay, Station 3 19
3 Water Quality Data - Dunham Bay, Station 2 21
'4 Water Quality Data - Dunham Bay, Station 4 23
5 Water Quality Data - Echo Bay, Station 1 25
6 Water Quality Data - Echo Bay, Station 2 27
7 Water Quality Data - Smith Bay, Station 1 29
8 Water Quality Data - Smith Bay, Station 2 30
9 Recovery Runs 31
10 Cell Concentration in Water Column U-l
11 Cell Concentration in Surface Water 4M-
12 Cell Concentration in Culture Flasks 46
13 Microliters Oxygen Uptake 61
14- Predominant Algal Genera - Dunham and Echo
Bays 5/18/72 74
15 Predominant Algal Genera - Dunham and Echo
Bays 6/12/72 75
16 Predominant Algal Genera - Dunham and Echo
Bays 6/19/72 76
17 Predominant Algal Genera - Dunham and Echo
Bays 6/26/72 77
18 Predominant Algal Genera - Dunham and Echo
Bays 6/30/72 78
19 Predominant Algal Genera - Dunham, Echo and
Smith Bays 7/3/72 79
20 Predominant Algal Genera - Dunham and Echo
Bays 7/6/72 80
xi
-------
Page No.
21 Predominant Algal Genera - Dunham and Echo
Bays 7/10/72 81
22 Predominant Algal Genera - Dunham, Echo and
Smith Bays 7/24/72 82
23 Predominant Algal Genera - Dunham, Echo and
Smith Bays 8/15/72 83
24 Predominant Algal Genera - Dunham and Echo
Bays 9/4/72 84
25 Predominant Algal Genera - Dunham, Echo and
Smith Bays 9/18/72 85
26 Growth Rates - Selanastrum capricornutum 93
27 Growth Rates - Microcystis aeruginosa 94
28 Growth Rates - Anabaena flos-aquae 95
29 Physical-Chemical Data, Mud-Water Interface, February 105
30 Physical-Chemical Data, Mud-Water Interface, March 105
31 Physical-Chemical Data, Mud-Water Interface, May 106
32 Physical-Chemical Data, Mud-Water Interface, June (early) 106
33 Physical-Chemical Data, Mud-Water Interface, June (late) 107
34 Physical-Chemical Data, Mud-Water Interface, July 107
35 Physical-Chemical Data, Mud-Water Interface, August 108
36 Physical-Chemical Data, Mud-Water Interface, September 108
37 Estimated Substrate Compositions 110
38 Average Dredge Penetration 110
39 List of Aquatic Plants 111
40 List of Benthic Fauna Identified from Each Bay 112
41 Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders,
February 122
xii
-------
Page No.
•42 Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders,
March 123
43 Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders,
May 124
44 Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders,
June (early) 125
45 Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders,
June Clate) 126
46 Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders,
July 127
47 Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders,
August 128
48 Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders,
September 129
49 Diversity Index (d) Values 148
50 Bioassay Data
a Gammarus fasciatus - Run 1, 24- hours 150
b Gammarus fasciatus - Run 2, 24 hours 150
c Gammarus fasciatus - Run 3, 24 hours 151
d Gammarus fasciatus - Run 4, 24 hours 151
e Gammarus fasciatus - Run 5, 24 hours 152
f Gammarus fasciatus - Run 6, 24 hours 152
g Gammarus fasciatus - Run 7, 24 hours 153
h Gammarus fasciatus - Run 1, 48 hours 153
i Gammarus fasciatus - Run 2, 48 hours 154
j Gammarus fasciatus - Run 3, 48 hours 154
k Gammarus fasciatus - Run 4, 48 hours 155
1 Amnicola limnosa - Run 1, 24 hours 155
xiii
-------
Page No.
m Amnicola limnosa - Run 2, 24 hours 155
n Amnicola limnosa - Run 3, 24 hours 155-
o Amnicola limnosa - Run 1, 48 hours 157
p Amnicola limnosa - Run 2, 48 hours 157
q Amnicola limnosa - Run 3, 48 hours
51 Comparison of Pertinent Parameters for the Stations
Studied 167
52 Summary of Adsorption Results 177
53 Normal Alkanes Identified in Sediment Extracts 181
54 Five Largest Peaks Detected in Sediment Extracts 182
55 Tank Tests 186
56 Threshold Odor Numbers for Outboard Motors Run in a
Controlled Environment - Evinrude 190
57 Threshold Odor Number for Outboard Motors Run in a
Controlled Environment - Johnson 192
58 Threshold Odor Numbers from March through July 1972 194
59 Evaporation Studies - Gasoline 209
60 Evaporation Studies - Exhaust Products 212
61 Evaporation Studies - Gasoline Plus Oil 214
62 Evaporation Studies - Oil 216
63 Current Studies - Smith Bay 233
64 Current Studies - Echo Bay 234
65 :' Current Studies - Dunham Bay 235
66 Relation Between Phytoplankton, Column Microorganisms,
Column Dissolved Oxygen, Column Temperature and Hydro-
carbon Level
a Over-all Means and Standard Deviations of Variable:; 242
xiv
-------
Tage Mo.
b Means and Standard Deviations of Log (Phytoplankton) 243
c Means and Standard Deviations of Hydrocarbon Level ' 243
a Means and Standard Deviations of Column Micro-
organisms 246
e Means and Standard Deviations of Column Temperature 246
f Means and Standard Deviations of Dissolved Oxygen 246
g Partial Correlation After Adjusting for Concomitant
Variables 246
h Partial Correlation After Adjusting for Temperature 247
i Partial Correlation After Adjusting for Dissolved
Oxygen 248
j Summary of Results 248
67 Relation Between Phytoplankton, Surface Microorganisms,
Surface Dissolved Oxygen, Surface Temperature and
Hydrocarbon Level
a Over-all Means and Standard Deviations of Variables 255
b Means and Standard Deviations for Log (Phytoplankton) 256
c Means and Standard Deviations for Hydrocarbon Level 256
d Means and Standard Deviations of Surface Micro-
organisms 256
e Means and Standard Deviations of Surface Temperature 256
f Means and Standard Deviations of Surface Dissolved
Oxygen 257
g Summary of Results 257
68 Relation Between Column Microorganisms, Hydrocarbon
Level and Column Temperature
a Over-all Means and Standard Deviations of Variables 263
b Means and Standard Deviations of Hydrocarbon Level 264
xv
-------
Page No.
c Means and Standard Deviations of Temperature . 264
d Means and Standard Deviations of Dissolved Oxygen 264
2
e Means and Standard Deviations of (Temperature) 264
f Means and Standard Deviations of Log (Column
Microorganisms) 265
g Summary of Results 265
69 Relation Between Surface Microorganisms, Hydrocarbon
Level, Surface Dissolved Oxygen and Surface Temperature
a Over-all Means and Standard Deviations of Variables 266
b Means and Standard Deviations of Hydrocarbon Level 269
c Means and Standard Deviations of Temperature "269
d Means and Standard Deviations of Dissolved Oxygen 269
e Means and Standard Deviations of Log (Surface
Microorganisms) 269
2
f Means and Standard Deviations of (Temperature) 270
g Summary of Results 270
70 Relation Between Odor, Hydrocarbon Level, Column
Microorganisms and Surface Microorganisms 271
xvl
-------
SECTION I - SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
1. The infrared spectrometry method used for hydrocarbon measurement
preferentially determines non-polar material, but cannot distin-
guish between outboard engine emissions and naturally occurring,
non-polar extractables, all of which are reported as "hydrocarbons".
2. "Hydrocarbon" levels for Florisil treated surface samples ranged
from I.C-5.0 mg/m . Concentrations followed the levels of boat
usage.
3. The "hydrocarbon" (CCl^ extractables) levels found in water column
samples in the test bays were uniformly low during the 1972 boating
season, indicating the presence of very little soluble or dispersed
products from exhaust. Levels were generally less than 0.1 ppm.
U-. There is a significant difference in numbers of water column micro-
organisms between the bays throughout the year.
5. Growth of heterotrophic lake cultures and a pseudomonad isolated
from Dunham Bay was usually less on petroleum agar than on nutrient
agar.
6. Warburg respirometer studies show that the presence of oil does not
significantly change the oxygen uptake rate of lake sediment.
7. Maximum endogenous oxygen uptake rate of the sediment from Dunham
Bay Station 4 occurs during the spring growing season. High oxygen
uptake capacity of the sediment from Dunham Bay Station 4 over the
July 4-th holiday is seen as a result of boating activity.
8. The metabolic activity (as heterotrophic potential) of the hetero-
trophic microflora from Dunham Bay Station 2, when normalized to
unit microbial cell activity, appears significantly greater than
that of any other station. In general, all Dunham Bay stations
show more activity than Echo Bay stations.
9. Statistical analysis of the data indicates that 4-3% of the variation
of the log value for column organisms can be explained by the other
variables in the statistical model.
10. The study has provided information on the variation of major algae
species present in the test bays. The data do not afford any sig-
nificant correlation between kinds and number of algae present, and
boat traffic.
14
11. C 02 fixation by indigenous algae is enhanced in the presence of
1-3 ppm crankcase drainage or 1-5 ppm oil gas (1:50) mixture but is
inhibited at higher concentrations.
-------
12. At a concentration of 5 ppm of carbon from water soluble extract from
crankcase drainage, the C 02 rate of Mycrocystis aeruginosa is in-
hibited, whereas Anabaena flos-aquae and Selanastrum capricornutum
are not materially affected.
13. The level of water soluble extract from crankcase drainage that
produced a stimulation of specific growth rate was 1 ppm for Micro-
cystis aeruginosa, 5 ppm for Anabaena flos-aquae, and 35 ppm for
Selanastrum capricornutum.
14. The length of the log period in the algal growth curves reflected
the levels of water soluble extract from crankcase drainage.
Anabaena flos-aquae showed the greatest effect. Maximum standing
crop, however, was not materially affected.
15. The benthic fauna of Dunham Bay did not appear to be essentially
different from Smith or Echo Bays. Species variation, density, and
distribution among the bays and specific stations, however, ap-
parently can be attributed to natural factors (e.g. vegetation, bot-
tom type) rather than exogenous materials, low dissolved oxygen or
toxicity. The diversity index (3) values and variation in species
for Dunham Bay were somewhat greater than for the other bays studied.
Although of higher density, the benthic fauna were characteristic of
that described for the littoral and sublittoral zones of oligotrophic
lakes.
16. The bioassays indicate that materials discharged from two-cycle
marine engines are highly toxic and have a 24 hour TI^Q of approxi-
mately 1.0 mg/1 for certain benthic macroinvertebrates. The TL5Q
for more extended time periods is not significantly larger.
17. The results of threshold odor number tests seemed to relate closely
with levels of boat usage. Results corresponded with chemical tests,
but reacted more strongly and rapidly.
18. Adsorption tests indicated that the sediments from both Echo Bay
and Dunham Bay are capable of adsorbing exhaust products and carrying
them to the bottom. Sediments from Echo Bay had a greater tendency
to adsorb exhaust products than did sediments from Dunham Bay. The
presence of hydrocarbons in bottom sediments from sources other than
natural sources was very low.
19. A .considerable fraction of exhaust products can be expected to
evaporate from the water surface to the air at temperature.--; nor-
mally encountered during periods of the year when boating is at a
maximum level. For the exhaust products studied, it was found
that approximately 65% was removed from the surface by this mech-
anism.
-------
20. Statistical analysis of portions of the data has been made to
elucidate variations in certain components of the lake system, and
to identify factors having an influence on such components. Such
identification does not necessarily imply any absolute cause and
effect relationship. This work has led to the following conclusions
3.} Eased on limited results, the level of phytoplankton depends
uccr. temperature and dissolved oxygen, and decreases as these
fa:tors increase.
b) Analysis indicates that there may be correlations between
phytoplankton and surface microorganism levels, surface tem-
perature and surface dissolved oxygen. With the given data
no conclusions could be reached regarding the association
between hydrocarbon levels and phytoplankton levels.
c) Analysis of data related to water column microorganisms,
hydrocarbon levels and column temperature indicates that
there may be associations between the variables.
d) Examination of the relationship between surface microorganism
levels, hydrocarbon levels, surface dissolved oxygen and sur-
face temperature indicates that after the response variable
(surface microorganism) has been adjusted for temperature, the
contributions due to hydrocarbon and dissolved oxygen are neg-
ligible.
21. The studies have indicated that a normal boating concentration of
about 20 boats per square mile may be expected on Lake George. The
concentration may reach a value of 300 boats per square mile during
holiday weekends. The resulting concentrations of exhaust products
which result from an equilibrium of inputs and outputs from the lake
system as indicated within the scope of this study appear to be low
enough to cause no discernable effects of a permanent nature.
-------
SECTION II - RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Refinements in analytical techniques need to be developed. For the
low levels of hydrocarbons and products from the exhaust encountered
in water, sediments and in various forms of life, the need for im-
provements in technique and methods is paramount.
2. Further improvements in methods of sampling for surface films need
to be developed. This can be developed in the laboratory but needs
to be proven in the field.
3. Characterization of the chemical components of discharges from two-
cycle outboard engines should be made.
U. Improved data on inputs to the lake system can be expected, as in-
formation from recent opinion surveys by users of Lake George is
computerized. This information should be used to refine the
evaluation of the exhaust product problem.
5. Intensive heterotrophic potential studies should be made with sedi-
ments and microflora from water, samples in controlled experiments
in which oil and exhaust water is added at various levels with and
without additional nutrients at various pH values, temperatures,
and dissolved oxygen concentrations. These studies will produce
mechanistic information with respect to the influence of these
pertinent variables on the turnover capacity of the natural micro-
flora .
6. In order to include the smaller species of algae, plankton tow sam-
ples need to be supplemented with VanDorn bottle sampless Dominant
algal species, like Fragilaria, Asterionella, etc., should be
isolated and unialgal bioassays performed to determine the effect
of exhaust products on each species.
7. The studies of toxicity effects by engine discharges on macro-
benthic invertebrates should be continued. Continuous flow bio-
assays should be conducted to determine precise 96 hour TL^Q'S for
selected macroinvertebrates exhibiting a range of tolerances.
9. As improved analytical techniques become available, studies should
be extended towards quantifying the amounts of individual hydro-
carbons and other products found in bottom sediments which have
their origins in engine discharges, including the establishment of
baseline levels.
9. Further work needs to be done on the evaporative studies by inves-
tigating the evaporation of exhaust products taken under a broad
spectrum of operating conditions. This can be done by collecting
samples of exhaust products from tank tests.
-------
SECTION III - INTRODUCTION
In recant years increased attention has been directed towards the pres-
ervation of the chemical, physical and biological quality of our natural
waters. The rapidly growing use of two-cycle outboard engines has
-ocuse-i attention or. the possibility that the exhaust from these engines
may be - significant source of pollution in areas where their use Is ex-
-er.si"<"e. Hence, it is important to determine the extent of this form
cf Dclluticn and its influence on the environment, in order to determine
acceptable limits of discharge. These limits must be based on: (1) the
-hvsicai and chemical processes involved in removing the collutar.ts from
their area of influence; (2) the ability of the body of water with its
accompanying flora to degrade the pollutants; and (3) a residual that is
unobjectionable in terms of water usage and/or ecological balance.
Puroose and Scone
In the cresent study, both field and laboratory work have been conducted
for the purpose of establishing the level and nature of the pollution
from two-cycle outboard engines in an oligotrophic/mesotrophic lake svs-
tem. In addition, work has been directed towards establishing the fate
of the exhaust products discharged, and the interactions that occur
between these products and the lake environment.
The lake selected for field studies has been Lake George in Upper New
York State. Lake George is a natural body of water and is located in
the southeastern portion of New York's Adirondack State Park. The lake
is approximately 32 miles long and varies in width from 1 to 3 miles.
Its surface area is 44- square miles and has a drainage area of 234 square
miles. The average discharge from the lake is 295 cfs based on 22 years
of records. There are 109 miles of shoreline with many small bays. The
maximum depth of the lake is about 195 ft. It is an oligotrophic lake
with the exception of certain mesotrophic bays and the mesotrophic area
at the southern tip, bordered by Lake George Village. Previous work by
the Lake George Study Group from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute pro-
vides a background of chemical and biological data on the lake.
The lake is a very popular resort area and has many fine attractions for
tourists who come regularly from as far as New York City and Montreal.
The permanent population of the Town of Lake George was 2603 in 1970.
The permanent summer population was lU-,845 during the same year. The
total suMito^population, including transients and visitors, was esti-
mated to b»vc!lose to U0,000 people. With the expansion of transporta-
tion facilities to the Lake George area, there has been an increase in
both permanent and transient population in this region.
Because of the emphasis on recreational usage, the number of boats on
Lake George has been considerable. A number of surveys and counts have
been reported from various sources. In a recent survey conducted through
-------
a joint effort of the Lake George Park Commission and the Warren County
Sheriff's Patrol, and reported in a private communication by Mr. Jamer,
O'Brien, Director of Marine and Recreational Vehicles, New York State
Department of Parks and Recreation, it has been estimated that on a
typical holiday weekend, the number of boats is in the range of 12,000
to 14,000. It has further been reported that the normal loading of
boats navigating in the water at "any given hour" will be about 800 to
1000. These estimates have been confirmed by aerial spot checks made
by the Lake George Park Commission, and more recently, by aerial photo-
graphs made by Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute personnel. It may be
noted that the number of boats registered in the Lake George watershed
is approximately 8000.
In studying the effects of outboard engine exhaust products on the lake
system, comparative studies have been made in three Lake George bays
having widely different use patterns. Counts of boats using these bays
have been made to establish relative levels of use. The bays studies
are: (1) Smith Bay having light traffic (5-20 boats/day); (2) Echo Bay
having a restricted entry which limits traffic (40-80 boats/day) almost
entirely to that from local residents; and (3) Dunham Bay which has heavy
boat usage (400-700 boats/day).
Dunham Bay is the largest of the three bays and is located in the south-
ern part of the lake as shown in Fig. 1. The bay has an area of 0.11
square miles and is serviced by two marinas. Based upon aerial surveys,
the number of boats normally docked within the bay and in the creek
feeding the bay is about 245 during the height of the summer season. On
holiday weekends the number may be increased by about 20% to approxi-
mately 295. The amount of gasoline used by the largest marina in the
bay has been reported as about 30,000 "gallons during 1971. During the
peak July 4th weekend, a count of boats entering and leaving the entrance
to the bay was made and found to be about 690 boats per day, with a peak
traffic count of 89 boats per hour. The average horsepower used was es-
timated to be 70. On a more typical summer weekend, the number of boats
in and out of the bay was 410 boats per day. This number, of course,
varied greatly depending upon weather conditions and the time of the
year, (see Fig. 2)
Echo Bay is a narrow bay having restricted access to the lar'j. It .vr,
an area of about 0.04 square milen and one fuel jjump iz lo'i.ii:^'] 1.'.•/•'.•.
Because of its shape and location, the boat traffic in and o\i> of tii'.-
bay is usually limited to local residents. The number of bocit. nor-iiM i i ;
dockect in the bay is about 31. Boat counts of boats in and out of ;.h-;
bay hfave indicated a peak figure of about 77 boats per day, and about
40 boats per day on a more normal weekend, (see Fig. 3)
Smith Bay has a wide entrance to the bay and an area estimated to be
about 0.02 square miles. No fuel pumps are provided in this bay. The
major traffic consists of boats used by the Fresh Water Institute plus
a few boats of other residents. The boats docked in the bay seldom
exceed 10. Boat traffic in and out of the bay on a peak weekend has
-------
Ticonderoga
N
I
(Scale: 1" equals
"+.6 miles)
Lake
George Village
Figure l - An Outline Map of Lake George Showing
the Three Bays under Investigation
-------
MARINA
Figure 2 - sketch of Dunham Bay Showing
Location of Saapling Stations *
-------
A
SCALE: 1" = approx.
100 meters
Figure 3 - Sketch of Echo Bay Showing
Location of Sampling Stations
-------
been estimated as 18 boats per day. On a typical weekend, the number
is closer to 7 boats per day. (see Fig. 4)
It is recognized that boat usage may vary over wide limits depending
upon many factors. For instance, in very bad weather, the usage may be
zero. However, the values reported and summarized in Table 1 are typ-
ical of summer usage in reasonably good weather, and are indicative of
the relative stress in the bays studied in this work.
In the present study, a sampling program has been developed that has
been related to the intensity of boat usage. Intensive sampling has
been conducted during the summer nonths with particular emphasis imme-
diately before, during, and immediately after holiday weekends. Water
quality determinations have been made on samples collected on a routine
basis. Particular emphasis has been directed towards establishing cur-
rent levels of hydrocarbons at the water surface, in the water column
and in the sediments, and in determining those factors which enhance or
limit microbial degradation of hydrocarbons. A variety of sampling
techniques and analytical methods have been examined, evaluated, and
modified where necessary to suit particular needs.
The scope of the field studies has also incorporated estimates of the
effects of engine discharge on primary production. Speciation and num-
bers of periphytic and planktonic algae have been investigated using
several techniques. Speciation and enumeration of benthic macroorganisms
have also been made on a limited scale.
To provide support data for the primary studies, a number of limited
studies have been conducted in the field. These include studies of cur-
rents in the bays under investigation, and determination of odor levels
and odor variations in the waters of the study bays.
A major effort has been directed to laboratory studies. Work has been
devoted to studying the kinetics of removal of engine discharge by
biological oxidation, physical adsorption to sediments and other sub-
strates, and by volatilization from water. Associated with much of this
work has been the need for modifying existing experimental techniques,
and for developing new techniques as dictated by local circumstances.
Source of Discharges from Two-Cycle Engines
By far, the majority of the outboard engines in use are two-cycle models.
In this type of engine a gasoline-oil mixture is used both as a fuel and
as a lubricant. The engine combines, in one stroke, both fuel intake
and exhaust. Since both intake and exhaust valves are open at the same
time, a portion of the fuel is exhausted directly in an unburned or
partially burned state during this part of the cycle. An additional
characteristic of two-cycle engines which results in discharge is the
lubrication system that is used. In contrast to a forced feed system
a§ used in most four-cycle engines, where oil is delivered directly to
10
-------
SCALE: 1" = approx.
100 meters
N
Figure U - Sketch of. Smith Bay Showing
Location of Sampling Stations
11
-------
Table 1
Boat Usage on Lake George
Fuel Area Boats
Bay Pumps Square Miles Docked
Dunham 2 0.11 295
Traffic-Boats/Day
Peak Typical
690
Echo
O.OH
31
77
Smith
0.02
10
18
12
-------
engine parts from a crankcase reservoir, lubrication is achieved in the
two-cycle engine by mixing the lubricating oil with the gasoline fuel.
The aas-oil mixture is fed to the engine via the crankcase where a por-
^ion~of the fuel is condensed. Because of the much lower volatility of
i-he oil, the °il Predominates in the material which coats the engine
s and accomplishes the desired lubrication. Since a continuous sup-
f the gas-oil fuel mixture is fed to the engine, the oil tends to
accumulate in the engine. To prevent an excessive build-up, engines are
--ovided with a bleed valve which directs the excess oil to the exhaust
line and, hence, to the water.
review of Related Work
Efforts 'nave been made by a number of investigators to measure the quan-
tity of exhaust products discharged by outboard motors under a variety
of operating conditions. Studies conducted at Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute have indicated that for a moderately sized engine, freshly
tuned, the fraction of fuel used that was discharged varied from about
3% at high speeds to about 26% at low speeds (69). Similar studies made
by Foster D. Snell, Inc. indicated that between 10% and 33% of the fuel
charged was discharged in the exhaust (71). For engines which had not
been freshly tuned, the fractions discharged were somewhat higher.
While attempts are currently being made by engine manufacturers to re-
duce the amount of exhaust products discharged by some engine models,
the success of these attempts remains to be proven. As pointed out by
Muratori, the rate of increase of total amount of discharge from outboard
engine usage may well offset any improvements in engine design (49).
Muratori also pointed out the fact that some 50% of all outboards pres-
ently owned are at least eight years old.
A number of investigators have noted effects from the discharge of motor
boat exhaust (18,21,26). English et al. (22) have estimated that for
every gallon of fuel consumed by outboard engines, between 300,000 and
500,000 gallons of water are required as dilution to provide adequate
protection from fish tainting. Others have noted the apparent persis-
tence of oily discharges from outboard motors and the effects on the
biological life in natural wastes (17). Stewart has briefly reviewed
some of these efforts (77). In the earlier Rensselaer study, prelimi-
nary work on the biodegradability of engine fuel and exhaust products
was made (69). Results indicated that these materials are capable of
supporting inicrobial growth, and that growth rates are limited by avail-
able oxygen. -
13
-------
SECTION IV - WATER QUALITY MEASUREMENTS
INCLUDING HYDROCARBON ANALYSES
INTRODUCTION
The evaluation of effects from two-cycle outboard engines is based on
the actual levels of exhaust products present in the study bays of Lake
George. Samples collected from the bays were analyzed for exhaust
products, as "hydrocarbon", to establish both levels present and fluc-
tuations which could occur as a result of varying degrees of boating
activities.
The term "hydrocarbons" has been operationally adopted and does not
infer identification of exhaust products. The materials measured are •
those which can be extracted from an acidified sample using a non-polar,
halogenated solvent, those not retained on a Florisil column, and those
containing saturated carbon-hydrogen bonds.
This analytical approach to determining "hydrocarbon" material has gen-
erally been applied to environmental conditions which include obvious
oil pollution, whether by design or accident. While the method is ap-~
plicable to extended field studies, it is not specific for exhaust
products, so that other materials normally present could contribute
significantly to the extractables at low levels of outboard emissions.
Water quality parameters have been determined on bay samples where
biological co-studies were underway. The parameters do not relate
directly to the levels of "hydrocarbons" as exhaust wastes, but are
pertinent to the utilization of "hydrocarbons" as a carbon source by
bacterial decomposers.
PROCEDURE
Sampling
In the Lake George study, all field sampling involving "hydrocarbon"
samples were conducted from a twelve-foot aluminum boat. The boat
was fitted with a small electric motor, but a pair of oars often
proved more useful. A truck was used to transport the boat to and
from the bays so that an outboard engine was not required at any
time.
From previous work conducted at R.F.I. (3), it had been determined
that more than 90% of outboard motor exhaust accumulated in a sur-
face film. Sampling of the water column would then present a
deceptively low level of "hydrocarbon" concentration, which would
be dependent upon the surface to volume ratio.
The sampling approach taken in this study was, therefore, to col-
lect separate film and bulk samples at each station. Water column
-------
samoles were collected with a conventional VanDorn sampler, having
a sj_x-liter volume. The sampler was placed through the surface
film, closed, and cocked under water. Samples were collected in
four-liter pyrex bottles which were marked at the three-liter level.
Water quality samples were collected in polyethylene containers of
one-quart size .
perhaps the most difficult phase of "hydrocarbon" measurement L:;
the collection of surface film samples. In his work, Kramer (40)
used two methods. The first employed a four-liter pyrex bottle
which was dipped length-wise to a depth at which the surface film
flowed into the mouth of the bottle. By gradually tipping the
bottle deeper, a three-liter sample could be collected. However,
the surface area this volume represented could not be calculated.
The second method tried by Kremer utilized an aluminum ring
17.5 cm i.d. and 7.5 cm deep. In sampling, a strip of Whatman #1
filter paper was placed around the interior surface and held in
place by wetting. The ring was dipped to a depth where the surface
film lay within the width of the filter paper. A few drops of
detergent solution were placed in the center of the enclosed film
driving the film toward the paper on which it was collected. The
"hydrocarbons" could then be recovered by extracting the paper in
a Soxhlet apparatus. While the ring appeared to work well when
the surface was still, any surface disturbance was exaggerated
within the ring, resulting in'a distinct vertical "pulsing" or
surge effect. This action made the ring virtually useless with
the usual lake surface.
As a feasible solution, a stainless steel pot (see Fig. 5), 25.6 cm
i.d., 11.5 cm deep and fitted with a 5 cm hole in the bottom was
prepared and employed. Beneath the hole, a threaded, circular
aluminum fitting was mounted which accepted an 11 cm length of PVC
pipe. In the field, the pot was first covered, pushed through the
surface film, and then uncovered. Holding the pot with the handle
above the surface, the pot was then maneuvered to an undisturbed
area and drawn up through the surface. The large bottom opening
allowed relatively rapid upward motion without causing the surface
film to disperse. When the pot had been raised through the surface
a sufficient distance, i.e. 1/2 to 2/3 pot depth, the pipe was
closed with a No. 11 stopper, and the pot removed from the water.
The sample was then poured into a one or two-liter pyrex bottle,
and the stopper set aside. All interior metal surfaces of the pot
were then rinsed down with solvent using a 10 ml Manostat Mini-Pet
syringe. Generally, a total of 50 mis of solvent was sufficient
for this operation with all rinsings being added to the sample.
Although simple in construction, the sampling pot allowed a known
surface area to be entrapped under most surface conditions, and
provided a minimum of film disturbance in quiescent conditions.
15
-------
STAINLESS STEEL POT
T"
i i
i i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
—
ALUMINUM
FLANGE
PVC PIPE
Figure 5 - Surface Film Sampler
16
-------
analytical Procedures
The measurement of "hydrocarbon" material is based on the API
infrared procedure (2). Both carbon tetrachloride and trichloro-
trifluoroethylene (Freon TF, Dupont) were used as extraction
solvents during the course of the study. Freon TF was substituted
-ri~arily for its lower toxicity since the surface sampling re-
auired use of the solvent in the field. Spectranalyzed and reagent
grades of carbon tetrachloride (Fisher Scientific) were found to be
of equal quality so long as the latter was shipped in glass con-
tainers. A five-gallon can of the reagent-grade solvent gave an
IF. response greater than many samples and was rejected. Freon TF
was found to absorb more strongly than carbon tetrachloride at the
analytical wave length, but the standards prepared gave transmit-
tancies similar to those prepared in carbon tetrachloride.
The "hydrocarbon" materials were measured against standards pre-
pared from outboard motor oil (Mobil Oil Corp.) since evaporation
studies (see Section XII) indicate that gasoline would be rapidly
lost to the atmosphere. Outboard motor oil is the most appropriate
material for calibration, since it has a definite composition.
While outboard motor exhaust waste would be even more appropriate,
its composition can be drastically altered by the efficiency of
the engine, which is a function of engine tuning and speed (69).
Measurements of extracts were made on a Beckman IR-20 spectro-
photometer using 50 mm cells with CaF2 windows. While the extended
light path increased the sensitivity of the measurements, the cell
(Barnes Engineering) had two deficiencies. The cell volume was
32 mis which limited the degree of concentration possible and the
long light path minimized the usable IR wave lengths because of
solvent absorption. Spectral areas where aromatic compounds are
most active were "blind". The analytical wave length was set at
maximum absorbance in the vicinity of 3.42 microns using the
standard solutions. Other wave lengths were not considered be-
cause of the small response of the samples.
Both water column and surface film samples were extracted in the
same manner. The samples were extracted in the glass sample con-
tainers following acidification to pH 2 with concentrated HC1.
Sodium chloride was added at 5 gms per liter. Fifty mis of solvent
were added to approximately 3 liters of water column sample while
the film samples were extracted with the field rinsings already in
the containers. Sample volumes were determined by weight.
All samples were shaken vigorously for two one-minute periods and
allowed to stand overnight for separation. One technician was
assigned to the extraction procedure to maximize reproducibility.
Film samples were transferred to a one-liter separatory funnel and
17
-------
the solvent phase drawn off into a graduated cylinder for volume
measurement. Twenty-five mis of solvent were drawn from the column
samples by pipette and made up to 50 mis with additional solvent.
All extracts were dried over 5 gins of anhydrous sodium sulfate.
Initially, dried extracts were measured, then evaporated to approxi-
mately 25 mis at room temperature (20-23°C). The procedure assumes
the absence of materials which are volatile at this temperature
range since the bulk of the sampling had occurred during the summer
boating season. Extracts were then passed through a one cm diam-
eter column packed with 5 gms of Florisil and made up to 50 mis
with column washes for IR analysis.
Samples taken for water quality measurements were filtered through
0.45 micron membrane filters (Millipore Corp.) upon return to the
laboratory. Alaklinity, pH, total phosphorus and total kjeldahl
nitrogen were determined on the unfiltered samples, with nitrate
and total soluble phosphorus being determined on the filtered samples.
Phosphorus results were obtained with the ascorbic acid procedure
(73) following persulfate oxidation. Nitrate was determined, fol-
lowing reduction on a copperized-cadmium column, by a colorimetric
nitrite procedure (94). Kjeldahl-nitrogen employed the usual di.-
gestion step (73), but the ammonia was determined using an Orion
electrode, following addition of an alkaline reagent to convert all
NHjJj present to NH3 and which complexed mercuric ions with iodide (55),
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Tabulated data for Dunham, Echo and Smith Bays for the 1972 boating sea-
son have been presented in Tables 2-8. The following data have been
presented:
1. "Hydrocarbons" are reported in milligrams of oil per square
meter of surface (mg/m ) in the film, and milligrams of oil
per kilogram of sample (mg/kg) in the column.
2. Alkalinity (ALK) is reported as milligrams of CaCOg per
liter (mg CaCOs/l).
3. Total phosphorus (TP) and total soluble phosphorus (TSP)
are reported in micrograms P per liter (ugP/1).
4. Total kjeldahl nitrogen (Kj-N) and nitrate (NIT) are re-
ported in micrograms N per liter (ygN/1).
5. Temperature (Temp.) is reported in °C.
6. Dissolved oxygen (D.O.) is reported in milligrams 02 per'
liter (mg C>2/1) •
In general, "hydrocarbon" levels in the water column were less tli/in
0.1 mg per kg. Column samples would indicate whether significant amount:j
of the outboard exhaust were soluble to any extent, but this does not
appear to be the case. From Table 9, "hydrocarbon" recoveries at this
level are less than two-thirds. However, taking the probable losses
into account, the column levels still remain very low.
18
-------
Table 2 - Water Quality Data
Dunham Bay: Station 3 - 1972
Date
3-30
5-2
6-1
6-9
6-12
6-16
6-19
6-23
6-26
7-1
7-3
7-4
7-6
7-10
7-14
7-17
7-21
7-24
Day
Th
T
Th
F
M
F
M
F
M
S
M
T
Th
M
F
M
F
M
"Hydrocarl
Temp. D.O. Surf.
°C rag Op/I tng/tn* i
10.0
14.5
13.0
11.8
15.0
15.6
16.5
19.0
18.0
19.0
18.9
19.9
20.5
20.5
23.5
~
12.5
10.5
10.4
10.0
9.8
9.7
8.0
8.2
8.6
7.9
8.1
7.8
8.7
8.9
9.4
~
3 2
\J m £.
2.2
2.4
1.9
2.4
2.4
1.8
1.8
2.4
4.6
2.4
1.7
6.4
2.8
<1.5
<1.5
<1 S
^ X • ~->
sons"
Col.
Tig /kg £H_ mj
<0.1 6.80
<0.1 7.11
<0.1 7.52
<0.1 7.22
<0.1 7.29
<0.1 7.36
<0.1 7.37
<0,1 7.52
<0.1 7.48
<0.1 7.31
<0.1
<0.1 7.22
<0.1 7.50
<0.1 7.26
<0.1 7.19
<0.1 7.37
<0.1 7.23
<0.1 7.11
ALK
g CaCO AL
22.5
22.9
28.5
23.5
24.5
24.5
24.1
24.2
28.5
24.6
25.5
26.1
25.7
21.6
21.6
21.6
25.4
TP TSP Kj-N
yg P/l PR P/l PR N/1
2.8 <2.0 117.
14.2 3.1 267.
6.6 <2.0 225
18.8 2.6 188.
7.3 4.6 183.
7.1 7.4 148
8.0 7.7 170.
7.4 6.3 145.
11.1 3.7 153.
NIT
yg N/l
47.0
48.5
3.2
6.1
18.5
63.0
45.0
8.7
3.5
-------
ro
o
Table 2 (continued)
"Hydrocarbons"
Date
7-28
7-31
8-7
8-16
8-21
8-28
9-4
9-11
9-18
9-25
Day
F
M
M
W
M
M
M
M
M
M
Temp.
°C
24.5
24.0
22.0
21.5
22.0
23.0
21.9
20.9
19.8
17.2
D.O.
8.6
8.5
8.9
9.8
10.1
9.1
8.4
8.2
9.4
9.6
Surf^
ing /ra
2.7
2.8
4.8
4.3
1.9
2.9
<1.5
<1.5
<1.5
<1.5
Col.
mg/kg pH_
<0.1 7.45
<0.1 7.23
<0.1 7.31
<0.1 7.20
<0.1
<0.1 7.37
<0.1 7.38
<0.1 7.17
<0.1 7.12
<0.1 7.53
ALK
mg CaC03/l
23.4
22.3
24.3
23.0
-
22.4
23.8
23.0
22.5
22.7
TP
Pg P/l
6.0
13.1
10.3
6.6
8.8
31.3
5.1
6.0
20.2
TSP
Pg P/l
3.1
6.3
5.4
3.1
<2.0
<2.0
3.4
4.0
_
Kj-N
Pg N/l
191.
130.
220.
368.
376.
264.
212.
267.
215.
NIT
Pg N/l
3.6
3.5
10.8
5.5
4.7
4.2
5.0
12.7
8.9
-------
Table 3 - Mater Quality Data
Dunham Bay: Station 2 - 1972
"Hydrocarbons"
Date
5-2
6-1
6-9
6-12
6-16
6-19
6-23
6-26
6-30
7-1
7-3
7-4
7-6
7-10
7-14
7-17
7-21
7-24
Day
T
Th
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
S
M
T
Th
M
F
M
F
M
Temp.
°C
—
13.0
14.0
15.5
16.0
17.2
21.5
20.1
20.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
21.0
25.0
23.8
-
D.O.
mg 02/1
—
12.6
10.4
10.3
10.7
7.9
8.3
8.1
8.2
7.6
7.4
7.9
8.6
8.1
9.2
~~
Surf.
mg/m2
^•i ^
^- J. , D
2.2
2.3
2.4
<1.5
1.7
2.4
4.1
2.9
2.1
1.8
-
4.3
3.4
4.4
<1 S
** J_ . D
Col.
mg/kg £H_
<0 1 7.03
^ W • J. r • w
<0.1 7.45
<0.1
<0.1 7.47
<0.1 7.57
<0.1 7.48
<0.1 7.29
<0.1 7.23
<0.1
<0.1 7.19
<0.1 7.38
<0.1 7.10
<0.1 7.36
<0.1 7.19
<0.1 7.28
<0.1 7.17
ALK
mg CaCO_/l
-« 3 —
24.4
25.3
24.9
19.0
27.8
30.6
24.0
30.6
28.8
25.9
22.3
24.3
21.6
27.0
TP TSP Kj-N NIT
1-E P/l »iE P/l ua N/l Hg N/l
m.5 9.1 146. 7.8
19.1 9.7 221. 156.0
5.1 2.0 149. 6.2
11.4 <2.0 135. 5.1
5.7 4.6 170. 40.5
16.0 6.6 272. 15.8
19.1 4.3 254. 19.9
7.7 4.6 123. 9.5
16.8 10.3 291. 6.0
-------
Table 3 (continued)
"Hydrocarbons"
to
(O
Date
7-28
7-31
8-7
8-16
8-21
8-28
9-4
9-11
9-18
9-25
Day
F
M
M
W
M
M
M
M
M
M
Temp.
°C
26.0
24.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
23.1
21.9
21.2
20.2
18.0
D.O.
mg Qn/l
9.0
8.3
8.6
10.5
10.8
9.2
8.4
5.8
9.4
9.4
Surf. Col.
mg/m^ mg/kg pjj^ r
<1.5 <0.1 7.38
2.5 <0.1 7
3.1 <0.1 7
4.0 <0.1 7
2.4 0.1 7
2.2 <0.1 7
<1. 5 <0.1 7
<1.5 <0.1 7
<1.5 <0. 1 7
<1.5 <0.1 7
.12
.20
.42
.77
.32
.40
.41
.08
.07
ALK
ng CaCO /I
28.5
25.0
24.3
23.6
19.4
22.4
23.5
23.0
23.4
18.9
TP
Pg P/l
16.
9.
4.
8.
10.
15.
6.
14.
8.
5
1
8
0
0
4
3
5
0
TSP
Pg P/l
2.0
<2.0
<2.0
2.6
6.3
2.9
3.0
<2.0
2.3
Kj-N
Pg N/l
296.
224.
176.
282.
326.
376.
191.
195.
384.
NIT
Pg N/l
8.6
6.0
4.6
3.3
3.2
7.5
6.5
7.0
14.2
-------
Table 4 - Water Quality Data
CO
Dunham Bay: Station 4 - 1972
"Hydrocarbons"
Date
3-30
5-2
6-1
6-9
6-12
6-16
6-19
6-23
6-26
6-30
7-1
7-3
7-4
7-6
7-10
7-14
7-17
7-21
Day
Th
T
Th
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
S
M
T
Th
M
F
M
F
Temp.
°C
-
20.0
18.0
17.0
21.0
21.7
20.0
18.1
24.2
22.0
26.0
21.1
22.0
22.0
25.2
29.0
27.0
D.O.
-
-
7.8
8.9
9.0
7.4
7.2
8.1
5.4
5.7
4.5
4.8
4.7
5.1
6.2
6.2
5.5
5.5
Surf.
mg/m
3.3
1.9
1.9
1.7
<1.5
2.7
2.6
<1.5
1.9
4.0
22.2
3.5
3.0
1.0
7.8
15.0
2.6
2.4
Col.
mg/kg £H_
<0.1 6.66
<0.1 6.91
<0.1 7.56
<0.1 7.43
<0.1 7.37
<0.1 7.48
<0.1 7.47
<0.1 7.37
<0.1 7.29
<0.1 7.06
<0.1 7.31
0.1
<0.1 7.03
<0.1 7.12
<0.1 7.02
<0.1 7.02
<0.1 7.08
<0.1 7.06
ALK TP TSP
mg CaC00/l yg P/l yg P/l
34.5
26.3
22.9 27.1 17.9
33.4
59.0 62.4 10.3
46.0
49.3 21.6 7.4
40.1
50.1 28.2 10.0
47.4
50.0 31.3 14.2
44.8 29.6 12.5
49.1 24.2 13.4
49.1 27.9
51.3
47.9
50.0
Kj-N NIT
yg N/l yg N/l
409. 1.6
804. 60.5
348. 6.8
378. 22.0
491. 134.0
419. 142.5
415. 28.0
397. 2.2
-------
Table 4 (continued)
Date
7-24
7-28
7-31
8-7
8-16
8-21
8-28
9-4
9-11
9-18
9-25
Day
M
F
M
M
W
M
M
M
M
M
M
Temp.
°C
26.0
24.5
22.0
22.0
24.9
23.7
22.9
19.0
20.5
16.5
D.O.
mrr A /I
mg UP'
6.5
6.6
7.0
8.7
8.9
8.2
10.2
7.8
9.2
7.0
"Hydrocarbons"
Surf. Col.
mg/m2 mg/kg £H IT
<1.5 <0.1 7.15
5.7
3.6
4.8
5.5
5.6
2.4
4.0
<1.5
1.7
<1.5
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
0.1 7
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
0.3 7
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
.28
.55
.36
.56
.32
.08
.20
.67
.32
.57
ALK
IE CaC00/l
55.4
53.3
68.9
61.4
39.2
56.7
23.0
37.8
66.2
32.7
57.2
TP
Ug P/l
40.7
33.6
30.2
39.0
21.1
8.8
21.4
29.3
6.6
30.4
TSP
yg P/l
16.0
16.0
13.7
14.8
17.7
<2.0
3.4
6.0
5.7
25.2
Kj-N
Mg N/l
506.
559.
452.
490.
436.
267.
420.
488.
224.
420.
NIT
yg N/l
6.2
5.1
5.0
3.9
8.9
5.6
5.2
9.8
11.6
-------
Table 5 - Water Quality Data
Echo Bay:
Station 1
- 1972
"Hydrocarbons"
Date
6-1
6-9
6-12
6-16
6-19
6-23
6-26
6-30
7-1
7-3
7-4
7-6
7-10
7-14
7-17
7-24
7-28
7-31
Day
Th
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
S
M
T
Th
M
F
M
M
F
M
Temp.
°C
11.5
14.0
16,5
16.5
18.0
21.8
23.0
23.2
19.9
19.8
21.0
22.5
24.9
25.3
25.0
24.5
D.
mg 0
16
10
8
10
8
8
7
8
8
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
0.
.o/l
.0
.8
.5
.5
.0
.2
.9
.5
.2
.9
.4
.8
.8
.2
.2
.8
Surf.
1.8
2.
5.
<1.
4.
2.
4.
4.
3.
2.
3.
3.
2.
2.
<1.
<1.
