Seasonal, Interannual, and Longitudinal Patterns in Estuarine Metabolism Derived from Diel Oxygen Data Using Multiple Computational Approaches
Twenty-three station-years of diel oxygen data for the James River Estuary were analyzed to characterize longitudinal, seasonal, and interannual patterns of gross primary production (GPP) and ecosystem respiration (ER). We compared two commonly used methods for deriving metabolism (bookkeeping and Bayesian) to determine whether the observed patterns were robust with respect to computational methodology. The two methods revealed similar longitudinal patterns of increasing GPP and ER, and decreasing net ecosystem metabolism (NEM), with increasing salinity. Seasonal patterns in GPP and ER tracked water temperature and solar radiation, except during high discharge events when metabolism declined by 40%. The bookkeeping method yielded higher estimates of GPP and ER in the higher end of the range, and smaller estimates in the low end of the range, thereby accentuating seasonal and longitudinal differences. Inferences regarding net autotrophy and heterotrophy were robust, as both methods yielded positive estimates of NEM at the chlorophyll maximum (tidal fresh segment) and negative values for the saline portion of the estuary. Inferences regarding the relative importance of allochthonous inputs (based on inferred ER at GPP = 0) differed between the two methods. Values derived by the bookkeeping method indicated that respiration was largely supported by autochthonous production, whereas the Bayesian results indicated that autochthonous and allochthonous inputs were equally important. Overall, our findings show that methodological differences were small in the context of longitudinal, seasonal, and interannual variation but that the bookkeeping method yielded a wider range of values for GPP and ER relative to the Bayesian estimates.
KeywordsProduction Respiration Metabolism Bayesian Chesapeake Bay
We are grateful to our colleagues at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science for making the longitudinal diel oxygen dataset available via their VECOS website and to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Piedmont and Tidewater Offices for collecting longitudinal water quality data. We thank Alison Appling (USGS) for her assistance with the Bayesian modeling and Jian Shen (VIMS) for providing model output on atmospheric exchange coefficients for the James. Ken Moore and Robert Orth (VIMS) provided data and helpful discussions on SAV. Three anonymous reviewers provided valuable comments. This paper is a contribution to the VCU Rice Rivers Center.
- Appling, A. P., R. O. Hall, M. Arroita, and C. B. Yackulic. 2017. streamMetabolizer: models for estimating aquatic photosynthesis and respiration. R package version 0.9.33. https://github.com/USGS-R/streamMetabolizer.
- Bott, T.L., D.S. Montgomery, J.D. Newbold, D.B. Arscott, C.L. Dow, A.K. Aufdenkampe, J.K. Jackson, and L.A. Kaplan. 2006. Ecosystem metabolism in streams of the Catskill Mountains (Delaware and Hudson River watersheds) and Lower Hudson Valley. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 25 (4): 1018–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Boynton, W., W. Kemp, and C. Keefe. 1982. Estuarine comparisons: a comparative analysis of nutrients and other factors influencing estuarine phytoplankton production. Estuarine comparisons. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
- Bricker, S., B. Longstaff, W. Dennison, A. Jones, K. Boicourt, C. Wicks, and J. Woerner. 2007. Effects of nutrient enrichment in the nation’s estuaries: a decade of change. Silver Spring: NOAA Coastal Ocean Program Decision Analysis (Series 26) National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science.Google Scholar
- Caffrey, J.M., M.C. Murrell, K.S. Amacker, J.W. Harper, S. Phipps, and M.S. Woodrey. 2014. Seasonal and inter-annual patterns in primary production, respiration, and net ecosystem metabolism in three estuaries in the northeast Gulf of Mexico. Estuaries and Coasts 37 (S1): 222–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Crosswell, J.R., M.S. Wetz, B. Hales, and H.W. Paerl. 2012. Air-water CO2 fluxes in the microtidal Neuse River Estuary, North Carolina. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans 117 (C8).Google Scholar
- Grace, M.R., D.P. Giling, S. Hladyz, V. Caron, R.M. Thompson, and R. Mac Nally. 2015. Fast processing of diel oxygen curves: Estimating stream metabolism with BASE (BAyesian Single-station estimation). Limnology and Oceanography: Methods 13 (3): 103–114.Google Scholar
- Herrmann, M., R. Najjar, W.M. Kemp, R.B. Alexander, E.W. Boyer, W.-J. Cai, P.C. Griffith, K.D. Kroeger, S.L. McCallister, and R.A. Smith. 2015. Net ecosystem production and organic carbon balance of U.S. East Coast estuaries: a synthesis approach. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 29 (1): 96–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Murrell, M.C., J.M. Caffrey, D.T. Marcovich, M.W. Beck, B.M. Jarvis, and J.D. Hagy. 2018. Seasonal oxygen dynamics in a warm temperate estuary: effects of hydrologic variability on measurements of primary production, respiration and net metabolism. Estuaries and Coasts 41 (3): 690–707.Google Scholar
- O’Connor, D., and W. Dobbins. 1958. Mechanism of reaeration in natural streams. Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers 123: 641–684.Google Scholar
- Paerl, H.W., K.L. Rossignol, S.N. Hall, B.L. Peierls, and M.S. Wetz. 2010. Phytoplankton community indicators of short-and long-term ecological change in the anthropogenically and climatically impacted Neuse River Estuary, North Carolina, USA. Estuaries and Coasts 33 (2): 485–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Raymond, P.A., C.J. Zappa, D. Butman, T.L. Bott, J. Potter, P. Mulholland, et al. 2012. Scaling the gas transfer velocity and hydraulic geometry in streams and small rivers. Limnology and Oceanography: Fluids and Environments 2: 41–53.Google Scholar
- Testa, J.M., W.M. Kemp, C.S. Hopkinson, and S.V. Smith. 2012. Ecosystem metabolism. In In estuarine ecology 381–416. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Thomann, R.V., and J.A. Mueller. 1987. Principles of surface water quality modeling and control. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
- Tranvik, L.J., J.A. Downing, J.B. Cotner, S.A. Loiselle, R.G. Striegl, T.J. Ballatore, P. Dillon, K. Finlay, K. Fortino, L.B. Knoll, P.L. Kortelainen, T. Kutser, S. Larsen, I. Laurion, D.M. Leech, S.L. McCallister, D.M. McKnight, J.M. Melack, E. Overholt, J.A. Porter, Y. Prairie, W.H. Renwick, F. Roland, B.S. Sherman, D.W. Schindler, S. Sobek, A. Tremblay, M.J. Vanni, A.M. Verschoor, E. von Wachenfeldt, G.A. Weyhenmeyer, et al. 2009. Lakes and reservoirs as regulators of carbon cycling and climate. Limnology and Oceanography 54 (6.2): 2298–2314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- USEPA and Region III Chesapeake Bay Program Office. 2005. Chesapeake Bay program analytical segmentation scheme: revisions, decisions and rationales 1983–2003, 2005 addendum. Rep. No. EPA 903-R-05-004, Monitoring and Analysis Subcommittee, and Tidal Monitoring and Analysis Workgroup, Annapolis, Md.Google Scholar