0
9
5
1
0
7
7
7
2
1
1
1
2
5
5
Col.
mg/kg
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
<0 .1 7
<0. 1 7
<0.1 7
<0. 1
<0 .1 7
0.1 7
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
<0 .1 7
<0.1 7
<0 .1 7
<0.1 7
ALK
gH mg CaC00/l
.47
.23
.33
.50
.33
.37
.23
.20
.31
.12
.21
.24
.06
.33
.04
25
26
25
23
26
23
24
24
25
26
21
21
23
24
20
.1
.3
.5
.5
.6
.4
.3
.4
.2
.2
.6
.6
.0
.3
.3
TP TSP Kj-N NIT
pg P/l pg P/.1 ug M/l pg N/l
11.1 2.8 122. 3.0
9.1 <2.0 163. 7.2
6.3 <2.0 144. 11.7
8.5 <2.0 271. 8.7
6.0 <2.0 188. 5.9
13.7 2.0 142. 13.3
14.8 3.1 297. 7.9
5.4 2.3 212. 4.7
-------
Table 5 (continued)
"Hydrocarbons"
Date
8-7
8-16
8-21
8-28
9-4
9-11
9-18
9-25
Day
M
W
M
M
M
M
M
M
Temp .
°C
22.0
22.0
23.0
23.0
22.0
21.0
20.2
17.5
D.O.
rag 0/1
8.0
10.4
10.2
8.3
8.2
8.2
9.3
9.6
Surf.
mg/m
3.6
4.7
6.5
2.7
2.1
3.8
<1.5
<1.5
Col.
rag /kg pJH
<0.1 7.31
<0.1 7.45
<0.1 7.12
<0.1 7.46
<0.1
<0.1 7.23
<0.1 7.04
<0.1 7.29
ALK
mg CaC00/l
16.9
25.0
22.7
22.7
-
22.1
22.3
23.1
TP
Pg P/l
7.1
7.1
14.0
16.8
8.5
21.1
9.7
7.4
TSP
Pg P/l
2.8
6.6
2.3
2.0
4.6
<2.0
-
6.6
Kj-N
Pg N/l
261.
276.
362.
704.
218.
256.
260.
168.
NIT
Pg N/l
8.9
3.2
12.5
8.7
7.4
3.7
9.6
9.8
-------
Table 6 - Water Quality Data
to
Echo Bay: Station 2 - 1972
"Hydrocarbons"
Date
6-1
6-9
6-12
6-16
6-19
6-23
6-26
6-30
7-1
7-3
7-4
7-6
7-10
7-14
7-17
7-24
7-28
7-31
Day
Th
F
M
F
M
F
M
F
S
M
T
Th
M
F
M
M
F
M
Temp.
°C
18.0
16.8
18.8
21.5
20.0
21.0
19.0
19.8
20.0
22.5
24.0
25.0
25.0
24.5
D.O.
mg On/l
£.
9.3
9.2
8.1
7.8
7.9
8.0
8.5
8.6
7.8
8.2
8.1
9.1
8.6
9.1
Surf.
mg/rn^
2.6
6.2
1.9
2.4
1.6
3.0
<1.5
5.7
1.6
2.2
2.6
<1.5
2.6
Col.
mg/kg £H^
<0.1 7.35
<0.1 7.40
<0.1 7.46
<0.1 7.34
<0.1 7.33
<0.1 7.30
<0.1 7.55
<0.1 7.21
<0.1 7.18
<0.1 7.23
<0.1 7.15
<0.1 7.42
<0.1 7.16
ALK TP TSP
mg CaC00/l pg P/l pg P/l
" • — o --••-• -
25.1
25.0 5.1 3.4
23.6 11.4 <2.0
23.0
23.0 9.1 3.4
22.8 7.7 3.4
23.6 4.6 3.1
22.5 9.1 6.6
23.0
21.6
20.9 12.5 11.7
24.3
16.9 12.8 <2.0
Kj-N NIT
pg N/l pg N/l
174. . 7.8
142. f>.0
206. 44.0
203. 8.2
198. 4.6
102. 10.2
224. 5.3
842. 5.1
-------
Table 6 (continued)
ro
CD
Date
8-7
8-16
8-21
8-28
9-4
9-11
9-18
9-25
Day
M
W
M
M
M
M
M
M
Temp.
°C
22.0
22.8
22.5
23.0
22.1
20.9
19.9
17.0
D.O.
2B_0.2^
8.2
10.1
10.2
8.6
9 .2
8.8
9.2
9.1
Surf.
mg/m2
4.0
7.3
7.1
2.1
**i £
<1. D
2.6
1.7
<1.5
Col.
mg/kg pji
<0.1 7.36
<0.1 7.62
<0.1 7.12
<0.1 7.57
<0 .1 7 . 40
<0.1 7.38
<0 .1
0.1 7.40
ALK
mg CaC03/l
32.0
22.3
22.1
22.1
22.3
22.3
21.7
TP
Ug P/l
6.0
10.3
6.3
12.5
4.0
9.7
8.0
9.4
TSP
Ug P/l
<2.0
9.4
<2.0
<2.0
<2.0
6.3
-
Kj-N
pg N/l
210.
263.
180.
495.
294.
456.
376.
234.
NIT
Ug N/l
6.0
2.6
5.0
7.4
5.7
4.5
8.7
14.5
-------
Table 7 - Water Quality Data
Smith Bay:
rate
6-1
6-9
5-15
6-19
6-23
6-26
6-29
7-1
7-13
7-27
8-1
8-8
8-14
8-29
9-4
9-11
9-18
9-25
Dav
Th
F
r
M
F
M
Th
S
Th
Th
T
T
M
T
M
M
M
M
Tamo.
°C
14.5
15.3
19.0
21.0
25.9
22.5
25.2
23.5
23.0
21.0
22.2
21.2
20.0
20.1
17.1
D.O.
mg 02/1
9.6
9.2
9.2
7.7
8.4
8.3
9.0
9.1
9.8
10.8
9.2
8.8
9.0
9.2
10.2
Station 1 - 1972
"Hydrocarbons"
Surf. Col. ALK
mg/m2 mg/kg pH mg CaC00/l
3.2 <0.1 7.56 32.8
2.6 <0.1 7.37 23.1
2.0 <0.1
4.3 <0.1 7.45 18.5
1.9 <0.1 7.38 27.8
7.9 <0.1 7.36 23.0
2.7 <0.1 7.41 24.3
3.2 <0.1 7.12 23.0
<1.5 <0.1 7.56 28.4
<1.5 <0.1 7.38 20.9
1.6 <0.1
<1.5 <0.1 7.57 25.4
<1.5 <0.1
<1.5 <0.1
2.5 <0.1
29
-------
Table 8 - Water Quality Data
Smith Bay: Station 2 - 1972
Date
6-1
6-9
6-16
6-19
6-23
6-26
6-29
7-1
7-13
7-27
8-1
8-8
8-14
8-29
9-4
9-11
9-18
9-25
Day
Th
F
F
M
F
M
Th
S
Th
Th
T
T
M
T
M
M
M
M
Temp.
°C
-
15.0
15.2
17.8
18.5
20.0
21.0
22.5
25.0
23.4
23.0
21.0
21.5
21.9
19.0
19.5
17.2
"Hydrocarbons"
D.O. Surf. Col. ALK
rag 00/1 mg/m2 mg/kg pH mg CaCO,/l
1.8 <0.1 7.73 26.3
9.5 1.8 - 7.60 24.9
9.7 2.5 - 7.37 25.3
9.2 5.9 <0.1 7.46 24.9
7.6 5.7 <0.1 7.55 24.0
7.9 2.1 <0.1 7.22 25.8
8.4 4.1 <0.1 7.28 23.7
8.4 12.0 <0.1 7.45 . 22.3
9.0 <1.5 <0.1 7.38 25.0
9.4 2.8 <0.1 7.41 23.6
10.1 <1.5 <0.1 7.47 24.3
10.0 <1.5 <0.1 7.59 23.0
9.2 1.6 <0.1
8.9 <1.5 <0.1 7.50 23.0
8.6 3.6 <0.1
9.7 1.9 <0.1
9.8 1.5 <0.1
30
-------
Table 9
Recovery Runs
Bulk (Column) Recoveries
Oil Added (mg/kg) Solvent
% Recovery
- —
Sr.it h Bay
Smith Bay
Smith Bay
Distilled
Smith Bay
Smith Bay
Smith Bay
Distilled
Smith Bay
Smith Bay
Smith Bay
Distilled
0.102 CC14
0.107 CCl^
0.126 Freon TF
0.124 Freon TF
0.308 CC14
0.312 CCl^
0.326 Freon TF
0.305 Freon TF
0.497 CC^
0.520 CC1H
0.534 Freon TF
0.479 Freon TF
55 . 5
51.7
61.0
72.4
90.3
85.9
74.3
74.6
83.0
93.5
91.2
75.3
31
-------
Water
Smith Bay
Table 9 (continued)
Recovery Runs
Surface Recoveries*
9.87
% Recovery
Oil Added (mg/m ) Solvent 1st'
2nd+ ' Total
CC1 22.8 14.7 37.5
63.7 18.1 81.i
CC1,
6.9 25.0 31.9
Smith Bay
Smith Bay
19.75
29.60
46.7 57.3 104.0
36.3 21.1 57. K
AFlorisil Treated; Replicate samplings of the same surface
32
-------
face concentrations of Florisil-treated "hydrocarbons" were generally
"U een 1-0 an(^ ^'^ m§/m • The reliability of these numbers are more
• question than those of the water column largely due to the sampling
"115 discussed. From Table 9, recovery of "hydrocarbon" film is
Better than one-third. Caution must, however, be exercised in ap-
- lying table numbers because of the additional difficulty of evaluating
-^"surface sampler. The evaluation runs were made in a 300 gal. metal
-ank having a surface area of only 1.1 meters. The sampling pot, there-
'-,--*e disturbed the film in passage through the surface with a smaller
i--;
-------
Station 3
101
MAY
31
10 20
JUNE
30
10 20
JULY
31
10 20
AUGUST
31
10 20
SEPTEMBER
30
•8
nl
o
o
10
Station 2
MAY
31
10 20
JUNE
30
10 20
JULY
31
10 20
AUGUST
31
10 20
SEPTEMBER
31
Figure 6 - Surface Film Levels of "Hydrocarbons" in Dunham »ay
-------
"yarocarbons" in ljunham
31
Station
MAY
10 20
JUNE
30 10 20
JULY
31
10 20
AUGUST
31
10 20
SEPTEMBER
30
Figure 7 - Surface Film Levels of "Hydrocarbons" in Dunham Bay
-------
Station 1
10
c
•H
§
•H
•P
(0
0)
20 30 10 20 31 10
31 10 20 30
10
JUNE
JULY
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
o
I
o
•e
id
o
o
•s
10
Station 2
31
10 20
JUNE
30
10 20
JULY
31
10 20
AUGUST
31
10 20
SEPTEMBER
30
w^jw|^-^
•r
Figure 8 - Surface Film Levels of "Hydrocarbons" in Echo Bay
-------
a - burtace Fij^ Levels of "Hydrocarbons" in Echo Bay
B
.9
a
0)
o
o
Station 1
31
10 20 30 10
JUNE
20 31 10
20
JULY
AUGUST
~31 10 20 30
SEPTEMBER
u.
Station 2
31 10 20
JUNE
TO 10 20 31 10 20
JULY AUGUST
31 10 20 30
SEPTEMBER
Figure 9 - Surface Film Levels of "Hydrocarbons" in Smith Bay
-------
were found at this station, season-wise concentrations are of the same
order as found in Station 3 which is located approximately in the middle
of the bay itself.
Dec
It should be stressed again that the IR procedure is non-differentiating
for organic material. Any compounds consisting of CH2 and CH3 groups Se;
which are extractable from the acidified solution, with the solvents used, he
can contribute to the sample absorbance. Passage through the Florisil
column will reduce the polar components and tend to isolate the non-polar, Th
including aliphatic, components. Because of the low level of "hydro-
carbon" found, the importance of removing background materials, e.g.
humics, lipids, proteinaceous substances, and pigments, is great. While
Florisil will retain much of this material, it can also retain oxidized
oil components resulting from decomposition processes, photochemical
reactions and the operation of the outboard engine.
A possible complicating factor is the interaction of fulvic acids with -.
hydrophobic substances such as alkanes to form soluble complexes as re-
ported by Ogner and Schnitzer (53). These workers found that the alkanes
could not be extracted with solvents unless the complex was first
methylated. Dunham Bay Creek drains a large wetlands area and is highly
colored. Values reported by Kobayashi (38) indicate that humic concen-
trations are at least four times higher in the creek than they are in
the bay proper. Whether humic substances, such as the fulvic acids,
actually do retain "hydrocarbons", however, is speculative.
The analytical procedure cannot distinguish between hydrocarbon compounds
arising from outboard engine use, and those which occur naturally in the
environment. While the latter group would represent a positive inter-
ference, there is, as yet, no quantitative data to assess its importance.
38
-------
SECTION V - MICROBIOLOGICAL STUDIES
Studies
rial characterization of the relative quantity and activity of the
microflora in Dunham, Echo, and Smith Bays was made.
--e work is described in the following sections:
a) concentration
b) laboratory plate investigations
c) oure culture studies
d) sediment storage
e) oxygen uptake
f) radioisotope uptake
Samples for microbiological analysis have been taken from surface water,
half depth in the water column, and from the sediments.
Sampling Methods
For surface water cell enumeration, 20 ml surface water samples were
collected. This was done by suspending horizontally an empty, covered,
sterile 20 ml test tube at the water surface. The cover was then re-
moved, and the tube allowed to fill with water from a depth no greater
than three quarters of an inch. The tube was then re-covered with its
cap and kept on ice to await lab analysis.
For analysis, a 1 ml aliquot was withdrawn from the lake sample and pyt
into 9 ml of sterile nutrient broth. From this tube, six serial dilu-
tions were made, in broth, for MPN method of enumeration. For plate
counts on both nutrient and hydrocarbon agars, a 0.6 ml aliquot was re-
moved from each serial dilution tube: 0.3 ml plated on nutrient agar,
0.3 ml on hydrocarbon agar.
A six-liter VanDorn water sampler was used to obtain water column sam-
ples from mid-depth at each station. From this large sample, four 1 ml
aliquots were withdrawn and each of these used to inoculate a sterile
9 ml nutrient broth tube. These inoculated broth tubes (four per sta-
tion) were kept on ice awaiting lab analysis.
For analysis, six serial dilutions in broth were done from each inoculated
(at time of sampling) tube. From each dilution tube a 0.6 ml aliquot was
removed: 0.3 ml plated on nutrient agar, 0.3 ml on hydrocarbon agar.
Sediment was collected in one-liter quantities using an Eckman dredge.
These samples were placed in sterile one-liter plastic containers,
covered, and placed on ice.
39
-------
For oxygen uptake studies, samples of sediment were removed from these
containers in quantities of about 1.2 g for each respirometer flask.
Samples were collected and prepared for radioisotope analysis in the fol-
lowing manner. Water samples from Dunham and Echo Bays were collected in
a six-liter VanDorn sampler and placed in sterile, four-liter plastic
containers. Samples were kept on ice for transportation to the laboratory
and stored there at 4°C prior to analysis.
For each assay, one liter of water was membrane filtered in order to con- -
centrate the microflora by approximately one hundred-fold. The rate of
incorporation of (r-4-glucose was then determined for these microbial
concentrates.
A 0.3 ml aliquot was withdrawn from the four-liter sample for enumerating
the organisms by a plate count. Plate counts were done in duplicate.
An Eckman dredge was used to obtain sediment samples, which were placed
in sterile, one-liter, plastic containers, and stored at 4°C until ana-
lyzed. The sediment suspension was diluted to twice its volume and
7.4 ml withdrawn for each glucose incorporation assay. The rate of in-'
corporation was correlated with the amount of combustible organic matter
present in the sediment.
Concentration of Heterotrophic Microorganisms
Throughout the study, water samples have been analyzed for the concen-
tration of-heterotrophic microbes by means of the MPN technique, by plate
counts on nutrient agar, and by plate counts on petroleum agar. Water
samples were always analyzed within four hours of collection and kept on
ice in the interim.
Petroleum agar was prepared by blending 1/2 gram SAE 40 motor oil (Mobil
Oil Outboard Super), 20 mg Difco yeast extract, and 15 grams of Difco
agar in one-liter distilled water. The emulsion was maintained during
autoclaving.
Incubations at various temperatures have been made with samples taken
from the water column showing maximum rate of colony development at
30°C with a lower limit of 10°C at which no colonies develop even after
a 3-4 day period of incubation. Normally the plates were incubated from
24-48 hours.
In the following tables the cell concentration data are presented along
with the critical physical parameters of depth of sample (for water
column, temperature, and dissolved oxygen concentration, in that order).
Counts on petroleum agar are underlined. (Tables 10-12) Each count
represents an average of duplicate analyses. The data for Echo Bay does
not begin to any extent until late in June of 1972 when systematic sam-
pling began. At the same time dock building at Smith Bay with its ob-
vious disturbances rendered its inclusion relatively useless with respect
to study of microflora.
40
11
-------
Table 10
Cell Concentration in the Water Column
(petroleum agar underlined)
Dunham Bay Echo Bay
Dates_
10/20/71
11/9/71
12/1/71
3/30/72
5/2/72
6/1/72
6/12/72
Station
2
103/ml
* 1.5m
•'"'••16 . 9°C
103/ml
1.5m
8.8°C
102/ml
1.5m
5.0°C
***19.5mg/l
102/ml
1.5m
102/ral
0/ml
1.5m
13.0 C
10.2mg/l
Station Station Station Station
34 12
103/ml 103/ml
3.0m 0.75m
16.2°C 1M-.2°C
103/ml 103/ml
3 . Om 0 . 7 5m
9.2°C 2.9°C
loVml 102/ml
0.75m 0.75m
1.5°C
103/ml 104/ml
3.5m 0.5m
103/ml 102/ml
3 . Om 0 . 7 5m
4.0°C 12.0°C
3.8mg/l 16.4mg/l
102/ml 103/ml
3.0m 0.75m
102/ml 103/ml
4x10 /ml 5xlOD/ml
3.0m 0.75m
13.0°C 16.0°C
10.4mg/l 8.5mg/l
Smith Bay
Station
1
*depth of water sample throughout
**water temperature throughout
***dissolved oxygen concentration throughout
-------
Table 10 (continued)
Dunham Bay
Dates
6/19/72
6/26/72
7/1/72
7/3/72
7/4/72
7/6/72
7/10/72
7/2U/72
Station
2
102/ml
0/ml
1.5m
15.0°C
lO.Omg/1
103/ml
lxlO°/ml
1.5m
16.9°C
8 . Omg/1
103/ml
0/ml
1.5m
19.9°C
8 . 2mg/l
10°/ml
1.5m
20.0°C
8.2mg/l
103/ml
1.5m
20.0°C
7.4mg/l
103/ml
1.5m
20.1°C
7.7mg/l
103/ml
1.5m
21.6°C
7.9mg/l
102/ml
Station
3
102/ml
3x10° /ml
3.0m
15.0°C
9 . 8mg/l
102/ml
0/ml 1
3.0m
16.5°C
8. Omg/1
103/ml
0/ml
3.0m
19.0°C
8 . 2mg/l
103/ml
3.0m
18.0°C
8.6mg/l
103/ml
3.0m
19.0°C
7.9mg/l
102/ml
3.0m
18.9°C
8.1mg/l
102/ml
3.0m
19.9°C
7.8mg/l
102/ml
Station
4
103/ml
1C /ml
C.75ro
2C.O°C
7.4mg/l
lO^/ml
^xloVml
0.75m
17.5°C
5.3mg/l
loVml
3x10 /ml
0.75m
22.0°C
4.1mg/l
103/ml
0.75m
25.0°C
5 . 8mg/l
103/ml
18/ml
0.75m
20.5°C
4.7mg/l
10^/ml
10 /ml
0.75m
20.0°C
4.9mg/l
loVml
0.75m
22.0°C
6.2mg/l
103/ml
Echo Bay Smith Bay
Station
1
103/ml
3xlO°/ml
0.75m
17.5°C
7.9mg/l
103/ml
1x10 /ml
0.75m
23.0°C
7.7mg/l
loVml
0.75m
23.0°C
7.7mg/l
103/ml
50/ml
0.75m
19.5°C
7.7mg/l
102/ml
0.75m
19.0°C
7.6mg/l
loVml
0.75m
20.9°C
7.4mg/l
loVml
25.2°C
Station Station
2 1
103/ml
1.5m
15.8°C
9.4mg/l
103/ml 104/ml
0/ml 5xlO°/ml
1.0m
18.0°C
8.1mg/l
102/ml
0/ml
1.0m
19.1°C
7.9mg/l
104/ml
1.0m
20.1°C
8 . lmg/1
103/ml
1.5m
19.0°C
8.Hmg/l
103/ml
1.5m
19.2°C
7.8mg/l
104/ml
1.0m
20.9°C
7.7mg/l
103/ml
25.0°C
8 .
9 . Omg/1
-------
Table 10 (continued)
Dates,
5/7/72
3/16/72
8/21/72
8/28/72
9/4/72
9/11/72
9/18/72
9/25/72
Dunham Bay
Station Station S
2 3
loVml
10 /ml
loVml
22.0°C
10.5mg/l
loVml
21.8°C
9.8mg/l
104/ml
23.1°C
9.2mg/l
loVml
21.9°C
8.4mg/l
102/ml
20.0°C
5.2mg/l
103/ml
20.0°C
9.3mg/l
103/ml
104/ml
loVml
103/ml
21.5°C
9.8mg/l
103/ml
22.0°C
10.1mg/l
103/ml
23.0°C
9.1mg/l
103/ml
21.7°C
8.3mg/l
103/ml
20.9°C
8.2mg/l
loVgl
19.8 C
9.4rag/l
103/ml
Echo Bay Smith Bay
tat ion Station Station Station
4 1 2 1 '
loVml
105/ml
10L|'/ml
21.0°C
9.4mg/l
loVml
24.4°C
8.7mg/l
103/ml
23.6°C
8.3mg/l
103/ml
23.0 C
9.7mg/l
104/ml
18.0°C
7.2mg/l
103/ml
20.0 C
8.4mg/l
loVml
103/ml
103/ml
loVml
21.0°C
9.9mg/l
105/ml
o
22.2 C
9.8mg/l
loVml
23.1°C
8.2mg/l
104/ml
f*\
22.2 C
8.9mg/l
104/ml
21.0°C
8.2mg/l
103/ml
20.1°C
9.6mg/l
103/ml
103/ml
loVml
10^/ml
o^
22.0 C
10.2mg/l
105/ml
o
22.0 C
10.0mg/l
103/ml
o
22.8 C
8.6mg/l
104/ml
o
22.1 C
8.1mg/l
103/ml
20.3°C
8.0mg/l
103/ml
19.9°C
9.9mg/l
102/ml
-------
TaDle 11
Cell Concentration in Surface Water
6/26/72
7/1/72
7/3/72
7/4/72
7/6/72
7/10/72
7/24/72.
(petroleum agar underlined)
Dunham Bay Echo Bay
Station
2
102/ml
17.2°C
7.9mg/l
102/ml
20.1°C
8 . lmg/1
20.0°C
8.4mg/l
103/ml
20.0°C
7.6mg/l
21.0°C
7.4mg/l
3xlO°/ml
22.0UC
7 . 9mg/l
3x1 O2 /ml
~
Station
3
0/ml
**11.0mg/l
17.8SC
7.9mg/l
103/ml
20.9°C
7 . 9mg/l
102/ml
20.5°C
7.7mg/l
103/ml
20.0°C
7 . 9mg/l
20.0°C
7.9mg/l
20.1°C
8.2mg/l
102/ml
10 /ml
_
Station
4
102/ml
o/m;
10.4mg/l
102/ml
5.4mg/l
104/ml
22.0°C
4.5mg/l
102/ml
26.0°C
4.8mg/l
u
10 /mJL
4 . 7mg/l
102/ml
22.0°C
5 . lmg/1
2xlO-Yml
22.0UC
6.2mg/l
102/ml
10 /ml
"~
Station
1
18.0°C
8.0mg/l
103/ml
23.0°C
7.9mg/l
102/ml
23.2°C
8.5mg/l
19.9°C
8.2mg/l
102/ml
19.8°C
7.9mg/l
3xl02/ml
21.0°C
7.4mg/l
103/ral
10 /ml
25.3UC
8 . 2mg/l
Station
2
18.8°C
8. lmg/1
0/ml
20.0°C
7.9mg/l
None
21.0°C
8.0mg/l
103/ml
19.0°C
8.5mg/l
19.8°C
8.6mg/l
20.0°C
7.8mg/l
102/ml
10 /ml
25.0°C
9. lmg/1
^temperature of water sample throughout
A*dissolved oxygen concentration throughout
44
-------
Table LI (continued)
3/7/72
3/15/72
8/21/72
9/28/72
9/U/72
9/11/72
9/18/72
9/25/72
Dunham Bay
Station
2
102/ml
10 /ml
102/ml
102/ml
3xlO°/ml
22.0^C
lO.Smg/1
102/ml
4xlO°/ml
22.0UC
10.8mg/l
102/ml
0/ml
23.1°C
9.2mg/l
103/ml
3x10° /ml
22.0°C
8.5mg/l
lO1/™!
21.2 C
5.8mg/l
102/ml
10 /ml
20.2°C
9.4mg/l
10^/ml
10 /ml
Station
3
102/ml
10 /ml
102/ml
102/ml
Q
22.0 C
9.8mg/l
102/ml
0/ml
22.7°C
ll.Omg/1
102/ml
0/ml
23.2°C
9.2mg/l
102/ml
0/ml
21.9°C
S.Umg/l
102/ml
21.0 C
8.9mg/l
loj/ml
10 /ml
20.2°C
9.6mg/l
102/ml
10 /ml
Station
4
lof/ml
10 /ml
104/ml
102/ml
10 /ml
22.0°C
8.7mg/l
lo'J/ml
10 /ml
2^.9°C
8.9mg/l
102/ml
3x10° /ml
23.7°C
8.2mg/l
104/ml
I+XIO1/!!!!
22.9°C
10.2mg/l
102/ml
19.0 C
7 . 8mg/l
10^/ml
10 /ml
20.5UC
9.2mg/l
10^ /ml
10 /ml
Echo Bay
Station
1
Station
2
10 /ml
102/ml
102/ml
22.0°C
10 /ml
3xlO°/ml
23.0UC
10.2mg/l
102/ml
0/ml
23.0°C
8.3mg/l
102/ml
0/ml
22.1°C
9.2mg/l
102/ml
21.0 C
8.2mg/l
102/ml
10 /ml
20.2°C
9.3mg/l
102/ml
10 /ml
10 /ml
102/ml
102/ml
22.8°C
10.1mg/l
101/ml
0/ml
22.5°C
10.2mg/l
102/ml
0/ml
23.0°C
8.6mg/l
102/ml
0/ml
22.0°C
8.2mg/l
0/ml
20.9 C
8.8mg/l
10^/ml
10 /ml
19.9°C
9.2mg/l
102/ml
10 /ml
-------
Table 12
Cell Concentration in Culture Flasks (x 10 /ml)
(petroleum agar underlined)
Hours
Run Flask 0 4
1
10/17/72 A 0.4* 0
0.3** 0
B 6.7 0
4.8 0
C 31.0 0
20.0 0.1
D 0.6 0
0.1 0
Hours
0 4
2
11/25/72 A 0.1 0
0 0
B 0.1 0
0 0
C 00
D 0.4 4.0
0.4 50.0
into Incubation
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
22
0
1.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
into Incubation
8
2.0
0
0
0
0
5.0
0
17
0
0
0
0
30.0
1.0
1.0
21
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*Counts made on nutrient agar
••'""Counts made on petroleum agar
46
-------
Table 12 (continued)
Hours into Incubation
Flask
0
50.0
30.0
160.0
30.0
100.0
4.0
150.0
30.0
3.25
1.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6.5
0
0
0
0
3.0
0.1
0
0
12.5
0
0
0.3
0
0
0
0
0
14.5
0.1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
Laboratory Plate Investigations
During enumeration of surface cell population, when plating water samples
on both nutrient agar and on petroleum agar, it was frequently .seen that
more colonies appeared on the petroleum than on the nutrient agar for a
given water sample. Those on the petroleum agar were smaller than those
on nutrient agar. Colonies on nutrient agar were obviously from dif-
fering genera, whereas petroleum metabolizers were identical in appear-
ance, implying that they were of the same genus. See, for example, the
data in Table 11 for the dates 7/24/72, 9/18/72, and 9/25/72. (This
phenomenon continues to be seen in lake studies as well as in batch cul-
tures which are described later.)
Since these samples were identical, it would seem that, at best, the
counts on the two agars should be identical, and assuming motor oil to
be far more difficult for microbes to metabolize, it seems reasonable
that the petroleum agar populations should be smaller. Two explanations
were offered:
1. The petroleum metabolizers are selective for the motor
oil and cannot thrive on nutrient agar.
2. Certain (one or more) of those colonial species found
on the nutrient agar produce some kind of substance
toxic to the petroleum microbe, such that the two are
unable to co-exist on the same nutrient agar plate.
These possibilities were investigated by various culture combinations on
the two agars.
First, the petroleum metabolizer was plated alone on the nutrient agar.
Growth was abundant in 36 to 4-8 hours. Colonies were larger but only
slightly more colored than when grown on petroleum agar (on petroleum
agar, colonies are opaque - white; on nutrient agar, they appear off-
white). This observation seemed to rule out the former explanation above.
To test the second hypothesis, several systems were set up. Two sets of
plates were inoculated for each of the original lake sample plates: one
set was nutrient agar and the other, petroleum agar.
Or. each plate one colony was streaked from the nutrient agar plate with
one colony from the petroleum agar plate. This was done with each pheno-
typically different colony on the nutrient agar. The colonies from the
petroleum agar were assumed identical. (See Fig. 10 for clarification)
The petroleum oxidizers grew on both agars in the presence of any one of
the other original nutrient agar colonies. The original nutrient agar
cells grew on the nutrient agar copiously and one was found to also grow
on the petroleum agar, along with the original petroleum oxidizer. This
colony, when grown on nutrient agar, was bright orange, whereas, while
growing on petroleum agar was off-white in color. Therefore, it was in-
ferred that perhaps those colonies found on the original petroleum agar
were indeed of various genera but simply appeared similar on petroleum
agar.
48
-------
Nutrient
Agar
Nutrient
Agar
Lake Sample
Hydrocarbon
Agar
Hydrocarbon
Agar
Figure 10 - Metabolite Toxicity Test
-------
If this was true, an explanation for the great difference in numbers of
colonies may have been that on nutrient agar, easily metabolizable nu-
trient was available throughout Cagar was quite homogeneous), hence
colonies were allowed to grow to great proportions, perhaps overlapping
each other so that distinct colonies were not easily detected. On the
other hand, the petroleum agar was essentially an emulsion, i.e. oil
droplets suspended throughout an agar-water phase. This meant food
(oil) was not so easily obtainable (droplets may have been far apart)
and the size of such droplets limited the amount of metabolizable mate-
rial available to the cell, therefore, limiting colony growth.
Pure Culture Studies
These experiments with isolate YS-25 were done to ascertain petroleum
hydrocarbon metabolism using batch culture techniques. The organism was
isolated from Dunham Bay and belongs to the genus Pseudomonas.
In these studies, 25 mg of motor oil was emulsified in 250 ml distilled
water using a Waring blender, with 3 minute blending time. This emul-
sion was then inoculated with YS-25 prepared as follows: a loopful of
slant culture was thoroughly mixed into 5 ml sterile distilled water. -A
1 ml aliquot was withdrawn and introduced into each 250 ml oil-water
emulsion. The inoculated medium in a one-liter Erlenmeyer flask was in-'
cubated in a gyratory water bath to maintain a constant temperature (25°C)
and a constant rapid aeration rate.
At various time intervals throughout the incubation, aliquots were with-
drawn. A sample was removed from this aliquot, diluted serially in water,
then plated on nutrient agar and petroleum agar.
The nutrient agar and petroleum agar plate counts for these culture stud-
ies have been analyzed.
Table 12 indicates the cell concentration in the identical culture flasks
at various time intervals in the incubation. These data show trends in
population growth. Populations at initiation of incubation were large.
In several cases, population size seemed to increase, but in every case
decreased to nearly negligible numbers by 24- hours of incubation. This
could mean that the utilizable components of the motor oil were limiting.
When exhausted, the population size fell. Another possibility is that
some toxic substance was produced by an early metabolic process, thereby
preventing further growth. Perhaps the oil concentration of the etnul:.ion>
though small, was still so great that cells absorbed oil to th'.-ir ••ur-
faces and were either unable to metabolize the oil or were unabie t.o sur-
vive because diffusion of other necessary substances became impo.-:s i \j\<-.
Sediment Storage Study
Before any sediment studies were made, it was necessary to assess the
effects of storage of sediments. Sediments were collected. An aliquot
50
-------
for oxygen uptake capacity in a Warburg respirometer. The
""*" • der was storec* at 4 C for subsequent analysis after various inter-
remain^ tiffle> There was less than 7.5% variation in the quantity of
>:n,ent employed during the study.
xvgen uptake curves, shown in Figs. 11-14, indicate that low tem-
~r'e °.,'r,o storage of sediments is possible for at least 48 hours. Long
?er3L^~orage (9-11 days) resulted in a marked suppression of 02 uptake
"e^:v7ry< Samples were always analyzed within the 48 hour period. These
show that replication is sometimes a problem (Fig. 11).
3take Studies
. • •^•^— i -
-i ,<= way of estimating the decomposition capacity of lake sediments is the
-a'asurement of the oxygen consumed during incubation of the sediment for
"a given period of time. Oxygen uptake rates were measured in Warburg
This measurement reflects the oxidative metabolism of
and hydrocarbon residues as well as any other oxidizable
substrates associated with the sediment. In general, measurements of
the endogenous oxygen uptake were greater than or similar to the measure-
ments of the oxygen uptake in the presence of additional substrate. This
implies that the microflora was substrate saturated and was working at
maximum velocity with respect to the chemically complicated substrates
available to it. It also may imply some physical or chemical interference
by the oil at the level employed.
The addition of more microflora would increase the net uptake, but this
would also increase substrate level proportionately if added as sediment.
The uptake rates obtained in Warburg analysis of the lake sediments are
presented in graphical form in Figs. 15-19. In addition, there is a
table summarizing the Warburg data on the basis of specific uptake rates
(microliters oxygen uptake/gram dry sediment/hr at maximum velocity).
Table 13 illustrates an interesting trend in Dunham Bay Station 4. The
maximum activity was seen in the early spring. This activity reached a
low early in July and rose again over the July 4th weekend.
Radioisotope Uptake
A technique that has been developed in our laboratory for estimating the
metabolic activity of aquatic heterotrophic microflora has been used on
selected water and sediment samples in this study (13).
14
In this assay,- the rate of incorporation of C -glucose is used to monitor
the growth rate of the raicroflora. The assumption is made in this asuay
that glucose is utilized by all heterotrophic microflora. Prior concen-
tration of the water samples is needed for sufficient sensitivity and
minimum use of isotopes. This is done by an overlay method that has been
described by Clesceri
51
-------
Sampled 5/2/72
0)
bO
440 .
400 .
360 .
320 .
280 -
240 -
200 .
160 -
120 -
80 .
40 .
Duplicates
1.2 g sediment
2.0 ml buffer
Temp. = 30°C
Duplicates
1.2 g sediment
2.0 ml buffer
0.04 g motor oil
Temp. = 30°C
15 30 45
i
60
I
75
90 105 120 0
Minutes
i
15
30 45
i
60
I
75
90 105 120
Figure 11 - Sediment Storage Study
(24 hours)
-------
hours)
Sampled
g
in
CJ
400
360
320
280
2HO
^ 200-
H
160-
120
80-|
40
15
Duplicates
1.2 g sediment
2.0 ml buffer
Temp.
= 30°C
30
45 60 75 90 105 120 0 15
Minutes
Duplicates
1.2 g sedinent
2.0 ml buffer
0.04 g motor oil
Temp. = 30°C
30 45 60 75 90 105 120
Figure 12 - Sediment Storage Study
(48 hours)
-------
Sampled 5/2/72
in
-P
440 .
400 -
360 -
320.
c 280 -
0)
bO
o 240 .
O
H 200 _
3.
160 _
120 .
80 _
40 -
0
i.
i
Duplicates
1.2 g sediment
2.0 ml buffer
Temp. = 30°C
_Xy^~^
Is
*
Duplicates
1.2 g sediment
2.0 ml buffer
O.OU g motor oil
Temp. = 30°C
_-
/^-^
£r
1 • i i I i i i i • i i i • < i
15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120
Minutes
Figure 13 - Sediment Storage Study
(216 hours)
1
-------
Sampled
in
tn
Duplicates
1.2 g sediment
2.0 ml buffer
0.04 g motor oil
1.2 g sediment
2.0 ml buffer
60 ,5 ,0 105 120 0 15 30 ,5 60 ,5 90 105 120
= 30°C
15 30
Figure 1H - Sediment Storage Study
(336 hours)
-------
Sampled 5/2/72
350
300 •
250 .
0)
00
U-l
o
200-
150.
100.
50.
c
V
X
o
i
Duplicates
1.2 g sediment
2.0 ml buffer
Temp. = 30°C
T
30
60
Minutes
~T
90
120
Figure 15 - Endogenous Respiration
Dunham Bay Station 4
56
-------
1*00 -
350-
300
250
oi
oo
3 200
o
H
3.
150-
100.
50,
Sampled 5/2/72
Duplicates
1.2 g sediment
2.0 ml buffer
0.04 g motor oil
Temp. = 30 C
30
60
90
120
Minutes
Figure 16 - Substrate Respiration
Dunham Bay Station 4
57
-------
300
250
200
0)
00
150
100
* +
i •
+
O
•
•f
O
; * ; *
Sampled 7/3/72
Comparative Study
2.0 g sediment
2.0 ml buffer
Temp. = 30°C
Key: • Dunham Bay 4-
+ Dunham Bay 2
O Echo Bay 2
X Dunham Bay 3
A Echo Bay 1
60
90
120
Minutes
Figure 17 - Endogenous Respiration
58
-------
350.
300J
250
a)
go
20CU
o
m
o
» 150J
lOO
50
Sampled 7/4/72
Comparative Study
2.0 g sediment
2.0 ml buffer
Temp. = 30°C
Key :
+ +
*
* *» /^
I 5 • S
• Dunham Bay 4
+ Dunham Bay 2
X Dunham Bay 3
O Echo Bay 2
• Echo Bay 1
30
60
Minutes
90
120
Figure 18 - Endogenous Respiration
59
-------
r
T
300 .
Sampled 7/6/72
Comparative Study
2.0 g sediment
2.0 ml buffer
Temp. = 30°C
250
Key: • Dunham Bay 4
O Echo Bay 2
4- Dunham Bay 2
X Dunham Bay 3
O Echo Bay 1
200 -
0)
bO
U-i
o
150 «
100 .
50 -
X
•
X
•
o
+
X
•
o
X
o
X
30
60
Minutes
90
120
Figure 19 - Endogenous Respiration
60
-------
5/2/72
Table 13
Uptake/Hour/1.0 GM Dry Sediment
Dunham Bay
Echo Ba
Station
2
Station
3
Station Station Station
444 0*
endog.
0.04g
oil
5/1/72
7/3/72
7/4/72
7/6/72
59
102
77
30
132
158
1430
73
555
710
21
42
41
53
26
89
eiiuug.
endog.
endog ,
-average of duplicate runs
Respiration in presence of 0.04 g of oil;
-IT _-^u«-,<- n-ma onrlntrenOUS
rebjjii a t j-wii j... j
all others are endogenous
61
-------
Incorporation rate of the water samples is looked at as a function of
number of cells as determined by plate count. This gives a specific
activity of the microflora which can be related to chemical, physical,
or other biological aspects of the system.
Some isotope studies were done for surface water in Dunham Bay and for
the water column in both Echo Bay and Dunham Bay.
Isotope studies were done on sediments from all three bays. These studies
are shown in Figs. 20-22.
Discussion
The field survey for cell concentrations in surface waters and the water
column indicated that no significant differences occurred with respect to
sampling station or date of sampling. A possible exception is that oc-
casional highs were found at Station 4 in Dunham Bay. There was a one
hundred-fold increase in cell count at this station over the July 4th
weekend, but scattered equivalent highs at Dunham Bay Station 4- on 8/7
and Echo Bay Station 1 on 8/21.
Studies of biodegradability of oil and oil products by natural microflora
in the water column and surface waters were limited by the low concentra-
tions of heterotrophic microflora found in Lake George. Therefore, an
isolate (YS-25) that grew well on petroleum agar was used as a test or-
ganism for pure culture studies of biodegradability. Although the organism
proliferated on petroleum agar, growth in an oil-water mixture was not
apparent. The concentration of oil in the oil-water mixture was 1/5 of
that used in the petroleum agar. This was necessary to avoid a surface
film in the oil-water mixture which may have interfered with oxygen
transfer. Growth on petroleum agar occurred without the addition of
yeast extract to the agar, although it was routinely added to enhance
the size and number of colonies in field studies. The failure to produce
growth in the oil-water mixture may be due to the absence of trace nutri-
ents supplied by the agar itself.
Radioisotope studies permitted the examination of the activity of the
microflora in water and sediment. Although these studies of "hetero-
trophic potential" only indirectly implicate the effects of oil in the
ecosystem, there is some evidence that the July 4th weekend activities
stimulated the sediment microflora in Dunham Bay, but not in Echo Bay.
For equal quantities of sediment, the heterotrophic potential for Dunham
Bay rose during the period 7/4 to 7/6, whereas the heterotrophic potential
for Echo Bay fell. This could be attributed to addition of metabolizable
carbon compounds from outboard engine waste to a carbon limited system
or to increased mixing.
The oxygen uptake activity of the sediments possibly reflects difference.';
in the composition of the organic material available for oxidation .In the
sediments. On the other hand, these data may reflect changes in thr: micro-
biological population such that organisms of shorter generation timea
62
-------
2U hours
Sampled 6/26/72
nucleopore Teflon filters,
0.45 micron
glucose-free nutrient medium
Temp • =
Dunham Bay Station 2 (surface)
DuihamC|iySStation 3 (surface)
330 cells/ml
Echo Bay Station 1 (mid-depth)
327 cells/ml
10,000
Hours
Figure 20 - Heterotrophic Potential: Water
63
-------
24 hours
15
13
12
11
10
Sampled 7/4/72
cellulose acetate filters, 0.45 micron
glucose-free nutrient medium
Temp. = 24°C
Dry Weights:
Echo Bay Station 1
Echo Bay Station 2
Dunham Bay Station 4
Dunham Bay Station 3
Dunham Bay Station 2
0.00735 g
0.0383 g
0.00675 g
0.0142 g
0.02295 g
Hours
Figure 21 - Heterotrophic Potential: Sediment
64
-------
hours
0 u5 micron
lucose-free nutrient medium
* -
Dry Weights
0.0141 g
0.0305 g
0.01073 g
0.01093 g
0.0153 g
Echo Bay Station 1
Echo Bay Station 2
Dunham Bay Station
Dunham Bay Station 3
Dunham Bay Station 2
Figure 22 -
Hours
Heterotrophic Potential: Sediment
65
-------
predominate during periods of high oxygen uptake, and the converse in
periods of low oxygen uptake. However, since a rather drastic change
occurs in the short interval 7/3 to 7/6, it seems that the variation in
oxygen uptake is more likely a function of chemical composition.
If the lack of stimulation of initial oxygen uptake by oil on 5/2 was due
to substrate saturation as indicated earlier, perhaps there is signifi-
cance in the divergence that occurred in one of the endogenous sampler
after prolonged incubation. (Fig. 15)
Since decomposing heterotrophs are opportunists in the sense that they
respond quickly to the introduction of suitable substrate to their en-
virons, it is reasonable to assume that the microflora (heterotrophic)
is relatively constant with respect to size of population and that varia-
tion in activity is a function of temporary population expansion. As the
newly introduced substrate becomes depleted, the population is returned
to the normal level as these microflora are consumed by zooplankton,
autolyze, or otherwise transported out of the system.
The introduction of wastes from outboard engines may play a role in these
activity pulsations but positive proof would require chemical identifica-
tion of the organics utilized by the microorganisms.
66
-------
SECTION VI - EFFECT OF OUTBOARD ENGINE EXHAUSTS
ON PHYTOPLANKTON
^search has been conducted on the effects of oil discharges on
,.ater algae. The low level pollution of lakes and rivers from the
'"",'Of the research has been to examine and evaluate any effects which
~e'---oard engine exhausts may have on the phytoplankton of Lake George,
r.~.~.~vork, especially the effect on phytoplankton ability to fix C02 in
l~-"e oresence of crankcase drainage.
-' !
-------
damaged algae showed some signs of recovery after four to five weeks.
Tenderon (86) also discussed the effects of the Torrey Canyon disaster
and pointed out that marine birds suffered the most from oil pollution
and that there did not seem to be a high mortality rate in the flora.
LaRoche et al. (42) have described bioassay procedures for oil and oil
dispersant toxicity evaluation in the marine environment. In general,
they found crude oils (West Texas, Kuwait, Lagumillas) to be far less
toxic to shrimp and other marine species in 96 hours than were refined
oils.
Tarzwell (85) summed up the effect of oil on aquatic organisms in the fol-
lowing words: "The effects of oil on aquatic organisms are very diverse
and complex. Oil on the surface may limit oxygen exchange, entangle and
kill surface organisms, contaminate organisms which come to the surface
only occasionally, contribute water soluble materials which are toxic,
contain volatiles which may produce toxic conditions before their re-
lease and result in the production of degradation products, which are
toxic or are contaminants, coat the gills of aquatic organisms or produce
solid tar-like masses." He further states that oil spillages or leakages
from oil wells, barges and tankers along our coast, have resulted in
harmful effects to the marine biota. Water soluble portions, volatile-
fractions, and breakdown products such as naphthenic acids have injured
or killed certain aquatic life. Direct contact with the oil interferes
with gaseous exchange at the air-water interface and respiration.
Hardy (30) points out that a layer of hydrocarbon on a water surface in-
terferes with gaseous exchange between the atmosphere and sea water. The
opacity of the hydrocarbon film has an adverse effect on the photosyn-
thesis of algae. Clendenning (12), in a controlled laboratory experiment,
observed that a film 0.02 mm thick on sea water did not affect the
photosynthetic activity of Macrocystis pyrifera during 24 hours exposure
at 22°C, but the photosynthetic activity stopped completely after three
days .
In a review paper on occurrence, effects and fate of oil polluting the
sea, Zobell (95) noted that oils have a relatively high oxygen demand and
may result in oxygen depletion in certain oil polluted waters. From the
observations made by various workers on the toxicity of oils on phyto-
plankton, he concluded that phytoplankton seemed to be injured only by
continuous prolonged exposure to large amounts of oil. Such conditions,
he noted, prevailed only in exceptionally heavily polluted areas such as
tidepools, seaports and settling ponds or lagoons.
Galtsoff et al. (26) reported normal growth of diatoms in an aqueous
medium overlayered with various kinds of mineral oil. They also found
that water soluble extract from 12% crude oil stimulated growth of most
diatoms while extract from 25% crude oil retarded the growth and ex-
tract from 50% crude oil stopped the growth of all diatoms. Clendenning
(12) found that a 1% emulsion in sea water reduced the photo:;ynther;i::
68
-------
c-'-
3'°M
' ''
r
-------
Materials
1. Plankton tow with a nylon net, No. 20, aparture
80 microns, inlet diameter 4 inches
2. Sample containers, plastic, one liter capacity
3. Microscope, Zeiss, RA type with inclined binocular
body
4. Microscope slides, cover glass and immersion oil
5. Filtering apparatus and 0.45y membrane filters
(Millipore HAWP type)
6. VanDorn bottle, 4.1 liter capacity
7. Temperature and D.O. meter (Model 54 oxygen meter
supplied by Yellow Springs Instrument Company,
Yellow Springs, Ohio)
8. pH meter, stirrer, etc.
9. Milk dilution bottles, 160 ml capacity
10. Liquid scintillation counting vials, screw cap, foil
lined, 22 mm neck, supplied by New England Nuclear,
Boston, Massachusetts
11. Test algae, Selenastrum capricornutum Printz, Microcystis
aeruginosa Kutz, and Anabaena flos-aquae Lyngb, Source:
National Eutrophication Research Program, Pacific Northwest
Water Laboratory, EPA, Corvallis, Oregon
Apparatus
1. Incubator Box
The incubator box, commonly known as a photosynthetic en-
vironmental control chamber, consisted of a water-tight
plexiglas tank with inside dimensions of 7" x 11" x 15".
The milk dilution bottles (54 can be accommodated) are
held in 1 1/4" wide stainless steel clips which are mounted
on 1 1/2" wide and 6" diameter plexiglas discs. The discs
are rotated by means of a gear motor at 6 rpm to effect
continuous mixing of the sample. The plexiglas tank is
enclosed in a plywood box and is provided with two sets
of four cool white fluorescent lights, one set on each
long side and 4 inches from the outside of the tank. The
light intensity can be varied by means of a dimming sys-
tem provided in the box. Maximum light available to algae
was about 1200 foot candles. Lake water was continuously
circulated through the incubator box to maintain the water
samples at approximately the lake temperature.
2. Liquid Scintillation Counter
A Liquid Scintillation System, LS-133 (Beckman Instruments,
Inc., Fullerton, California) was used throughout this study.
70
-------
jc-133 is an ambient temperature scintillation counter and is
gauipped with a Model 33 Teletypewriter for data print-out.
rt has a conveyor chain with 100 sample positions which are
automatically sequenced by photoelectric cells. The instru-
ment is primarily designed to count H , C , and P or a
mixture of these radioisotopes.
tow samples were collected from the three bays. Vertical
tow samples were obtained from two stations in each bay. The
of water that passed through the plankton net was calculated for
The samples were collected in one-liter plastic containers
1^ nsuallv examined on the day of collection. When not being examined,
*•-!' samples were stored at 3°-5°C in a cold room. Identification and
j-^neration of algae followed the method described by Edmondson (19).
~-~Q only variation in this procedure was that algae under the whole cover
-l~ss were counted instead of counting algae in two transects. The
I-?ects of outboard engine exhausts were determined by the radioisotope
dilution technique introduced by Steeman-Nielsen (74-) to be used in
oligotrophic waters and in waters with a photic zone of greath depth.
The method has since been modified by Ryther (63), Goldman (27), and
others. It consists of adding a known amount of NaHC 63 possessing a
high C^ activity to lake samples and incubating for a known period of
time (3 hours). The sample is filtered through a membrane filter, O.M-Sy
oore size, and the activity of the retentate is determined which provides
a measure of C02 fixed.
Water samples were taken with a VanDorn bottle, from one station in each
bay at a depth of 2 meters. This depth was selected because it was al-
ways in the photic zone and the algae in this zone are not subjected to
intensive light. Temperature and D.O. were measured at the time of
sampling. The pH of the sample was measured and alkalinity was obtained
by titrating it with 0.02 N H SO. to pH 5.0.
One hundred ml of lake water samples were placed in milk dilution bottles,
160 ml capacity. Various amounts of crankcase drainage (collected with
a Kleen Zaust, Goggi Corporation, Staten Island, N. Y.) were added to
make up 0 (control), 1, 5, 10, 20, 30, and 50 ppm (by volume) samples.
Three replicate light bottles and two replicate dark bottles were pre-
pared for each concentration. Three yc of C^ as NaHC 03 (unler;:; no Led
otherwise) were added to each bottle. The mouths of the bottle:; were
sealed with"1 aluminum foil and then capped securely. These were then
incubated in the photosynthetic chamber for three hours. This time
period was considered reasonable since sufficient C would be fixed by
those algae present to give reliable counts in a short counting time of
one minute; it was not excessive to completely exhaust the available
carbon or other essential elements which might limit the growth of these
organisms.
71
-------
The samples were then filtered through 0.45y membrane filters under a
low vacuum. The algae retained on the filter were washed with 20 ml of
lake water to remove any radioactive carbon adsorbed onto the algae or
soaked in the membrane filter. The membrane filter and the C^ labelled
cells retained on it, were dissolved in 10 ml of scintillation cocktail
in a liquid scintillation counting vial. One liter of the scintillation
cocktail was composed of 120 grams of naphthalene and 8 grams of Om-
nifluor dissolved in 1-4, dioxane. The activity present in each vial was
measured, as counts per minute, in a liquid scintillation counter.
The rate of carbon assimilated can be obtained from the relationship:
12 14
C available , C available
"™-^™™^^™^™1^™^^^ ™ I\ ^\ ^^•^•^^^^™^^^^™^™-^^*-^^
12
C assimilated C assimilated
14
where k is a factor which corrects for the slower uptake of C as com-
pared to C-J-2 (26). It is seen from the above relationship that C up-
take for a given sample is proportional to the C14" uptake.
The effect of various concentrations of oil-gas mixtures added to the
sample can, therefore, be obtained by comparing the number of counts per
minute for each sample with those of the control.
Similar experiments were also conducted with raw fuel (1:50 oil-gas
mixture). The gasoline as well as the oil used in this research was
obtained from Mobil stations in one batch.
Also, effects of water soluble extract of crankcase drainage on test
algae were determined. Nutrient medium consisting of macronutrients and
micronutrients, as detailed in Sec. 6 of the "Algal Assay Procedures,
Bottle Test" by EPA (23), was prepared. About 6 ml of crankcase drainage
obtained from a 33 1/3 HP Evinrude engine running at 1000 rpm, was added
to approximately 6 liters of the nutrient medium and shaken thoroughly.
This was then allowed to rest for a few hours. The medium was withdrawn
from an opening at the bottom, leaving the oil film behind. The carbon
content of the standard medium and that of the medium plus crankcase
drainage was measured on a Beckman Carbon Analyzer. The difference in
the two carbon measurements is due to the oil-gas mixture dissolved in
the medium. More crankcase drainage had to be added to make up the
highest concentration noted on Figs. 23-28. With 60 ml of this medium
in each of the 250 ml flasks, algal assays were performed using test
algae Selenastrum capricornutum (Printz), Microcystis aeruginosa (Kut z)
and Anabaena flos-aquae (Lyngb). The method followed for thf- algal
assay procedure is outlined in the above noted EPA brochure (23).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Plankton tow samples (vertical tows) were collected during June through
September in order to determine the predominant species of algae present
72
-------
in
the
three bays under study. Smith Bay has not been sampled as fre-
-•- ly as the other bays because of dock building activity occurring
a-ue? most of the summer, 1972. In addition, a few drag samples
"url-£ZOntal plankton tows) from one station to the other at Dunham and
- ° Say were also obtained during May and June, 1972.
• ies 14-25 have been prepared to include the number of different algae
^ r'uter of lake water for the algal genera observed from various sam-
',-i'0s. *-- is seen from these tables that Fragilaria, Asterionella,
-tjjoijrvon and Tabellaria were the predominant algal genera present in
rt^~~bays~during the period under study. Rhizosolenia is another genus
was present in sufficient numbers in the plankton tow samples of
June. It is noticed that in both Dunham and Echo Bays
began to appear in the middle of May, was in bloom by mid-
~and disappeared almost completely by the end of June 1972. Echo
3ay samples had twice as much Rhizosolenia as that found in Dunham Bay
gamp]_es. The highest concentration of Rhizosolenia in Echo Bay was
approximately 7000 cells/liter. Dinobryon increased steadily since the
middle of May and reached its maximum growth at the end of June. It
disappeared almost completely at the end of August yet was observed
again in the September samples.
Population concentrations of Asterionella and Fragilaria have varied
during the period under investigation. In Dunham Bay Asterionella
reached a peak concentration (27,600 cells/liter) on 6/26/72. However,
in the 6/30/72 sample it had dropped to 1200 cells/liter. It began
increasing in July samples and has been varying during the following
months (August and September). Fragilaria demonstrated its peak popu-
lation in the first week of July in Echo Bay and in the second week of
August in Dunham Bay. In the plankton tow sample of 7/6/72 at Station
2, Echo Bay, the Fragilaria population density was estimated at 56,000
cells/liter. Dunham Bay, Station 2 had a maximum concentration of
40,000 Fragilaria cells/liter on 8/15/72.
Concentrations of Synedra populations have remained relatively stable
during the period under investigation. Tabellaria has also remained
steady except for a peak in the middle of August, when it reached the
maximum concentration noted (6000 cells/liter at Station 2, Dunham Bay).
Staurastrum and Spondylosium do show up at times but their numbers have
been relatively low. The case is similar with Zygnema and Mougeotia
which have made their appearance in only a few samples. Ceratium ap-
peared at the end of June and reached a maximum population of 1500
cells/liter by the end of July, 1972.
It was observed that Fragilaria was the most abundant alga present in
the three bays. On the average Echo Bay contained the largest number
of organisms per liter and Smith Bay the least.
June samples had the highest concentrations of algal populations which
decreased considerably by the last week of July, but recovered somewhat
73
-------
f
Table 14
Predominant Algal Genera Found in
Dunham Bay and Echo Bay
Sample 5/18/72
Number of Organisms per liter
Asterionella
Fragilaria
Tabellaria
Rhizosolenia
Navicula
Synedra
Staurastrum
Spondylosium
Dinobryon
Dunham Bay
Stations 2-3
140
1,200
720
40
40
60
Total
100
2,300
Echo Bay
Stations 1-2
1,050
1,050
360
200
100
10
10
70
2,850
74
-------
Table 15
Predominant Algal Genera Found in
Asterionella
Fragilaria
Tabellaria
Rhizosolenia
Navicula
Synedra
Pinnularia
Cymbella
Spondylosium
Dinobryon
"""••—• — J -
Sample 6/12/72
Number of Organisms
Dunham Bav
Stations 2-3
560
1,350
0
1,310
20
50
0
10
0
210
per liter
Echo Bav
Stations 1-2
2,950
3,400
2,880
2,540
10
40
0
n
u
80
430
Total
3,510
12,330
75
-------
Table 16
Predominant Algal Genera Found in
Asterionella
Fragilaria
Tabellaria
Rhizosolenia
Navicula
Synedra
Cymbella
Staurastrum
Spondylosium
Arthrodesmus
Mougeotia
Dinobryon
Dunham Bay and Echo Bay
Sample 6/19/72
Number of Organisms
Dunham Bay
Stations 2-3
3,500
8,000
1,440
3,500
0
50
0
0
120
0
0
1,500
Total 18,110
per liter
Echo Bav
Stations 1-2
7,700
7,600
2, ,20
6,700
50
110
30
10
600
20
100
1 ,"00
26,840
76
-------
Table 17
Sample 6/26/72
Number of Organisms per liter
Asterionella
Fragilaria
Tabellaria
Dl-» -i Tn^olSTllcl
J\ll J. ti W J ^^
Navicula
Synedra
Staurastrum
Spondylosium
Zygnema
Dinobryon
Gomphospheria
^ —
Dunham Bav
c-^-t-Tnn 2 Station 3
4,800 27,600
10,000 32,000
1,080 3,420
0 300
0 °
\J
250 °
TOO 20°
J_L/\J
_ n
550 °
1 000 °
JL 5 N* *^ w
4,800 5,700
o 9_
._ -«^ KQ 990
Echo
Station 1
49,800
81,000
7,200
1,000
0
o
200
1,000
?
0
5,100
o
145,300
Bav
Station 2
37,200
76,500
3,600
300
900
100
0
0
0
4,000
100
122,700
Total
22,580
77
-------
.1
I
Table 18
Predominant Algal Genera Found in
Dunham
and Echo Bay
Sample 6/30/72
Number of Organisms per liter
Dunham Bay
Asterionella
Fragilaria
Tabellaria
Navicula
Synedra
Staurastrum
Zygnema
Dinobryon
Ceratium
Total
Station 2
3,000
7,500
5,400
50
900
200
500
10,900
0
Station 3
1,200
4,000
120
0
100
20
0
3,300
10
Echo Bay
25,950
8,750
Station 1
300
2,000
300
50
200
20
0
3,400
0
6,250
Station 2
4,800
18,500
720
0
80
400
0
11,900
200
36,600
78
-------
Table 19
Predominant Algal Genera Found in
P.T Echo Bay and Smith Hay
Sample 7/3/72
of Organisms per liter
isterionella
Fragilaria
Tabellaria
Rhizosolenia
Synedra
Pinnularia
Staurastrum
Arthrodesmus
Cosmarium
Synura
Dinobryon
Ceratium
Total
Dunham Bay Lcno DdY
Station Station Station Station
2 3 1 f
9,000 600 600 U,800
9,000 6,000 2,500 25,500
600 600 120 2,400
0 100 10 0
100 100 0 40
0 0 2 0
o o o 10
0 0 0 5
o o o 10
100 o 10 10
5,500 2,900 2,700 3,100
inn 90 800
100 ioo_ /u-
Station
1
3,000
900
0
0
10
0
60
10
60
0
600
60
"
Station
2
17,000
3,310
360
0
60
0
60
10
0
0
1,250
375
10..00
36,675 ,,700
79
-------
Table 20
Predominant Algal Genera Found in
Dunham Bay and Echo Bay
Sample 7/6/72
Asterionella
Fragilaria
Tabellaria
Navicula
Synedra
Pinnularia
Staurastrum
Pediastrum
Dinobryon
Gymnodinium
Ceratium
4,000
12,000
2,000
100
0
0
100
0
3,000
0
0
Bay
Station 3
5,000
15,000
500
0
0
0
80
60
1,500
60
100
oo -^nn
Echo
Station 1
1,500
6,000
800
20
20
0
100
0
2,000
0
100
10,540
Bay
Station 2
15,000
56,000
7,000
800
400
400
400
0
12,000
400
1,000
93,400
Total 21,200
80
-------
Table 21
Algal Genera Found in
Dunham Bay and Echo Bay
Sample 7/10/72
A.sterionella
Fragilari-3
Tabellaria
Cyclotella
Frustula
Staurastrum
Arthrodesmus
Pediastrum
Synura
Dinobryon
Sphaerocystis
Gyrnnodinium
Dunham Bay
Station 2 Station 3
4,000 1,300
25,000 10,000
1,500 2,100
0 50
20 0
800 0
0 0
60 50
0 30
100 600
20 0
0 0
0 0
Echo
Station 1
700
10,000
1,500
0
0
80
0
80
0
1,500
0
50
700
Bay
Station 2
3,000
5,000
500
0
0
100
300
0
0
0
0
0
8£
Total 31,500
14,130
14,610
8,980
81
-------
Table 22
Asterionella
Fragilaria
Tabellaria
Navicula
Synedra
Pinnularia
Cymbella
Staurastrum
Arthrodesmus
Cosmarium
Zygnema
Spirogyra
Dinobryon
Ceratium
Euglena
Predominant Alge
Dunham Bay, Echc
Sample
Number
Dunham Bay
Station Station
2 3
300 1,500
8,000 10,000
300 2,000
300 0
500 0
0 0
0 0
300 300
300 300
0 30
1,000 0
1,000 0
500 0
0 0
1,000 300
1 13.500 14,430
il Genera Found in
5 Bay and Smith Ba^
7/24/72
of Organisms per
Echo Bay
Station Station
1 2
0/\
0
1,500 150
0 300
40 100
40 100
40 0
0 100
40 200
0 100
0 0
On
U
0 0
\J w
n o
U w
40 1,500
200 700
1,900 3,250
r
liter
Smith Bav
Station Station
1 2
0 150
600 1,500
0 5.0
30 10
60 10
0 0
0 0
100 10
30 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
100 30
o_ o
920 1.76C
82
-------
Table 23
isterionella
rragilaria
Tabellaria
Mavicula
Synedra
Cymbella
Cyclotella
Frustula
Staurastrum
Arthrodesmus
Mougeotia
Spirogyra
Dinobryon
Ceratium
Total
Dunham Bay, Echo Bay and Smith Bay
Sample
Number
Dunham Bay
Station Station
2 3
20,000 3,000
40,000 5,000
6,000 400
0 0
100 0
50 0
200 0
0 0
300 100
50 0
0 0
0 0
500 0
0 0
R7 -?nr> 8.500
8/15/72
of Organisms per liter
Echo Bay Smith
Station Station Station
121
2,000 3,000 200
8,000 6,000 20
3,000 800 200
000
0 400 0
0 0 20
0 40 100
000
100 100 10
0 0 20
0 100 0
5,000 0 0
0 0 20
200 40 10
18,300 10,480 600
Bay
Station
2
0
6,000
0
1,000
150
0
300
300
0
0
0
0
0
0
7,750
83
-------
Table 24
^^.ant Algal r.nsra Found in
p""*"™ **v and Lchu Uay_
Sample 9/4/72
y^xor. nf Organisms per liter
Echo
Dunham Bay
Station. A Station 3 Station^
S 000 500 2,000
Asterionella 5»000
i inn 5,000
5 000 1,100 »
Fragilana b'uuu
inn 200
500 10U
Tabellana buu
cr. 0
. , 100 60
Navicula
n
100 50
Synedra
n 20
0 °
Pinnulana
i nn
n luu
0
. Cymbella
0 20 °
Gyros igma
100 ° °
Epithema
n 40
0 °
Amphora
on 60
100 30
Staurastrum
inn °
0 10°
Mougeotia
n
2 000 200
Ulothrix ^,uuu
n °
0 °
Oscillatoria
0 60 20
Stephanodiscus u
Z(J
Ceratium 1°0 .
Total 13,000 2,250 7 ,4UO
Bav
Station 2
800
4,000
400
100
40 -
20
80
0
0
60
50
0
0
3 ,000
?0
0
8,570
84
-------
Table 25
Algal Genera Found in
Sample 9/18/72
Number of Organisms per liter
Dunham
Bav
station 2 Station 3
i£terlonella 900
n,ria 1,500
rr-agj.J.ar-1-a
u -MP-ria 90°
-jheiJ-SI J.G
Q
\avicula
Q
Svnedra
n
Pinnulana
rv
Cymbella
Cyclotella °
f\
Frustula u
n
Gyros igma
r\
Amphora
Achnanthes °
Staurastrum 300
• n
Soondylosium u
Arthrodesmus °
• n
Cosmarium u
• n
Mougeotia u
Ulothrix °
Dinobryon 30
Ceratiuffl _______
Total 3,530
3,000
6,000
500
0
0
0
0
100
o
0
o
n
VJ
200
o
150
0
500
n
\J
0
50
10,500
Echo Bay
Station 1 Station 2
1,000 1,000
2,000 9,000
120 2,000
0 500
0 300
o 100
o 100
n 0
0 u
o 100
o 100
o 100
0 80
0 200
0 300
o o
0 80
o o
0 1,000
0 °
30 200
3,150 15,160
Smith 3av
Station 2
400
1,000
100
0
0
0
n
u
0
0
0
0
60
o n
80
0
n
w
0
1,6UO
85
-------
in August. September samples exhibited the least amounts of algae in
them. The total number of algae found in samples from Station 1, Smith
Bay was less than 1000 cells/liter in sarples taken on both 7/24 and
8/15/72. Although algal populations in all three bays were relatively
low at that time, it is not unlikely that a copper-containing wood pre-
servative at the dock near Station 1 had contributed to the reduction
in the number of algae -
The following is a listing of the planktonic algae found in Dunham, Smith
and Echo Bays, Lake George, New York, from May through September, 1972.
Division Chlorophyta
Volvocaceae
Gonium Mueller
Eudorina unicocca G. M. Smith
Chlamydomonadaceae
Chlamydonomas Ehr.
Palmellaceae
Sphaerocystis Chodat
Ulotrichaceae
Ulothrix Kutzing
Micractiniaceae
Golenkinia Chodat
Hydrodictyaceae
Pediastrum boryanum Menegh
Pediastrum Meyen
Oocystaceae
Pachycladon umbrinus G. M. Smith
Scenedesmaceae
Scenedesmus Meyen
Zygnemataceae
Mougeotia Agardh
Spirogyra Link
Zygnema Agardh
Desraidiaceae
Closterium Nitzsch
Staurastrum paradoxum Meyen
Staurastrum Meyen
Cosmarium Corda
Arthrodesinus octocornis Ehr.
Arthrodesmus Ehr.
Spondylosium de Brebisson
Division Chrysophyta
Tribonemataceae
Tribonema Derkes 6 Solier
Synuraceae
Synura uvella Ehr.
Ochromonadaceae
Uroglenopsis americana Lemm.
Dinobryon sertularia Ehr.
Dinobryon stipitatum Stein
86
-------
Coscinodiscaceae
Melosira Agardh.
Cyclotella Kutzing
Stephanodiscus
Rhizosoleniaceae
Rhizosolenia eriensis H. L. Smith
Tabeilariaceae
Tabellaria floccosa Kutz
Tabellaria fenestrata Kutz
Fragilariaceae
Asterionella Hassall
Fragilaria Lyngbye
Synedra Ehr.
Achnanthaceae
Achnanthes
Naviculaceae
Frustulia
Gyrosigma
Navicula Bory
Pleurosigma W. Smith
Pinnularia Ehr.
Gomphonemataceae
Gomphonema Agardh
Cymbellaceae
Amphora
Cymbella Agardh
Surirellaceae
Surirella Turpin
Ephithemiaceae
Epithema
Division Pyrrophyta
Gymnodiniaceae
Gymnodinium Stein
Ceratiaceae
Ceratium Schrank
Division Cyanophyta
Chroococcaceae
Chroococcus Nageli
Gomphosphaeria Kutzing
Oscillatoriaceae
Oscillatoria Vaucher
Nostocaceae
Anabaena Bory
Division (uncertain)
Cryptomonadaceae
Crytomonas Ehr.
The 50 genera listed above were identified from various samples collected
from the three bays during the period under report. The predominant
species, however, were few, as noted in Tables l"4-25.
87
-------
The data on algal populations of the three bays do not afford any sig-
nificant correlation between the kind and number of algae present and
the amount of oil present in each bay. The data do provide important
information about the seasonal variations of major algal species present
in the bays.
Figs. 23-25 have been plotted to show the response of indigenous algae
to various concentrations of oil-gas mixture. The C uptake by the
algae appears to initially increase at concentrations of raw fuel equal
to or less than 5 ppm. However, the photosynthetic activity of the
algae decreases at higher oil-gas mixture concentrations and is extremely
low at a concentration of 100 ppm. The response of the indigenous algae
to crankcase drainage from a two cycle outboard engine is somewhat sim-
ilar in that C02 fixation capacity seems increasingly inhibited with
increasing concentrations of the oil-gas mixture. Also, it was noted I
that the dark bottle counts decreased when the concentration of oil-gas !
mixture was 100 ppm. A number of reasons can be advanced for this be- t
havior of the algae. These are:
1. The oil-gas mixture is not inhibitory to the ability of |
these algae to fix C02 at concentrations less than 5 ppm.
2. The addition of a small quantity of oil-gas mixture (i.e.
5 ppm) may supplement the carbon available to the algae,
thereby increasing the carbon uptake by the latter. This
is not to suggest that carbon is limiting but the situa-
tion is more like that of luxury uptake. It is noted that }
the increase in C uptake is less than 15% in all the [
experiments. !
3. Although the oil-gas mixture at higher concentrations r
provides more carbon to these algae, it appears to in- ;
hibit their ability to fix C02. '
U. It is possible that at higher concentrations the surface
of the algae is coated with the oil-gas mixture which
then may interfere with various biochemical functions.
5. Reflection of some of the incident light by the oil film
present at the surface of the liquid, especially at higher
concentrations, may affect the photosynthetic activity of
the algae.
6. At higher concentrations, some of the oil-gas mixture
added coats the walls of the milk dilution bottle. This
may also affect the availability of light to the algae.
7. The presence of oil-gas film at the surface reduces the
gas transfer from and into the sample, which may affect
l^C uptake by the algae.
The effects noted from these studies suggest that:
1. The crankcase drainage discharged into water by two cycle
outboard engines may inhibit the ability of algae in-
digenous to Lake George to fix C02 if the hydrocarbon
levels in the lake reach 3-5 ppm or more.
88
-------
ID
10
25
30
1 S VU ^^ \
Concentration of Oil-Gas Mixture in PPM (by volume)
1U
Figure 23 - Effect of Crankcase Drainage on C Uptake by Indigenous Algae
in Their Natural Population Density
Dunham Bay Sample 7/27772
-------
• •* ..- >~.i., -.-..^f, H«££rut:
ID
O
Raw Fuel (1:50)
Crankcase Drainage —O-
Cfroo two cycle engines)
JU / •, \
Concentration of Oil-Gas Mixture in PPM (by volume)
Figure 2U - Effect of Oil-Gas Mixture on C14 Uptake by Indigenous Algae
in Their Natural Population Density
Echo Bay Sample 9/1U/72
-------
10
10,000 f
9000 i>
8000
X
a.
o
I
0)
(X
0)
I
o
1000
Raw Fuel (1:50)
Crankcase Drainage
(from two cycle engines)
>~ -A-
, o-
10
20 30 40 50 60 70
Concentration of Oil-Gas Mixture in PPM (by volume)
Figure 25 -
lu
Effect of Oil-Gas Mixture on C Uptake by Indigenous Algae
in Their Natural Population Density
Dunham Bay Sample 9/1U/72
-------
2. Algal growth potential may be enhanced by the intro-
duction into lake water of crankcase drainage from two
cycle outboard engines to 1-3 ppm.
3. The crankcase drainage from two cycle outboard engines
appears more inhibitory to the algae's rate and extent
of C02 fixation capacity than does the raw fuel. |
Data for the bioassay tests conducted on test algae in a controlled en-
vironment have been analyzed as to the effect on maximum specific growth
rate of algae by the addition of water soluble extent of crankcase
drainage. Mean maximum specific growth rate for replicate bottles was
calculated by the EPA method (23). The computer program used for this
purpose is essentially the same as employed by Sachdev (64). This has
been slightly modified to include, in the computer output, the day on
which maximum growth rate occurred for each bottle. The computer pro-
gram, as used in this work, is listed in Appendix 1 of this report.
Rensselaer's IBM 360, Model 50 computer was employed for the data analysi;
Daily absorbance readings and maximum specific growth rates for each
bottle are given in Appendix 2. .A summary of the results appears in
Tables 26-28 and growth curves are shown in Figs. 26-28. The data on
growth curves presented in summary Tables 26-28 are discussed under
three headings as below.
For the sake of clarity and to avoid repetition it is added that con-
centrations of added carbon appearing in Tables 26-28 in mg/1 and in
the following discussion refer to additional concentration of carbon
in the sample due to the presence of water soluble extract from crank-
case drainage.
The criteria adopted for interpreting the results of bioassay tests re-
garding maximum specific growth rates are that values within 10% of the
control indicate no effect, values more than 110% of control indicate
stimulation, and values less than 90% of control indicate inhibition.
1. Maximum specific growth rate
Microcystis aeruginosa appears to be most sensitive to water
soluble extracts of crankcase drainage so far as maximum
growth rate is concerned. In this case stimulation was
observed when added carbon due to water soluble extract of
crankcase drainage was only 1 mg/1. At 5 mg/1 or more maxi-
mum growth rate decreased to a point indicating inhibition.
Maximum inhibition occurred when the added carbon was 10
Stimulation in the case of Selenastrum capricornutum wan
observed at a concentration of 35 mg/1 as added carbon. At
5, 10, and 20 mg-c/1 there was neither stimulation nor in-
hibition. Inhibition occurred only at the lowest and the
highest concentration of added carbon, i.e. 1 mg/1 and 120
mg/1, respectively, and about the same amount in both cases
92
-------
10
OJ
5 7
Table 26
£ o a in i-. $ '-? I7>
£ > MWM §3
ca f+ i
^ '• *'~
__,_,-, Ln|| __ ___ Mimm^^^
Growth Rates
Selenastrum capricornutum
Day of
Mean Maximum
Maximum Specific Specific Growth
Sample Title Growth Rate Rate (average)
(•> ) (2) {3)
*OS051572IJK 1.027 ± 0.137 3
1S051572IJK 0.808 ± 0.290 3.33
5S051572IJK 1.002 ± 0.072 2.67
10S051572IJK 1.095 ± 0.095 3
20S051572IJK 0.993 ± 0.205 3
35S051572IJK 1.251 ± 0.079 3
120S051572IJK 0.780 ± 0.056 7.5
*ncn*m79T.TK indicates Selenastrum capricornutum with
Mean Maximum Effect of
Specific Addition of
Growth Rate Crankcase Maximum Standing
% of Control Drainage** Crop (average)*—
(4) (5) (6)
o 1-27
78.68 - I-41
97.57 o 1-34
106.62 o 1-37
96.69 o 1-38
121.81 + 1'31
75.95 - 1'22
0 mg/1 added carbon (control) inoculated on
05-15-72
**+ = stimulation; - = inhibition; o = no effect.
standing crop is assumed to be proportional to the maximum abaorbance.
-------
Table 27
Growth Rates^
Microcystis aeruginosa
10
.p
Sample Title
___OJ__—
OM051572IJK
*1M051572IJK
5M051572 UK
10M051572IJK
20M051572IJK
35M051572IJK
120M051572IJK
Mean
Maximum Specific
Growth Rate
(2)
0.603 ± 0.076
0.683 ± 0.004
0.526 ± 0.006
0.410 ± 0.028
0.490 ± 0.123
0.508 ± 0.009
0.600 ± 0.039
Day of
Maximum
Specific Growth
Rate (average)
(3)
3
3
3
3
3
3
. 5
Mean Maximum
Specific
Growth Rate
% of Control
(4)
100.1
113.27
87.23
67.99
81.26
84.25
99.50
Effect of
Addition of
Crankcase
Drainage**
(5)
Maximum Standing
Crop (average)***
(6)
1.31
1.37
1.27
1.20
1.20
1.25
1.32
*1M051572IJK indicates synthetic nutrient medium in the 1 mg/1 of added carbon due to water soluble
extract of crankcase drainage, inoculated with Microcystis aeruginosa on 05-15-72
**+ = stimulation; - = inhibition; o = no effect.
"""'•'.axir MTV. standing crop is assumed to be proportional to the maximum absorbance.
-------
ID
cn
Table 28
Growth Rates
Anabaena flos-aquae
Sample Title
(1)
OA060972IJK
1A060972IJK
5A060972IJK
10A060972IJK
20A060972IJK
30A060972IJK
*60A060972IJK
Mean
Maximum Specific
Growth Rate
(2)
0.815 ± 0.000
0.780 ± 0.060
0.962 ± 0.092
0.638 ± 0.127
0.703 ± 0.128
0.745 ± 0.052
0.853 ± 0.066
Day of
Maximum
Specific Growth
Rate (average)
(3)
H
4
3.67
7
9.5
12
10
Mean Maximum
Specific
Growth Rate
% of Control
(4)
100.0
95.71
118. OH
78.28
86.26
91. m
104.66
Effect of
Addition of
Crankcase
Drainage*"
(5)
0
o
+
-
-
o
o
Maximum Standing
Crop (average)*"*
(6)
0.940
0.925
0.870
0.805
0.430
0.550
0.710
*60A060972IJK indicates synthetic nutrient medium with 60 mg/1 of added carbon inoculated with
Anabaena flos-aquae on 06-09-72
**+ = stimulation; - = inhibition; o = no effect.
•'•''^Maximum standing crop is assumed to be proportional to the maximum absorLance.
-------
to
CD
1.2
0 mg/1 (control)
1 mg/1 C
5 mg/1 C
10 mg/1 C
20 mg/1 C
35 mg/1 C
6 8
Time in Days
16
Figure 9F>
- Growth Curves for Microcystis aeru^inosa
-------
10
Q mg/1 (.control)
1 mg/1 C
5 mg/1
10 mg/1
20 mg/1
30 mg/1
60 mg/1
0 1
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Time in Days
16 17 18
Figure 27
- Growth Curves for Anabena
-------
ID
CD
f /
/ *
/
<\ /
1 *1 I 1 10 A i 1§3 i»
0 mg/1 (control)
1 mg/1 C
5 mg/1 C
10 mg/1 C
20 mg/1 C
35 mg/1 C
120 mg/1 C
15 16 17 18
Time in Days
Fig,uT-e ?8 - Growth Curves for Selane»°'>'rum capricornutum
-------
(23-24%). Although inhibition at 120 mg/1 of added carbon
may be expected, due to very high concentration of the
water soluble extract in the sample, an equal amount of
inhibition at 1 mg/1 of added carbon is unexpected and is
hard to explain.
Increase in the maximum growth rate of Anabaena flos-aquae
occurred at a concentration of 5 mg/1 of added carbon.
Inhibition occurred only at 10 mg/1 and 20 mg/1. Maximum
inhibition of 22% was observed at 10 mg/1.
2. Maximum standing crop
Absorbance readings were taken for a maximum of 18 days.
Maximum standing crop is assumed to correspond to the
mean maximum absorbance readings for the replicates (Col.
6, Tables 26-28) during this period.
Microcystis aeruginosa and Selenastrum Capricornutum show
a variation from control of less than 10% in the maximum
crop for any concentration of added carbon. This, there-
fore , indicates no effect on maximum crop as a result of
addition of water soluble exhaust for crankcase drainage.
In the case of Anabaena flos-aquae, however, the maximum
crop at 20 mg/1 of added carbon is as low as 46% of that
of control and at 30 mg/1 it is 59%. It may be added that
in both cases, i.e. at 20 mg/1 and 30 mg/1, the lag period,
as discussed later in this section, was from 4 to 11 days
(Appendix 2), and therefore, in several bottles the crop
had not reached to its maximum value when absorbance
measurements were discontinued. This fact, in most cases,
is responsible for the low values of maximum crop mentioned
above. No definite conclusion can, therefore, be drawn from
these data on maximum crop for Anabaena flos-aquae.
3. Lag Period
Microcystis aeruginosa achieved maximum growth rate on the
third day after inoculation. Even when water soluble ex-
tract was added to culture flasks , the day of maximum growth
rate remained unchanged for 1, 5, 10, 20, and 35 mg/1 of
added carbon. For 120 mg/1, maximum growth rate occurred
on the fifth day after inoculation. This clearly shows a
lag period of two days for the highest concentration of
added carbon.
The case with Selenastrum capricornutum is similar. The
day of maximum growth rate for cultures with up to 35 mg/1
of added carbon remained about the same as that for control.
At 120 mg/1 it showed an average lag period of four and
one half days.
99
-------
Anabaena flos-aquae appears to be affected the most so far
as lag period is concerned. The lag period is as much as
eight days in the case of 30 mg/1 of added carbon. There
is, however, no lag period in achieving maximum growth
rate when added carbon due to water soluble extract from
crankcase drainage is 5 mg/1 or less.
In summary, therefore, the bioassay tests on test algae indicate that:
1. The result is mostly of "inhibition" or "no effect", so
far as maximum specific growth rate is concerned.
2. Microcystis aeruginosa appears to be most sensitive, of
the three species studied, to water soluble extract from
crankcase drainage. As added carbon levels reach 5 ppm,
maximum growth rate is reduced indicating inhibition.
3. Stimulation of algae has been noticed at only one con-
centration for each alga studied, i.e. at 1 mg/1, 5 mg/1,
and 35 mg/1 for Microcystis aeruginosa, Anabaena flos-aquae,
and Selenastrum capricornutum, respectively.
4. Maximum standing crop does not provide any indication of
the effect of water soluble extract from crankcase drainage.
5. Lag period in achieving maximum specific growth rate appears
to be the best indicator of the effect of water soluble ex-
tract from crankcase drainage.
6. Anabaena flos-aquae, of the three species studied, experienced
the greatest lag period. The lag period observed was from
three to eight days for added carbon levels ranging from 10
to 60 mg/1.
INT
The
19-
was
o
c
100
-------
SECTION VII - A STUDY OF THE MACRO-BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES
IN THREE EMBAYMENTS OF LAKE GEORGE, NEW YORK
,as
a)
b)
c)
io-benthic fauna were sampled from February through September
three bays of Lake George, New York. The purpose of this study
riole in scope and included the following objectives:
Establish the taxonomy of the macro-benthic inverte-
brates in the littoral zone of Lake George to at
least the genus level,
Follow fhe invertebrate populations through their
respective seasonal fluctuations,
From the data obtained, develop a diversity index
as an indication of water quality.
d)
Margalef (44) •, d = -E — Log,. — where s = number of
genera, ni = number of individuals in genera i, n =
total number of organisms.
Interpret these results with respect to the effects of
hydrocarbons from a two cycle marine engine exhaust.
Figure 1, an outline map of Lake George, shows the locations of the three
bays under study.
PROCEDURES
Samples were secured from each bay station with a 6" x 6" Eckman dredge
on a monthly basis with two exceptions. No data were obtained in April
due to unsafe ice conditions. Also, in June biweekly samples were taken
since the peak boating period apparently occurred from mid June through
the July M-th weekend. Winter sampling took place through the ice.
Whenever possible, two dredge hauls were taken at each station. There
were several exceptions causing population density data to be based on
the average of two dredge hauls in 39 instances and on a single haul in
the remaining 14 cases. Each sample was placed in a clean metal bucket
and the dredge rinsed off with lake water to insure collection of all
organisms. The sediments were washed using a U. S. Standard No. 30 mesh
(Tyler Na. 28) sieve (mesh size = 600y) to remove silt and to reduce the
sample size. Samples were washed upon collection when permissible; other-
wise they were transported to shore and washed immediately. These washing
procedures followed the methods suggested by Cairns and Dickson (9).
Samples obtained from February to July were picked immediately while the
organisms were still alive. According to Welch (92) and others, this is
the most accurate, though tedious, method. Small portions of the sample
101
-------
f
were placed in a shallow, white enamel pan under a bright light. Suf-
ficient water was added to allow organisms to swim clear ^of the debris.
Specimens were picked or removed using eyedroppers, forceps or a small 3
screen dipnet. They were separated on the basis of gross morphological
characteristics and placed in 70% alcohol. All samples, including those
of large volume from Dunham Bay, were studied entirely. Later, the
technique of Pagel (56) employing Phloxine B dye, in 70% alcohol solution
was employed. The organisms were easily separated from the sediments an;
the method was judged to be more efficient and less tedious than previ-
ously used techniques.
A binocular dissecting scope and a standard monocular microscope were
used for the identification of the organisms. It was necessary to pre-
pare slide mounts of the smaller organisms belonging to the Acari and
Diptera groups. The specimens were boiled in an NaOH solution to soften
the exoskeleton and then mounted in Turtox C Mountant. Identification
was limited in most cases to the generic level. A listing of the keys
utilized in identification is given on p. 304.
Acute Static Bioassays
In addition to the field studies, preliminary bioassays were con-
ducted throughout August 1972 to obtain an approximation of toxic
limits above which benthic populations would be affected. The
measure chosen was the toxic lethal mean (Tl^g) or the lethal con-
centration above which 50% of the test organisms were killed after
a prescribed time period. The time periods chosen were 24 and 48
hours.
The selection of test organisms was based on several requirements.
The organisms had to be common in the bays of Lake George to pro-
vide representative information; they had to be abundant enough to
provide ample specimens and be collected easily; specimens had to
be adaptable to a laboratory environment so that a healthy test
population could be easily maintained; they should be sensitive to
environmental stress; and, the test organisms had to be large enougr-
to handle and to readily observe its vital signs.
Insect larvae were rejected because their life habits involve emer-
gence and thus, test population maintenance is difficult. The
common oligochaetes were not considered suitable for this parti.cuis;
study due to their tolerance to environmental stress. Crustacean'--
have been used previously by Sanders (65) and others in testing t'u'-
toxicity of various chemicals. They are considered sensitive and
have a complete aquatic life cycle. After much preliminary work».
the amphipod Gammarus fasciatus and the gastropod Amnicola limnoj^
were judged appropriate for evaluation purposes.
The test organisms were obtained from the field using a Wildco
dredge net which was dragged at a very low speed behind a boat. ''
dredge collected and concentrated plants and animal specimens while
102
-------
fine sediments washed through. Collection sites were chosen outside
Of the bays under study to prevent disturbing the study areas. Am-
phipods were obtained from Hulett's Landing and gastropods were
C0llected from Northwest Bay.
Specimens were hand-picked and transferred to three 6 gallon aquaria
to acclimate for at least a week prior to experimentation. The
aauaria were equipped with air pump and filter. A sandy substrate
was provided as was natural vegetation. Weak or injured organisms
were removed to insure that only healthy specimens would be tested.
A concentrated solution of exhaust products resulting from the
operation of a two cycle outboard engine was prepared. A 1971
Chrysler 9.9 HP Model 92 HD engine was run for 1/2 hour in a
steel test tank. The test tank dimensions were 4-' x U1 x 3' with
a volume of 359 gallons. A constant speed of 3000 RPM was main-
tained using a tachometer. The fuel was a 50:1 mixture of Mobil
Marine Gasoline to Mobil Outboard Motor Oil. Three individual runs
were made to check the resulting concentrations. The tank was
scrubbed with detergent and thoroughly rinsed after each run to in-
sure that no residual exhaust products remained.
At the end of a run, subsurface samples of the test tank water were
removed in a clean glass flask from a depth of 1 foot below the
surface to avoid the concentrated surface film. It was felt that
subsurface samples would contain the soluble or emulsified materials
most likely to be found in the water column or to accumulate in sed-
iments . The analysis procedures to determine the hydrocarbon con-
tent followed the CClq. extraction techniques developed by CONCAWE (2).
A Beckman IR 20 Spectrophotometer was used to measure the extracted
materials. The same technique has been used in other studies to
obtain background hydrocarbon information from lake water samples.
Calculations were based on the comparisons between readings for
known hydrocarbon weights (outboard motor oil) and samples taken
from the test tank.
The preparation of bioassay solutions involved the dilution of sam-
ples from the test tank with standard freshwater as recommended by
Tarzwell (85). Twenty liter batches were prepared and carbon dioxide
was bubbled into distilled water to obtain a carbonate system. The
pH was adjusted to between 7.6 and 7.8 by bubbling air into the
solution. The alkalinity of the test solution was 28.H to 29.2 mg/1.
Clean, wide mouth, glass jars of one quart capacity were used as
bioassay containers. Small measured amounts of exhaust water were
pipetted into standard freshwater to make up 500 ml. Prior to
pipetting, the concentrated solution was thoroughly mixed by using
a mechanical shaker set at about 300 oscillations per minute for
5 minutes. After the dilution series was prepared the test jars
were placed on a shaker in a similar manner to insure proper mixing.
103
-------
Dissolved oxygen and temperature were recorded in each jar and 10
organisms were placed in a container for each test solution. Care
was taken to insure the specimens were all of a similar size cla:;:;.
Amphipods between 2 and 4 mm were used and gastropods between 1
and 2 mm in shell diameter were selected. A small brass wire scoop
was used to transfer the organisms to minimize injury. A glass top
was placed loosely over the container. At the end of the test
period, the dissolved oxygen and temperature were again recorded.
The test organisms were observed for characteristic vital signs.
The amphipods were judged dead if no evidence of gill movement was
associated with respiration or movement in response to prodding.
The gastropods required more intense scrutiny. In many cases,
snails close their opercula in response to environmental stress;
in addition, the opercula may remain open after death. This often
made the state of death difficult to determine and in these inves-
tigations the snails were transferred to a solution of standard
freshwater and left undisturbed for 24 hours. If, after this
period , the opercula remained closed or a snail whose opercula was
open did not close in response to prodding, the organism was judged
dead. The procedures used generally followed those outlined by
Patrick (57) and Tarzwell (85). Results were plotted on semi-lo.g
paper according to Warren (91) and others from which 24 and 4-8 hour
's were determined.
j.
RESULTS
Physical and Chemical Data
Physical and chemical data are given in Tables 29-36. The dissolved
oxygen (D.O.) was generally above 5.0 mg/1 with two exceptions,
both during May, immediately after ice went out. In both cases the
deepest stations were involved, specifically Smith No. 2 (5.0 meters
and Dunham No. 3 (6.0 meters). The depth of all stations, except
Dunham No. 3, was less than 7.0 meters and located within the lit-
toral zone.
Results show that at the stations sampled, the lowest recorded bot-
tom temperatures, 1.0 to 2.0°C, were found during February and Marcn
under the ice cover. The highest temperature was 22°C recorded in
both Smith and Echo Bays in July. Similar high temperatures were
reached in Dunham Bay by early September. At Dunham No. 3, a ther-
mocline was noted from mid May to late June. Generally, the bay
waters appeared to be well mixed throughout the sampling period.
Alkalinity was consistently between 20 and 25 mg/1 of CaC03 at all
stations except during May and late June when values were between
25 and 30 mg/1. The pH ranged between 7.0 and 7.5 with few excep-
tions, vis. in March pH values in Dunham Bay were between 6.48 ana
6.80. This may have been due to the higher spring stream inflow
carrying organic acids from the accumulated plant debris in the
adjacent marsh area.
104
-------
Table 29
Physical and Chemical Data
SAMPLING PERIOD
rEBRUARY
*Deoth (meters)
Date
Dissolved Oxygen
(mg/D
Temperature ( C)
Alkalinity
(mg/l as CaC03)
?H
Secchi Disc
(meters)
''•Ice Cover
SAMPLING PERIOD
MARCH
*Depth (meters )
Date
Dissolved Oxygen
(mg/l)
Temperature ( C)
Alkalinity
(mg/l as CaCOg)
pH
Secchi Disc
(meters )
Stations
Smith Smith Dunham Dunham Dunham Echo
121231
1.0 4.0 3.0 — 5.0 2.0
2/5/72 2/20/72 2/10/72 — 2/19/72 2/19/72
11.0 8.0 10.5 — 10.1 11.0
1.0 1.0 1.5 — 1.0 1.0
—
— — — — — —
—
Table 30
Physical and Chemical Data
Stations
Smith Smith Dunham Dunham Dunham Echo
121231
1.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 7.0 2.0
3/16/72 3/16/72 3/21/72 3/21/72 3/21/72 3/25/72
10.7 7.0 10.2 10.4 10.2 11.8
1.0 1.0 2.0 1.5 1.5 1.0
18.0
7.31 7.28 6.49 6.72 6.80 7.23
**CTB 3.0 CTB CTB 5.0 CTB
Echo
2
—
—
--
—
—
—
Echo
2
3.0
3/25/72
13.0
1..'.
--
7.32
CTB
*Ice Cover
**CTB = Clear to Bottom
105
-------
Table 31
Physical and Chemical Data
SAMPLING PERIOD
MAY
***Depth (meters)
Date
Dissolved Oxygen
(mg/1)
Temperature ( C)
Alkalinity
(mg/1 as CaC03)
PH
Secchi Disc
(meters)
***Ice Out: Smith
Smith
1
1.0
5/1/72
9.4
6.0
—
—
CTB
- April
Smith
2
5.0
5/1/72
5.2
4.0
28.5
7.23
CTB
Dunham
1
3.0
5/14/72
7.2
8.0
—
—
CTB
Stations
Dunham
2
3.5
5/2/72
8.4
6.0
27.2
7.45
CTB
24, Dunham - April 29,
Dunham
3
6.5
5/2/72
4.7
4.0
30.8
7.52
6.0
Echo -
Echo
1
1.0
5/14/72
11.0
7.5
27.0
7.47
CTB
April 30
Echo
2
3.0
0/14/72
9.4
5.0
—
6.86
CTB
Table 32
Physical and
SAMPLING PERIOD
JUNE (early)
Depth (meters)
Date
Dissolved Oxygen
(mg/1)
Temperature ( C)
Alkalinity
(mg/1 as CaC03)
PH
Secchi Disc
(meters )
Smith
1
1.0
6/6/72
10.6
14.8
26.2
7.66
CTB
Smith
2
5.0
6/6/72
10.8
13.1
19.9
7.60
5.5
Chemical Data
Dunham
1
3.0
6/7/72
9.8
13.0
21.0
7.33
CTB
Stations
Dunham
2
4.0
6/7/72
10.4
13.0
19.8
7.46
CTB
Dunham Echo
3
6.0
6/7/72
7.9
12.0
19.6
7.29
CTB
1
3.0
6/10/72
7.4
15.8
19.5
7.23
CTB
Echo
_2___
—
—
—
—
" "
""
106
-------
Table 33
Physical and Chemical Data
3AMPLING PERIOD
Stations
Smith Smith Dunham Dunham Dunham Echo
^ 2 1 2 _J _±_
Echo
2
1.0 5.0
6/26/72 6/26/72
2.0 6.0 2.0 3.0
6/26/72 6/26/72 6/26/72 6/26/72
-,:-sSolved Oxygen
8.4 7.6
TemPerature (°C) 19.3 13-5
Alkalinity
8.0
16.8
7.9
16.0
7.9
17.5
8.0
17.0
(iag/1 as CaC03)
pH
Secchi Disc
(meters )
30.6 27.3
7.37 7.37
CTB CTB
27.0 26.5
7.47 7.36
27.6 27.2
7.33 7.35
CTB
5.0M
CTB
CTB
Table 34
Physical and Chemical Data
SAMPLING PERIOD
JULY
Depth (meters)
Date
Dissolved Oxygen
(rag/1)
Temperature C C)
Alkalinity
(mg/1 as CaC03)
pH
Secchi Disc
(meters)
1.0 5.0
7/13/72 7/13/72
2.0 6.5 2.0 3.0
7/14/72 7/14/72 7/14/72 7/14/72
8.9
21.5
23.0
•7 TK
8.4
22.0
22.4
7.UR
9.0
21.0
22.4
7.36
9.0
18.0
21.6
7.19
8.1
22.0
21.6
7.21
8.5
21.0
23.0
7.18
CTB CTB
CTB
CTB
CTB
CTB
107
-------
Table 35
Physical and Chemical Data
SAMPLING PERIOD
AUGUST
Depth (meters )
Date
Dissolved Oxygen
(mg/1)
Temperature ( C)
Alkalinity
(mg/1 as CaC03)
PH
Smith
1
1.0
8/11/72
7.4
21.0
21.0
7.38
Smith
2_
5.0
8/11/72
7.3
21.5
23.0
7.59
Stations
Dunham Dunham
1 2
3.0
8/16/72
8.6
21.5
23.6
7.42
Dunham
3
6.0
8/16/72
8.6
20.0
23.0
7.20
•
Echo
1
3.0
8/15/72
8.0
22.0
25.1
7.45
Echo
2
3.0
0/15/72
8.6
21.5
22.4
7.62
Secchi Disc
(meters)
CTB
CTB
CTB
CTB
CTB
C-TB
Table 36
Physical and Chemical Data
SAMPLING PERIOD
SEPTEMBER
Depth (meters)
Date
Dissolved Oxygen
(mg/1)
Temperature ( C)
Smith
1
1.0
9/4/72
5.8
21.0
Smith
2
5.0
9/4/72
6.2
21.7
Stations
Dunham Dunham
1 2
3.0
9/4/72
8.1
21.8
Dunham
3
6.0
9/4/72
8.2
21.8
Echo
1
2.0
9/4/72
7.9
22.1
Echo
2
3.0
9/4/72
8.'
22.1
Alkalinity
(mg/1 as CaC03)
PH
Secchi Disc
(meters)
25.4 23.0
7.52 7.50
23.4 23.7 23.3 22-1
7.4 7.38 7.32 ?.L
CTB
CTB
CTB
5.5
CTB
108
-------
Secchi disc readings were between 3 to 5 meters and at most stations
t-ne bottom was clearly visible. Periodically at the deeper stations,
^specially Dunham No. 3, visibility was limited. In such cases,
a higher phytoplankton population appeared to be the cause.
The bottom sediments varied considerably among the three bays
studied. Dunham Bay sediments were primarily silt and plant de-
bris; Echo Bay sediments were principally clay and some fine sand
with a -dense mat of roots from submerged plants which effectively
bind the substrate together; Smith Bay sediments varied from sand
at Station No. 1 to more silt and clay at Station No. 2. Table 37
represents the approximate amounts of silt, sand, clay and plant
debris in the sediments sampled. Table 38 shows the average pene-
tration of the dredge at each station.
Aquatic Vegetation
Echo Bay supported several species of aquatic vegetation with
varying density. Table 39 lists the species identified and their
respective distribution. Potamogeton Robbinsii was common to all
bays. Nitella Spp. were limited to the deeper waters of Smith and
Dunham Bays and some were observed only at shallow water stations.
One species of water milfoil, Myriophyllum alterniflorum, was iden-
tified from all stations but it was not abundant.
Benthic Macroinvertebrates
Over 100 taxonomic groups have been identified from the samples.
Table 40 contains a list of the fauna identified and shows the dis-
tribution of organisms among the bays studied. In general, over
50 taxa were represented at each station. Echo Bay Stations 1 and
2 were the lowest with 50 and M-8 different taxa being identified,
respectively. The greatest faunal variation was found at Dunham
Bay No. 2 with 72 different taxonomic groups being represented.
The number of taxa identified from Dunham, Smith and Echo Bays wt.re
91, 83 and 62, respectively. The total taxa identified from all
samples was 108. Most taxa were common to Smith and Dunham Bay,
however, many were absent in Echo Bay. Where adequate keys were
available, species were identified; yet, in many cases identifica-
tion was possible only to the generic level. At least one repre-
sentative of each major class of invertebrate common to freshwaters
was identified from each station. Of considerable importance was
the cosmopolitan nature of the amphipods, isopods and various in-
sect nymphs. At least 4-6 of the 108 taxa identified were common
to all three bays and many were found at all stations.
The average number of different taxa identified from each sample was
considerably less than the total. Figure 29 illustrates the average
number of taxa found in a single dredge haul at each station. At-
tention should be directed to the corresponding number of taxa being
nearly proportionate to the distribution indicated in Table M-0.
109
-------
Material
Organic Debris
Silt (fine
sediments)
Clay
Sand
Table 37
Estimated Substrate Compositions (%)
Stations
Smith
1
20
80
Smith
2
20
Dunham Dunham
1 2
50
50
60
Dunham Echo
3 1
30
70
10
10
60
20
Echo
_2
20
20
40
20
Average Dredge
Penetration
5 cm
8 cm
10 cm
15 cm
Table 38
Average Dredge Penetration
Stations
Smith
1
Smith
2
Dunham Dunham Dunham Echo Echo
1231 J2__
110
-------
Table 39
List of Aquatic Plants" Identified from Each Bay
Station**
CN
•H TH
e e
01 01
;haraceae
Mitella flexilis
Mitella hyalina
^soetaceae
Isotes Tuckermanii A. Br C
Najadaceae
Potamogeton amplifolius Tuckerman
Potamogeton Richardsonii
(Benn.) Rydb.
Potamogeton gramineus var
myriophyllus Robbins
Potamogeton Robbinsii Oakes
Hydrocharitaceae
Elodea canadensis (Michx.) Phanchon C
Cyperaceae
Eleocharis acicularis (L.) R & S C
Eriocaulaceae
Eriocaulon septangulare With. C
Pontederiaceae
Pontederia cordata forma taenia
Fassett
Ceratophyllaceae
Ceratophyllum demersum L.
Hippuridaceae
Hippuria vulgaris L. C
Myriephyllum alterniflorum
Pugsley
Myriophyllum tenellum Bigel
Myriophyllum Farwellii Marong
c
c
*See page 304, Identification Source C,
**C = Common
111
ro
jz
e
^
O
C
C
C
c
c
c
c
c
ham
c
C
C C
C C
H CN
O O
A J=
O O
U U
C
C
c
c
-------
Table 40
List of Benthic Fauna Identified from Each Bay*
1.
2.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Taxa Identified
COELENTERATA (b, g)
Hydra americana, Hyman
TURBELLARIA (b, g)
Planariidae
Dugesia tigrina, Girard
GORDIIA Cb, g)
Gordiidae
Gordius sp . , Linneaus
OLIGOCHAETA (b, g)
Naididae
Chaetogaster sp. K, Von Baer
Pristina bilongata, Chan
Pristina osborni , Walton
Pristina breviseta, Bourne
Dero sp. , Ok an
Stylaria fossularis , Leidy
Nais sp. , Muller
Haplotaxidae
Haplotaxis sp. , Hoffmeister
Lumbricidae
Eiseniella sp. , Michaelse
Enchytraeidae
Henlea sp., Michaelsen
Enchytraeus sp . , Henle
H
.C
•M
•H
C/3
C
C
C
P
C
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
Station**
i-t CM CO
CM
E e E
jn ID m m
4-> .C .C ff.
•H C C C
e 3 2 3
en Q Q a
C C C C
C C C C
C C C C
P P
C C C C
C C C I1
C C C
C P
C C C C
C C C C
C C C C
c c c
.-1 CM
o o
"o o
u u
C C
C C
C C
C C
C
P
c c
c c
c c
c c
''Identification sources noted after each major taxa, see page :IOM
**C = Common, P = Present, A = Abundant
112
-------
Table 40 (continued)
Station
15.
15.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
+J
• H -H
Taxa Identified w en
OLIGOCHAETA (cont)
Tubifieidae
Limnodrilus sp . , Claparede P C
Tubifex tubifex, 0. F. Muller A C
HIRUDINEA (b, g)
Gloss iphoniidae
Helobdella sp., E. Blanchard C
ISOPODA (a, b, g)
Aselidae
Asellus communis , Say C
AMPHIPODA (a, b, g)
Talitridae
Hyalella azteca, Saussure C C
Gammaridae
Gammarus f asciatus , Say C C
EMPHEMEROPTERA (b, f, g, h)
Caenidae
Caenis sp . , Stephens C C
Ephemerellidae
Ephemarella sp . , Walsh C C
Siphonuridae
Atneletus sp . , Eaton
Centroptilum sp . , Eaton P
NEUROPTERA (b, g, h)
Sialidae
Sialis sp., Latreille P C
i— I CM CO
e e e -H CM
03 fl3 03
A J2 ff. O O
c, c a ^ .c
3 3 3 O CJ
Q Q a CJ U4
C C C ? P
C C C
C C C C
C C C C
c c c c c
c c c c c
c c c c c
c c c
P
P
P P P P C
113
-------
Table 40 (continued)
Taxa Identified
ODONATA Cb, g, h)
Agrionidae
26. Anomalogrion sp., Selys
27. Enallagma sp., Charpentier
Libellulidae
28. Tetragoneuria sp., Hagen
COLEOPTERA Cb, g, h)
Gyrinidae
29. Dineutus sp., MacLeay
Haliplidae
30. Peltodytes sp., Regimbart
31. Haliplus sp. , Latreille
TRICOPTERA (b, g, h)
Hydroptilidae
32. Oxyethira sp., Elton
Psychomyiidae
33. Phylocentropus sp., Banks
3U. Polycentropus sp., Curtis
35. Psychomyiid Genus B
Leptoceridae
36. Leptocerus americanus, Banks
37. Leptocella sp., Banks
38. Triaenodes sp., McLaehlan
LEPIDOPTERA (b, g, h)
39. Nyphyla sp. (= Poraponyx),
Schrank
Station
rH CN en
H CN
,c .c !i3 ifl ro
•H -p jc x: x: o
'e °e § § 3 "o
M 10 Q Q Q U
c c c c
C C
p*ft* c
P
P
P P
P
C C
c c c c c c
c c c c
C C C C C
c c c c c c
c c c c
CN
o
u
c
c
c
***0bserved emerging as pre-adults, but never found in samples
-------
Table 40 (continued)
no.
41.
1+2.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
Station
•-I v .c ,c .c
•H >H C C C
S E 3 33
Taxa Identified w en a a a
DIPTERA (b, d, e, h, i)
Chironomidae
Tanypodinae
Anatopynia (Psectrotanypus )
sp . , Johannsen P
Tanypus sp . , Meigen P
Procladius sp . , (Skuse)
Edwards P C C C C
Clinotanypus sp. , Kieffer C C C C C
Coelotanypus sp . , Kieffer P P P
Pentaneura f lavifrons ,
Johannsen P
Pentaneura pilosela, Loew P P
Pentaneura monilis , Linnaeus C C C C C
Pentaneura carnea, Fabricius C P P
Pentaneura declarata Malloch P P
Chironominae
Pseudochironomus
richardsoni , Malloch C C C
Chironomrus
(Cryptochironomus )
stylifera, Johannse Var a. C C C C
Chironomus
Tcryptochironomus )
parilis, Walker P
Chironomus
(Cryptochironomus )
nais (?) P P
Chironomus
Tcryptochironomus )
abortivus, (Harnischia) ,
Malloch C C C C C
-1 CN
0 O
-C X2
U 0
w w
P
C C
C C
P
C C
P
C
115
-------
Table 40 (continued)
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
Taxa Identified
Chironomus
CStenochironomus)
exquisitus, MitchelK?)
Chironomus
(Endochironomus)
dimorphus, Malloch
Chironomus
(Glyptotendipes)
senilis n.s.p.
Chironomus (Chironomus)
sp. (?)
Chironomus
(XenochTronomus)
xenolabis, Kieffer
Chironomus (Kiefferalus),
Johannsen
Chironomus
(Limnochironomus)
modestus, Say
Chironomus
(Limnochironomus)
tenuicaudatus, Malloch
Chironomus (Polypedilum)
sp., Kieffer
Phaenopsectra
(Pentapedilum) sp.,
Kieffer
Zavrelia (Tanytarsus) sp.,
Kieffer (?)
Tanytarsus (Calopsectra)
dissimilas, Johannsen
Tanytarsus (Calopsectra)
exigous, Johannsen
P
C
C
C
Station
H CM
fj ,£ .
p -P
•?4 .H
e e
CO CO
p
C C
H CN CO
€ § & *"*
TO TO nJ
J3 J3 .C O
c c c x:
3330
Q Q Q U
P P
C C C
P
C C C C
p
p \
!
1
t
[
1
116
-------
Table 40 (continued)
59.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80,
81.
82.
Station
r-t
.c
• H
Taxa Identified w
Tanytarsus (Calopsectra)
gregarius , Kieffer
Tanytarsus (Microspectra)
def lectus , Johannsen C
Tanytarsus (Microspectra)
dives, Johannsen C
Tanytarsus (Senslat)
sp. J. (?) C
Orthocladimae
Coryneura sp. , Winnertz P
Brillia sp., Kieffer
Cricotopus trif asiatus ,
Panzer P
Trichocladius (Spaniotoma)
senex, Kieffer C
Psectrocladius (Spaniotoma)
simulans, Johannsen P
Psectrocladius (Spaniotoma)
sp. A, Kieffer P
Ceratopodinae
Cuilicoides sp. , Latreille
Palpomyla sp. , Mcgerla C
Palpomyla tibialis, Meigen
Culicidae
Chaoborinae
Chaeoborous sp . ,
Lichtenstein
ACARI (b, h)
Limnesiidae
Limnesia sp., Koch P
rH CN CO
CN
E § E r-{ CN
,c rd fo fiJ
•P .C J= JZ O O
•H C C C ,C J=
S d 3 3 y o
00 Q Q Q u CJ
C C C
c
C C C
C ' C
P P P P
C
C C C C C C
P P
P
P
C C C C C C
c c c
P
P P P P
117
-------
Table 40 (continued)
Station
H CN
CM CO
-------
Table 40 (continued)
1
Taxa Identified
Lymnacidae
g& ( Lymnaea sp., Lamarck
Planorbidae
27. Gyraulus deflectus, Say
gg. Gyraulus altissimus. Baker
gg. Heliosoma sp., Swainson
Ancylidae
100. Ferrissia sp., Walker
Viviparidae
101. Vipiparus sp., Montfort
102. Campeloma sp., Rafinesque
Valvatidae
103. Valvata tricarinata, Say
104. ' Valvata sp. , Muller
Bulimidae
105. Amnicola limnosa, Say
PELECYPODA (b, g, h)
Margaritiferidae
106. Margaritifera
margaritifera, Linne
Sphaeriidae
107. Sphaerium sp., Scopoli
108. Pialdium sp., Pfeiffer
Total Taxa found per station
Total Taxa found per Bay
Total Taxa all Bays
Station
H CN
X! J3
•p +-1
•H -H
e e
GO CO
p
p
c c
C C
P P
P
C C
P P
C C
p
p p
c c
62 67
83
Dunham 1
Dunham 2
P
C C
C
p
p p
c c
p
c c
p p
p p
c c
56 72
91
Dunham 3
P
C
C
P
P
P
C
c
p
p
c
65
H CN
0 0
~ ,c
o o
U '~1
p
p
c
C C
C C
P P
C C
1' p
c c
50 48
62
108
119
-------
E-
4-1
O
h
0)
0)
00
m
(H
I
i
CO
•H
S
UH
O
0)
« 10°
131
SI
S2
Dl
D2
D3
El
E2
Smith Bay 1
Smith Bay 2
Dunham Bay ]
Dunham Bay :
Dunham Bay :
Echo Bay 1
Echo Bay 2
150
Fieure 99 - Comparison of Average Number of Taxa and Average Number
of Organisms per Dredge Haul for Each Station
120
-------
Distribution of organisms varied considerably at all stations
a monthly basis. Tables 41-48 contain tabulations of the num-
°nr of organisms per square meter at each station throughout the
D& o1 ing period. To obtain these values the results of two dredge
u uls (3^ instances) were added and multiplied by 22. If data for
'' iy one haul was available (14 instances) the results were mul-
-•clied by 43. These factors are based on the dredge sample area
"Qf 36 square inches or 0.0238 square meters.
r.-ffure 29 also illustrates the average number of organisms per dredge
•-aul at each station. Smith Bay stations had the highest standing
rroo followed by those from Dunham Bay and Echo Bay, respectively.
The densest populations were at Smith No. 2 when 12,151 organisms
oer scuare meter were found in May 1972. Smith Mo. 1 had a popu-
lation high of 10,704 organisms per square meter in the September
1972 samples. In the former case, dipteran larvae were the most
common organisms; in the latter, oligochaetes (especially Tubifex
so.) were especially abundant. The lowest population density oc-
curred at Dunham Bay Station No. 2 in late June (i.e. 882 organisms
per square meter). In February, Dunham Bay No. 3 had 989 organisms
per square meter.
Figures 30-32 illustrate the variations in dominant taxonomic groups
throughout the sampling period. The early dominance of dipterans
(February through May) followed by increased numbers during the
summer of oligochaetes, gastropods and pelecypods is quite clear.
One should note the three to tenfold increases of amphipods at
several stations in May 1972, and the increase of isopods at Dunham
No. 3 in late June. These high population densities of crustaceans
were comprised of numerous small individuals. In the case of the
isopods, the female adults examined in the same samples carried many
eggs.
In general, Smith Bay Station 2 showed the highest population num-
bers. Population densities of macroinvertebrates appeared maximum
in May (Echo Bay) or early June (Smith and Dunham Bays) followed by
a sharp decline in late June or early July 1972. Insect nymphs
from Empheroptera, Tricoptera, Neuroptera and Odonata had virtually
disappeared by the end of June. These total population densities
began to increase again at all stations during August and September.
At the end of September Tricoptera nymphs reappeared in most of the
bays.
The abundance of individual genera of dipteran larvae varied con-
siderably from month to month and among the bays. The genus
Procladius was common in most samples and in May, June and July,
Polypedilium was found at most stations. Members of the genus
Tanytarsus were especially common in March, August and September.
Station No. 2 at Smith Bay and No. 3 at Dunham Bay, the deepest
stations studied, seemed to consistently support the largest and
121
-------
Table 41
Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders
2
(number of organisms per meter )
SAMPLING
PERIOD
FEBRUARY
Oligochaeta
Amphipoda
Isopoda
Stations
Smith
1
474
107
Smith
2
1205
560
Dunham
1
43
301
129
Dunham Dunham Echo
2 31
344
215 129
Echo
2
Pelecypoda
Gastropoda
Diptera
Tricoptera
Ephemeroptera
Neuroptera
Odonata
Others
TOTAL
86
86
776
86
43
129
4000
172
258
387
43
730
86
43
43 387
645 301
343
86 86
64
1722
6711
43
1418
989
1590
122
-------
Table 42
of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders
- — 27
(number of Organisms per meter ;
St at ions
::^—
., —
Smith Smith
_1 2
840 86
258 1060
22
86
602 129
1630 4860
43
124 172
129
22
31454 6609
__— - — -
Dunham
1
43
344
280
43
114
1210
43
22
22
2121
Dunham Dunham Echo
2 3 J__
86 43 344
308 474 155
108 1250
1160 689 645
43 64
22 86
43 22
22
64 43
1597 1465 2609
Echo
__2
100
116
28
1160
344
14
28
14
72_
1876
123
-------
Table 43
Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders
2
(number of organisms per meter )
SAMPLING
PERIOD
MAY
Oligochaeta
Amphipoda
Isopoda
Pelecypoda
Gastropoda
Diptera
Tricoptera
Ephemeropt era
Neuroptera
Odonata
Others
Stations
Smith
1
1290
129
1420
1161
43
152
22
43
Smith
2
86
4480
108
6270
172
818
195
22
Dunham
1
43
237
22
108
64
903
194
Dunham
2
365
1035
64
194
1380
129
43
43
43
Dunham Echo
3 1
64 453
580 1763
157
43 129
355 560
2230 558
22
387
123 43
Echo
2
645
1161
22
474
774
86
22
86
43
TOTAL
4260 12151
1571
3296
3390
4072 3313
124
-------
Table 44
Density of Dominant Henthic Macroinvertebrate Orders
(number of orp.aniams per metur )
PERIOD Stations
JUN'E
(early)
;iigochaeta
\n-.ohipoda
[sopoda
Pelecypoda
Gastropoda
)iptera
Tricoptera
ilphemeroptera
Jeuroptera
)donata
)thers
Smith
1
3700
108
86
1680
688
86
22
43
Smith
2
86
430
43
43
603
646
129
43
43
Dunham
1
22
150
22
172
732
22
22
64
Dunham
2
108
108
172
430
215
129
150
Dunham Echo Echo
312
280 539
64 134
22
988 625
301 344
22
86
43
85 43
TOTAL
6413
2066
1206
1312
1826 1810
125
-------
Table 45
Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders
2
(number of organisms per meter )
SAMPLING
PERIOD
JUNE
(late)
Oligochaeta
Amphipoda
Isopoda
Pelecypoda
Gastropoda
Diptera
Tricoptera
Ephemeroptera
Neuroptera
Odonata
Others
TOTAL
Smith
1
5410
22
65
1270
194
86
22
7069
Smith
2
108
880
278
1410
236
409
108
43
3472
Dunham
1
65
454
3500
580
150
510
65
5324
Stations
Dunham
2
150
65
65
301
215
43
65
904
Dunham
3
215
238
22
580
278
3000
86
108
4527
Echo
1
323
22
22
560
172
43
65
43
1250
Echo
2
452
86
22
815
150
86
22
43
1676
126
-------
Table 46
Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders
(number of
5AMFLING
PERIOD
-~~
JULY
jligochaeta
Asphipoda
Isopoda
pelecypoda
Gastropoda
Diptera
Tricoptera
Ephemeroptera
Meuroptera
Odonata
Others
Smith
1
4150
43
64
730
86
22
22
22
65
Smith
2
280
172
236
253
602
925
22
65
22
22
86
2,
organisms per meter )
Stations
Dunham Dunham Dunham Echo Echo
1 2 312
22 840 172 648 408
387 129 236 43 65
301 129
365 419 325 151 108
194 539 135 560 990
1080 508 1510 193 151
43 129 86 22
22
22
22 172 151 43
TOTAL
5204
2690
2414
2865
2637
1660 1744
127
-------
Table 47
Density of Dominant Benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders
(number of organisms per meter )
SAMPLING
PERIOD
AUGUST
Oligochaeta
Amphipoda
Isopoda
Pelecypoda
Gastropoda
Diptera
Tricoptera
Ephemeroptera
Neuroptera
Odonata
Others
Stations
Smith
1
4730
215
22
1308
108
43
108
Smith
2
815
1140
65
236
387
1030
65
236
Dunham
1
430
1785
409
1420
268
1462
65
22
450
Dunham
2
1570
744
1680
279
1100
43
494
Dunham
3
1720
172
258
1335
183
1465
172
Echo
_1
452
43
43
43
667
193
22
65
Echo
2
1010
344
193
751
151
43
22
65
TOTAL
6534
3974
6289
5932
5305
1528 2579
128
-------
Table 4-8
Density of Dominant benthic Macroinvertebrate Orders
:1j_gochaeta
i.mpnipoda
Isopoda
Peiecypoda
Gastropoda
Diptera
Tricoptera
Ephemeroptera
Neuroptera
Odonata
Others
TOTAL
(number of
Smith
;R i
:a 6880
258
1 43
3. 3050
43
a 43
Smith
2
2363
387
86
162
2105
258
organisms per meter )
Stations
Dunham
I
730
1980
1248
344
172
1460
129
Dunham
2
2620
645
903
301
686
215
Dunham
3
1510
815
43
1120
129
816
Echo Echo
1 2
904 1935
172
86 603
602 772
301 86
129 43
387
10704
86
301
5748
215
645
730
344 387
6278 6015 5163 2366 3998
129
-------
Smith Bay - Station 1
100 -
JUNE JUNE
FEE MAR MAY (Early) (Late) J
50 .
c
o
H
4->
H
01
— _ „
^M^M
F
0
G
A
D
I^M^H
• ••
^^••M
^^MM
F
0
G
D
^•••H
1— MM
MMNM
•«•••
F
0
^
0
A
D
•—»•
=a
t
0
f>
j
A
D
t
0
G
D
ULY
MMM
•••M*
iH^M*
I
0
o
0
A
^
VUG
M*^MI
MM
S
F
0
G
A
ft
EPT
—
o
4->
O
I
0)
eu
100
Smith Bay - Station 2
JUNE JUNE
FEE MAR MAY
(Late) JULY AUG SEPT
Figure 30 - Comparison, by percent composition, of the do
orders of macro-benthic fauna present in Smith Bay, Febr]J
through September 1972. (KEY: D - Diptera, A - Araphipoa-
G - Gastropoda, 0 - Oligochaeta, F - Other Fauna)
130
-------
1
Echo Bay - Station 1
ircent Composition
M
en O
0 °
• . .!_ .
FEB
•M^^Hl
••MM1
^•M^M
MMMH
0
/^
o
A
D
MAR
MMMi
^^^•M
•••••
••••••1
JUNE JUNE
MAY (Early) (Late) JULY
7
0
3
A
D
^^HH
••^IH
••••••
•^••B
0
J
A
D
MMMH
•PMMB
^^•^M
0
/^
o
A
D
^•^MB
0
J
A
D
—
0
J
A
D
AUC
^^^•i
^•^••M
0
J
A
D
SEPT
F
0
G
D
Echo Bay - Station 2
^
§
8
JUNE JUNE
FEB MAR MAY (Early) (Late) JULY AUG SEPT_
•MMH
NO
)AT/
•MMM
^•I^^B
^i^BMH
•MMM
^^^•i
•••^•B
F
0
G
A
D
^^i^M
••^^
^•••H
t
^
0
3
A
D
MMMH
F
0
G
A
D
MMM
Ml^H^
1
o
3
A
D
iMKiMi
MMMI
0
"^
A
D
MMM1
•••MB
•^i^^^
0
^i
J
A
D
••MM
MMM1
=
7
0
G
A
a_
Figure 31 - Comparison, by percent composition, of the dominant
orders of macro-benthic fauna present in Echo Bay, February
through September 1972. (KEY: D - Diptera, A - Amphipoda,
G - Gastropoda, 0 - Oligochaeta, F - Other Fauna)
131
-------
100 J
o
•H
CO
o
o
Oi
100
100
50
FEB
MAR
Dunham Bay - Station 1
JUNE JUNE
MAY (Early) (Late) JULY
F
AUG
SEPT
Dunham Bay - Station 2
Figure 32 - Comparison, by percent composition, of the dom
orders of macro^benthic fauna present in Dunham Bay, Febru
through September 1972. (KEY: D - D^era* AT^^
G - Gastropoda, 0 - Oligochaeta, F - Other Fauna)
132
-------
F
'0
st diverse dipteran fauna. In contrast, the shallow stations
' peared to support higher numbers of the oligochaetes and gastro-
-ods. Figures 33-46 illustrate the four dominant dipteran genera
at each station.
IT is important to note that high numbers of organisms may not' be
•'ndicative of a healthy body of water if only a few species are
-.resent. A healthy or unstressed body of water should have numer-
ous species represented and more moderate population densities.
A study of Fig. 29 shows that Dunham Bay No. 2 and No. 3 and Smith
Bay Station No. 2 averaged the most taxa found in each sample. Also,
this is reflected in Table 40 which shows the total number of species
found at each station.
Figure 29 shows the number of organisms per square meter of benthic
area, during the period February through July 1972, in Smith, Dunham
and Echo Bays. The organisms chosen were: Polypedilium and Pro-
cladius, dipterans; Hyalella, an amphipod; Caenis, an ephemeroptera;
and Amnicola, a prosobranch snail. These genera were chosen because
they were common to all of the stations and in higher numbers than
other populations.
Diversity Index Values
In order to obtain an easily understood numerical comparison of the
populations at each station, a diversity index (3) was applied to
the data. Table 49 lists the values obtained. Values ranged from
a low of 1.4-2 at Smith Bay Station No. 1 in late June, to a high
of 4.15 at Dunham Bay Station No. 3 in July. Diversity values
fluctuated somewhat, especially in the warmer period from June
through August. These data are discussed more extensively in a
later portion of this section.
Generally, the values for each station are greater than 2.5 and
values above 3.0 were found at all stations for some portion of the
sampling period. The overall average 3 values for each station are
given in Table 4-9. Note that only Smith No. 1 and Dunham No. 1 are
less than 3.0, the theoretical value above which water might be
considered unpolluted (Wilhm (93)). The average 3 values for the
bays as a whole are Dunham Bay, 3.075; Echo Bay, 2.976; and Smith
Bay, 2.786.
Generally, the diversity index values for deep and shallow stations
within the same bay were not comparable. Maximum 3 values at deeper
stations corresponded with depressed values at the shallow stations
and vice versa. The highest d values for Smith No. 2 and Dunham
No. 3 occurred from June through September. Maximum values for
Smith No. 1 and Dunham No. 1 occurred prior to June and after July.
133
-------
1000
3
a-
10
I
o
fc
4)
1000
1000
KEY:
SI
S2
Dl
D2
D3
El
E2
Saith Bay, Station 1
Smith Bay, Station 2
Duohaa Bay, Station 1
Dunhsvi Bay, Station 2
DotaBB Bay, Station 3
Echo tagr, Station 1
Echo Bay, Station 2
FEBRUARY
108
129
43
1720
990
MARCH
34U
n
1210
86
S2
MAY
666
IT
215
Q
387
T3
129
D3
TT
E2
Figura 33 - Comparison of Populations of Polypedilium by
in Tl»«« Bays of Lake Geor§« fro* February through May
-------
1
2
3
1000
t
o*
to
c
o.
10
8
•H
§
00
s
14-1
0
1000
1000
Smith Bay, Station 1
Smith B*y, Station 2
Dunham B*y, Station 1
Dunham Bay, Station 2
Dunham Bay, Station 3
Echo Bay, Station 1
Echo Bay, Station 2
JUNE CEarly)
JUNE (Late)
by Staton
135
-------
2000
0)
V
0)
-------
Jtl ;
1.000
4)
g-
tn
.r-l
I
afl
1000
1000
t ion
972
Smith Bay, Station 1
Smith Bay, Station 2
Dunham Bay, Station 1
Dunham Bay, Station 2
Dunham Bay, Station 3
Echo Bay, Station 1
Echo Bay, Station 2
137
-------
1000
t,
0)
o4
to
0)
a.
•H
i
O
h
0)
1000
1000
Smith lay,'Station 2
Dunhaa Bay, Station 1
Dunham Bay, Station 2
Dunham Bay, Station 3
Echo Bay, Station 1
Echo Bay, Station 2
JUNE (Early)
JUNE (Late)
51 S2 D1 tior. *
Figure 37 - Comparison of Populations of Procladius by Sta ,; !
Three Bays of Lake George from June (early) through July I
in
138
-------
2000
01
0<
C/3
0)
o.
e
to
•H
§
$
1000 •
2000
1000 .
KEY:
AUGUST
SI Smith Bay, Station 1
S2 Smith Bay, Station 2
Dl Dunham Bay, Station 1
D2 Dunham Bay, Station 2
D3 Dunham Bay, Station 3
El Echo Bay, Station 1 •
E2 Echo Bay, Station 2
516
108
22
215
n
SEPTEMBER
516
215
86
SI
S2
Dl
D2
D3
El
E2
Figure 38 - Comparison of Populations of Procladius by Station
in Three Bays of Lake George from August through September 1972
139
-------
FEBRUAW
1000
KEY: SI Smith Bay, Station 1
S2 Smith Bay, Station 2
Dl Dunhn Bay, Station 1
02 Dunhar. Bay, Station 2
D3 Dunhon Bay, Station 3
El Echo Bay, Station 1
E2 Echo Bay, Station 2
560
86
258
n
215
o
86
£
4)
|
O"
CO
0)
o.
OT
CO
C
bO
MARCH
1030
1000
129
U73
279
258
n n
43
86
i»i»BO
CP
VV^.
1680
1000
65
MAY
1032
215
516
1120
SI
S2
Dl
D2
D3
El
E2
Figure 39 - Comparison of Populations of Hyalella by
in Three Bays of Lake George from February through May
-------
1000
I*
C/5
fc
I
I
•A
I
g
s
1
1000
1000
SI Saith Bay, Station 1
S2 Saith lay, Station 2
01 Dunhw lay, Station l
D2 Dunham Bay, Station
D3 Dunha« Bay,
El Echo Bay, Station 1
E2 Echo Bay, Station
^
1U1
-------
2000.
1000-
0)
o.
w
CO
'c
rO
O
0)
2000.
1000-
KEY:
AUGUST
SI
S2
Dl
D2
D3
El
E2
Smith Bay, Station 1
Smith Bay, Station 2
Dunham Bay, Station 1
Dunham Bay, Station 2
Dunham Bay, Station 3
Echo Bay, Station 1
Echo Bay, Station 2
1118
945
645
169
65
1162
258
EL
816
516
86
SI
S2
Dl
D2
D3
El
E2
Figure 41 - Comparison of Populations of Hyalella by Static11,.
in Three Bays of Lake George from August through September 1
-------
FEBRUARY
KEY: SI Smith Bay, Station 1
S2 Smith Bay, Station 2
Di Dunham Bay, Station 1
D2 DunhJ» Bay, Station 2
D3 Dunham Bay, Station 3
El Echo Bay, Station 1
E2 Echo Bay, Station 2
215
86
86
I
0)
a
MARCH
V
p.
1000
I
8
14-1
O
65
86
22
22
22
MAY
1000
860
n
972
S2
Dl
D3
301
El
-------
1000.
0"
1000 . ,
o
b
0)
1000
KET;
JUNE (Early)
SI
S2
Dl
D2
D3
El
E2
Smith Bay, Station 1
Smith Bey, Station 2
DtahOT Bay, Station 1
Dunhac B«y, Station 2
Dvihaa Uy, Station 3
Ech* Bay, Station 1
Echo Bay, Station 2
U3
86
65
JUNE (Late)
n
65
JULY
65
22
Dl
D2
D3
El
E2
SI S2
Figure 43 - Comparison of Populations of Caenis by Station
in Three Bays of Lake George from June (early) through July l
-------
FEBRUARY
1000
KEY: SI Saith Bay, Station 1
S2 Saith Bay, Station 2
Dl Dunhan Bay, Station l
D2 Dunham Bay, Station 2
D3 Dunham Bay, Station 3
El Echo Bay, Station 1
E2 Echo Bay, Station 2
129
22
86
C/)
O.
MARCH
1000
387
n
108
65
65
530
MAY
1000
516
108
452
129
SI
""""1 301
I n
S2
D3
El
E2
figure HH - Comparison of Populations of Anmicola by Station
in Three Bay* of Laka George fron February through May 1972
1U5
-------
1000
cr
co
&
CO
0)
•H
S
1000
1000
KEY; SI Smith toy, Station 1
82 i»itk Bay, Station 2
$i BmLfcam fey, Station a
»
mum
1180
mmmmmmm
E2 Ehh« B«y» Btmtlon 2
516 560 516
258
n
JUNE (Late)
235 ^/B
151 151 i
r^, l-l I"!
JULY
800
605
••m^H
607
258 248
65 | I 86 I—I
r~n I I pn I 1 J
SI
S2
Dl
D2
D3
El
E2
Figure 45 - Comparison of Populations of Amnicola by Static"
in Three Bays of Lake George froa June (early) through July ^°
-------
2000.
-------
Table 49
Diversity Index (d) Values
1972
Sample
Month
February
March
May
June
(early)
June
(late)
July
August
September
Sta. Ave.
Bay Ave .
Stations
Smith
1
3.022
2.066
3.206
2. 9 34
—
3.188
3.079
2.020
2.191
1.422
1.640
1.505
1.689
2.074
2.874
2.432
2.358
2
Smith Dunham
2 1
3.079
—
3.170
2.651
—
2.664
2.858
3.442
—
3.405
3.228
3.578
3.334
4.002
3.475
3.881
3.284
.786
3.219
--
2.566
3.058
—
2.327
2.858
2.422
2.920
1.626
1.982
2.998
3.266
3.302
3.223
3.539
2.804
Dunham
2
—
—
2.974
—
—
3.605
2.724
3.380
3.323
3.291
3.142
3.606
2.637
3.545
3.351
3.796
3.278
3.075
Dunham
3
2.281
—
2.868
2.638
--
3.734
2.549
—
—
3.373
3.654
3.727
4.152
2.878
—
3.392
3.200
Echo
1
2.880
—
2.741
2.877
—
3.457
2.428
2.875
3.043
3.081
2.578
3.597
2.942
2.547
3.606
3.396
3.021
2
Echo
2
—
—
3.222
2.645
2.949
2.943
2.925
3.080
2.792
2.639
2.783
2.533
1.545
3.271
2.850
3_J_7_5.
__2_._923_
.976
. .1 ~
148
-------
Acute Static Bioassays
Test solutions containing exhaust products were prepared as out-
lined previously. Three test runs were made during August to
supply test solutions for static bioassays. The resulting CCln
extractable hydrocarbon concentrations were 33.6 mg/1, 30.0 mg/1
and 34.0 mg/1 as calculated utilizing infrared spectrophotometry
and standards of known hydrocarbon weights.
The test solutions were diluted as indicated in Tables 50(a)-50(q).
Survival was plotted against concentrations as suggested by Warren
(91) and others. TL data are shown in Figs. 47-50.
The 24 hr TL5Q for Gammarus fasciatus and Amnicola limnosa was 1.16
mg/1 and 1.08 mg/1, respectively. The 48 hr TL5Q was slightly lower,
1.0 mg/1 and 0.96 mg/1. In each case, acute toxicity (TL^QQ) w^s
estimated at less than 10 mg/1. Temperatures ranging from 21° to
24.5° varied less than 1.0°C for any given trial during the test
period. D.O. never fell below 6.0 nor varied more than 2.5 mg/1.
Alkalinity and pH of the standard fresh water was comparable to
those in the bays studied. The survival rate in the control bot-
tles was not always 100%; however, a survival rate of at least 80%
and usually 90 to 100% occurred in the control samples in all but
one of the test results (see Table 50(1)).
Toxic levels appeared to be considerably lower than expected. In
addition, the TL^Q'S for both of the test organisms were very simi-
lar and occurred over a narrow range. For each organism and test
period the bioassay was repeated at least three times.
DISCUSSION
Field Studies
It is probable that the characteristic differences (other than
size) of the three bays examined played a role in the variation of
composition and abundance of the benthic communities among the bays
and between individual stations within the same bay. Reid (61),
Odum (52) and others state that benthic fauna are not evenly dis-
tributed throughout a given lake. In addition, there are often
noticeable differences between the fauna of different lakes. As
noted, the shallow station in Smith Bay (Station No. 1) was prin-
cipally sand in composition, which may have been of significance
in the low 3 values computed for that station since the composition
of bottom sediments has been considered of prime importance in af-
fecting the development of these communities (Moon (48)), Eggleton
(20), Kendeigh (37)). Sand Bottoms are unstable and abrasive and
may be limiting; mud bottoms are a great deal more productive. The
dominant life form at Station No. 1 throughout most of the sampling
period was the Oligochaete, Tubifex (25-75% of the total population)
Dunham Bay stations (primarily silt and organic detritus) appeared
149
-------
Table 50(a)
Bioassay Data
Organism Tested:
Test Duration: 24 hr
Run No . :
Test
Cone.
(mg/1)
0.000
0.067
0.672
3.360
8.400
16.800
33.600
1 No.
Initial
Temp.
22.0
21.5
22.0
22.0
22.5
23.0
22.5
Organism Tested:
Test Duration: 24 hr
Run No. :
Test
Cone.
(mg/1)
0.000
0.672
1.344
2.016
2.688
3.360
2 No.
Initial
Temp.
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.0
21.5
Gammarus fasciatus
Original Cone, of
Test Organisms Used:
Initial Final
D. 0. Temp.
(mg/1) (°C)
9.2
9.4
8.8
9.0
9.2
9.2
9.4
22.5
22.0
22.0
21.5
22.0
22.0
22.5
Table 50(b)
Bioassay Data
Gammarus fasciatus
Original Cone, of
Test
Organisms Used:
Initial Final
D. 0. Temp.
(mg/1) (°C)
8.6
8.8
8.8
9.0
8.6
9.0
22.0
22.5
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
Date: 8-8-72
Solution:
10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
8.6
8.4
8.6
8.6
8.8
8.4
8.8
Date : £
Solution :
10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
8.4
8.2
8.0
8.5
8.0
8.6
33.6 (mg/1)
No. Organisms
Surviving
10
10
10
0
0
0
0
3-10-72
33.6 (mg/1)
No. Organisms
Surviving .
10
9
1
0
0
0
150
-------
Table 50(c)
Bioassay Data
Organism Tested':
-,cr Duration: 24 hr
>ur- fo-
rest
Cone.
0.000
0.941
i.076
1.210
1.345
1.470
3 No.
Initial
Temp.
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.5
Organism Tested:
Test Duration : 24 hr
Run No. :
Test
Cone.
(mg/1)
0.000
0.720
0.840
0.961
1.080
1.210
4 No.
Initial
Temp.
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
Gammarus fasciatus
Date: 8-15-72
Original Cone, of Solution:
Test Organisms Used:
Initial Final
D. 0. Terno.
(mg/1) (°C)
9.4 21.5
9.2 21.5
9.2 22.0
9.2 21.5
9.4 21.5
9.0 21.5
Table 50(d)
Bioassay Data
Gammarus fasciatus
Original Cone, of
Test Organisms Used:
Initial Final
D. 0. Temp.
(mg/1) (°C)
7.9 24.5
8.4 24.5
8.1 24.5
8.2 24.5
8.4 24.5
8.2 24.5
10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
8.6
8.7
8.4
8.6
8.8
8.4
Date : i
Solution :
10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
7.5
7.8
7.7
7.8
7.8
7.7
33.6 (mg/1)
No. Organisms
Surviving
10
7
9
5
6
1
3-22-72
30.0 (mg/1)
No. Organisms
Surviving
8
10
7
9
6
4
151
-------
Table 50Ce)
Bioassay Data
Organism Tested:
Gairanarus fasciatus
Date:
Test Duration: 24 hr Original Cone, of Solution
Run No. :
Test
Cone.
(mg/1)
0.000
0.840
0.961
1.080
1.200
1.316
5 No. Test Organisms Used:
Initial
Temp.
(°C)
23.0
23.5
23.0
23.0
23.5
23.0
Initial
D. 0.
(mg/1)
8.3
8.1
8.2
8.4
8.2
8.4
Final
Temp.
(°C)
22.5
22.5
22.5
22.0
22.0
22.0
10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
7.6
7.8
7.4
7.9
7.4
7.6
8-28-72
: 30.0 (mg/1)
No. Organisms
Surviving
9
9
8
7
6
4
Table 50Cf)
Bioassay Data
Organism Tested: Gammarus fasciatus
Date: 8-31-72
Test Duration: 24 hr Original Cone, of Solution:
Run No. :
Test
Cone.
(mg/1)
0.00
0.96
1.20
1.44
1.68
1.92
6 No. Test Organisms Used:
Initial Initial Final
Terno. D. 0. Temp.
(°C) (mg/1) (°C)
22.5
22.0
22.5
22.0
22.0
22.5
8.8
8.6
8.6
8.7
8.6
8.7
22.5
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.5
22.0
10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
8.0
7.8
7.6
7.8
7.9
7.8
: 30.0 (mg/1)
No. Organisms
Surviving _
8
6
7
7
5
6
152
-------
Table 50(g)
B.ioa:'::-:ay Data
Orgar
-ast Dural
= un ^°-:_
Test
:onc.
(sg/1).
o.ooo
0.702
0.809
0.916
1.025
1.135
1.240
lism Tested:
-ion : 24 hr
7 No.
Initial
Temp.
(°C)
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
Organism Tested:
Test Duration: 48 hr
Run No. :
Test
Cone.
(niff/1)
0.000
0.941
1.076
1.210
1.345
1.470
1 No
Initial
Temp.
(°C)
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
Gammarus fasciatus
Original Cone, of !
Test Organisms Used:
Initial Final
D. 0. Temp.
(mg/l) (°C)
8.4 22.0
8.3 22.0
8.4 22.0
8.4 22.0
8.2 22.0
8.4 22.0
8.3 22.0
Table 50(h)
Bioassay Data
Gammarus fasciatus
Original Cone, of
. Test Organisms Used:
Initial Final
D. 0. Temp.
(mg/l) (°C)
9.4 22.0
9.2 22.0
9.2 22.0
9.2 22.0
9.4 22.0
9.0 22.0
Date: 9-5-72
solution: 34.0 (mg/l)
10
Final
D. 0. No. Organisms
(mg/l) Surviving
7.4 9
7.2 7
7.3 6
7.5 7
7.3 6
7.3 5
7.4 3
Date: 8-15-72
Solution: 33.6 (mg/l)
10
Final
D. 0. No. Organisms
(mg/l) Surviving
8.0 10
8.2 7
7.8 5
7.6 4
8.0 5
7.8 2
153
-------
Table 50(i)
Bioassay Data
Organism Tested:
: Gammarus fasciatus
Date:
Test Duration: 48 hr Original Cone, of Solution:
Run No. :
Test
Cone.
(mg/1)
0.000
0.720
0.840
0.961
1.080
1.210
2 No. Test Organisms Used:
Initial
Temp.
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
Initial
D. 0.
(mg/1)
7.9
8.4
8.1
8.2
8.4
8.2
Final
Temp.
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
; 10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
7.0
7.2
6.8
7.2
7.2
7.6
8-22-72
: 30.0 (mg/1)
No. Organisms
Surviving
7
9
4
6
3
1
Table 50(j)
Bioassay Data
Organism Tested: Gammarus fasciatus
Date: 8-28-72
Test Duration: 48 hr Original Cone, of Solution:
Run No. :
Test
Cone.
(mg/1)
0.000
0.840
0.961 - - .
1.080
1.200
1.316
3 No. Test Organisms Used:
Initial
Temp.
(°C)
23.0
23.5
23.0
23.0
23.5
23.0
Initial
D. 0.
(mg/1)
8.3
8.1
8.2
8.4
8.2
8.4
Final
Temp.
(°C)
22.5
22.5
22.5
22.0
22.0
22.0
: 10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
7.0
7.0
6.8
7.0
6.8
6.6
: 30.0 (mg/1)
No. Organisms
Surviving
8
7
8
7
5
3
154
-------
Table 50(k)
Bioasuay Data
Orgar
T3St Durai
5-jp No.:_
"Test
Cone.
(mg/ii
o.ooo
0.702
0.809
0.916
1.025
1.135
1.240
lism Tested:
:ion: 48 hr
4 No.
Initial
Temp .
(°C)
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.5
Gammarus fasciatus
Original Cone, of
Test Organisms Used:
Initial
D. 0.
(mg/1)
8.8
8.6
8.6
8.7
8.6
8.7
8.6
Final
Terno.
(°C)
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
Date:
Solution
10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
6. 8
7.0
6.8
6.6
7.0
6.9
6.8
9-5-72
: 34.0 (mg/1)
No. Organisms
Surviving
4
5
6
6
4
2
Table 50(1)
Bioassay Data
Organism Tested:
Test Duration: 24 hr:
Pirn M^ •
I\lUi l\\J • .
Test
Cone.
fmo'/l 1
v. nig/ i /
0.00
0.72
0.84
0.96
1.08
1.24
1 No
Initial
Temp.
(°C)
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
Amnicola limnosa
s Original Cone.
. Test Organisms Used:
Initial
D. 0.
(mg/1)
8.3
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.5
Final
Temp.
(°C)
24.5
24.5
24.5
24.5
24.5
24.5
Date:
of Soluti
10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
7.4
7.4
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
8-22-72
.on: 33.6 (mg/1)
No. Organisms
Surviving
10
9
10
8
6
3
155
-------
Table 50(m)
Bioassay Data
Organism Tested:
; Amnicola limnosa
Date: 8-28-72
Test Duration: 24 hr Original Cone, of Solution
Run No. :
Test
Cone.
(mg/1)
0.00
0.84
0.96
1.08
1.21
1.316
2 No. Test Organisms Used:
Initial
Temp.
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
Initial
D. 0.
(mg/1)
8.4
8.3
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.3
Final
Temp.
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
: 10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
6.8
6.9
6.7
6.9
6.9
6.8
: 30.0 (mg/1)
No. Organisms
Surviving
9
9
6
5
1
0
Table 50(n)
Bioassay Data
Organism Tested:
: Amnicola limnosa
Date : 8-
Test Duration: 24 hr Original Cone, of Solution
Run No. :
Test
Cone.
(mg/1)
0.00
0.96
1.20
1.44
1.68
1.92
3 No. Test Organisms Used:
Initial
Temp.
(°C)
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
Initial
D. 0.
(mg/1)
8.8
8.6
8.6
8.8
8.6
8.7
Final
Temp.
(°C)
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.5
10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
7.0
7.1
6.9
6.8
7.0
7.0
-31-72
: 30.0 (mg/1)
No. Organisms
Surviving
9
7
4
0
0
0
156
-------
Table 50(o)
Bioassay Data
Crgs
-J=t D1^
'-'.'*<. Mo. '•_
_-\L»*'
Test
."one-
(wg/il
o.ooo
0.720
0.890
0.961
1.080
1.210
~ -? <-m Tested :
• 1 1 O Vi vi
,-t-ion: 48 hr
i No .
.. ~
Initial
Temp.
/ no \
(. C ;
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
Amnicola limnosa __
Q^n^_23_nal
Cone, of
Test Organisms Used:
Initial
D. 0.
(mg/1)
8.2
8.4
8.4
Q T
O . *J
8.2
8.3
Final
Temp.
(°C)
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
.24.0
Date : 8-2
Solution:
10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
6.5
6.6
6.6
6.8
6.5
6.6
2-72
33.6 (mg/1;
No. Organisms
Surviving
5
2
0
0
Table 50(p)
Bioassay Data
Or gar
Test Dural
Run No. :
Test
Cone.
(mg/1)
0.000
0.840
0.961
1.080
1.210
1.316
lism Tested:
;ion: 48 hr
Amnicola limnosa
Origir
2 No. Test Orgar
•••W^BOI
Initial Initial
Temp. D. 0.
(°C) (mg/1)
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
8.4
8.2
8.2
8.3
8.2
8.2
lal Cone, o
lisms Used:
Final
Temp.
(°C)
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
Date: 8-28-72
10
Final
D. 0.
(mg/1)
6.0
6.2
6.3
6.2
6.2
6.3
No. Organisms
Surviving
8
7
4
1
0
0
157
-------
Table 50(q)
Bioassay Data
Date: 8-31-72
Organism Tested: Amnicola limnosa
Test Duration: 48 hr Original Cone, of Solution: 30.0 (mg/1)
Run No.: 3 No. Test Organisms Used: 10
Test
Cone.
(mg/1)
0.000
0.961
1.210
Initial
Temp.
1.680
1.920
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
22.0
Initial
D. 0.
(mg/1)
8.8
8.6
8.6
8.6
8.6
8.8
Final
D. 0. No. Organisms
(mg/1) Surviving
6.6 9
6.5 7
6.3 4
6.4 0
6.6 0
6.4 0
158
-------
100% n
•H
•
§
0)
o.
50%
TL5Q =1.16 mg/1
0.1
1.0
Third Run
Fourth Run
Fifth Run
Sixth Run
Seventh Run
Hydrocarbon Concentration (mg/1)
Figure 47 - 24 hr TL for Gammarus fasciatus
-O-r
10.0
I
-------
100%
•H
en
o
w 50% . _ •_
g
o
fc
0)
i.o
First Run
Second Run
Third Run
Fourth Run
10.0
Hydrocarbon Concentration (mg/1)
Figure 48 - 48 hr TL,.. for Gammarus fasciatus
-------
100%,
•H
0)
O
I*
0)
TL5Q = 1-08 mg/1
50% I
0.1
First Run
Second Run
Third Run
10.0
Hydrocarbon Concentration (mg/1)
Figure 49 -
for Amnicola lirnnosa
A
-------
100%-
0>
50%-
®
o
&
0)
0.1
TL = 0.96 mg/1
2
First Run
Second Run
Third Run
D
.yWH^HMM^
•oo
i.o
Hydrocarbon Concentration (mg/1)
10.0
Figure 50 - 48 hrTL for Amnicola limnosa
50
-------
more suitable to many burrowing worms, dipterans and aquatic in-
sects. Echo Bay consistently had a relatively sparse dipteran
fauna which may be due at least in part to the higher percentage
of clay in the bottom sediments. According to Pagel (56) clay
sediments yielded far fewer dipterans than either silt or sand
substrates. Cole (16) has reported that the majority (70%) of
benthic fauna are found in the upper 1 centimeter (cm) of bottom
deposits. Also, deeper sediment layers contain less oxygen and
may account for faunal distributions on the surface layers
(Humphries (33)).
The water depth sampled ranged from 1.0 meter in Smith Bay to
nearly 7.0 meters in Dunham Bay. Differences in taxa and sea-
sonal variations seem to be depth dependent in many cases.
Eggleton (20) discusses the distribution of benthic forms as it
varies with depth from season to season. In the present study,
it was noted that the highest populations of midges and other
aquatic insects occurred earlier in the shallow areas (March to
May) than at deeper stations (May to June), such as Dunham Station
No. 3 and Smith Station No. 2. These maxima occurred just prior
to the emergence of adults. The controlling mechanism also may
be linked to a critical temperature which takes longer to be
reached in deeper areas. In the case of midge larvae, several
lesser populations were observed at the deeper stations. Appar-
ently this is due to the fact that the number of generations per
year varies in different species and depends in part on the depth
and temperature of their habitats (Kendeigh (37)). In Smith Bay
for example, three distinct maxima in the dipteran, Polypedilium
were seen. More commonly, each month was dominated by a different
dipteran group indicating some variation in emergence time among
species. A similar pattern was noted by Pagel (56) for the bays of
Lake Champlain. In general, the seasonal variations in both
transitory fauna (insects) and permanent fauna (mollusks, worms,
and crustaceans) after May followed the patterns described by
Humphries (33) and many others.
Aquatic vegetation is known to affect the distribution of benthic
fauna. Extensive examinations have been made on the relationships
of benthic fauna distribution and aquatic vegetation as a nutrient
source and/or cover (Berg (5), Walshe (90), Moon (48), Menon (46)).
The submerged vegetation was greatest in variation in Dunham Bay.
Dense beds of Potamogeton developed in May and were well estab-
lished by June. Maximum populations of amphipods, Gammarus and
Hyalella, and the isopod, Asellus, were due to early instar juven-
iles. Th« abundance of these forms occurred after the establish-
ment of dense beds of submerged vegetation in the bays. At Smith
Bay Station No. 1, where vegetation was limited to only small
clumps, relatively few crustaceans were found.
Currents and wave action also affect faunal distributions (Odum (52)
and Reid (61)). The streams entering Dunham Bay and Smith Bay seemed
163
-------
to play a role in the deposition or removal of substrate materials.
In addition, Smith Bay was particularly exposed to the effects of
wind and often experienced considerable wave action along the
sandy shore near Station No. 1. Predation also regulates benthic
populations and is considered one of the more important (Needham
(51) and Swift (84)).
Hayne and Ball (31) and Hall (28) have studied the effects of preda-
tion on the density of benthos in experimental ponds and estimated
that due to predation the actual production of an ecosystem may
be many times greater than that resulting from instantaneous meas-
urement (standing crop). In Lake George, fish such as bass, perch
and sunfish were observed to spawn in late May through early June
and the offspring remain in the bays through July. Predation along
with insect emergence may play a major role in the decreased abun-
dance of benthic fauna throughout the summer months.
The major physical and chemical parameters measured did not seem
to exceed the limits suggested by Macon (43) and others for various
sensitive aquatic insects. Dissolved oxygen reached 5.2 and 4.7
mg/1 at the deeper stations in Smith and Echo Bays in May prior to
the spring overturn which appeared to occur on the lake in late
May or early June. This did not appear to have a significant ef-
fect on the benthic fauna whose density and relative abundance were
high. Dissolved oxygen values were usually above 6.0 mg/1 and
temperature, pH and alkalinity were within accepted limits for
aquatic organisms. Clesceri and Williams (15) and Bloomfield (6)
reported that diatom assemblages in some portions of the southern
end of Lake George are indicative of abnormal nutrient levels and
related to population concentrations and presumably sewage efflu-
ents. In addition, Kremer (40) reports that high concentrations of
hydrocarbons were found in Dunham Bay when compared with Echo and
Smith Bays. While these may be causing subtle changes in the
benthic fauna, they did not seem to be having noticeable effects.
In general, the diversity of fauna in Dunham Bay exceeded that of
both Smith and Echo Bays.
The results in Tables 41-48 indicate that these shallow bays have
similar assemblages composed of diverse fauna. Of the total num-
ber of taxa identified, at least 22% appear to be common to all
stations and 43% were found in all bays. Less than 20% of the
total taxa were limited to only one bay. Most of the latter were
uncommon representatives of the dipteran larvae or water mites
(Acari) which were found in low numbers in only one or two dredge
hauls. The greatest number of taxa were obtained from Dunham Bay
and the least from Echo Bay.
All the major benthic faunal orders were well represented in each
bay including "intolerant" groups such as mayflies, caddisflies,
scuds and clams. In addition, "tolerant" groups such as certain
164
-------
annelid worms (Tubifex and Limnodrillus) and snails (Physa and
Lymnea) were commonly found. The common occurrence of many forms
generally considered sensitive to environmental stress indicate
the absence of conditions which might limit such faunal diversity.
More specially, the burrowing mayfly, Caenis, the caddisflies,
Polycentropus and Leptocella, the amphipods, Gammarus and Hyalella
and the clam, Pisidium, were commonly found in all locations.
The abundance or density of macroinvertebrates fluctuated consider-
ably throughout the sampling period which is likely due to the
emergence of aquatic insects in the spring or early summer. At the
shallow stations, dipteran populations peaked between March and
May 1972, immediately prior to and after ice out. At the deeper
stations maximum values were noted between May and June followed
by a similar drop due to insect emergence. Again, temperature
dependence for the initiation of adult dipterans is likely. Other
aquatic insects were most abundant in May at all stations prior
to their emergence as adult:; in late May and June. The density
of organisms in all bays avuraged higher than reported for Lake
Windermere, England (Moon (48), Humphries (33)) and for Lake Simcoe,
Ontario (Rawson (60)); the number of taxa identified was higher
than reported by these investigators for the littoral zones of
other oligotrophic lakes.
Moon (M-8) stated that Lake Windermere was undergoing an oligotrophic
to mesotrophic transition based on the abundance of Tanytarsus sp.
and on a lesser number of Chironomus midge larvae equipped with
auxiliary gills. In Lake George, several species of Tanytarsus were
common. In addition, although species of Chironomus were common,
only one of those identified possessed the auxiliary ventral gills
considered indicative of oxygen depletion and eutrophic conditions.
Ruttner (62) similarly stated that oligotrophic lakes were charac-
terized by the presence of Tanytarsus whereas eutrophic waters were
dominated by Chironomus. Most of the dipteran genera in Lake
George were "clean water forms" as defined by Macon (43).
These studies showed diversity indexes (d) to be generally around
3.0. The most notable exceptions were those for Smith Bay No. 1
and Dunham Bay No. 1, which averaged 2.358 and 2.804, respectively.
Smith Bay Station 1 is in shallow water (1 meter); is exposed to
considerable wave action; and the substrates are unconsolidated
sands. The lower diversity indices computed for many stations from
June through August were probably due to the emergence of insects
or migration to deeper waters as described by Eggleton (20) and not
representative of the true variety in fauna.
An additional factor must be considered when comparing the diver-
sity index (d) values obtained in this study with the range of
values developed by Wilhm (93). Wilhm's scale of values was derived
primarily from water quality studies in flowing waters. According
to Odum (52) and Reid (61) lotic (flowing waters) conditions favor a
165
-------
greater variation in microhabitats than lentic Cstanding water)
situations due to greater variations in factors such as current,
temperature, dissolved oxygen and substrate. Pool communities
differ markedly from those occurring in the riffles and there is
a greater tendency for drifting of organisms from one area to
another. In addition, flowing waters receive a greater input from
adjacent terrestrial habitats creating additional nutritional
niches to be exploited. These two factors encourage greater taxo-
noraic variation in flowing waters. As a result, values for flowing
waters would probably be higher than those for standing waters of
equal quality. It is probable that the borderline diversity val-
ues obtained in the present study are in fact indicative of good
water quality.
Dunham Bay No. 1 is a rather shallow station and appears to re-
ceive silt from Dunham Bay Brook and the marsh which it drains.
It had a low mean diversity index and only 56 taxa were identified.
High levels of hydrocarbons ranging from about 30 to U2 yl/m^ from
the boat activity in the brook have been noted by Kremer (40).
Dunham Bay Station No. 2 is located just offshore from a large
marina and high hydrocarbon values should be common in the area; •
however, it had a high mean diversity index (3.278) and the highest
number of taxa (92). It would seem unlikely, therefore, that it
should not be similarly effected if petrochemicals were limiting
at Station No. 1.
In summary, the diversity indices for all bays exceeded or bor-
dered the values considered indicative of unpolluted waters. The
taxonomic variation was extremely high and contained many forms
generally considered intolerant of nutrient loadings and toxic
conditions. There was, however, high abundance compared to data
for other oligotrophic lakes. Table 51 serves to compare the
three bays on the basis of these three criteria. With the excep-
tion of Station No. 1, Dunham Bay is high in diversity and popu-
lation density. Smith Bay Station No. 2 appears to have the most
desirable characteristics from' a biological point of view having
high taxonomic variation (diversity) and population density. Echo
Bay has a moderate diversity but low density. It must be remem-
bered that abundance alone is not indicative of desirable condition
On the contrary, low diversity and high density is characteristic
of most highly enriched environments. Low abundance and low
diversity may be indicative of toxic conditions (Cairns and
(9)). Smith No. 1 had low diversity and high abundance. This
was judged to be less a factor of water quality than of other en
vironmental factors, such as lack of vegetation, shallow depth
unfavorable substrate. Dunham Bay Station No. 1 was similar to
Nos. 2 and 3 in population density and had more taxa associated
with it than either of the Echo Bay stations. The diversity index
was only slightly below that assigned to unstressed waters.
166
-------
Table 51
Comparison of Pertinent Parameters
Diversity
Index
Taxonomic
Variation
Population
Density
for the Stations Studied*
Stations
Smith Smith Dunham Dunham Dunham Echo
121 2 31
716 2 34
425 1 36
214 5 37
Echo
2
5
7
6
*Rating on a number line from 1 = highest to 7 = lowest
167
-------
The hypothesis that the benthic community of Dunham Bay might be
affected by the discharge of hydrocarbons from two-cycle marine
engines is not supported by the field studies. The benthic com-
munity is markedly similar to that of the other bays considered.
In some ways, a more diverse faunal assemblage is indicated.
It is felt that variations among the bays and individual stations
studied at Lake George can best be attributed to natural factors
such as bottom type, vegetation and depth rather than the direct
influence of exogenically introduced materials. It is likely that
the shallow bays are in a more advanced nutrient state than are
the deep profundal areas. This is expected, however, since the ac-
cumulation of nutrient rich matter, such as detritus, occurs in
such areas more rapidly. In addition, shallow areas contain greater
numbers of rooted aquatics and other producers which enhance the
available nutrient pool, considerably.
Static Bioassays
It must be stressed that the static bioassays conducted on selected
benthic fauna were preliminary in nature and were intended only to
obtain estimates of the actual acute toxic lethal mean (Tl^g). The
exhaust waters tested contained materials which were both biode-
gradable and highly volatile. For such materials, the National
Technical Advisory Committee (50) suggests continuous flow bioassays
as the first choice. In addition, the materials in the exhaust
waters appear to be toxic. The Advisory Committee again suggested
continuous flow bioassays for materials toxic at concentrations of
1 mg/1 or less, because the quantity taken into the organisms may
be a very large percentage of the amount in the test waters. The
static test can give useful relative measures of toxicity but should
not be expected to yield absolute values on which to base standards.
Secondly, it is important to note that acute toxicity is quite dif-
ferent from chronic effects. It is possible that concentrations
which are not lethal may affect reproduction or other behavior.
Acute toxicity is a measure of what concentrations of a substance
will kill an organism in a limited time.
According to Warren (91) and others the toxic effects of substances
vary according to the chemistry of the water in which the test is
conducted. Temperature, dissolved oxygen and other environmental.
conditions may affect toxicity. The use of standard freshwater as
a dilutent was an attempt to standardize conditions. The resulting
data are not necessarily applicable to all aquatic ecosystems.
Due to the use of small organisms in a large volume of water, an
air conditioned laboratory and a standard test solution, the ef-
fects of such variables was diminished.
The concentrations of CCl^ extractable hydrocarbons were in the
range of those reported by Shuster (69) and others. In each run,
168
-------
he resulting concentrations in a subsurface sample was about 30.0
i\ indicating consistency in engine efficiency and the spectro-
"notometric analysis.
The curves CFigs . 4-7-50) for the various TL 's are symmetrically
s'gmoid and the median portion is almost linear. In addition, the
range of effects is quite narrow. These characteristics are iden-
tical to those described by Warren (91) for the theoretical cumula-
tive frequency distribution curve of survival at various concen-
trations of a highly toxic substance.
It is likely that the values obtained are a reasonable approximation
of the TLjQ for exhaust water in the test environment. They are
probably of the order of magnitude which might cause similar effects
in Lake George .
The TLso is a measure of acute toxicity or that level of material
which kills 50% of the test organisms in a prescribed time limit.
It is by no means a safe level for the organisms. The TL^Q'S es-
timated for Gammarus fasciatus and Amnicola limnosa are remarkably
small in range for both 24 and 4-8 hour periods . All values were
close to 1.0 mg/1.
Pickering and Henderson (58) found that in bioassays using petro-
chemicals, the differences in the mortality of fish resulting from
24 hour or 4-8 hour exposures to the same concentrations were small.
Apparently the range of TL^Q'S is not broad and the 96 hour TLs
the test organisms does not differ markedly from that for 24 or 48
hour periods.
The National Technical Advisory Committee suggests that harmless
concentrations for various chemicals be derived from specified
"application factors". The first of these is a ratio between known
safe concentrations for continuous exposure and the known 96 hour
TL50> To calculate the harmless level, one multiplies the 96 hour
TLtjQ by the application factor. In the bioassays on exhaust water's
survival was high, below a value of 0.6 mg/1. We can approximate
the 96 hour TLso a-t 0.9 mg/1. By assuming these values are repre-
sentative, the ratio (0.6/0.9) or application factor would be 0.66
and the safe level approximately (0.66 x 0.9) (K59 mg/l._ A second
application factor involves a fixed percentage of the 96 hour TL5Q.
For non-persistent materials a concentration of not more than 1/10
the 96 hour TL50 is advised. For persistent materials from 1/20 to
1/100 may be safe.
An additional consideration involves the possibility that any pos-
sible effects from hydrocarbon discharges may occur initially in
the deeper waters of the lake. Surber (82) suggests that while the
shoreward zones of vegetation contain a greater variety of organ-
isms, the photosynthetic activity of plants and the circulation of
169
-------
surface waters are likely to create better living conditions in the
zone of vegetation than exist in waters deeper than about 15 feet.
In this way, organisms in deeper waters may be more readily effected
by discharge than those in shallow bays.
170
-------
SECTION VIII - ADSORPTION OF EXHAUST PRODUCTS
ON BOTTOM SEDIMENTS
A an aid to establishing the fate of exhaust products discharged to
'-' i
-------
Antonetti-Alvarez has presented an extensive review of analytical tech-
niques used in this area CD.
PROCEDURE
The methods used for the adsorption studies were essentially modifica-
tions of methods described by Hamilton (29). Samples of sediments were
collected from the bays by a dredge, filtered and weighed. Sample
weights were corrected for moisture content as determined separately.
Direct drying of samples produced very hard samples which had to be
pulverized. Direct drying was, therefore, not used after preliminary
work .
Sediment samples were added to 1800 ml of water in two-liter beakers.
Measured quantities of liquid exhaust products collected from test
outboard engines were added to each beaker. The beakers were placed
in a standard Phipps-Bird jar test apparatus and agitated at about 90
RPM for two hours. Previous work had indicated that this speed appeared
to be optimum. A range of speeds appeared to have almost no effect on
absorptive properties. The quantity of exhaust products added were
0.05, 0.10, 0.20, 0.50, and 1.00 ml to the beakers. These quantities •
corresponded to 3, 6, 12, 30, 60, and 72 ml/square meter of surface.
The agitator blade was positioned about 1 cm below the water surface,
as recommended by Hamilton. (Fig. 51)
Aliquot samples of sediments were removed by suction to avoid bringing
the sediments in contact with surface material. A siphon arrangement
was used to draw off samples as shown in Fig. 52. The samples were
filtered, weighed and placed in a Soxhlet extraction thimble and ex-
tracted. Anhydrous sodium sulfate was placed in the flask to remove
water. The salt was filtered out before evaporation of the solvent.
In preliminary work, hexanes were used as the solvent, but were replaced
by methylene dlchloride. This solvent proved to be much more effective
and generally satisfactory. Solvent was evaporated in a rotary evapo-
rator under a vacuum. The residue remaining in the flask was weighed.
Blanks were run on each sediment to determine the solvent extractables.
In the work directed at hydrocarbon identification, most of the
ical work which was done was aimed at isolating the aliphatic (saturate^'
compounds from the myriad of other compounds which form sediment. Fig*
ure 53: graphically depicts in block form the procedure followed. The
analytical procedure may be divided into five phases :
a) Sample Preparation
b) Total Organic Carbon Determination
c) Soxhlet Extraction
d) Liquid Chromatography
e ) Gas Chromatography
Sample preparation involved a sequence of four steps, mainly: sample
characterization, filtering, drying, and grinding. These steps con
sisted basically of methods aimed at removing extraneous material
172
-------
icml
*
OIL FILM—, 1
2.54
cm
/
1
1 cm
J 1
PADDLE
7.6 cm ^
TWO
LITERS OF
WATER
I cm
Figure 51 - Jar Test Apparatus
173
-------
•• TO VACUUM
PINCH CLAMP
TO
REGULATE FLOW «J
.'.^TTi.-::':'•; SAMPLE y/.:V.';y;: •'"'./
GLASS TUBING TO BOTTOM
OF THE BEAKER
ERLENMEYER
FLASK
SOIL TRAVEL
DURING SAMPLING
Figure 52 - Soil Sampling Apparatus
17U
-------
SAMPLE
COLLECTION
SAMPLE
CHARACTERIZATION
FILTERING
DRYING
GRINDING
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
DETERMINATION
GAS
CHROMATOGRAPHY
LIQUID
CHROMATOGRAPHY
SOXHLET
EXTRACTION
Figure 53 - Analytical Procedure Used in This Study
175
-------
the sediment (animals, bottom plants, whole leaves, etc.), washing the
sediment with distilled water in order to effect a partial removal of
soluble organic compounds and inorganic (salts) - since these compounds
are not of interest here. The sediment was then air-dried with dry air
at room temperature, and it was finally ground with mortar and pestle
to approximately a 60/200 mesh size.
The next step was a determination of the total organic content of the
sediment samples. The method of Schollenberger (68) as later modified
by Purvis and Higson (59) was used for this purpose. In this project
this method was modified slightly in order to make it more useful and
faster; also, a new way of analyzing the data obtained by using this
method was devised.
Following the total organic carbon determination, the dry sediment sam-
ples were then extracted in a Soxhlet extractor with a CC1U, CgHg, CHgOH
mixture during 24 hours. Normally 160 mg of this mixture was used in the
extraction. The extract obtained by this procedure ranged in color from
golden to almost black. The extract residue was isolated by blowing dry
air into the flask with the sediment extract until all of the excess
solvent had evaporated. Usually around 0.1-0.8 g of extract residue was
obtained per 18-4-0 g of air-dried sediment.
This residue was then dissolved in n-heptane and forced onto a column of
activated alumina previously prewetted with n-heptane. The column was
eluted with 5-10 ml fractions of n-C^ followed by 10-10 ml fractions of
CC14. The material eluting with these two compounds was collected (in
same flask), according to Smith, Bray and Evans, and Kvenvalden (70,7,41).
Dry air was then passed into the flask containing this eluate fraction,
and the excess solvent mixture was removed. The residue thus obtained
was then dissolved in toluene and analyzed on a gas chromatograph (F c,
M 810, FID, single column) using n-decane as reference.
RESULTS
The results of the adsorption tests on sediments have been summarized
in Table 52, and are plotted in Fig. 54.
Figures 55 and 56 show the results of the gas chromatographic runs of
two of the samples tested. Table 53 shows the normal alkanes identified
in each sediment batch. Table 54 gives the peak number (a set of num-
bers, in sequence, given to each peak for accounting purposes) of the
five largest peaks on each chromatogram - when the identity of the peak
is known, the number of carbon atoms are given in parenthesis. This
table also gives the total number of peaks on which identification was
attempted.
DISCUSSION
It can be seen from the results listed in Table 52 and plotted in
54 that the amount of exhaust products adsorbed on lake sediments
I'ij'.-
176
-------
Table 52
Summary of Adsorption Results
,v-,aust
• >•*
~rc^ gms Extract Blank
•^.gg per gm Soil gms Extract
?•' * Collected per gm Soil
Net gms
Extract per
gm Soil
Collected
Total
gms Extract
to Soil
XstJ^lL— - ————— —— • *
. gav Samples , Dried and Pulverized
-xhaust' Products from 33 Hp Evinrude @ 1200 RPM
Solvent -Hexanes
3 0.0041 0.0008
6 0.0030 0.0008
12 0.0022 0.0008
30 0.0074 0.0008
120 0.0313 0.0008
Echo Bay Samples, Filtered
Exhaust Products from 9.5 Johnson @ 1000
Solvent -Methylene Chloride
3 0.00220 0.00139
6 0.00384 0.00139
12 0.00261 0.00139
30 0.01509 0.00139
. 60 0.01210 0.00139
72 0.01740 0.00139
Dunham Bay Samples , Filtered
Exhaust Products from 9.5 Johnson @ 1000
Solvent-Methylene Chloride
3 0.0307 0.0041
6 0.0273 0.0041
12 0.0200 0.0041
30 0.0289 0.0041
60 0.0312 0.0041
72 0.0387 0.0041
0.0033
0.0022
0.0014
0.0066
0.0305
RPM
0.00081
0.00245
0.00122
0.01370
0.01071
0.01601
RPM
0.0266
0.0232
0.0159
0.0248
0.0271
0.0346
0.0189
0.0137
0.0094
0.0451
0.1560
0.00027
0.00697
0.00899
0.00555
0.0532
0.0851
0.0268
0.0341
0.0267
0.0432
0.0385
0.0488
177
-------
0.20
Echo Bay - Simple #1
y = 0.006 + 1.246 ClO}~Jx
-3
Echo Bay - Sample #2
y = 0.0071 t 1.107
-3
co
c
CO
+J
o
I
3
n>
X
W
0.15
0.10
0.05
Dunham Bay - Sample #1
y = 0.0287 + 0.25 (10)~3x
Dunham Bay
50 100
Amount of Exhaust Products Placed on Surface (ml./sq.m.)
Figure 54 - Amount of Exhaust Products Adsorbed in Sediments
vs Amount of Exhaust Products on Water Surfaces
178
-------
GAS CHROMATOGRAM OF SAMPLE 4A
Figure 55
-------
00
o
GAS CHROMATOGRAM OF SAMPLE 7A
Figure 56 •
-------
Table 53
Normal Alkanes Identified in Each Sediment Extract
Comoound
Octadecane
Nonadecane
Eicosane
Heneicose
Docasane
Tricosane
Tetracosane
Pentacosane
Hexacosane
Heptocosane
Octacosane
Nonacosane
Sample Numbers
3A, 4A, 7A, 8A
10A
7A, 8A, 10A
1A, 4A, 7A, 8A, 10A
1A, 3A, 4A, 7A, 8A, 10A
1A, 4A, 7A, 8A, 10A
4A, 7A, 8A
1A, 4-A, 7A, 8A, 10A
1A, 4A, 7A, 10A
1A, 4A, 7A, 8A, 10A
1A, 4 A
1A, 7A, 8A, 10A
181
-------
Sample Number
1A
3A
4A
7A
8A
10A
Table 54
Five Largest Peaks Detected
in the Sediment Extracts
Five Largest Peaks
1; 7; 8; 5; 13(22)
6; 8; 9; 12(22); 11
14; 13(25); 15(27); 10(23); 16(28)
15(27); 16(29); 12; 10(23); 13(25)
15(29); 14(27); 10(23); 13(25); 4
16(27); 18(20); 13(25); 11(23); 9(21)
No. of Peaks
Between
100°C-340°C
22
13
16
18
15
18
Numbers in parentheses are the carbon numbers corresponding to the
indicated peaks.
182
-------
• creases with the amount. This is consistent with the results of
Hafliilton made with various types of soils. It also can be seen that
rue sediments in Echo Bay seem to have a much higher tendency to adsorb
the exhaust products, than do those from Dunham Bay. This may be re-
lated to the nature of the sediments in the bays. The sediments in Echo
nay seem to be characterized by a high clay content and a low organic
al content. The sediments from Dunham Bay are much higher in or-
matter and more heterogeneous in composition.
rt is noticeable, from the data in Fig. 57 which represents the relative
amounts of n-alkanes in a variety of products as presented by Stevenson
from the data of other investigators, that there seems to be a preva-
lence or predominance of odd-numbered hydrocarbons over even-numbered
hydrocarbons in natural occurring systems.
In Fig. 57 Stevenson has shown relative amounts of n-alkanes in pasture
plants, manure, soils, recent sediments, and crude oil, from the work
of other investigators (75). It is readily seen that sediments, soils,
and extracts from land plants and cattle manure show a definite pre-
dominance of odd-numbered hydrocarbons , while crude oil shows no such
preference. These considerations suggest that the hydrocarbons de-
tected in Lake George sediment extracts are "native" or natural to these
sediments - that their presence in the sediment was not due to man-
induced sources. Although this odd-numbered normal alkane preference
of sediments is well-established, there is still some debate about it.
Koons , et al. found no significant odd-numbered normal alkane preference
in the sediments which they tested (39).
183
-------
ft
BnOnHn
n
n
UTtU
n
HnGnl]rrBnnn
UMTA tOM CAM W.
Hnon nun n
t> l« » t« >r a o M x a u u t* a a it tt
'nn.n
Z> X) II II U
figure 57 - Relative Amounts of N-Alkanes in Pasture Plants,
Manure, Soils, Recent Sediments, and Crude Oil,
from Reference 75
Reproduced from
best available copy.
184
-------
SECTION IX - TANK TESTS FOR COLLECTING EXHAUST PRODUCTS
of tests were made by operating a 33 H.P. Evinrude engine in a
, rank. The purposes of these tests were several. The primary pur-
'3-I was to collect samples of exhaust products at various operating
^"'^tions for use in developing analytical procedures, and for use in
'% ' adsorprion studies, evaporation studies and microbiological studies.
-•-a engine was run with and without an anti-pollution device attached.
'•-» device was not used in its normal way by recirculating the material
.Ve'uallv disposed of through the puddle drain. Instead, the device was
'.-ed as a means of collecting the exhaust products. Surface samples,
'-ater column samples and perimeter samples were collected for each run
-0 determine the total amount of carbon tetrachloride extractable ma-
-erial which was added to the water during specified operating condi-
tions .
fne tests were run in a steel tank of U-8 cu ft capacity. This tank was
used to facilitate sampling and to make it easier to operate and clean.
;t was found, however, that while the expected advantages were indeed
realized, its use had other disadvantages. The small size made it
difficult to use other larger engines because of splashing. In addition,
it was found that the tank water heated up somewhat as noted in Table 55.
This may account for the lower values for the percent of fuel discharged
found during these runs as compared to previously noted values (3).
Surface samples were collected and analyzed by the techniques described
in Section IV. Samples were collected using the sampler shown in Fig. 5.
Carbon tetrachloride was used for extraction and the samples were ana-
lyzed using infrared spectroscopy.
Water column samples were collected at a point approximately six inches
below the water surface.
Perimeter samples were collected by cleaning a one foot section of the
wall at the surface level with a measured amount of carbon tetrachloride
and analyzing the extract.
185
-------
CD
O>
Table 55
Tank Tests
Motors: 1968 Evinrude 33 H.P. in Good Condition
Run
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
RPM
1200
2000
4000
650
2000
4000
600
2000
4000
650
2000
Fuel
Used
Liters
2.00
2.48
4.48
1.56
2.32
5.60
1.73
2.55
5.40
1.84
2.48
% of Fuel Initial
Discharged Temp. °C
3.9 11
1.1 9
0.4 9
10.7 10
1.1 10
0.4 10
* 12
* 10
* 12
* 11
* 12
Oil Concentrations
Final Surface Tank Perimeter
Temp. °c gms/12 ft2 g/36 ft3 mg 10 ft
18
18
29
14
21 385 85.5 126
33
16
21
32 244 11.4 418
16
22
-Without anti-pollution device attached
-------
SECTION X - THRESHOLD ODOR NUMBER TESTS
_ ;V-i t'ne increased usage of our natural waters for both drinking and
"~I,,eational purposes, greater emphasis has been directed to the sub-
'."^r-'ve auaiity criteria of water. Tastes and odors are quite apparent
'~~ >oTieowners and residents on recreational bodies of water such as Lake
-^crge • '^se °^ ~t^e la^s water for drinking, cooking and washing, as
.'•oil as for swimming, boating, and other recreational purposes is wide-
Manv substances contribute to the taste and odor of water including most
organic compounds and many inorganic compounds. Since many odorous
materials are detectable when present in only a few micrograms per liter
and are often complex, it is usually impractical and often impossible to
•isolate and identify the odor-producing material. The chemical senses
of odor and taste are thus important in the evaluation of the levels of
odor and taste-producing substances.
In recent years, numerous complaints of increased levels of odor have
been made by residents at Lake George, particularly during the summer
period. Residents have associated these odors, described as petrol-
like, with the exhaust discharges from outboard engines. A study,
therefore, has been made of the levels of odor experienced in the waters
of Dunham, Echo and Smith Bays as a function of the time of year. For
comparison a few tests were also made on water from a test tank in which
an engine was run for various times. The effect of allowing samples to
age was also examined to a limited extent.
BACKGROUND
The perception of odor has never been fully explained to the complete
satisfaction of all investigators. It has been observed that an odor
is perceived by humans when some substance capable of exciting the
nerves reaches the specialized tissues of the olfactory tract high in
the nasal vault and dissolves in the films of liquid covering the exposed
surfaces of these tissues (80). The property of the dissolved substance
which causes the nerves to transmit a sensation to the brain hac not yet
been found. Human response to odor is quite variable. A smell to one
person may b« a fragrance to another. It appears that when the odor
stimulus is transmitted to the brain, we draw upon memory of past odors
and match this stimulus with one of these odor memories.
In order for there to be a perceptible odor, a certain number of mole-
cules or particles sufficiently small to be carried along with the air
must reach the olfactory receptors. This number is determined by the
size, shape, and polarity of the molecules (79). At the same time,
these factors determine the specific odor of each molecule, so that there
187
-------
is an interdependence between odor threshold, the size and the smell of
the molecular species. The odor threshold is defined as the lowest
concentration at which one recognizes the odor.
For further information regarding the most recent theories on the mech-
anism of olfaction, books by Sumner (80,81), and reports to a symposium
for the American Chemical Society (18) are most useful.
PROCEDURE
The tests used to determine the threshold odor number of water samples
were conducted in accordance with procedures described in Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. All glassware used
in these tests was specially cleaned using chromic acid cleaning solu-
tion and rinse water deodorized with activated carbon.
Water samples collected for examination were stored in cleaned glass
containers and kept at low temperatures to preserve the odor quality of
the water. Tests were performed as soon as possible after collection,
generally four hours after collection but no more than 24 hours.
The test was conducted by placing a 200 ml sample of water in a 500 ml
Erlenmeyer flask and allowing the flask and contents to achieve a con-
stant temperature of M-0°C in a constant temperature bath, and comparing
the odor with that of a similar flask of odor-free water. When an odor
was detected, its nature was recorded, and the sample diluted with odor-
free water until an odor could no longer be detected. The last dilution
at which odor is detected is defined as the threshold odor number, and
is equal to the ratio of the volume of diluted sample (constant at 200
ml), and the actual volume of the original sample present in the diluted
volume.
Odor-free water was prepared by passing double-distilled water through a
column of activated carbon. Precautions were observed to air-condition
the room in which tests were conducted, and to keep all odorous material
away from the room. All glassware was specially cleaned and rinsed with
odor-free water. Checks on results were made periodically by using
several individual testers.
Samples were collected in 16 oz wide-mouthed glass jars with plastic
covers by lowering the containers to a point one foot below the surface>
opening, and filling the container, restoppering and removing the con-
tainer. The same technique was used for all samples.
To investigate the severe effect outboard motor exhaust would have on
the threshold odor number of water, outboard engines were run in a
painted steel tank. The tank's dimensions were 3' x 3' x 4'.
The engines were recent models: an Evinrude 33 H.P. and a Johnson 9.
H.P. Both engines were run with a 50:1 fuel to oil ratio. The Johnso-
188
-------
was equipped with a device designed to recirculate liquid exhaust
missi°ns' The Evinrude was equipped to either discharge exhaust prod-
ucts directly to the water, or to allow the liquid exhaust products to
he collected as desired.
Before each test run, the tank was scrubbed with cleansers and rinsed
to remove oil and odor-bearing water. A background sample was taken
Before the run was started. Water temperature was determined before
and after each run.
In most cases the engine was run for 30 minutes. Samples were taken at
intermediate times also. Total fuel consumption and engine speed were
measured and recorded (88).
RESULTS
The results of running outboard engines at controlled speeds in the test
tank are given in Tables 56 and 57. As seen from these results, the
build-up of odors was severe under these conditions. It may be noted
that the threshold odor number increased with time and with engine speed.
Fuel usage also increased with engine speed.
All odors from these tests were characterized as slight petrol to very
heavy petrol. There was no question as to the type of odor. A compari-
son of values when exhaust was discharged directly from the Evinrude,
and when it was collected separately, showed lower odor numbers in the
latter case. The larger engine generated higher odor numbers than the
smaller engine.
An investigation was made of the effect of aging samples in open con-
tainers for various times, to simulate the lake surface exposed to the
atmosphere. Results of these tests for both pre-aged and post-aged
threshold odor numbers are given in Table 57. In all cases the thresh-
old odor number was greatly reduced and in most cases the definite
petrol odor was no longer detectable.
The results of the lake tests for the various sampling stations are
given in Table 58 and are plotted in Figs. 58-64. It may be noted that
the ranges given both in the tables and the figures represent the in-
terval between the number corresponding to the last detectable odor, and
the next succeeding number at which no odor was apparent.
The samples, taken prior to early May were taken while ice was on the
lake. These values in general were quite low. After the ice melted,
the threshold odor numbers for Dunham Bay and Echo Bay showed increasing
values as the summer progressed, and reached values as high as 38.1 and
32.0, respectively. Except for a brief sharp rise in June coinciding
with an algal bloom, the values for Smith Bay tended to remain low, with
small fluctuations in the range of 5 to 15.
189
-------
Table 56
Threshold Odor Numbers for Outboard Motors Run in a Controlled Environment: Time and RPM.
Evinrude 33 H.P. with Liquid Exhaust Collection and with a Test Propeller
ID
o
^---— ^___RPM
Time ' -—______
Background
1 minute
3 minutes
7 minutes
10 minutes
30 minutes
Fuel Usage (ml)
Initial Temp. /Final
Temp. (°C)
600-700
8.0
21.4
32.0
40.0
95.0
190.0
1565
10/14
1000
14.2
852.0
6880. -13333.
2000
2000
7.1
2560. -5120.
10240. -20480.
2480
10/18
4000
7.1
850. -1130.
3200. -6400.
4480
9/29
Note: All samples were characterized by strong petrol odors with the exception of 1 minute
and 600-7jO PPM which exhibited a slight petrol odor.
-------
Table 56 (continued)
Threshold Odor Numbers for Outboard Motors Run in a Controlled Environment: Time and RPH.
Evinrude 334H.P. without Liquid Exhaust Collection (no control device) and with a Test Propeller
RPM
Time
Background
1 minute
3 minutes
10 minutes
30 minutes
Fuel Usage (ml)
Initial Temp. /Final
Temp. (°C)
600-700
5.33
50.7
135.0
672. -900.
4010. -5340.
1730
12/16
1000
10.7
70.7
189.0
675. -900.
1540. -2020.
2550
10/21
2000
Recheck
14.2
150.0
171. -228.
1010.0
2040.0
2650
10/22
4000
5.33
76.0
202.0
2000. -2666.
6050. -8060.
5100
12/35
-------
Table 57
Threshold Odor Numbers for Outboard Motors Run in a Controlled Environment: Time and RPM.
Johnson 9.5 H.P. with a Liquid Exhaust Recirculation Device.1000 RPM
ID
ro
Background
10 minutes
20 minutes
30 minutes
Fuel Usage (ml)
3.15
80. -160.
880
4.0
20. -HO.
160.0
133. -200.*
160. -200.**
10.7
28.4+
26.6t+
*Sampled from under the surface of the water while air bubbles were rising.
''"''Sampled from under the surface of the water after waiting 15 minutes, no more air bubbles rising.
+Sample tested in usual procedure.
++Same sample but allowed to remain in an open container for 6 hours. Still a strong petrol odor.
-------
Table 57 (continued)
Threshold Odor Numbers for Outboard Motors Run in a Controlled Environment. Tests for the
Effect pf Aging One Week in Open Glass Jars. Evinrude 33 H.P. with Liquid Exhaust
''' ""' Collection and with a Test Propeller. 600-700 RPM
UD
CO
Background
1 minute
3 minutes
7 minutes
10 minutes
30 minutes
Immediate Testing
8.0
cleanser odor
2m
slight petrol odor
32.0
stronger petrol odor
40.0
very strong petrol odor
95.0
very strong petrol odor
190.0
very strong petrol odor
Aged One Week
2.0
musty odor
4. 64
musty , no petrol odor
10.9
musty , very slight petrol odor
18.25
musty, very slight petrol odor
24.4
slight petrol odor
64.0
definite petrol odor
Note: In all cases 1, 3, 7, and 10 minutes there was no petrol odor at all or it could not be
detected after the first few dilutions. 30 minutes had a petrol odor that remained for
a while.
In all cases 1, 3, 7, 10, and 30 minutes after the petrol odor could not be detected,
they all maintained the same musty odor, similar to the background odor.
-------
Table 58
Threshold Odor Number from March through July 1972
(The lower number of the threshold number range represents the last
detectable odor number, while the higher number is the next succes-
sive odor number for which no odor was detected.)
Date
Dunham Bay Station 1
3/21
5/13
5/26
5/29
6/5
6/9
6/12
6/16
6/19
6/23
6/25
6/30
7/1
7/3
7/4
7/6
7/10
7/14
7/17
7/21
Dunham Bay Station 3
3/21
5/13
5/26
5/29
6/5
6/9
6/12
6/16
6/19
6/23
6/25
6/30
7/1
Threshold Odor
Number Range
3.4
8.13
8.0
8.46
10.7
9.45
18.9
18.9
21.3
9.45
14.2
14.2
14.2
38.1
33.5
28.3
16.0
18.9
10.7
10.7
6.17
9.29
7.05
6.34
10.7
12.6
14.2
21.3
25.2
9.45
10.7
10.7
10.7
- 3.97
- 9.3
- 10.7
- 11.3
- 14.2
- 12.6
- 25.2
- 25.2
- 28.4
- 12.7
- 18.9
- 18.9
- 18.9
- 50.7
- 44.7
- 37.7
- 21.3
- 25.2
- 14.2
- 14.2
- 7.06
- 10.62
- 9.47
- 8.46
- 14.2
- 17.0
- 18.9
- 28.4
- 33.5
- 12.7
-14.2
-14.2
-14.2
Odor
Description
algal odor
earthy odor
earthy-musty-fishy
faint fishy
earthy-grassy
earthy
earthy
sweet earthy
earthy
very earthy
earthy-grassy
earthy-grassy
strong earthy-fishy
distinctly earthy
very earthy
mild earthy
earthy
algal
strong algal-fishy
earthy
faint earthy-fishy
earthy
earthy
earthy
sour earthy
earthy-slight fishy'
strong earthy
earthy-fishy
194
-------
Table 58 (continued)
Date
Threshold Odor
Number Range
station 3 (cont)
7/3
7/4
7/&
7/10
7/14
7/17
7/21
Echo Bay Station 1
3/21
3/25
5/13
5/26
5/29
6/5
6/9
6/12
6/16
6/19
6/23
6/25
6/30
7/1
7/3
7/6
7/10
7/14
7/17
7/21
Echo Bay Station 2
3/25 .
5/13
5/26
5/29
6/5
6/9
6/12
6/16
6/19
28.5
25.2
28.3
16.0
14.2
8.0
10.7
- 38.1
- 33.5
- 37.7
- 21.3
- 18.9
- 10.7
- 14.2
5.44
6.32
12.0
9.47
9.52
10.7
14.2
21.4
7.1
7.1
14.2
10.7
14.2
18.9
18.9
25.2
21.3
14.2
10.7
10.7
9.47
- 6.22
- 8.43
- 13.7
-12.7
- 12.7
-14.2
-18.9
- 28.5
- 9.53
- 9.47
- 18.9
-14.2
-18.9
- 25.2
- 25.2
- 33.5
- 28.3
- 18.9
- 14.2
- 14.2
- 12.7
4.74 -
9.3 -
7.05 -
9.52 -
21.4 -
14.2 -
21.4 -
5.33 -
9.47 -
' 5.43
10.64
9.47
12.7
28.4
18.9
28.5
7.1
12.7
Odor
Description
strong earthy-fishy
earthy
earthy
mild earthy
very mild earthy
earthy
algal odor
earthy
strong fish odor
sweet fishy
definite earthy-fishy
earthy-slight fishy
earthy-slight fishy
sweet fishy
weak, non-descriptive
earthy
sweet earthy
earthy-grassy
earthy
earthy
sweet earthy
earthy
mild earthy
earthy
earthy
fishy odor
sweet fishy
definite earthy
earthy-fishy
earthy-slight fishy
earthy-fishy
light, non-descriptive
earthy
195
-------
Table 58 (continued)
Date
Threshold Odor
Number Range
Echo Bay Station 2 Ccont)
6/23
6/25
6/30
7/1
7/3
7/4
7/6
7/10
7/14
7/17
7/21
Smith Bay Station 1
4/22
5/13
5/26
5/29
6/5
6/9
6/16
6/19
6/23
6/25
6/30
7/1
7/3
7/4
7/10
7/14
7/17
7/21
Smith Bay Station 2
5/13
5/26
5/29
6/5
6/9
6/16
6/19
)
9.45
10.7
14.2
14.2
18.9
25.2
21.3
14.2
10.7
10.7
8.0
2.37
4.06
5.33
10.7
18.9
28.4
5.33
3.55
5.33
7.1
6.32
8.0
10.7
9.47
7.1
10.7
5.33
3.56
5.33
8.0
18.9
28.4
7.1
9.47
-12.6
- 14.2
-18.9
- 18.9
- 25.2
- 33.5
- 28.3
- 18.9
- 14.2
- 14.2
-10.7
- 2.7
- 4.64
- 7.1
- 14.2
- 25.2
-38.0
- 7.1
- 4.74
- 7.1
- 9.47
- 8.42
- 10.7
-14.2
-12.7
- 9.47
-14.2
- 7.1
- 4.06
- 7.1
- 10.7
- 25.2
- 38.0
- 9.53
-12.7
Odor
Description
earthy
earthy-grassy
earthy
slight earthy
earthy
earthy-grassy
slight earthy
almost sweet-fishy odor
earthy-fishy
very strong fish odor
heavy fish-earthy
strong earthy-fishy
light fishy odor
petrol odor
sweet
earthy
earthy
non-descriptive
very mild earthy
petrol odor
slight fi:,h odor
sweet fishy
very strong fi:;h odor
strong fish odor
strong fishy
earthy
sweet earthy
196
-------
Table 58 (continued)
Date
Threshold Odor
Number Range
smith Bay Station 2 (cont)
6/23
6/25
6/30
7/1
7/3
7/4
7/10
7/14
7/17
7/21
Smith Bay Tap Water
4/22
5/13
5/26
5/29
6/5
6/9
6/16
6/19
6/23
6/25
6/30
7/1
7/3
7/4
7/10
7/14
7/17
7/21
t)
4.74 -
3.55 -
6.32 -
5.33 -
4.73 -
7.1 -
7.1 -
5.33 -
10.7 -
5.33 -
1.49 -
1.0 -
4.0 -
21.2 -
18.9 -
10.7 -
5.33 -
5.33 -
3.55 -
5.33 -
5.33 -
3.55 -
5.33 -
5.33 -
3.55 -
3.55 -
4.0 -
2.67 -
6.32
4.74
8.1
8.1
6.33
9.47
9.47
7.1
14.2
7.1
1.69
1.14
5.33
28.3
25.2
14.2
7.1
7.1
4.74
7.1
7.1
4.73
7.1
7.1
4.73
4.73
5.33
3.55
Odor
Description
sweet earthy
non-descriotive
earthy
mild earthy
mild petrol
197
-------
60
50--
O
§ 30
O
,C
CO
20
10
III1! I
II
10
20
March
— I——
30
1
10
1— —
20
May
— 1 —
30
t
10
1
20
June
1
30
10 2°
July
Figure 58 - Threshold Odor Number
Dunham Bay Station No. 1
198
-------
50
g
8
(0
g
30 .
20 ••
10 • •
Ii
I1
I
10
20
March
1
30
10
20
May
30
1
10
20
June
30
10 20
July
Figure 59 - Threshold Odor Number
Dunham Bay Station No. 3
199
-------
60 . .
50
140 • >
£-,
0)
z
(H
O
o 30 -
T3
f~\
O
x:
OT
2
,c
20 •
10 ,
0
i
•
. ' III
•
•
•
•
10 20 30 10 20 30 10
March May
»
i
•
•
II
20
June
«
m «*
I
"
M
•
•
30
Figure 60 - Threshold Odor Number
Echo Bay Station No. 1
200
Hi
10
juiy
-------
50
h
0
o 30
20
10
II
i
i
1 — h-
10
— 1 —
20
March
— 1
30
1—
10
1
20
May
1
30
1—
10
1 1 —
20 30
June
1 — i-
10 20
July
Figure 61 - Threshold Odor Number
Echo Bay Station No. 2
201
-------
60 +•
504
o
T>
H
O
CO
30 +
20
10
I
— I—
10
— 1 —
20
March
«
30
— 1
10
•
20
May
— 1
30
10
f
20
June
30
Figure 62 - Threshold Odor Number
Smith Bay Station No. 1
202
-------
60
50
40 4-
i
I
I
if1! I
' 1
10
— 1 —
20
March
— 1
30
10
-H 1 —
20 30
May
10 20
June
30 10 20
July
Figure 63 - Threshold Odor Number
Smith Bay Station No. 2
203
-------
60 -..
50 . .
S 30 ..
o
0]
I
20
10
I
II I II r
I I II1!
10
20
March
30
10
20
May
1
30
1
10
20
June
30
1 90
10 2L
juiy
Figure 64 - Threshold Odor Number
Smith Bay Tap Water
204
-------
can t>e seen from the data plots that a sharp rise in threshold odor
occurred in samples from Dunham Bay and Echo Bay following the
Day weekend and the Fourth of July weekend. These odors were
as being strongly fishy. After each rise, the values rather
returned to lower values. These weekends corresponded to
inusually heavy boat usage and were characterized by weather ideal for
heating. The stations in Smith Bay showed a rise following the Memorial
lay weekend but no appreciable rise over the Fourth of July weekend.
rt was noted that a number of the higher threshold numbers were asso-
ciated with the presence of certain algae, such as Dinobryon, which are
;
-------
The results suggest that the odors in the water are at least in part
related to the presence of algae and/or other microbiologic organisms.
It is also suggested that a relationship exists between odor levels
and the degree of boat usage in the vicinity where sampling occurred.
In the bays where boat usage was high, as in Dunham Bay, and to a lesser
extent in Echo Bay, the threshold odor numbers were considerably higher
than the numbers in Smith Bay where boat usage was much less. In addi-
tion, the peaks in odor numbers followed with a slight delay the periods
of heaviest boat usage.
While the threshold odor test is a subjective test, it has been an ex-
tremely useful indicator of changes in the concentration of odor pro-
ducers. With experienced personnel the results are highly reproducible
and sensitive.
206
-------
SECTION XI - EVAPORATION STUDIES
Tt has frequently been observed that a major part of the exhaust prod-
' ts from outboard engines discharged to water bodies, accumulates on
rvje water surface in thin films. Since a relatively large surface area
oar unit weight of exhaust products is thus exposed to the air, it is
'^easonable to expect that evaporation of the low-boiling fractions of
*-ne exhaust products would be significant. In order to examine the role
r,f evaporation on the equilibrium concentrations of liquid exhaust
-^oducts found in a lake environment, laboratory studies of the rates
"of evaporation were made.
PROCEDURE
Initial tests were made by adding measured quantities of exhaust prod-
ucts to water, equilibrating with an air flow at a known temperature in
a water bath, extracting the residual material with a solvent, and
evaporating off the solvent. It was found, however, that because the
exhaust products contain a fraction of low boilers, this method gave
high results because of the loss of the low boiling fraction. It was
also found that a portion of the water also evaporated, introducing a
second type of error. Consequently, the results using this method have
not been included.
The method that was established for use involved measuring a weighed
amount of exhaust products into a flask which was attached to a rotary
evaporator operating in a water bath held at a desired temperature. A
measured air stream was introduced into the flask to carry off evap-
orated products above the liquid. At measured intervals the flask was
removed and weighed to obtain the loss due to evaporation. The appa-
ratus used is shown schematically in Fig. 65.
Tests were made on the products collected from a 33 horsepower Evinrude
engine operated at 1200 RPM in a test tank. For comparative purposes,
tests were also made on straight Mobil regular gasoline, and on straight
Mobil outboard engine oil. Tests were also made on a 50 to 1 mixture of
gasoline and oil as used for engine- fuel. Rates of evaporation were
established at temperatures of 5°C, 10°C, 15°C, 20°C, 25°C, and 30°C fo^
all materials tested except the oil which had a very low evaporation
rate.
RESULTS
The results of the evaporation tests have been summarized in Tables 59-
62 and plotted in Figs. 66-79. The evaporation rates have been ex-
pressed in several ways. To demonstrate the proportion of total exhaust
products which evaporate as a function of time, the rate has been
expressed as a percent evaporation. In addition, since the quantity of
207
-------
ro
O
CD
CONSTANT
PRESSURE
LEG
AIR
SUPPLY
WET- TEST
METER
ICE
BATH
ROTARY
EVAPORATOR
CONSTANT TEMPERATURE BATH
Figure 65 - Evaporation Test Apparatus
-------
Table 59
Evaporation Studies
o
to
Temperature
°C
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
Cumulative
Air Flow
S.C.F.
0.047
0.140
0.326
0.792
1.724
2.656
0.047
0.140
0.326
0.792
1.724
2.656
0.046
0.138
0.322
0.783
1.705
2.627
Mobil
Cumulat ive
Time
Hours
0.020
0.060
0.141
0.326
0.745
1.148
0.022
0.066
0.300
0.518
0.954
1.389
0.021
0.062
0.143
0.347
0.759
1.171
Gasoline
Cumulative
Percent
Evaporation
9.12
20.33
31.18
44.18
56.14
63.06
10.79
21.04
41.15
49.47
58.80
64.60
15.51
22.61
34.58
48.50
63.38
67.74
Cumulative
Evap. Rate
Gms/Hr
11.36
8.44
5.51
3.38
1.88
1.37
11.57
7.52
3.23
2.25
1.18
1.09
17.62
8.70
5.77
3.33
1.91
1.38
Cumulative
Evap. Flux
Grns/Hr/Gm Sample
4.56
3.39
2.21
1.36
0.75
0.55
4.91
3.19
1.37
0.95
0.50
0.41
7.39
3.65
2.42
1.40
0.80
0.58
-------
Table 59 (continued)
Temperature
°C
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
20
20
on
{- M
20
20
7.0
Cumulative
Air Flow
S.C.F.
0.046
0.139
0.325
0.791
1.769
2.701
0.047
0.140
0.326
0.792
1.724
1.724
0.046
0.139
0.324
0.787
1.712
2.637
0.047
0.139
0.324
0.790
1.722
2.654
Cumulative
Time
Hours
0.022
0.065
0.150
0.364 .
0.811
1.495
0.020
0.061
0.142
0.346
0.755
1.245
0.021
0.063
0.146
0.355
0.775
1.197
0.021
0.062
0.145
0.351
0.847
1.179
Cumulative
Percent
Evaporat ion
8.04
16.97
26.94
39.19
51.28
59.62
12.18
25.28
38.00
52.88
65.66
73.22
14.80
28.64
40.72
54.53
66.96
73.97
14.75
28.62
41.77
56.71
71.16
76.26
Cumulative
Evap. Rate
Gms/Hr
8.85
6.32
4.35
2.61
1. 53
0.97
15.04
10.24
6.61
3.78
2.15
1.45
17.48
11.23
6.89
3.79
2.13
1.53
18.62
12.23
7.63
4.27
2.22
1.71
Cumulat ive
Evap. Flux
Gms/Hr/Gm Sample
3.65
2.61
1.80
1.08
0.63
0.40
6.09
4.14
2.67
1.53
0.87
0.59
7.08
4.55
2.79
1.53
0.86
0.62
7.03
4.62
2.88
1.61
0.84
0.65
-------
Table 59 Ccontinued)
Temperature
°C
20
20
20
20
20
20
25
25
25
25
25
25
30
30
30
30
30
30
Cumulative
Air Flow
S.C.F.
0.047
o.i4i
0.329
0.800
1.742
2.684
0.046
0.139
0.324
0.787
1.712
2.637
0.046
0.137
0.319
0.784
1.694
2.604
Cumulative
Time
Hours
0.018
0.057
0.135
0.333
0.727
1.120
0.021
0.062
0.164
0.370
0.783
1.198
0.021
0.062
0.146
0.357
0.783
1.215
Cumulative
Percent
Evaporation
12.52
25.75
38.53
52.90
65.65
72.39
17.60
33.13
49.19
63.36
75.99
82.20
24.20
40.46
54.77
70.15
82.20
88.37
Cumulative
Evap. Rate
Gms/Hr
17.27
11.22
7.09
3.95
2.24
1.61
19.36
12 . 34
6.93
3.95
2.24
1.58
29.31
16.59
9.54
5.00
2.67
1.85
Cumulative
Uvap. Flux
Gms/llr/Gm Sample
6.95
4.52
2.85
1.59
0.90
0.65
8.38
5.34
3.00
1.71
0.97
0.68
11.53
6.52
3.75
1.97
1.05
0.73
-------
Table 60
Evaporation Studies
Temperature
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
15
15
15
15
15
Cumulative
Air Flow
S.C.F.
0.046
0.138
0.322
0.782
1.702
2.622
0.046
0.138
0.322
0.780
1.696
2.612
0.046
0.137
0.320
0.780
1.693
'roducts from
Cumulative
Time
Hours
0.027
0.080
0.186
0.449
0.972
1.495
0.026
0.079
0.183
0.446
0.973
1.495
0.025
0.075
0.175
0.425
0.925
1.425
33 H.P. Evinru
Cumulative
Percent
Evaporation
1.11
4.61
8.52
14.48
23.10
28.34
1.85
5.17
9.86
17.17
26.00
32.28
2.54
7.00
12.71
20.75
31.10
37.98
Cumulative
Evap. Rate
Gms/Hr
0.340
0.475
0.378
0.267
0.196
0.156
0.587
0.540
0.444
0.318
0.220
0.178
0.840
0.772
0.600
0.403
0.277
0.220
Cumulative
Evap. Flux
Gms/Hr/Gm Sample
0.412
0.576
0.458
0.324
0.237
0.189
0.712
0.655
0.538
0.386
0.267
0.216
1.017
0.935
0.727
0.488
0.355
0.266
-------
Table 60 (continued)
Temperature
20
20
20
20
20
20
25
25
25
25
25
25
30
30
30
30
30
30
Cumulative
Air Flow
S.C.F.
0.046
0.137
0.320
0.780
1.693
2.606
0.045
0.136
0.318
0.775
1.688
2.601
0.046
0.137
0.320
0.780
1.693
2.606
Cumulative
Time
Hours
0.028
0.080
0.186
0.441
0.985
1.518
0.026
0.076
0.177
0.431
0.940
1.480
0.026
0.076
0.177
0.431
0.938
1.440
Cumulative
Percent
Evaporation
3.87
8.71
15.17
. 25.25
36.98
44.61
5.22
11.46
19.32
31.31
45.14
53.06
6.44
13.80
23.22
37.33
52.18
59.50
Cumulative
Evap. Rate
Gms/Hr
1.134
0.895
0.670
0.470
0.308
0.241
1.586
1.235
0.893
0.593
0.393
0.294
2.041
1.500
1.081
0.714
0.458
0.340
Cumulative
Evap. Flux
Gnis/llr/Gm Sample
1.
1.
.380
.089
0.815
0.572
0.375
0.293
1.938
1.509
1.091
0.724
0.480
0.359
2.
1.
1.
.477
,820
312
0.867
0.556
0.413
-------
Table 61
Evaporation Studies
to
\->
-P
Temperature
°C
5
5
5
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
15
15
15
15
15
15
Cumulative
Air Flow
S.C.F.
0.047
0.141
0.329
0.800
1.741
2.682
0.047
0.141
0.329
0.800
1.741
2.682
0.047
0.140
0.326
0.792
1.724
2.656
Gasoline Plus
Cumulative
Time
Hours
0.021
0.063
0.148
0.362
0.792
1.227
0.0219
0.0662
0.1552
0.3775
0.8221
1.2662
0.0199
0.0605
0.1419
0.3461
0.7586
1.1765
Oil - 50:1 M
Cumulative
Percent
Evaporation
9.14
20.18
30.83
43.26
55.83
62.73
8.23
17.87
29.04
42.36
54.86
61.96
11.49
24.58
36.39
50.46
63.30
70.35
Cumulative
Evap. Rate
Gms/Hr
12.00
8.83
5.74
3.29
1.94
1.40
9.65
6.94
4.81
2.88
1.71
1.26
16.58
11.66
7.36
4.19
2.39
1.72
Cumulative
Evap. Flux
Gms/Hr/Gm Sample
4.35
3.20
2.08
1.19
0.70
0.51
3.76
2.70
1.87
1.12
0.67
0.49
5.77
4.06
2.56
1.45
0.83
0.60
-------
Table 61 (continued)
to
H*
cn
Temperature
C
20
20
20
20
20
20
25
25
25
25
25
25
30
30
30
30
30
30
Cumulat ive
Air Flow
S.C.F.
0.047
0.110
0.326
0.792
1.724
2.656
0.047
0.140
0.326
0.792
1.724
2.656
0.046
0.139
0.324
0.787
1.712
2.637
Cumulative
Time
Hours
0.021
0.057
0.142
0.347
0.753
1.-160
0.020
0.061
0.141
0.344
0.733
1.156
0.020
0.060
0.141
0.344
0.754
1.168
Cumulative
Percent
Evaporation
13.84
27.49
40.07
54.66
67.07
73.37
16.41
30.58
44.03
59.28
72.63
77.99
17.40
33.01
47.49
63.78
77.72
84.47
Cumulative
Evap. Rate
Gms/Hr
17.57
12.85
7.52
4.19
2.37
1.69
20.40
12.40
7.69
4.24
2.44
1.66
22.27
13.97
8.54
6.38
2.62
1.83
Cumulative
Evap. Flux
Gms/Hr/Cm Sample
6.59
4.82
.82
57
0.89
0.63
2,
1.
8.28
5.05
3.12
1.72
0.99
0.67
8.78
5.51
37
,85
.03
3.
1.
1.
0.72
-------
Table 62
Evaporation Studies
ro
I-1
cr>
Temperature
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
25
25
25
25
25
25
Cumulative
Air Flow
S.C.F.
0.046
0.138
0.322
0.781
1.699
2.802
0.046
0.138
0.322
0.781
1.700
2.619
0.046
0.138
0.322
0.783
1.705
2.627
lobil Outboard
Cumulative
Time
Hours
0.023
0.068 .
0.159
0.387
0.843
1.390
0.023
0.068
0.160
0.389
0.847
1.259
0.023
0.069
___
0.391
0.854
1.320
Super Oil - Si
Cumulative
Percent
Evaporation
0.123
0.081
0.104
0.112
0.091
0.011
0.049
0.148
0.043
0.137
0.209
0.097
0.060
0.107
0.015
0.004
0.122
0.223
Cumulative
Evap. Rate
Gms/Hr
0.042
0.010
0.005
0.0.02
0.001
0.018
0.018
0.002
0.003
0.002
0.021
0.013
0.001
0.001
Cumulative
Evap. Flux
Gms/Hr/Gm Sample
0.050
0.012
0.006
0.002
0.001
0.022
0.022
0.002
0.004
0.002
0.026
0.015
0.001
0.001
-------
100
•rH
tt
£
to o
I
Cumulative Time - Hrs
Figure 66 - Cumulative Percent Evaporation - Gasoline
1.5
-------
100
to
M
CD
€*>
C
O
id
S-,
o
ex
w
c
0)
o
fc
4)
PL,
o io°c
D 20°C
& 30°C
0.5
1.0
Cumulative Time - Hrs
1.5
» on — O
-------
•gure G7 - Cumulative
100 .-
KJ
I-1
UD
<*>
I
c
o
8*
C
V
u
p
0)
(X.
rt
o
O
D
25°C
0.5 1-0
Cumulative Time - Hrs
1.5
Figure 68 - Cumulative Percent Evaporation - Exhaust Product:,
-------
100_
to
to
o
o io°c
D 20°C
£ 30°C
0.5
1.0
Cumulative Time - Hrs
Ion - I]xhaust Products
-------
100
to
ro
g
•H
V
2
o
f
w
c
0)
o
fc
V
V
I
0.5
1.0
Cumulative Time - Hrs
Figure 70 - Cumulative Percent Evaporation - Gasoline plus Oil
1.5
-------
100,.
ro
ro
ro
0.5
1.0
Cumulative Time - Hrs
T\ - Cumulative Percent Evaporation - Gasoline plus Oil
-------
100
g
•H
4->
£
c
-------
10.0
nJ
w
,c
\
m
ro
» I
•M
2
o
d)
•H
V
Hi
H
3
5.0
O 5°C
A 25°C
0.5 1.0
Cumulative Time - Mrs
1.5
Figure "73 - Cumulative Evaporative Flux - Gasoli/,*
-------
(Jasol;,,c
Cumulative Time - Hrs
1.5
Figure 74 - Cumulative Evaporative Flux - Gasoline
-------
10. CU
10
KJ
CD
I
X
0)
id
b
o
o<
n)
w
0)
«
l-t
O
D
A
5°C
15°C
25°C
5.0
0.5
Cumulative Time - Hrs
Cumulative Evaporative Flux - Exhaust Products
-------
10.0
ro
to
o
O 10°C
D 20°C
A 30°C
Cumulative Time - Hrs
1.5
Figure 76 - Cumulative Evaporative Flux - LAuctust Products
-------
10.0
ro
10
CD
0)
H
P<
8
g>
I
•H
•P
a
b
o
o.
0)
U4
O)
•H
-------
,lux _
10.0
0)
H
0)
5.0
(£>
o.
w
0)
O
o iovc
D 20°C
^ 30°C
Cumulative Time - Hrs
Figure 78 - Cumulative Evaporative Flux - Gasoline plus Oil
1.5
-------
io.o_
I
V)
g,
'
jo £ 5.0
o „,
•H
CO
O
a.
1
CJ
'
-------
haust products considered would be proportional to the area of surface
e osed to the air, the rate has been expressed as grams of material
evaporated per unit time per gram of sample, or a true evaporative flux.
rt will be noted from the tabulated results that percent evaporation had
3 high initial rate that fell off rapidly as a function of time, and
approached a steady value. Correspondingly, the evaporative flux had
•n'igh initial values which decreased with time. The evaporative rates
-increased with an increase in temperature.
H will be noted by comparison of results that for any given temperature
the highest evaporation rates were encountered with the straight gaso-
line. Mixtures of gasoline and oil as used in the fuel gave evaporation
rates only slightly lower, as might be expected. The evaporation rates
for the exhaust products used in this study are intermediate between
those of the fuel mixture, and the almost negligible rates found for the
straight oil.
A significant feature of these results is that a considerable fraction
of the exhaust products can be expected to evaporate from the water sur-
face to the air at temperatures normally encountered during periods of
the year when boating is at a maximum level. Indeed, it would appear
quite likely that evaporation may be the controlling mechanism for de-
termining the fate of the considerable low-boiling fraction of the
exhaust products. It should be noted, however, that various significant
fractions of exhaust products remain to interact with the lake environ-
ment by various other mechanisms.
It should be noted that the evaporation rates reported here must be
considered specific to the materials and conditions used in these tests.
It would be expected that other gas/oil ratios, other brands of fuels,
other engines and other operating conditions would give different
specific rates. The trends reported here, however, are considered to
be significant and typical of the rates of evaporation to be expected of
the exhaust products discharged.
231
-------
SECTION XII - STUDY 01 CURRENTS
In order to determine whether surface and sub-surface currents played a
significant role in either the accumulation or dispersion of films of
exhaust products, a series of tests were made to examine the nature and
magnitude of currents in Dunham Bay, Echo Bay and Smith Bay.
It was originally planned to use a dye technique for these studies.
Initial tests, however, indicated that this method was unsuitable with
the equipment available at the time. Upon the advice of the New York
State Environmental Conservation Department, a method of floating bottles
was employed for surface measurements. In addition, a device was de-
veloped for indicating sub-surface currents. The device was lowered
through holes in the ice at selected stations in the bays, during the
winter season.
The bottle tests were made by using 250 ml polyethylene bottles that were
partially filled with water. This caused the bottles to attain a posi-
tion such that less than 1/2 inch of the diameter of the bottle was above
the surface of the water, thus minimizing direct effects of the wind on
the bottles. Bottles were painted a vivid orange to assist in future
sightings.
A dispersion study was made in Smith Bay to determine the validity of
using single bottles to represent the behavior of specific areas of the
water surface. Tests were made by setting bottles, usually fifteen in
number, in a circle of about two feet in diameter, and allowing the
bottles to travel freely. After a measured time period, usually one or
one and a half hours, the dispersion was noted by observing the position
of individual bottles and the general size and shape of the original
circle. The rate and type of dispersion, of course, depended somewhat
on weather conditions. It was found, in general, that circles of bot-
tles up to about 25 feet in diameter essentially retained their identity
within the confines of the test bay. The circles tended to deform to &
eliptical shape with the longer axis in the direction of flow.
The position of individual bottles as a function of time was determined
by measuring position angles from certain fixed points. These position?
were used for plotting on maps of the bays.
Data collected for the three bays are shown in Tables 63-6^, in the f°r'"
of field notes. The angles referred to are with reference to the
sighting points shown in Figs. 80-82, respectively.
Some interesting observations are apparent from these tests. In alm°Sl-
all cases the trend of the currents on the surface was into the bays _
regardless of the wind direction, except under extreme conditions.
not measured in this aspect of the study, it was strongly suspected tn
there was somewhat of a trend for outward flow beneath the surface.
was verified by sub-surface measurements. It was also noted that the
232
-------
Table 63
Current Studies - Field Notes and Observations
Smith Bay - June 16, 1972
13
19
20
21
22
23
2i+
25
26
27
28
29
30
11:25
11:30
11:30
Drop <1
L
110-1
Drop <2
R
180-2
11:31
11:32
11:33
11:35
11 : 37
11:38
11:40
11:42
11:45
11:47
11:48
72-2
0-3
61-2
120-2
169-2
101-2
50-2
135-3
120-3
125-2
125-2
11:50
93-1 . 140-2
inner
19-1 . 85-2
inner
31-3
35-2
13-3
59-3
133-1
71-3
31-3
0-4
0-4
0-4
10-4
19-3
Pick-up
Time
12:07 S.dock
S.L. West
12:10 See
Note
12:55
See Note
See Note
See Note
12:59
1:05
Pick-up Pick-up
<1-L <2-R
139-2
126-3
160-5
109-5
91-3
71-3
91-2
Same as 27
1:00 129-4 16-5
facing out
See Note
Note: By Poplar Tree - 12:35
Except 30 - 12:40
No boat traffic occurred throughout entire testing period (11:25-1:05).
Several bottles not found during tested period were found in bay during
the next two weeks by the roadside, thus indicating the direction of flow
was into bay on surface regardless of wind direction which had changed
throughout the two week period, or the heavy flow of water in'the stream
at the roadside due to the heavy rains.
The bottles floated at a slight incline to the surface and generally per-
pendicular to the direction of flow. Less than 1/2" of the diameter of
the bottle was above the surface, thus making negligible the effects of
wind directly? upon the bottle.
During the tests the wind generally followed the shape of the bay leaving
the bay in an easterly direction.
233
-------
Bottle
No.
35
40
38
36
32
33
45
43
34
28
44
42
41
18
Table 64
Current Studies - Field Notes and Observations
Time
Out
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
:51
:52
:55
:58
:00
:01
:05
:06
:07
:13
:14
:14
:16
:44
Echo Bay -
Left
0-1
0-1
30-1
0-3
14-3
0-3
0-5
20-5
15-5
0-7
17-7
25-7
25-7
3-7
Cen.
121-B
109-B
117-B
102-B
109-B
90-B
89-4
130-4
115-4
45-5
63-5
75-5
60-5
83-5
June 27, 1972
Time
Right
180-2
180-2
155-2
175-4
180-4
180-4
180-6
190-6
160-6
145-8
170-8
180-8
165-8
105-6
1
1
1
12
12
1
2
11
11
11
11
2
In
:02
:33
:27
:25
:23
:44
:00
:00
:00
:00
:00
:00
Left
Shore
50-1
63-3
63-3
70-5
7-7
Cen.
Right
south side
By island
Point
Point
Point
Point
7
7
7
7
By island
95-2
105-B
105-B
113-3
57-5
bridge
bridge
100-3
123-4
123-1-
130-6
76-5
A 5-10 mph wind from south occurred in lake. The wind was at a much
lower velocity in the bay.
The bottles were laid out in four lines across the bay and allowed to
float from 9:50 until 2:00 p.m.
Bottles in the bay drifted outwards and towards the shore. Those in the
outlet of the bay at first drifted inward and then reversed their direc-
tion.
The boat traffic was moderate with 25-30 boats coming into or out of the
bay during the test period. One bottle, which we were unable to find
the day. of the test, was recovered near the marina the following day wit'-
its number destroyed. The flow in the center of the bay displayed an
overall outward flow whereas that along the shore was toward the :;hor'.'-
234
-------
Table 65
Current Studies - Field Notes and Observations
18
35
33
38
30
43
37
45
21
28
44
26
20
39
42
23
15
19
5
22
27
29
Time
In
10:19
10:20
10:20
10:20
10:20
10:23
10:25
10:27
10:29
10:31
i n • T3
J_U . O O
i n • ^u.
J.U . OH
10 : 37
10:38
10:40
10:41
10:42
10:45
10:46
10:48
10:51
10:58
11:00
11:00
11:00
Dunham
Right
166-6
Bridge
Bridge
Bridge
Bridge
169-5
149-6
144-5
144-5
152-5
P« •> TI+- ^ _
P/-\ T -n-t- O
143-7
153-7
140-7
Off Point 7
Off Point 8
100-3
172-83
135-7
92-7
Point 1
Bridge
Bridge
Bridge
Bay -
Cen.
84-5
109-5
108-5
53-4
81-4
102-4
100-5
96-5
80-5
77-2
84-3
114-33
57-2
June 29
Left
3-4
+ 1-4
-1-4
26-3
46-3a
66-3a
a
76-4
71-4
55-4
27-1
9-1
43-1
11-1
, 1972
Time
Out
11:45
11:45
11:45
11:45
2:05
2:00
3:17
2:25
o » Lin
2:37
1:35
1:40
1:52
1:40
1:14
11:45
2:10
Right
In Swamp
In Swamp
In Swamp
In Swamp
90-4
98-2SL
90-7
Point 9
i nn t;
XUU— 3 _T
87-7^
117-8SL
105-8
112-8
122-8
82-8
Point 6
111-6
Cen.
83-3.
50-9C
71-4
74-4
68-5
94-7
82-7
82-3
95-3.
64-7
66-4
Lett
57-3
22-4
55-2
56-3
42-3.
86-3C.
71-3"
48-1
61-1
57-4
30-3
Very light wind from southeast.
Moderate boat traffic. One-hundred boats throughout test period.
The bottles were laid out in three lines across the bay and in two groups
in front of the bridge where the stream enters the bay.
As in Echo Bay, the bottles in the center of the bay tended to drift
outward and those on the sides tended to drift to the shore and remain
there.
It is interesting to note that those placed in front of the stream outlet
ended up in the nearby swampy area.
235
-------
A
STA #3
STA #2
Case A
Case B
4r — S
Poplar
Tree
Figure 80 -
Sketch of Smith Bay with the Approximate
Location of Sighting Points
236
-------
Case A
Case B
N
Marina
Green Gable
with Red
Roof
White and
Green Boathouse
White
Birch
Brown
Boathouse
White
Boathouse
Figure 81 - Sketch of Echo Bay with the Approximate
Location of Sighting Points
237
-------
A
N
Red
Dock
Gray with
Red Light
Marina
Figure 82 - Sketch of Dunham Bay with Approximate
Location of Sighting Points
238
-------
test bottles moved towards the shore, with the rate decreasing as dis-
tance from the shore decreased. These results reinforce the observations
made elsewhere that an appreciable portion of oil slicks tend to move
towards the shore and is deposited upon materials at the shoreline (4-0).
For the test bays used in this study, there did not appear to be appre-
ciable dispersal of surface materials out into the body of the lake under
conditions noted.
During the winter of 1972, a current-indicating device was built and used
to observe the direction of sub-surface currents at various stations in
the test bays. A sketch of the instrument is shown in Fig. 83. The de-
vice consisted of a metal vane approximately 1 foot by 2 feet in size
and 1/16 inch thick, attached to a vertical 6 foot section of Flexiframe
rod. The rod was supported between two steel plates and pivoted at the
pointed bottom end in a cup machined in the bottom plate. An indicating
arm was attached to the vertical shaft and aligned with the vane to show
the direction in which the vane was pointing at any instant. The whole
device was supported on a tripod ringstand with provisions made for as-
suring that the shaft was in a vertical position.
The following is the procedure used in making observations:
1. A hole approximately 1 foot by 2 1/2 feet was cut in the
ice with a chain saw.
2. Visual sitings of landmarks on shore were taken and
recorded.
3. The current direction indicator was lowered through
the ice and attached to the tripod ringstand by means
of adjustable clamps in a relatively vertical position.
M-. The shaft was then adjusted for plumbness by means of
the rod that was attached to the shaft bearing.
5. The indicator was allowed to reach an equilibrium posi-
tion and a compass reading was taken.
.-Readings were taken at the sites indicated in Figs. 80-82. The directions
of the currents at the time of the readings are also indicated on these
sketches. Observations were made at the sites during two periods when
run-off was markedly different. Case A corresponded to a period of high
run-off, while Case B corresponded to a period of minimum run-off.
As indicated in Fig. 82, the currents were found to be moving straight
out of Dunham Bay during the period of high run-off. During low run-off,
however, a counter-clockwise movement within the bay was observed. As
shown in Fig. 81, the current in Echo Bay was outwards during the period
of high run-off for both stations. During low run-off the flow was
again outward at the inner station, but tended to oscillate through nearly
180° at the outer station. At the stations in Smith Bay, the currents
were outward in all cases, as shown in Fig. 80. The directions, however,
were somewhat more southerly at the outer stations during the period of
low run-off.
239
-------
COMPASS
TABLE •
ADJUSTABLE
BEARING
POINTER
COUNTER-
WEIGHT
ICE
Figure 83 - Current Indicator
2UO
-------
SECTION XIII - STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF DATA
TMTRODUCTION
Tn this section the kinds of statistical analyses of the data, discussed
in the previous sections, are described.
The thrust of this section is to identify the components of the lake sys-
tem which tended to explain the variation of the "component of interest".
For instance, if the level of phytoplankton is'of. interest, it would be
identified as the response variable. The level of the response variable
Is postulated to be dependent upon the levels of certain other components
of the lake .system. In this analysis, such components are identified.
I'V should be pointed out that any such identification does not imply any
^.Tolute cause arid effect relationship. The reader must keep in mind
that due to the nature of the data collection procedure, only those sub-
sets of the data that were obtained during comparable time periods could
be used for these different analyses. It is felt that these results are
reasonable indicators of "possible" associations among variables. When
rto association is apparent, it could be due to sampling variation or the
fact that the variables really are not correlated.
GENERAL APPROACH TO ANALYSIS
The data were collected at three bays (Dunham, Echo and Smith Bays). At
Dunham Bay there were three stations and at the other two bays there were
two stations. For this work the bays were coded as 1, 0, and -1 for
Dunham, Echo and Smith Bays, respectively. In the initial analyses the
bays were coded using two dummy variables. The results of these analyses
indicated that there were no significant differences due to bay. How-
ever, it must be pointed out that 1) in different analyses different
subsets of data were used and 2) the number of observations were few.
'Hence, it was felt that the response variable should be adjusted for the
bay, since the potential reduction in variance might be sufficient to
warrant a loss of one degree of freedom. The coding given above was
based on the fact that Dunham Bay has the maximum man-made loading and
Smith Bay the least man-made loading.
For similar reasons the stations were coded 1, 0, and -1. The Julian
date was used in the analyses.
In the analyses that follow, the response variable was first adjusted for
Bay., Station and Day effects before attempting further analysis.
Tne population level of microorganisms was receded by dividing the observed
Value by 1000.0. This scaling was necessary for computing efficiency.
MODELS
In the next paragraph, a detailed description of the model-building pro-
cedure is given. In general terms, the analysis was basically an attempt
241
-------
to build a model which will explain the behavior of the response vari-
able. These models are not necessarily the "best" model in the true
sense of the word. Instead, they are conditional on the data observed.
Due to the fact that the degrees of freedom were small, no strong state-
ments could be made about these models.
SELECTION OF INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
A very important aspect of this analysis is the procedure by which the
components that explain the variation of the response variable are
selected. Based upon the knowledge of the lake chemistry and biota, the
possible independent variables are selected.
After correcting the response variable for Bay, Station and Day (here-
after referred to as concomitant variables), the partial correlations
of the remaining variables with the corrected response is studied. The
one which explains the greatest amount of the variation are introduced
into the equation. While there is no fixed level of significance, the
probability of such a contribution towards explaining the variance is
considered and depending upon one's willingness to accept certain levels
of risk, the variable is either selected or rejected. For phytoplankton,
the selection procedure is explained in detail. For the other variables,
only the summary of the analysis and conclusions are presented.
In order to facilitate easy cross-reference and continuity, the following
sections are organized according to important response variables. In
each section, the results are presented as relation to the independent
variables which were felt to be of primary importance.
RELATION BETWEEN PHYTOPLANKTON, COLUMN MICROORGANISMS, COLUMN DISSOLVED
OXYGEN, COLUMN TEMPERATURE AND HYDROCARBON LEVEL'
In this section the association between phytoplankton and column micro-
organisms, column dissolved oxygen, column temperature and hydrocarbon
levels are investigated.
As stated earlier, the concomitant variables, Bay, Station and Day, were
entered. It should be noted that simultaneously observed data on the
variables of interest are available only on seven days. The over-all
means and standard deviations are given in Table 66a.
Table 66a
Over-All Means and Standard Deviations of Variables
Variable
Column Microorganisms
Column Temperature
Column Dissolved Oxygen
Mean
3.8
20.2
8.3
Std. Dev.
4.5
2.21
0.69
242
-------
figs«
84
are plots of temperature against Log (phytoplankton) for
Echo and Dunham Bays. Again, it should be noted that most of the points
are clustered in the range from 1 to 5.
?he natural logarithm (Log) of phytoplankton was used. Based on theo-
retical studies, it was suggested that such, a logarithmic transformation
would convert phytoplankton to an appropriate scale for analysis. Sub-
sequent analysis supported this idea.
"or the total of 19 cases examined, the block variables consisting of
Bay, Station and Day explained about 11% of the variation in the response
variable. After removing the effect due to these variables, the partial
correlations of the variables with the response variable are given in
Table 66g. The means and standard deviations for the various bays and
stations are presented in Tables 66b-66f. These descriptive statistics
have not been corrected for Day. Hence, some of the apparent differ-
ences may be due to this.
Table 66b
Means and Standard Deviations of Log (Phytoplankton)
_ Dunham Bay
STATION
STATION
STATION
3
2
1
Mean
1.22
1.22
Echo
Std.
-
4.
3.
Bay
Dev.
-
03
52
N*
—
5 .
7
Std. Dev.
0.83
0.07
N_*
4.
3
*no. of points
Table 66c
Means and Standard Deviations of Hydrocarbon Level
STATION 3
STATION 2
STATION 1
3
2
1
Mean
—
3.26
3.2
Echo Bay
Std. Dev.
—
2.19
1.44
N
—
5
7
Mean
3.63
3.86
—
Dunham Bay
Std. Dev.
2.29
2.78
—
N
4
3
-•
243
-------
7.,
6 •
5 .
4 .
3 .
2
1
1
§•
Ou
i-1
Echo Bay
O Station 2
^ Station 1
A
o A ^ °
A
A A
o
17 19 21 23 25
Column
Temperature
°C
-2
-3
-5
-6 •
-7
Figure 84 - Log (Phytoplankton) vs Column Temperature
for Echo Bay, Stations 2 and 1
244
-------
7 -i
5 •
Dunham Bay
O Station 3
A Station 2
3 •
2 •
Ao
i «
-i
-2
-3
-5
-6
-7
17
19
21
23 25
Column
Temperature
°C
Figure 85 - LogCPhytoplankton) vs Column Temperature
for Dunham Bay, Stations 3 and 2
245
-------
Table 66d
Means and Standard Deviations of Column Microorganisms
STATION 3
STATION 2
STATION 1
Means
STATION 3
STATION 2
STATION 1
Means and
STATION 3
STATION 2
STATION 1
Mean
—
4.6
6.0
Echo Bay
Std. Dev.
—
4.93
4.98
Table
N Mean
0.325
5 0.667
7
66e
and Standard Deviations of Column
Mean
—
21.2
21.1
Echo Bay
Std. Dev.
—
2.61
2.59
Table
N Mean
18.33
5 19.0
7
66f
Dunham Bay
Std. Dev.
0.45
0.57
—
Temperature
Dunham Bay
Std. Dev.
1.44
1.82
—
N
4
3
--
N
4
3
—
Standard Deviations of Column Dissolved Oxygen
Mean
—
8.56
8.21
Echo Bay
Std. Dev.
—
0.89
0.83
Table
Partial Correlation
N Mean
8.15
5 7.97
7
66g
Dunham Bay
Std. Dev.
0.11 •
0.25
—
N
u
3
•" "~
After Adjusting
for Concomitant Variables
Variable
Hydrocarbon
Column
Column
Column
Microorganisms
Temperature
Dissolved Oxygen
Partial Corr
-0.475
-0.150
-0.814
-0.286
F-value_
4.08
0.32
27.43
1.2"
246
-------
As can be seen from Table 66g, column temperature is highly correlated
with phytoplankton levels. The probability that the F-value is as large
or larger due to chance is less than .001. In other words, the proba-
bility that the sum of squares due to temperature being 92.79 or larger
if there is no relationship with phytoplankton is less than .001. Hence,
temperature is said to explain a significant amount of the variation in
the response variable.
This principle is used throughout the analysis to determine whether a
given variable could be considered to account for a significant amount
of the variability observed in the response variable.
On adjusting the response (phytoplankton) for temperature, the current
model explains about 70% of the variation in the response variable.
The correlation of the remaining variables with the phytoplankton cor-
rected for the concomitant variables and temperature is given in Table 73.
Table 66h
Partial Correlation After Adjusting
for Temperature
Variable Partial Corr. F-value
Hydrocarbon 0.09 0.10
Column Microorganisms 0.46 3.57
Column Dissolved Oxygen -0.60 7.45 :
It should be noted that the partial correlation of hydrocarbon (HC) has i
dropped from -0.48 to 0.09. Apparently after removal of the variability !
• associated with temperature, the variability remaining that can be j
associated with HC has been drastically reduced. In other words, the
large experimental error in the measurement of HC has masked any associa-
tion that might exist between HC levels and the log (phytoplankton) after
correcting for temperature.
Again, the probability that the sum of squares due to dissolved oxygen
I being 17.249 or larger is less than .025. Hence, the response variable
is adjusted for dissolved oxygen. At this point, it must be noted that
the association with the time variable becomes significant. That is,
on removing the effects due to Bay, Station, Temperature and Dissolved
Oxygen, the association with Day becomes "visible". j
i
The partial correlations of the remaining variables are given in Table
66i.
247
-------
Table 661
Partial Correlations After Adjusting for Dissolved Oxygen
Variable
Hydrocarbon
Column Microorganisms
Partial Corr.
0.1
0.15
F (Partial)
0.13
0.28
Table 66i shows that the contributions due to HC and column microorganisms
are not significant.
The final model is summarized in Table 66j.
Table 66j
Summary of Results
Variable
(Constant)
Bay
Day
Station
Temp.
D.O.
Coefficient
33.67
-0.340
0.052
0.052
-1.132
-2.334
Std. Dev.
—
1.23
0.02
0.73
0.173
0.855
Increase in
—
9.91
0.90
0.01
59.05
10.98
Significance
F-value Level
—
0.0768
5.77
0.0052
42.57
7.4492
--
--
0.05
--
0.001
0.05
R =80.84; std. error of estimate = 1.52; degrees of freedom = 13
At this point the analysis is terminated. Further addition of variable--
to the model tends to increase the estimate of the variance of the es-
timated phytoplankton levels due to the small number of degrees of
freedom.
Table 66j summarizes the results of the analysis.
The first column gives the name of the variable for which the respon-j^
variable has been adjusted. The order in which the variables are l1^;...
is the order in which these variables were brought into the model-
order is important as will be explained later in this section.
The second column gives the coefficients in the model. For exampl6'
this section the model is:
Log(phytoplankton) = 33.498 + 0.170(Bay) t 0.052(Station)
+ 0.052(Day) - 1.132(Temperature)
- 2.334(Dissolved Oxygen) + Error
248
-------
These values of the coefficients are the estimates of the true coefficient
based upon the assumption that the form of the model relating the vari-
ables is reasonable.
l^e "error" at the end of the equation given above deserves some comments.
3y including such a term in the model, one is implying three important
facts.
1) There are random variations of the response.
2) There might be other variables that are not in the
model but maybe they should be.
3) The model representing the relationship among the
included variables is inaccurate.
These coefficient estimates in the model are correlated to one another.
This is due to the non-orthogenality of the data. Hence, one should be
careful with such models. It would be inappropriate to assess the effect
of the independent variables on the response variables separately. In
other words, these coefficients have values which are conditional on the
other independent variables being present in the model. It is quite
possible that addition of some other factor or factors may affect the
•association between a given independent variable (already in the model)
and the independent variable to such an extent that the variable may not
be so important anymore in the model.
The third column in Table 66 j gives the standard deviation of the coef-
ficients in column two.
2
The fourth column gives the -increase in R , where R is called the "mul-
tiple correlation coefficient". This coefficient R is often stated as
a percentage (as in this discussion). The coefficient is a measure of
the fraction of the variability of the response variable that has been
explained by the proposed model. A "true" model will give a R2 close to
100%. In the fourth column the additional percentage of the variability
that has been explained due to the addition of that specific independent
variable is given. It should be pointed out that this increase in R
always occurs when a new factor is brought into the model. Its magnitude
is related not only to the degree of association of the independent
variable to the response variable, but also to the form in which this
variable is included in the model. However, the order in which that
variable is brought in (that is the response variable is adjusted for
that variable) will affect the value of this increase in R . Thi:; i-j
mainly due to the non-orthogenality of the data, and hence, as explained
earlier, on6' should not make statements about the contribution to R^ by
a given variable without qualifying them with the variables already in
the model.
The fifth column gives the "partial F-values". In the previous pages
the sum of squares due to a given variable after adjusting for certain
specific variables was discussed. This F-value is the same sum of
squares divided by the estimated residual variance. Instead of making
249
-------
probability statements on the conditional sum of squares due to a given
variable, one can equivalently talk about the partial F and the proba-
bility statement based on this statistic. This probability statement
is given in the last column of Table 66j as significance level.
For example, the significance level for the variable, Day, is given as
0,05. This is equivalent to saying that the probability that the sum .
of squares due to Day (after adjusting the response variable for the
other independent variables) has a given value (or greater) purely by
chance if there exists an association between the two that is less than
0.05.
In the discussion the accuracy of these probability statements is de-
pendent upon the assumption that the error indicated in the model is
approximately normally distributed. With the sample size available,
this assumption could not be shown to be unreasonable.
As Table 66j shows, the Log (phytoplankton) displays an apparent depend-
ence upon the temperature and dissolved oxygen levels and when they
increase, the level of phytoplankton decreases.
One should use care in applying the model given in Table 65j for predic-"
tive purposes, since the total number of points is only 19 and the
observations taken over a total of seven days have not permitted any
powerful model evaluation.
However, these results represent a reasonably good indication of possible
relationships which might be worth investigating. Figures 86-89 are pre-
sented to show how the computed response variable compares with the
observed response. With the available data the model appears to be
reasonably good. In Figure 89 the confidence intervals and the predictior.
intervals are indicated.
These intervals are indicated on the figures as follows: The vertical
line indicates the prediction interval at the point. The horizontal
lines indicate the confidence interval of the true mean for that value
of independent variables. The observed value of the response variable
is denoted by "XJ? and the estimated value of the response variable is
denoted by "0_" •
The confidence interval and the prediction interval can be interpretec
as follows: Suppose repeated samples of the response variable arc ta
of the same size each time and at the same fixed values of the inde-
pendent variables, as were used to determine the model obtained earli^
Then, of all the 90% confidence intervals constructed for the mean V3'~
of the response variable for a given value of the set of independent
variables, 90% of these intervals will contain the true mean value °
the response variable at the given point in the factor space. Frofii
practical point of view, one can say that there is a 0.90 probabil1 i
that the true mean value of the response variable at the given p°in cg
lies between a^ and 3.2 > where a^ and a~ are the values of the resp°
variable as given by the horizontal lines in Fig. 89 for each i"1'
250
-------
1
Model 1: Log(Phytoplankton) = 33.67 - 0.34(Bay) - 0.052(Station)
+ 0.052(Day) - 1.132(Temp) - 2.334(0.0.)
7 T
O Estimated
X Observed
1
•M I ,
X
§
rH
cu
t>o -1 '
O
-2 '
-3 •
V /
\ 1
\ '
\
(6/29) (7/19) (8/8) ,<8/28) (9/17)
180 (7/9) *200 (7/29) 220 (8/^4) • 240 (9/7) 260 (9/
l / Julian Date
I / . (month/day)
i /
I /
«,
1 /
1 /
I /
-5
-6
-7
Figure 86 - LogCPhytoplankton) vs Julian Date
for Echo Bay, Station 2, Model 1
251
-------
Model 1: Log(Phytoplankton) = 33.67 - 0.34(Bay) + 0.052(Station)
+ 0.052(Day) - 1.132(Temp) - 2.334(0.0.)
7
6 «
5 •
•*.
3 '
2 .
2 I-
.X
9
H
8-
o
•H
a.
~ -1 <
00
o
-2
-3 <
-4 .
-5
-6
-7
O Estimated
X Observed
X
O
I
\ n
' ! 'N
\ x •
1 I \ X x°
1 X \ /
« 1 v / X
111
(6/2^ ^7/19) (8/8) (9/7>' (9/27)
180 \! (7/9) 200 (7/29) 220 (8/28) 240 (9/17) 260
O \ ,' Julian Date
\ / (month/day)
\ /
\ /
\ /
\ /
O
X
Figure 97 - Log(Phytoplankton) vs Julian Date
for Echo Bay, Station 1, Model 1
252
-------
Model 1: Log(Phytoplankton) = 33.67 - 0.3U(Bay) - 0.052(Station)
t 0.052(Day) - 1.132(Temp) - 2.33«*(D.O.)
7 ,
b •
3
2 •
^-O
\
\
\ \
Station 2
O Estimated
X Observed
Station 1
•4" Estimated
Q Observed
lanktoi
i-
3
V
•* \ \
17 ' 19 21 " \ 23V
\ \
O v
25
-1
00
-2
\ \ Temperature
v\ on
\\ "C
-3
-4
\\
-5
-6
a
x
-7
Figure 88 - Log(Phytoplankton) vs Temperature
for Echo Bay, Stations 2 and 1, Model 1
253
-------
Model 1: Log(Phytoplankton) = 33.67 - 0.3H(Bay) - 0.052(Station)
+ 0.052(Day) - 1.132CTenp) - 2.33U(D.O.)
O Estimated
X Observed
Figure 89 -
LogCPhytoplankton) vs Dissolved Oxygen(Column)
for Echo Bay, Station i, Model 1
254
-------
furthermore, suppose a future observation is taken at a given point in
the factor space. The probability that the future observation will lie
within the prediction interval is given by 0.9.
In the discussion above, a probability of 0.9 has been chosen. Any other
value of the probability can be chosen depending upon the risk one is
willing to accept.
RELATION BETWEEN PHYTOPLANKTON, SURFACE MICROORGANISMS, SURFACE DISSOLVED
OXYGEN, SURFACE TEMPERATURE AND HYDROCARBON LEVEL
In this section the association between phytoplankton and surface micro-
organisms, surface dissolved oxygen, surface temperature and hydrocarbon
level are investigated.
i
As in the previous section, simultaneously observed data on the variables i
of interest are available for this analysis for only seven days.
The over-all means and standard deviations are given in Table 67a.
Table 67a
Over-All Means and Standard Deviations of Variables
Variable
Hydrocarbon
Surface Microorganisms
Surface Temperature
Surface Dissolved Oxygen
Phytoplankton*
Mean
3.41
0.12
20.63
8.22
1.91
Std. Dev.
1.89
0.22
2.17
0.58
2.95
*natural logarithm of phytoplankton levels
The readings were obtained from Echo Bay (12 observations) and Dunham
Bay (7 observations).
The means and standard deviations for the "unadjusted" variables of in-
terest are given in Tables 67b-67f. These are given for descriptive pur-
poses only--.They are not adjusted for Day. Hence, direct comparisons
may be difficult because of this.
255
-------
Table 67b
Means and Standard Deviations for Log (Phytoplankton)
STATION 3
STATION 2
STATION 1
Mean
—
1.22
1.22
Echo Bay
Std. Dev. N
—
4.03 5
.3.52 7
Table 67c
Dunham Bay
Mean Std. Dev.
3.08 0.83
3.12 0.06
—
N
4
3
--
Means and Standard Deviations fop Hydrocarbon Level
STATION 3
STATION 2
STATION 1
Means
STATION 3
STATION 2
STATION 1
Means
STATION 3
STATION 2
STATION 1
Mean
—
3.26
3.2
Echo Bay
Std. Dev. N
—
2.19 5
2.08 7
Table 67d
and Standard Deviations of
Mean
--
0.064
0.24
Echo Bay
Std. Dev. N
—
0.049 5
0.34 7
Table 67e
and Standard Deviations of
Mean
—
21.14
21.36
Echo Bay
Std. Dev. N
—
2.45 5
2.41 7
Dunham Bay
Mean Std. Dev.
3.63 2.29
3.86 2.78
—
Surface Microorganisms
Dunham Bay
Mean Std. Dev.
0.03 0.047
0.04 0.047
—
Surface Temperature
Dunham Bay
Mean Std. Dev.
19.6 1.22
19.4 1.97
— —
N
4
3
--
N
4
3
—
N_
n
3
--
256
-------
Table 67f
Means and Standard Deviations of Surface Dissolved Oxygen
STATION
STATION-
STATION
3
2
1
Mean
—
8.5
8.34
Echo
Std
0
0
Bay
. Dev.
—
.63
.675
M
—
5
7
Mean
7.925
7.9
—
Dunham Bay
Std. Dev.
0.21
0.5
—
N
4
3
-•
For the same reasons listed in the previous section, the natural loga-
rithm of the phytoplankton was used in the analyses.
In Table 57g the final equation is given.
Table 67g
Summary of Results
Variable
Bay
Day
Station
Temp.
Surf.
Microorg.
D.O.
(Constant)
Coefficient
0.213
0.022
-0.77
-0.744
-6.432
-2.035
30.04
Std. Dev.
1.07
0.02
0.66
0.20
1.96
0.86
—
Increase in
R2%
9.91
0.90
0.01
61.37
7.88
6.36
—
F-value
0.04
1.38
1.87
13.41
10.76
5.62
--
Significance
Level
—
—
—
0.005
0.01
0.05
—
R =86.42; std. error of estimate = 1.33; degrees of freedom = 12
Table 67g indicates there might be correlations between Log (phytoplankton)
and surface microorganisms, surface temperature and surface dissolved
oxygen. Hydrocarbon does not seem to contain any significant information
after phytoplankton has been adjusted for the other variables. The sum
of squares due to hydrocarbon after adjusting for other variables is
0.687 and the probability of a value greater than 0.687 due to chance
alone is more than 0.9. Hence, the evidence to include hydrocarbon in
the model is insufficient. Also, it should be noted that the association
with Day and Station is significant at about the 25% level.
Figs. 90-94 are presented to compare the performance of the model in the
factor space under investigation.
257
-------
Model 2: Log(Phytoplankton) = 30.04 + 0.213(Bay) - 0.77(Station)
+ 0.22(Day) - 0.744(.T«inp) + 6.U3(Surface
Microorganisms) - 2.035(D.O.)
7 t
5 '
3-
§ 1
•p -1
.x
S
OH
-1
-2
-3
-5
-6
-7
O Estimated
X Observed
V \
x\
\
\
\
(6/29) (7/U9) (8/8)
/
/
/X(8/28)
(9/17)
180 (7/9) 200 (7/29) 220 ^6/18) 240 (9/7) 260 (9/27)
\
\
V
Julian Date
(month/day)
Figure 90 - Log(Phytoplankton) vs Julian Date
for Echo Bay, Station 2, Model 2
258
-------
Model 2
Log(Phytoplankton) = 30.04 + 0.213CBay) - 0.77(Station)
+ 0.22(Day) - 0.7U4(Temp) -t- 6. 43 (.Surf ace
Microorganisms) - 2.035(D.O.)
14
12
10 •
6 •
4
§
t! 2
8"
-u
-6 •
-8
-10
-12
O Estimated
X Observed
(6/29i
180
<
Y7/19) (8/8) (8/28>'
(9/17)
(7/b) 200 (7/29) 220
• » \
\
240
260* (9/27)
Julian Date
(month/day)
Figure 91 - Log(Phytoplankton) vs Julian Date
for Echo Bay, Station i, Model 2
259
-------
Model 2: LogCPhytoplanktonl = 30.04 + 0,213(3ay) - 0.77(Station)
" + 0;22CDay) - 0.7^CTeinp) + 6.13CSurface
Hicroorganisms) - 2.035(15.0.}
7 ,
6 4
5 4
O Estimated
X Observed
3 4
2 4
£
-2
17
19
\
g
1 *•
g
rH
Oi
ff
\
\
\
\
21
23 25
Surface
^ Temperature
\ OQ
\
-3
-1+
_7
Figure 92 - LogCPbytoplankton) vs Surface Temperature
for Echo Bay, Station 2, Model 2
260
-------
Model 2: Log(Phytoplankton) = 30.OU + 0.213(Bay) - 0.77(Station)
+ 0.22CDay) - 0,7i*U(Temp) + 6 .^(Surface
Microorganisms) - 2.035(D.O.)
5
3 •
§
o.
o
1 '
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-7
17
O Estimated
X Observed
K
19
21
23 . 25
\
\ Surface
N Temperature
\ °C
\
\
N
VX
Figure 93 - LogCF&ytoplankton) -ys Surface Temperature
for Echo Bay, Station 1, Model 2
261
-------
Model 2: LogCPhytoplankton) = 30.04 + 0.213(Bay) - 0.77(Station)
+ 0.22(Day) - 0.744CTenp) + 6.43(Swface
Microorganism*) - 2.035(D.O.)
I
7 ,
6 ,
5 ,
I'
a
0°
-1
-2
-3
-6
* ,'
*'
7.5
i
/1
*k
O* |l
f \\
~ II
Station 2
O Estimated
X Observed
Station 3
+ Estimated
D Observed
\
X \
x
\
8.5
9.0 9.5
^ Surface
\ D.O.
\
\
Figure 94 - LogCPhytoplankton) vs Dissolved Oxygen(Surface
for Echo Bay, Stations 2 and 1, Model 2
262
-------
figures 90 6 91 are plots of the observed and estimated responses against
Julian date for Echo Bay at Stations 2 and 3. As the plots indicate,
the fit is reasonably good. However, it is worth re-emphasizing that
even though the analysis gives a R2 of 86%, the results are based on ob-
servations taken on only seven days. As the plots indicate, a few more
observations must be taken around Julian date 200.
Confidence intervals and prediction intervals are indicated in Fig. 91.
RELATION BETWEEN COLUMN MICROORGANISMS, HYDROCARBON LEVEL, AND COLUMN
TEMPERATURE
In this section the association between column microorganisms and hydro-
carbon level, column temperature, square of column temperature (referred
to as (.temp)2 in the discussion below, i.e. temperature was accounted for
using a quadratic function) and column dissolved oxygen is discussed.
Simultaneously observed data on the variables of interest are available
on 17 days.
The over-all means and standard deviations for the different variables
are given in Table 68a.
Table 68a
Over-All Means and Standard Deviations of Variables
Variable
Hydrocarbon Level
Column Temperature
2
(Temperature)
Column Dissolved Oxygen
Column Microorganisms*
Mean
3.87
19.47
395.58
8.58
0.40
Std. Dev
3.10
4.08
131.95
2.37
2.21
^natural logarithm of column microorganisms
The observations were taken at Echo Bay (25 observations) and Dunham
Bay (33 observations).
The means and standard deviations at the two bays for the variables of
interest are given in Tables 68b-68f.
263
-------
Table 68b
Means and Standard Deviations of Rydracarben Level
STATION
STATION
STATION
Mean
3
2 4.00
1 3.9
Echo Bay
Std. Dev. N
—
2.5 12
1.6 13
Table 68c
Means and Standard Deviations
STATION
STATION
STATION
STATION
STATION
STATION
STATION
STATION
STATION
Mean
3
2 20.57
1 21.36
Means and
Mean
3
2 8.77
1 8.38
Means and
Mean
3
2 428.8
1 460.2
Echo Bay
Std. Dev. N
—
2 . 44 12
2.05 13
Table 68d
Dunham Bay
Mean Std. Dev.
3.19 1.60
3.07 1.66
4.9 5.62
of Temperature
Dunham Bay
Mean Std. Dev.
16.78 5.28
17.37 5.24
20.26 3.51
N_
10
10
13
N
10
10
13
Standard Deviations of Dissolved Oxygen
Echo Bay
Std. Dev. N
—
0.89 12
0.88 13
Table 68e
Standard Deviations
Echo Bay
Std. Dev. N
—
99.83 12
87.53 13
Dunham Bay
Mean Std. Dev.
8.4 1.9
9.95 3.54
7.65 3.24
2
of (Temperature)
Dunham Bay
Mean Std. Dev.
306.7 141.71
326.39 147.67
421.9 132.43
N_
10
10
13
N
10
10
13
264
-------
Table 68f
Means and Standard Deviations of Log (Column Microorganisms)
STATION
STATION
STATION
3
2
1
Mean
—
0.96
1.42
Echo
Std
2
1
Bay
. Dev.
—
.29
.77
Dunham Bay
N
12
13
Mean
-1.15
-0.92
1.06
Std.
1.
2.
1.
Dev.
21
70
79
N
10
10
13
As in the case of phytoplankton, the column microorganisms were trans-
formed by taking the natural logarithms. This is reasonable since the
rate equation for growth of microorganisms is similar to that of the
phytoplankton.
A total of 58 cases were considered in this study.
In Table 68gthe results of the analysis are summarized.
Table 68g
Summary of Results
Variable
(Constant)
Day
Station
Bay
Hydrocarbon
Temp.
D.O.
(Temp)2
Coefficient
-0.57
0.023
-0.713
-0.494
0.177
-0.123
-0.417
0.013
Std.
Error
—
0.010
0.350
0.524
0.084
0.110
0.280
0.008
Increase
in R2%
—
19.91
10.33
0.81
8.54
0.96
0.10
2.54
F-value
—
5.110
4.160
0.8870
4.51
2.26
1.25
2.23
Significance
Level
—
0.05
0.05
—
0.05
0.20*
0.30*
0.20*
*approximate values
o
R =43.19; std. error of estimate = 3.149; degrees of freedom = 50
The F-values indicate that there might be associations between the Log
(column microorganisms) and the other variables in the model. However,
it should be noted that only 43% of the variation has been explained.
This strongly indicates that the association of column microorganisms
with other lake chemistry parameters, like N03, P04, surface water runoff,
etc., might be worth investigating.
265
-------
T
Figure 95 is a plot of the observed and estimated levels of Log (column
microorganisms) against Julian date for Echo Bay. The value of 7.9 on
the 22nd of August should be noted. On either side of this day, the level
is below 2.3. This sudden increase may- also be the reason for such a
low R . This behavior around this date might be worth investigating.
Figure 96 is also a plot of Log (column microorganisms) against Julian
date at Echo Bay for Station 1. Again, the high value on the 22nd of
August should be noted.
Figure 95 also includes the prediction intervals and the confidence inter-
vals for a few selected points.
RELATION BETWEEN SURFACE MICROORGANISMS, HYDROCARBON LEVEL. SURFACE DIS-
SOLVED OXYGEN AND SURFACE TEMPERATURE
In this section the relationships between surface microorganisms and hy-
drocarbon, surface dissolved oxygen and surface temperature are analyzed.
Simultaneously observed data on the variables of interest were available
on 14 days. The observations were taken at Echo Bay (22 observations).
and Dunham Bay (29 observations).
The over-all means and standard deviations are given in Table 69a.
Table 69a
Over-All Means and Standard Deviations of Variables
Variable
Hydrocarbon Level
Surface Temperature
2
(Temperature)
Surface Dissolved Oxygen
Surface Microorganisms
Mean
4.04
21.16
453.7
8.40
-2.07
Std. Dev
3.22
2.42
98.39
1.57
2.03
In Tables 69b-69f the means and standard deviations of the unadjusted var
ables are- given. Unadjusted data is raw data that has not been adjuster
for Days.
266
-------
I M<
Model 3: Log(Column Microorganisms) = -0.57 - 0.491(Bay)
-0.713(Station) + 0.023(Day) + 0.177CHC)
-0.123(Temp) - O.U17(D.O.) + 0.013(T«mp)2
71
5 ,
M- •
H
in
•.-I
ifl i
ff X
O
Mic
o
o
00
o -
-3
-5
-6
-7
O Estimated
X Observed
(6/29) I/' (7/19)
«_• jfc_^ :
*•
X
, e -
(8/8)
(7/9) 200 (7/29) 220 (8/18
1
(8/28)
'a
N
«
240 (9/7) 2(
Julian Dat^
(month /day
Figure 95 - LogCC«lHnn Mfceroorganisas} vs Julian Date
for Echo Bay, Station 2, Model 3
267
-------
Model 3: Log(.Coluan Microorganisms) = -0.57 - 0,49U(Bay)
-0.713CStation) + 0.023(Day) + 0.177(HC)
-0.123CTerap) - 0.417CD.O.) + C.013CTerapr
6 •
5 .
3 '
00
o -
-3
-6
O Estimated
X Observed
Column Microorganisms)
\-> \-> ro
• • •
XX X
e
o %
(6/29) (7/19)
180 (7/9) 200 (7/29)
x 8 x x
O ° 0
(8/8) (8/28) (9/17)
220 (8/18) 240 (9/7) 260
Julian Date
(month/day)
Figure 96 - Log(Colunm Microorganisms) vs Julian Date
for Echo Bay, Station 1, Model 3
268
-------
Table 69b
Means and Standard Deviations of Hydrocarbon Level
STATION
STATION
STATION
STATION
STATION
STATION
Mean
3
2 4.2
1 3.9
Means and
Mean
3
2 21.4
1 21.65
Echo Bay
Std. Dev.
—
2.6
1.6
Table
N
9
13
69c
Standard Deviations
Echo Bay
Std. Dev.
--
2.11
1.92
Table
N
9
13
69d
Dunham Bay
Mean Std. Dev.
3.2 1.7
3.46 1.65
5.08 5.81
of Temperature
Dunham Bay
Mean Std. Dev.
20.03 2.80
20.67 1.81
21.60 3.14
N
9
8
12
N
9
8
12
Means and Standard Deviations of Dissolved Oxygen
STATION
STATION
STATION
Means
STATION
STATION
STATION
Mean
3
2 8.87
1 8.58
and Standard
Mean
3
2 -2.81
1 -1.69
Echo Bay
Std. Dev.
—
0.85
0.91
Table
N
—
9
13
69e
Deviations of Log
Echo Bay
Std. Dev.
—
1.54
1.67
N
9
13
Dunham Bay
Mean Std. Dev.
9.00 1.35
8.74 1.30
7.19 2.28
(Surface Microorganisms
Dunham Bay
Mean Std. Dev.
-3.33 2.03
-2.59 1.48
-0.63 2.28
N
9
8
12
N
9
8
12
269
-------
Table 69f
Means and Standard Deviations of (Temperature)
2 '
STATION 3
STATION 2
STATION 1
Mean
—
463.84
472.29
Echo Bay
Std. Dev.
—
91.52
83.11
Dunham Bay
N
—
9
13
Mean
408.29
430.31
475.60
Std. Dev.
104.76
72.86
126.19
N
9
8
12
Again, the surface microorganisms were transformed using natural logarithm.
Table 69g gives the summary of the results of this analysis.
Table 69g
Summary of Results
Variable
(.Constant )
Station
Bay
Day
(Temp)2
Coefficient
-6.44
0.82
-1.19
-0.004
0.20
Std. Dev.
0.55
0.36
0.01
0.12
Increase
in R2%
18.87
3.37
0.36
4.26
F-value
2.23
10.84
0.14
2.68
Significance
Level
0.15*
0.01
0.15*
•'approximate values
R =26.86; std. error of estimate = 1.8081; degrees of freedom = 46
After the response variable has been adjusted for temperature, the con-
tribution due to hydrocarbon and dissolved oxygen is negligible. Most
of the variability has been explained by the block variables.
RELATION BETWEEN ODQR, HYDROCARBON LEVEL, COLUMN MICROORGANISMS AND .SUR-
FACE MICROORGANISMS
In this'"section the association of logarithm of odor with hydrocarbon,
column microorganisms and surface microorganisms and temperature are
discussed.
Based on the reports of the investigators at Lake George, it was hypot'
esized that the odor level is associated with the phytoplankton level-
However, there were simultaneous observations only on four days fo? & f
total of 8 points. Hence, it was decided not to attempt any analysis
270
-------
1
the association between odor levels and phytoplankton. However, a plot
of odor levels and phytoplankton levels against Julian date showed similai
behavior.
The natural logarithm of the odor levels was used in the analysis. • Obser-
vations of odor levels and hydrocarbon levels were available on 14- days.
The analysis is summarized in Table 70.
Table 70
Summary of Results
Variable
Bay
Station
Day
Hydrocarbon
F-value
1.86
1.10
0.066
0.07
As Table 70 indicates, there is no significant association between hydro-
carbon level and the Log (odor).
271
-------
SECTION XIV - ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Dr. William W. Shuster, Chairman of the Bio-Environmental Engineering
Division at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York, served as
Project Director of this investigation. The assistance of Dr. Lenore S.
Clesceri, Assistant Professor of Biology, and Dr. Shigeru Kobayashi,
Research Assistant, is gratefully acknowledged.
Valuable assistance with the microbiological studies was provided by
Miss Rosalie Jennings and Miss Jeanne McGuire, graduate students in the
Biology Department. Mr. Inder Jit Kumar assisted with the algae studies,
and Mr. Peter Carney helped with engine tests and surface current measure-
ments. Dr. James Basila provided assistance with the development of
analytical procedures.
Dr. William Perrotte, Assistant Professor at Marist College, together
with Mr. John Henningson, a graduate student at Rensselaer, assisted
with the field measurements of benthal microorganisms and the surveys
of boat usage.
The assistance of Mr. Michael Asbury, Mr. Francis Gregory and Mr. William
Belden in sampling and with analytical work is acknowledged with thanks.
Inputs from Mr. Thomas Tough with odor tests, and from Mr. Miguel
Antonetti with studies of bottom samples and the development of analyti-
cal methods were much appreciated.
Dr. John W. Wilkinson and Mr. K. Deva Kumar provided guidance in the
statistical analysis of portions of the data.
The assistance and advice provided by Dr. Nicholas L. Clesceri and Dr.
James J. Ferris were most valuable. The use of Rensselaer's Fresh Water
Institute facilities was appreciated.
Support provided by the Water Quality Office, Environmental Protection
Agency, and the help provided by Mr. Thomas H. Roush, Mr. Leo T. McCartn,,
and Dr. Royal J. Nadeau, the Grant Project Officer, is acknowledged wi-v
thanks.
272
-------
SECTION XV - REFERENCES
10.
11.
12
13
Antonetti-Alvarez, M. , "Normal Alkane Hydrocarbons in Lake Sedi-
ments," Master's Project Report, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
Troy, New York, November 1972.
API Method 733-58, "Volatile and Nonvolatile Oily Material -
Infrared Spectrometric Method".
Barbato, P. and Brewer, T. E., "Oil Pollution from Marine Outboard
Engines," Master's Project, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy,
New York (1970).
Baylis , J. R. , Elimination of Taste and Odor in Water, McGraw-Hill,
New York, New York (1935)
Berg, C. 0., "Biology of Certain Chironomidai Reared from Potamo-
geton," Ecol. Mono, Vol. 20:2 (1950) pp. 83-102.
Bloomfield, J. A., "Diatom Death Assemblages as Indications of
Environmental Quality in Lake George, N.Y. ," M.S. Thesis, Rensselaer
Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York (1972).
Bray, E. E. and Evans, E. D. , "Distribution of n-Paraffins as a
Clue to Recognition of Source Beds ," Geochimica et Cosmochimica
Acta, 22_, 2 (1961).
Breger, I. A., "Geochemistry of Liquids," Jour. Amer. Oil Chemists
Soc. , 4_3, 198 (1966).
Cairns, J., Jr. and Dickson, K. L., "A Simple Method for the Bio-
logical Assessment of the Effects of Waste Discharges on Aquatic
Bottom Dwelling Organisms," JWPCF, Vol. 43:5 (1971) p. 755.
Clark, R. C. , Jr., "Saturated Hydrocarbons in Marine Plants and
Sediments," M.S. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
(1966).
Clark, R. C. , Jr. and Blumer, M. , "Distribution of n-Paraffins in
Marine Organisms and Sediments," Limnology and Oceanography, 12,
79 (1967).
Clendenning, K. A., "The Effects of Waste Discharges on Kelp. Fuel
Oil," Univ. Calif. Inst. Marine Resources, 59, 4, 4-12 (1958).
Clesceri, L. S., "Activity Estimation of Aquatic Fungal and Bac-
terial Decomposers," Memo Report 71-119, ORNL (1971).
Clesceri, L. S., "Role of the Heterotrophic Microflora in the
Cycling of Materials," Memo Report 72-64, ORNL (1972).
273
-------
15. Clesceri, N. L. and Williams, S. L., Eds., Diatom Population
Changes in Lake George (N.Y.), Final Report for Office of Water
Resources Research, Contract No. 14-31-0001-3387, Jan. 1972.
16. Cole, G. A. and Underhill, J. G., "The Summer Standing Crop of
Sublittoral and Profundal Benthos in Lake Itasca, Minn." Limn.
and Ocean., Vol. 10, (1965) pp 591-597.
17. Dietrick, K. R. , "Investigation Into the Pollution of Water by
Two-Stroke Outboard Motors," Gesundheitsingiew, 85, 342-347 (1964),
18. Dravnieks, Andrew, "Current Status of Odor Theories," Flavor
Chemistry, a symposium sponsored by the Division of Agriculture
and Food Chemistry at a meeting of the American Chemical Society,
(American Chemical Society, Washington, D. C.) (1966).
19. Edmondson, W. T., "In a Manual on Methods for Measuring Primary
Production in Aquatic Environments," IBP Handbook No. 12, p. 14,
(1969).
20. Eggleton, Frank E. , "A Comparative Study of the Benthic Fauna of
Four Northern Michigan Lakes ," Papers, Mich. Acad. Sci. Art and
Letters, Vol. 20 (1934) p. 609.
21. English, J. N. , "What Does Outboard Motor Exhaust Contribute to
Water?" Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Services, Cincinnati,
Ohio, Jan. 17, 1951.
22. English, J. N. , McDermott, G. N. and Henderson, C., "Pollutional
Effects of Outboard Motor Exhaust - Laboratory Studies," JWPCF,
35_, 7, 923-931 (1963).
23. Environmental Protection Agency, National Eutrophication Research
Program, "Algal Assay Procedure, Bottle Test." August 1971.
24. Evans, E. D. , Kenny, G. S. , Menschein, W. G. and Bray, E. E. ,
"Distribution of n-Paraffins and Separation of Saturated Hydro-
carbons from Recent Marine Sediments," Analytical Chemistry_, 29_,
12, 1858 (1957).
25. Gaines, T. H. , "Pollution Control at a Manor Oil Spill," .JWPCT,
4_3, 651 (1971).
26. Galstoff, P. S. , Prytherich, H. F. , Smith, R. 0. and Korhring, v'^'
"Effects of Crude Oil on Oysters in Louisiana Waters," Bull.
Bur. Fish. , 18, 143-210 (1936).
27. Goldman, C. R., "The Measurement of Primary Productivity and
Limiting Factors in Freshwater with Clu," p. 103-113 in M.S.
(ed), Proceedings of the Conf. on Primary Productivity Measure-
ment, Marine and Freshwater, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission,
TD-7633 (1963).
274
-------
28. Hall, D. J., "An Experimental Approach to the Production Dynamics
and Structure of Freshwater Animal Communities," Limn, and Ocean. ,
15., 3, 920 (1970).
29. Hamilton, E. J., "The Interaction of Outboard Motor and Inorganic
Sediments," Master's Project Report, Rensselaer Polvtechnic Insti-
tute, Trey, N. Y., June 1971.
30. Hardy, J. ?., "La Pollution des Oceans Par Les Hydrocarbures et
Ses Consequences Biologiques ," Penn. ARBed., p. 123-138 (1968).
31. Hayne, D. W. and Ball, R. C., "Benthic Productivity as Influenced
by Fish Predation," Limn, and Ocean. , 1_(3):162 (1957).
32. Holcomb, R. W., "Oil in the Ecosystem," Science, 166, 204, Oct. 10,
1969.
33. Humphries, C. F. , "An Investigation of the Profundal and Sublit-
toral Fauna of Windermere," Jour, of Animal Ecology, 15, 29 (1936).
34. Jeltes, R. and den Tonkelaar, W. A. M., "Gas Chromatography versus
Infrared Spectrometry for Determination of Mineral Oil Dissolved
in Water," Water Res. . 6_, 271-278 (1972).
35. Joint Industry/Government-Task Force on Eutrophication, "Provi-
sional Algal Assay Procedure," p. 27 (1969).
36. Kempf, Ludemann and Pflaum, "Pollution of Waters by Motorized
Operations," Water Pollution Abstracts, 316^ 85 (1968).
37. Kendeigh, S. C. , Animal Ecology, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
N. J., p. 92 (196TT
38. Kobayashi, S. , "Mineral Cycling: The Humic Materials of Lake
George," Rensselaer Fresh Water Institute Report No. 72-22 (1972).
39. Koons, C. B. , Jamieson, G. W. and Ciereszko, L. S. , "Normal Alkane
Distributions in Marine Organisms: Possible Significance to Petro-
leum Origin," Bull. Amer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. , 49, 3, 301 (1965).
40. Kremer, T. A., "Oil Pollution from Outboard Motors at Lake George,
New York," M. Eng. Project, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
Troy, N. Y. (1972).
41. Kvenvalden, K. A.,"Normal Paraffin Hydrocarbons in Sediments from
San Francisco Bay, California," Bull. Amer. Assoc. Petrol^ Geol.,
46_, 9, 1643 (1962).
42. LaRoche, G., Eisler, R. and Tarzwell, C. M., "Bioassay Procedures
for Oil and Dispersant Toxicity Evaluation," JWPCF, 42, 11, 1982-
1989 (1970).
275
-------
43. Macon, T. T., Ed. "Environmental Requirements of Aquatic Insects,"
Biological Problems in Water Pollution, 3d Seminar (1962) pp 105-
144.
44. Margelef, R., "Informacion y diversidad especifica en las comuni-
dades de organismas." Inv. Pesquera, _3_, 99-106 (1956).
45. McCauley, R. N., "The Biological Effects of Oil Pollution in a
River," Limn. Oceanog. , 11, 475-486 (1966).
46. Menon, P. S. , "Population Ecology of Gammarus lacustris in Big
Island Lake I Habitat Preference and Relative Abundance," Hydro-
biologia, 33_, 14 (1969).
47. Mitchell, C. T., Anderson, E. K. , Jones, L. G. and North, W. J. ,
"What Oil Does to Ecology," JWPCF, 42, 5, 812-818 (1970).
48. Moon, H. P. , "An Investigation of the Littoral Region of Winder-
mere." Jour, of Animal Ecol. , _3_, 8 (1934).
49. Muratori, A., Jr., "How Outboards Contribute to Water Pollution," -
The Conservationist, June-July 1968.
50. National Technical Advisory Committee, Water Quality Criteria,
Report to the Secretary of Interior, FWPCA, Wash., D.C. x p 78
(1968)?
51. Needham, P. R. , "A Quantitative Study of Fish Food Supply in Sel-
ected Areas," Supp. 17th Ann. Rept., N.Y.S. Cons. Dept. , Albany,
pp 192-208 (1927).
52. Odum, E. P., Fundamentals of Ecology, W. B. Saunders, Phila., pp
298-310 (19597!
53. Ogner, G. and Schnitzer, M. , "Humic Substances: Fulvic Acid-Dialkyl
Phthalate Complexes and Their Role in Pollution," Science, 170^,
317-318 (1970).
54. Ogner, G. and Schnitzer, M. , "The Occurrence of Alkanes in Fulvic
Acid, A Soil Humic Fraction," Geochiin. Cosmochim. Acta, 34, 921-
928 (1970).
55. "Orion Instruction Manual," IM95-01/1721, Orion Res. Inc.,
Cambridge, Mass. (1971).
56. Pagel, C. W. , "Aquatic Diptera in Lake Champlain Embaymentn ," f/;~-
Thesis, Univ. of Vt. , p. 36, 42 (1969).
57. Patrick, R., et al, "A Proposed Biological Measure of Stream c°n"
ditions, based on a Survey of the Conestoga Basin, Lancaster
Penn." Proc. Acad. of Natr. Sci. Phila., 101, 277 (1949).
276
-------
58. Pickering, Q. H. and Henderson, C., "Acute Toxicity of Some Im-
portant Petrochemicals to Fish," JWPCF, _38_» 9, 419 (1966).
59. Purvis, E. P. and Higson, G. E., Jr., "Determining Organic Carbon
in Soils," Ind. and Eng. Chem-Anal. Ed., LL, 1, 19 (1939).
60. Rawson, D. S., "The Bottom Fauna of Lake Simcoe and Its Role in
the Ecology of the Lake," Univ. of Toronto, Pub. Ont. Fish. P.es.
Lab, 40_, 1-83 (1958).
61. Reid, G. E., Ecology of Inland Waters and Estuaries , Reinhold, M.Y.
pp 300-307 (1961).
52. Ruttner, F., Fundamentals of Limnology, Univ. of Toronto, Toronto
(1961) p. 280.
63. Ryther, J. H., The Measurement of Primary Production," Limnol.
Ocean, of 1, 72-84.
64. Sachdev, D. R. , "Effect of Organic Fractions from Secondary Efflu-
ent on Algal Growth," Ph.D. Thesis, Rensselaer Polytechnic Insti-
tute, Troy, New York (1973).
65. Sanders, H. 0., Toxicities of Some Herbicides to Six Species of
Freshwater Crustaceans," JWPCF, 42_, 8, 1545 (1968).
66. Saunders, G. W. , Trama, F. B. and Bachmann, R. W., "Evaluation of
a Modified C Technique for Shipboard Estimation of Photosynthesis
in Large Lakes," Univ. of Michigan, Great Lakes Res. Div. Pub. 8,
61 p. (1962).
67. Schollenberger, C. J. , "A Rapid Approximate Method for Determining
Soil Organic Matter," Soil Science, 24_, 65 (1927).
68. Schollenberger, C. J. , Determination of Soil Organic Matter,"
Soil Science, 31, 483 (1931)
69. Shuster, W. W. , "Control of Pollution from Outboard Engine Exhaust:
A Reconnaissance Study," FWQA Proj. No. 15000 020 ENN (1970).
70. Smith, P. V., Jr., "Studies on Origin of Petroleum: Occurrence of
Hydrocarbons in Recent Sediments," Bull. Amer. Assoc. Petrol.
Geol. , Q, 3, 377 (1954).
71. Snell, Foster D. Inc., "Outboard Motor Tests Using Petro Save and
Kleen Zaust Devices," Sept. 1965.
72. Spooner, M. F. , Biological Effects of the Torrey Canyon Disaster,"
J. Devon Trust Nat. Cons. Suppt., p. 12-19 (1967).
277
-------
73. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Was tewater -
13th Ed. , American Public Health Assoc. (1970).
74. Steeman, N. , "Carbon Sources in the Photosynthesis of Aquatic
Plants," Nature . 5J3, 594-96 (1946).
75. Stevenson, F.'j., "Liquids in Soil," Jour. Amer. Oil Chemists Soc. »
43_, 203 (1966).
76. Stevens, N. P., Bray, E. E. and Evans, E. D. , "Hydrocarbons in
Sediments of Gulf of Mexico," Bull. Amer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. ,
40_, 5, 975 (1956).
77. Stewart, R. , "Outboard Motor Fuel Discharge," The N. Y. State
Conservat ionis t , June-July 1968.
78. Stillwell and Gladding, Inc. , "Pollution Factors of Two-Cycle Out-
board Marine Engines," Oct. 20, 1969.
79. Stoll, M. , "Facts Old and New Concerning Relationships Between
Molecular Structure and Odour," Molecular Structure and Organolip- -
tic Quality, Mactnillan Company, New York, New York (1957).
80. Suinner, W. , Methods of Air Deodorization , Elsevier Publishing Co.,
New York, New York (1963).
81. Sumner, W., Odour Pollution of Air, CRC Press, Cleveland, Ohio,
(1971).
82. Surber, E. W. , "Biological Criteria for the Determination of Lake
Pollution," Biological Problems in Water Pollution, pp 164-174,
(1957).
83. Swift, M. L. , "A Qualitative and Quantitative Study of Trout Food
in Castle Lake, California." Calif. Fish and Game, 56_, 2, 109-120
(1970).
84. Swift, W. H. , Touhill, C. J. , Templeton, W. L. and Roseman, D. P- •
"Oil Spillage Prevention, Control, and Restoration - State of the
Art and Research Needs," JWPCF, 4_1, 3, 392-412 (1969).
85. Tarzwell, C. M. , "Toxicity of Oil and Oil Dispersant Mixtures to
Aquatic Life," In Water Pollution by Oil. The Institute of Petro-
leum, London, p. 263 (1971).
86. Tenderon, G. , "Contamination of Flora and Fauna by Oil, and _
logical Consequences of the Torrey Canyon Accident," Internatio"0
Conf. on Oil Pollution of the Sea, Oct. 1968 at Rome, p. Hu-
87.- Tiffany, L. H. , Algae , Thomas Springfield, Illinois (1968).
278
-------
88. Tough, T. H. , "Odor Tests of Lake George Water," Master's Project
Report, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, N. Y. (July 1972).
89. "Visibility of Thin Oil Films on Water," Oil Pollution Res. News-
letter, Vol. V, Edison Water Quality Lab., EPA.
90. Walshe, B. M., "The Feeding Habits of Certain Chironomid Larvae,"
Free. Zool. Soc. , London, Vol. 121, pp 63-79 (1951).
91. Warren, C. E.-, Biology and Water Pollution Control, W. B. Saunder
Phila. pp 34, 289 (1971).
92. Welch, p. S. , Limnological Methods, Phila. p. 381 (1948).
93. Wilhm, J. L. , "Range of Diversity Index in Benthic Macroinverte-
brate Populations," JWPCF, 52_, 5, R221 (1970).
94. Wood, E. D., Armstrong, F. A. J., and Richards, F. A., "Deter-
mination of Nitrate in Sea Water by Cadmium-Copper Reduction to
Nitrite," J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. (U.K.), 47_, 23-31 (1962).
95. Zobell, C. E. , "The Occurrence, Effects and Fate of Oil Polluting
the Sea," Int. J. Air Wat. Poll. , 7, 173-198 (1963).
279
-------
SECTION XVI - APPENDICES
Computer Program for Calculating Maximum Specific
Growth Rate for Algae
Computer Output for Daily Absorbance Readings and
Maximum Growth Rate for Algae
Page No.
281
283
280
-------
c~
C
r.
c
c
c
c
c
_.. '.
* •
*
»
*
»
*
'-'...-
RENSSELAER POLYTECHNIC
OIO-ENV 1 AONMENIAl.
MAXIMUM SPECIFIC
BOTTLE IES), CPA
1NSTI
ENGINEER1N
GROWTH
19 1 1
KATE
TUTE.
G 0 1 v/ 1
TROY.N.Y.
SI ON
OKTERHVM ICN
*
*
*
*
*
*
i) MEN SUN UAYl i ,251 ,ABSC , !CA OA=OA+OK( i I
2h 5T CONTINUE
28
2'i UJ 70 IsltNCLKtfE
31
32 7j
3» SC»S vKTl AJSUM ,
3<> WRITE! 10,HC I HUE
35 Oj FOR^AK lMi//
-------
HRITE(I). ICHKMEI I . J) , I -- 1 .NCURVH ) ,MAY( 1, J) ,( ABSORB) J • J > . I "I.NCURV
IE )
FORtAll 64X, I 3F I J. 3) /?<•* .F3.0, IF11.3.2F1 3.311
GU TO 95
MRITE( 13.91 M-ttTEl I ,J> .1 =1 tNCURVE) .DAYI l.J) .(ABSORB (I , J 1 , 1« 1, NCURV
IE)
f-ORHATI64X,(2F13.3>/24X,F3.0.(FU.3,F13.3)l
&(K4 TEt I , Jl . 1 =1 ,i\CURVE I .OftVI 1 , J) ,( ABSORB 1 1 . J ) ,1-1, NCURV
lt> " ... . . .
HQR1AT(f>4X,( hl3.3)/24X,F2.0.(FL1.3l)
GU rn vs
CONTINUE
FORMATI//43* ,•.)»>• .IfcX.l 31 1.JI I
HKITEI IU, 1 1 . )( ",< ( I I , 1 = 1 .NCllRVt )
FURHATI /4JX , 'M4 >|MLM 3RCWTH K A1E • . I 3F 1 3. 3 »
rfKITFt I J, 1 2C) JlrA-4, il)
FUKMflTl /43X, 'H^ftN M4XIMM GROWTH R A r E • , F / . 3/ /43X , • ST AI\C AHC CEV
1IATIHN ',F1?.JI
5-* WHITE! HI, fc CO
6" bUO FO«MftJ( 1H1 I
61 STOP
62 END
K)
CD
K)
-------
f . . -. ..,
:
SAMPLES TITLE
DAY UCTfLE
1. C.C15
2. C.C30
j. c.:t2
"•• C.l
10. C.765
u. c.tes
12. C.ST>
1J. C.-i20
14. C.S40
15. C.415
RENSSELAEft PCLYTECHMC INSTITUTE
TRCY, _ N.Y .
DETERMINATION CF DAILY . AND fAXICUf SPECIFIC
GRUfcTH RATES CF ALGAL CULTURES 16CTTLE TEST)
OAC609f2I JK
1 BOTTLE 2 eCITLE 3 bCITLE 1 BUTTLE i BOTTLE 3
0.6S3
C.726
0.815
C.560
0.590
C.272
C.0/5
G.106
C.CS6
C.146
C.022
C.016
0.022
- . . -C.C27
DAY A
GHOhTH «ATF . C.815
^AXIKUh C!Th RATE 0.815
STANDARD DEVIAIICN C.OCC
-------
RENSSri«ER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
TRCY, >.Y.
DETERMINATION CF DAILY AND KAXIPUM SPECIFIC
i,.
1 1 .
1 ..' .
1 i.
I'..
l:i.
OUiLSUONLC
OUTTLt 1 HU1TLE 2 fiCTTLH
C.:2.) J.C15
C.04J 0.032
C.vJ/2 0.:57
C . 1 'i H 0.132
C.245 0.190
C.36G 1.335
C.'.SO D.'.2V.
C.t?'i 0.560
C.t9', O.dflO
C. !/>•> D.7«1t.
C.310 O.SOS
. c.^-.:o o.qoo
i-.tSC O.S15
C. .20 0.530
C . . " 0 0.910
DAY
PAX1PLM GRGW1H RATE
fFAN NAKlMUh GrtCViII-
S1AMD&R1I UfcMAliCN
3 OCTTLE 1
C.643
0.588
C.721
0.504
0.385
C.308
C.243
C.106
C.096
C.Q82
C.Jfcl
-C.022
0.044
-C.C22
4
C.721
RATE C.760
C.060
ILT tjKunir nnica
BOTTLE 2 BUTTLE 3
C.758
0.577
C.84C
0.364
0.567
0.238
0.276
C.1S4
C.156
0.130
-O.CC6
C.017
C.016
-0.022
4
0.840
-------
RIENSSELAER. PCLYTECI-MC JKST1TUTE
'ikLY, N.Y . . . .
(lElERMINATrON CF C&ILV AND PAX1KUP SPECIFIC
RATES CF ALGAL CULTURES IbCITLE TEST)
SAMPLES HUE 5AC60972UK
K>
00
Ln
ABSORBANCE
D^> BQIlLc 1 H01ILE 2
i. c.crsfi o.ooo
i. C.015 O.C15
1. C..27 0.0*3
-,. C.0t2 0.092
•3. C.09'j 0.16-i
6. C.117 0.3Sf
7. C.Lb'j O.r>12
fc. C.218 0.5->0
1. C.3C3 0.600
1... C.JHb O.b'.'J
11. C.'j30 0.7^-i
\t. c.ti.i o.en
UAY
BLIILL 3
0.01 '
0.02r.
0.07--'
J.12"
0.227
J. 1^2
O.'t'J >
0.5
-------
SAMPLES TITLE
O.iY ItUTfLt 1
i . C . •_ 1 1
;. . c . j 1 7
j. c.;:<:5
4 . C . '.'• 3 H
') . C. C(. i
1 - • (. • ' ' *•» 1
/ . C . 1 "i 0
f! . C . <- b 0
•> . C . J 7 0
1.. C.'.'JO
11. c.e'.ti
i.;. •:.t-7ii
IJ. C./2C
I'.. C. Mil
IT. C . /^^>
RENSSELOEB
Dt TERMINATION CF
GROWTH RATES CF
10AC6Q972IJK
PCLYTECKNIC INSTITUTE
TRCY, N.Y,
..
C«ILV AND HAXIHUM SPECIFIC
ALGAL CULTLRES (BOTTLE TEST)
BOTTLE 2 BCTTLF 3 BCTTLE 1
O.COfl
O.C12
0.024
.1 . C "> 0
O.GOT
0 . 1 ? 7
0.262
0.46]
O.b2'i
0.^90
0.710
0. 740
0.790
0.850
0.830
C.435
0.386
C.419
0.490
C.4Cb
C.478
C.511
C.392
0.261
C.275
0.038
C.072
C.027
C.C20
GHUk>Tb RATES
BOTTLE 2 BOTTLE 3
0.4C5
0.693
C.734
0.470
C. 765
C& j i
.Mel
C.563
0.122
C.I 17
0.185
0.041
C.OtS
0.073
Or^4
. U £ T
DAY H
GRCV.TH PATC C.511
XlPUf CRChTf- RATE C.638
STANDARD DEVIATION C.127
6
0.765
-------
RESSS1-LA.ER PCLYTcChNIC 1NSTIIUTE
TROY, .N.Y.
OElERf1NATICN CF DAILY AND fAXlfdf SPECIFIC
jKUvfH RATES o ALGAL CULTLKES IBCTTLE TEST)
TITLE
20AC609721JK
ro
CD
0:*>
i •
t. •
j •
H .
'j.
0.
1 ,
c .
•1 .
1 j.
11.
If.
13.
I'..
!•>.
BOTlLt 1
"\
V, •
C.
c .
c.
c.
0.
0 .
c.
c.
c.
c.
c.
c .
c.
c .
j02
CC3
cr<.
_ct>
CC6
i.CH
•.j I 0
>. I1)
L20
027
C6?
Jtb
120
2C5
2tS
-- ANMJ
B01
j.
0.
0.
0.
0.
3.
J.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
DAY
MAX1I"
KU«Nl.t
TLE 2 6CTTL£ 3
(102
C03
C'J1)
COd
C13
C12
Cld
032
C*.?
062
C90
C85
12">
175
21C
LP GRCV«TH RATC
LO 1
BLTTLE 1
C
C
c
c
c
c
c
0
c
c
c
c
c
c
0
.AC5
.26H
,2e 3
.1«2
,2t8
.223
.
-------
&
A
£
.%V
r ' i'«
RtNSSF.HER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
TRCY, N.Y.
DETERMINATION CF CAILY AND KAXIfUM SPECIFIC
R^rHS CF ALGAL CULTUPES IBCTTLE TEST)
. ..-.k. ...^fci-^
I
SAHPLtS TMLt
30AC60V72IJK
flO JU^O a^lk,C
D\Y KOTILC 1 H11TTLS ? EUITLE 3
i. C.CC2 O.CC2
C.^C3 O.C03
i . '.' . r. c 'i o . c o i
A. C.lCU O.CO?
j. O.J10 0.003
c. C.C2C O.CO.J
/. C'.uAO 0.002
^ . c.ye? O.C03
ro
g •!. :.iP2 o.co-.
1.. C.272 O.CO-J
11. C.^H5 O.OIS
\J. C.-J20 O.C10
i.'. c.:;:5o o.ci-)
1 '. . C.^60 O.C37
i*j. c.bHn o.c?'.
if;. :'.6<>!' O.KO
17. C.fc')J 0.263
1 " . C . o 7 'j 0 . <• 2 1)
H»Y
^ftHlFL" CKChlH RML
BCTILE
C.A05
C.511
C.
-------
••>r
ro
CD
ID
C.J52
RENSSE'LAEP PCLYTEChNIC INSTITUTE
TRCY, N,.Y,
OE1ERMNATICN CF DAILY AND MxiPUf SPECIFIC
GKGV.TH RATES CF ALGAL CULTURES (BUTTLE TtST)
SAMPLES TIILE 6
DAY OOTTLb 1
1. C.CC9
2. c.wCy
3. C.C10
4. C.013
•i . C . C 1 0
ft, C. 2lb
/ . C . vJ 1 0
b . e . ; 1 0
s. C.C2C
1 . . C.G41
11. C.CS5
U. C.112
13. C.2l?t)
1-i. C.'.C5
15. C.5CO
DAC60972I JK
- ABSORHANCE —
OOTTLE 2
O.CO'.
0.003
O.C05
O.C10
O.Old
0.035
0.075
0.165
0.305
0.^2J
0.^60
O.'.'tO
0.585
0.660
0. 710
DAY
...-•utu rar
CAILY GRQWTl- RATES
BCTTLf 3 BCTtLE 1 BUTILE 2
0.003
C.OCO -0.28B
0.002
0.1C5 0.511
3.00<.
C.262 C.fc-;3
C.OOtJ
-C.262 0.5e«
O.OOH
C.
-------
POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
TrtCY, N.Y.
', V'l -
1 I IU
OF IfKMIN4TIGN CF DAILY AND MAXIMUM SPECIFIC
GKDWTH MATfrS TF ALGAL CULTURES (BOTTLE TEST)
i JK
a r j ur h A^I. L UWILT OKUHIH UMI
,,AY ".nrL: i Ri.Tur 2 PLTTLC 3 BLTTLE i SOTTLE 2
1. -.113 J.,M-> 0.17?
C.214 0.274
;:. L.I'. -'.30-. 1.217
C.700 0.5S5
! . 'l.^H< ;.i.r>5 1 ;i.36 *
0.362 0.344
'.1' -. -.•. /ri > J.b,1
C. t'j9 0.187
•, . , . -jp-. '!.•;<.) 0.6s
0.244 0.130
t- . •./••• 1 1.07' .! . 7 » ••
r.l.i-i 0.055
7 . . ' • I . 1 3 ' .' . tH '
•.'.(14'j J.068
> ".-)')! 1 . <"* 1 "1 0 . *"> '
C.171 0.024
C.'149 0.047
i ?. 1 . ; /.' I . i''1 ' 1 .05
C. i28 O.C08
11. 1 . 1,' .' 1 ..)! 1 1 . Jb •
O.J27 O.COO
j : . i . i •-. : i . u M i.iO'
C.;i2h O."04
n . ; . ; . i . u ^ 1.12'
O.il34 O.CC4
1^. !.,.••• 1 . J.? ' 1.15i
C.017 O.J08
1 .. 1 . J.1" I . 33'i 1.18 •
C.016 0.015
: f . l..> !..?'.> 1 . 2 •> '•
C.J08 O.OC7
17. 1 .. T '• 1.36.1 1.25:
C.016 0.007
I . 1.27.' 1 . 3 7 .1 1 . ? b •>
I'Av 3 3
KAXlftiK GRCV.TH RATF O.7CO 0.5S5
i c o
HOTTLc 3
0.232
0.515
3.359
3.238
0.1HO
0. 1 19
3.C76
C.C26
O.C64
C . C ?. 8
O.C18
C.C18
O.C26
O.C26
O.C1 7
O.C41
O.C24
3
0.515
M\
-------
il ANIIM ) I. VJATICS
•J.O/ft
R?NSSELAEH POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
T R CY , N . Y .
ni-KRKtNATION OF DAILY AND HAXIKUK SPECIFIC
GM1V.TH kAltS CH ALGAL CULTUPES (BOTTLE USD
l JK
Al',SGk(lA'«CE nrrnc 1
ULTTLS 1 i-caiLF 2 UCULI 3 BCTTLE 1
1. ''..::•8
-2- S. 1.^,1 l-l^ 0.031
I0* n 1
IS-g.!. S. 1.."'.^ '•"'-" G.J15
ro |cr 1
£ "si i». l"»1-' l"'b> o.aoo
1 n a 1
I u. i.uo i. ••?'•' C>3CO
Ufel 12. I- " ' I C.-.U l'?H ' C.JO'.
!<•. 1.12' 1.3'' C.508
1-i. l.iU 1'"J C.007
1:,. I- i '•'••' 1'3''" C.J07
17. l.l.'O l.lt>J C.015
IS. Li''-' U'60
GAILY GRUWfH RATtb
BOTUE 2 bilfTLE 3
0.223
0.68B
0.3bO
O.ldl
0.127
0.073
O.C'32
O.C08
O.'3'i-)
0.008
O.CQO
O.C08
Q.D16
O.Olb
O.Ol'i
O.C07
O.CC7
il.1V
3
,A,,,LM CKOWth */UE 0.67-*
M.rft.xi C.«XlK,nf GKCWTH KATE O.ooJ
U-7VIAI1CN
0.688
-------
IUNSSFLAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
TRCY, N.Y.
!U~ TERMINATION CF DAILY AND MAXIMUK SPECIFIC
'HATES CF ALGAL. CULTURES (BOTTLE TEST)
TlFLt
JK
to
07
HAY
1 .
2.
1.
'* .
s .
1' .
1 .
f .
•>.
1 .'.
1 1.
12.
1 i.
I'..
I'j.
1 1 .
1 /.
1".
no^u 3 •> 0 . <• 1 2
0.34S
'. i'1:i J.-^^T
C.216
• '. MS.' 0.6h1
C.127
1. if-.-, .). 7?,.-.
C. I7S
. . ^ 1 •. r'> )
J.028
1 . v. / • j . J 3 I
0.019
i . .'II' J. ^a'.
C.071
1. 1 '<> 1 .'-J i
C.009
1. 1 p.i' i .:& i
C.017
1 ••-'-' 1.090
0.008
1 .,.'1 '• 1 . IT'
C.0i)8
i . i. 2 :• i.ii)
0.916
1. 2 4 1'1 l.Ui
0.008
1. -.".>•' 1.17-
C.024
l.^e:; 1.205
0.016
i. jrn i .2«.->
I'I4V . _.. . 3
M.IXIPLM GROWTH RATe 0.532
L T IjKUHin KOIti
BOTTLE 2 BOTTLE 3
0.1S3
0.520
0.2S8
0.173
0.141
0.112
O.OS7
0.02A
0.0 1J
0.029
0.028
O.OC9
O.OC9
0.027
0.026
0.025
0.033
3
• 0.520
l-V 1'; M.\»|Kl,f C.RCWIH rtftFE 0.526
-------
C.QJ6
l'.fcNSS?LAEP PCI.YTECHNIC INSTITUTE
TRfY, N.Y.
DC TERMINATION CF DAILY AND HAXIMLIM SPECIFIC
•.
3. ^.493 u.303 ?
't . '. . ci i_ ^ . '"2'> ''
5. :.7'o .1.64'' 0
6. ;..-!iO .-1.745 0
7. ' . <4'' -j..il "' •)
rf. '•.•yH> 0.680 J
4 . 1 . . ? •'. 0 . 3 2 •"' -1
10. 1.71 "i. >r> )
1 I . 1..' JO 1 .r? > 0
12. 1.1'' 1.04'1 0
11. 1 . UVi 1 ."S ' 1
14. 1.130 1.C.7J 1
IS. 1.1 ft? 1.110 1
H.. 1.2"' 1.14J I
17. 1.210 1.160 1
IS. 1.^6;, 1.18.1 I
0 A Y
MAXIMUM GROk,TH
.182
.217
..33H
.44 •
.55"
.6-jH
. 7 1 •'•
.81"
.83!'.
. ') 1 "
.945
.^75
.Ol'i
,05'J '
.08')
.12^
. ivi"
.16.-'
KATE
BCTTLE I
C
0
0
C
0
u
-
0
C
0
C
Q
0
0
0
_ C
0
0
.289
.411
.276
. 150
.153
.066
.J52
.030
.o4d
..U4
.009
.018
.009
.026
.034
.025
.u24
3.
.411
IU T VjnUM 1 T1 t\ A
BOTTLE 2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
.275
.375
.2SO
. 198
.152
.064
,0c3
.044
.053
.050
.019
.010
.014
.037
.027
.017
.017
3
. 375
ei --
BUT
0.
0.
'3.
0.
0.
j .
0.
0.
0.
0.
G.
"J.
(j.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
TLE 3
176
443
264
273
17<)
Ill4
104
C30
C75
C44
C31
r35
C 39
C28
C3b
C18
C17
3
443
MEAN MAXIMUM CSChTh rtATE 0.410
STANDARD OCVIATICN Q.128
-------
".^NSSELAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
TRfV, N.V.
ro
ID
11. . nil'
OElE^MINATION CF DAILY AND MAXIMUM SPECIFIC
^J.TH RATES... CF ALGAL CULTURES (BCT1LE TEST)
JI JK
JA V
1 .
^
3.
.
o .
/ .
i . .
1 1 .
i ; .
i * .
i •• .
i ^.
i c. .
17.
l».
it U ILL 1 HOTU: 2 RCTTLf 3 BCTTLE
0 . i / , -i . 1 '• J j . 2 1 *i
C.158
C.427
"' . I ~. u> 3 . 4 19 u . 3 b '
C.246
'•. •, ;.' j.t. j •• •:•.'. o '
C.248
1 . '> r o 3 . a i ^ 0.561''
C.215
^. »? '.i 0. ')ti ' I .655
C. 143
'./I'. 1 . '<. •> .«. /.!'.•
0.037
0.080
0.096
..it- l.^T' .1.91"'
C.O47
'.'.if': I . 2 1 •> 0.94 ^
C.'J35
1 . , 1 C' 1 . ? 1 •• •) . 9 7 5
C.J39
i . . 'J • 1 . . V ' 1 . .U
C . 0 3 7
1 . • > . 1.23 ' 1. •>'.'>
0.027
1 . 12'.' I .24 I 1 .06"
0.026
i.i'. i .?& • i. :)'»:•
... C.017
1. 1 r.i 1 .28 .1 1.1 D'!
0.017
1.UO 1.3;Vj 1,12.^
:)AY . . 3 . .
h».\*lMLM GROWTH RAIF 0.427
• U»IL T OKUH i n
I BOTTLE
0.365
O.tfc3
0.4CH
. 0.251
0.175
0.075
0.047
0.027
0.0t9
O.COH
o.cco
O.C08
o.coa
O.C08
0.016
0.016
0.016
3
• 0.663
R« 1 Cl
2 BUTTLE 3
0.135
0.381
0.245
0.197
0.157
0.115
0. 116
O.C42
O.C45
3.043
O.C37
O.C35
3.C29
O.C19
O.C28
O.C09
O.G18
3
0.381
'i ''%«!»«)»' GkCUTH KATE 0.49O
nliMMi IK. vltMC" 0.123
-------
I Atj(.,_ARii HE VI A I IOJ
. »•!• ..1 * • •»-• » »-••
«cf4SStl«ER POLYTECHNIC IKSTIIUTE
TKCV, N.Y.
f
PF.1ERM1NAT1UN CF DAILY AND MAXIMUK SPECIFIC
RATES CF A.LGAL CULTURES (BUTTLE JEST!
TIILi
JK
10
Ul
A 11 c n n a A M re — — — — HAllVftfilyThHA
AY oOTILe 1 BUTTLE 2 6QTTLF. 3 BCTTLE I BOTTLE 2
\. J.IW J.n-> ^-1»'
C.322 O.<,07
/. C.196 0.293 0.26C>
0.
C.19A 0.151
6. '.•.;.:". :3.93'i 0.91"
: . 1 1 3 0.083
i . ""./:> i . M ' vj.s-j »
C.Urt T.O'id
rt. 1. Vfl.i 1. J7 i 1. 16r
C.U3R 0.2C9
•j. C.i.ll I. C»^ 1.081
r...*tb O.J'i',
i j. •: .< ni i . K > i.i'.';
0.3-)6 0.017
11. • . JlT 1.16 ! 1.16-^
0.032 0.017
12. '.-;<.•> 1.181 1.18'>
O.C26 0.017
11. i. (7.i 1 .2'.)'' 1.21 '
C.030 O.OCH
it. l..:»i 1.210 1.23.1
0.039 0.02
-------
fO
ID
RENS.&EUUERI _?OLYTECHHIC INSTITUTE
TROY,' N.I
* . ' • '
*'•' .'; ' •
.•• -'.' -. ; '; ••
••'\^B"^!;i^^SB
DETERMINATION OF DAILY AND MAXIMUM SPECIFIC SB*'
GROWTH RATES CF ALGAL CULTURES (BOTTLE TEST) nf» .
SAMPLES
DAY
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
tJr
I^V
f\
'"*. "•
*
, :
. n
'
"'
„. . ... -f.
'•*'
-
"J:J
. • i _i 1H|
-------
RENSSEtAER
"
TROY. N.Y.
DETERMINATION OF OftTCv "" *NO" MAX IMUH SPECIFIC
GROkTH RATES OF ALGAL CULTURES IBOTUE TEST)
SAMPLES TITLE OS051572IJK
DAY
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
a.
9.
10.
to
10
-J 11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
ia.
BOTTLE 1
C.060
0.115
0.265
0.440
C.530
0.540
0.640
0.660
0. 725
C.725
0.805
0.835
O.B65
O.H95
C.925
0.955
0.970
C.9B5
- ABSORBANCI
BOTTLE 2
0.075
0.205
0.645
0.970
1.120
1.210
1.280
1.320
1.290
1.350
1.360
1.370
1.390
1.400
1.410
1.420
1.440
1.460
DAY
MAXIPCM
E -----------
BCTTLE 3
0.090
0,240
0.720
0.990
1.070
1.140
1.190
1.240
1.240
1.270
1.280
1.290
1.300
1.310
1.310
1.320
1.350
1.370
GROWTH RATE
MEAN HAXIKUP GROWTH
STANDARD
DEVI AT I CM
CAI
BCTTLE 1
0.651
0.835
0,507
0.186
0.107
0.081
0.031
0.094
0.000
0.105
0.037
0.035
0.034
0.033
0.032
0.016
0.015
3
0.835
RATE 1.027
0.137
[LY GROWTH RA1
BOTTLE 2
1.0C6
1.146
o.4oa
0.144
0.077
0.056
0.031
-0.023
0.045
O.C07
0.007
0.014
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.014
0.014
3
1.146
[ES
BOTTLE 3
O.SB1
1.094
0.318
0.078
O.C63
0.043
O.C41
O.COO
O.C24
o.coa
O.C08
O.C08
O.C08
0.000
O.C08
0.022
O.C15
3
1.099
-------
RENSSELAER
' ""
POLYTECHNIC
"TRO^T7 N.Vv-9
NSTITUTE
DETERMINATION CF DAILY AND MAXIMUM SPECIFIC vg|:,
GROWTH RATES CF ALGAL CULTURES (BOTTLE TESTJ **•"
SAMPLtS TITLE 1
DAY
l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
13.
ro
£ 11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
la.
BOTTLE 1
C.140
0.215
C.310
0.520
0.780
l.COO
1.150
1.230
1.290
1.290
1.310
1.330
1.350
1.370
1.380
1. 390
1.4CO
1.420
IS051572IJK
BOTTLE 2
0.085
0.195
0.650
0.970
1.103
1.180
1.220
1.240
1.280
1.280
1.290
1.300
1.320
1.340
1.350
1.350
1.350
1.360
DAY
MAXIHCM GROWTH
MEAN MAXIMUM
BOTTLE 3
0.145
0.255 . _ .
0.515
0.855
1.090
1.270
1.353
1.370
1.350
1.400
1.410
1.420
1.430
1.440
1.443
1.440
1.450
1.460
RATE
GRCtaTH RATE
BCTTLE
0.429
0.366
0.517
0.405
0.248
0.140
0.067
0.048
0.000
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.014
4
0.517
0.808
1 BOTTLE
0.830
1.204
0,400
0.126
0.070
0.033
0.016
0.032
0.000
0.008
0.008
0.015
0.015
0.007
0.000
0.000
0.007
3
1.204
. . - - ..... V'
2 BOTTLE 3
0.565
6.703 '*'
. -•
0.507 _ . .. . .
1 '-•
0.243
,.
0.153
0.061 . __ _"•••
O.C15
-O.C15
O.C36 _ . ...
O.C07
'
O.C07
O.C07
O.C07
O.COO
O.COO
f
0.007
O.C07
"
3
0.703 :
-------
10
ID
CD
H_ POLYTECHNIC JMSTITUTE
TROVt .,N.\
. I1.
•*'• .•'•"
r
DETERMINATION OF DAILY AM) MAXIMUM SPECIFIC
GROWTH RATES CF ALGAL CULTUDES (BOTTLE TEST)
SAMPLES TITLE 5S051572IJK
DAY
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
a.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
BOTTLE 1
0.080
0.200
0.6CO
0.840
0.985
1.140
1.180
1.2CO
1.240
1.250
1.260
1.270
1.290
1.310
1.310
1.3CO
1.310
1. 320
BOTTLE 2 BOTTLE 3
0.105
0.280
0.660
0.940
1.060
1.140
1.203
1.220
1.250
1.260
1.270
1.290
1.300
1.320
1.320
1.310
1.330
1.340
DAY
MAXIMUM
0.095 ""
0,220
0.555
0.820
0.990
1.120
1.163
1.210
1.250
1.260
1.280
1.290
1.310
1.330
1.330
1.310"
1.330
1.350
GROWTH RATE
BCTTte I BOTTLE 2 BOTUE 3
— —
0.916
1.099
.0_.J36
0.159
0.146
0.034
0.017
0.033
0,008
0.008
6.008
0,016
0.015
_
0.000
-O.ooa
o.ooa
o.ooa
3
1.099
0.981
0.857
0.354
0.120
0.013
0.051
0.017
0.024
0.008
0.008
0.016
o.ooa
0.015
0.000
-0.008
0.015
0.007
2
0.961
0.640
0.925
0.390
0.188
0.123
O.C35
O.C42
O.C33
O.C08
0.016
O.C08
O.C15
O.C15
O.COO
-O.C15
O.C15
O.C15
3
O.S25
. y
HEAN MAXIMUM GRCWTh
STANDARD DEVIATION
O.OT2
-------
RENSSELAER PQLV££CHNI£ ULSTJTUTE
TROV, N.V.
DETERMINATION OF DAILY «M) MAXIMUM SPECIFIC
GROkTH RATES CF ALGAL CULTURES (BOTTLE TEST)
SAMPLES TITLE ioso5i572UK
DAY
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
<>.
10.
11.
12.
1 J.
14.
15.
16.
1 t.
18.
BOTTLE I
G.050
C.143
C.430
C.652
C.810
C.975
1.070
1.090
1.150
1. 170
1.190
1.210
1.240
1.260
1.260
1.240
1.270
1.290
BOTTLE 2 BOTTLE 3
0.050
0.098
0.260
0.500
0.730
0.940
1.130
1.200
1.270
1.300
1.320
1.330
1.350
1.370
1.370
1.360
1 .390
1.420
DAY
MAXI PLM
O.OBO
3.215
0.720
1.030
1.150
1.230
1.270
1.270
1.290
1.320
1.330
1.350
1.360
1.370
1.350
1.340
1.380
1.410
GROkTH RATE
•
------- DAILY GROWTH RATES -------
BCTTLE I BOTTLE 2 BOTTLE 3
— . .
1.051
1.101
0.416
0.241
0.161
0.093
0.019
0.054
0.017
0.017
C.017
0.024
0.016
0.000
-C.016
0.024
C.016
3
1.101
0.673
0.976
0.654
0.378
0.253
0.184
0.060
0.057
0.023
0.015
0.008
O."15
0.015
0.000
-0.007
0.022
0.021
3
0.976
O.S89
1.209
0.358
0.110
O.C67
O.C32
O.COO
0.016
O.C23
O.C08
O.C15
O.C07
O.C07
-O.C15
-O.C07
O.C29
O.C22
3
1.209
MEAN MAXIMUM GRCWTH RATE 1.095
STANDARD DEVIATION 0.095
-------
pniYTfCHNIC INSTITUTE, „
DETERMINATION CF DAILY AND MAXIMUM SPECIFIC
GROfcTH RATES CF ALGAL CULTURES (BOTTLE TESTI
SAMPLES TITLE 20SCM572IJK
DAY
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
u>
o 11.
H
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
IB.
BOTTLE 1
0. ICO
0.175
0.360
0.700
0.990
1.210
1.150
1.150
1.180
1.210
1.220
1.220
1.230
1.240
1.240
1.230
1.250
1.270
- ABSORBANCE
BOTTLE 2 BOTTLE 3
0.140
0.238
0.675
0.945
1.170
1.330
1.290
1.290
1.343
1.350
1.360
1.370
1.380
1.390
1.380
1.370
1.390
1.420
DAY
MAXIMLM
0.095
0,160
0.540
0.920
1.230
1.450
1.340
1.330
1.340
1.350
1.360
1.370
1.380
1.39.0
1.380
1.370
1.390
1.450
GROWTH RATE
MEAN MAXIMUP GROWTH
STANDARD
DEVIATION
— — DAILY GROWTH RATES
BCTTLE 1
0.560
0.721
Q.665
G.347
0.201
-0.051
0.000
0.026
0,025
0.008
0.000
0.008
0.008
0.000
-C.008
0.016
0.016
»
j
0.721
RATE ._0.993
0.205
BOTTLE 2
0.531
1.042
0.336
0.214
0.128
-0.031
0.000
0.038
O.C07
0.007
0.007
0,007
0.007
-0.007
-0.007
0.014
0.021
3
1.042
BOTTLE 3
0.521
1.216
0.533
0.290
0.165
-0.079
-0.007
O.C07
O.C07
O.C07
O.C07
O.C07
O.C07
-O.C07
-O.C07
O.C14
O.C42
3
1.216
-------
o
K>
P*"1 ^n<''-
TRQV, N
•*•" ^
,>
• • . : • ; •••* •'i-\&*F*\
DETERMINATION CF DAILY AND MAXIMUM SPECIFIC '
GROWTH RATES CF ALGAL CULTURES (BOTTLE TEST)
SAMPLES TITLE 35SC51572IJK
DAY
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
S.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
IH.
BOTTLE I
0.030
0.065
0.250
0.420
0.795
1.190
1.2CO
1.230
1.270
1.3CO
1.310
1.320
1.330
1.340
1.320
1.320
1.360
1.4CO
BUTTLE 2 BOTTLE 3
0.067 0.030
0.142
0.450
0.720
0.920
1.130
1.120
1.150
1.270
1.220
1.230
1.250
1.270
1.299
1.270
1.270
1.290
1.320
DAY
MAXI PIM
0.090
0.315
0.530
0.805
1.090
0.940
0.990
1.070
1.090
1.110
1.130
1.150
1.160
1.160
1.163
1.200
1.210
GROWTH RATE
——— ———— n A 1 1 v ronuTi-i D & r F < ———————
— — — — — — — UHII.T uKUM in l\H 1 C 9 — — —— — ——
BCTTLE 1 BOTTLE 2 BOTTLE 3
0.773
1.347
0.732
0.425
0.403
C.008
0.025
0.032
0.023
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.007
-0.015
0.000
0.030
0.029
3
1.347
0.751
1.153
0.470
0.245
0.2C6
-0.009
0.026
O.OS9
-0.040
0.008
0.016
0.016
0.016
-0.016
0.000
0.016
0.023
3
1.153
1.099
s
1.253
0.520
0.418
0.303
-0.148
O.C52
0.078
O.C19 .
O.C18
O.C18
0.018
O.C09
0.000
o.coo
O.C34
O.C08
3
1.253
KEAN MAXIHUP GRCHTH RATE 1.251
STANDARD DEVIAUCN 0.079
- : v
-------
SENSSELAER POLYTECMNIC
...
. . . -
SAMPLES
DAV
I. %"'
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
a.
9.
10.
8 "•
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
"
MILE
•PULE
'0.012
0.022
0.040
C.065
0.130
C.300
0.478
C.725
1.000
1.120
1.160
1.170
1.190
1.200
1.200
1.210
1.220
1.230
DETERMINATION OF DAILY
GROWTH RATES CF ALGAL
120S051572IJK
1 BOTTLE 2 BOTTLE 3
0.022
0.022
0.035
0.065
0.110
0.205
0.210
0.395
O.B15
1.030
1.120
1.140
1.150
1.170
1.200
1.240
1.220
1.210
DAV
MAXIMUM GROWTH RATE
AND MAXIMUM SPECIFIC
CULTURES (BOTTLE
BCTTLE 1
. . . ....
0.606
0.598
0.486
0.693
O.B36
0,466
0.417
0.322
0.113
0.035
0.009
0.017
0.008
0.000
0*008
0.008
0.008
6
0.836
TEST)
f~ DDL! Y u DATCC
BOTTLE 2 BOITLE 3
0.000
0.464
0.619
0.526
0.623
0.024
0.632
0.724
0.234
0.084
0.018
O.OC9
0.017
0.025
0.033
-0.016
-0.008
9
0.724
MEAN MAXIMUM GKCHTH RATE 0,160
STANDARD DEVIATION 0.056
-------
IDENTIFICATION SOURCES
a. Bell, R.T. Handbook of Malacostraca of Vermont and Neighboring Regions ,
Univ. of Vt., Burlington (1971).
b. Edmundson, W.T. (W.T.) Freshwater Biology, 2nd Ed., John Wiley and
Sons Inc., NYC (1965~T
c. Fassett, iiorman C. A Manual of Aquatic Plants, Univ. of ".vise. Press,
Madison (1969).
a. Johannsen, Gskar, Aquatic Diptera, Entomological Reprint Spec., last
Lansing, (1969).
e. Mason, William T.. Jr. An Introduction to the Identification of
Chironomid Larvae, FWPCA, Cinn. (1968).
f. Needham, James G., Jay R. Traver and Yin Chi Hsu, "The Biology of
Mayflies , Comstock Pub. Ithaca, (1935).
g. Needham, J.G. and P.R. Needham, A Guide to the Study of Fresh Water
Biology, Holden Day, San Fran. (1962).
h. Pennak, R.W. Freshwater Invertebrates of the United States. Ronald
Press. NYC (1953).
i. Sublette, J.E. and Mary S. Sublette, "Chironomidae" from A Catalog
of Aquatic Diptera of America North Of Mexico Agric. Handbook
No. 76 (1965).
\
I
30U
------- |