Advertisement

Analysis of the Distribution of Suspended Particulate Matter, Bacteria, Chlorophyll a and PO4 in the Upper St. Lawrence Estuary, Using a Two-Dimensional Box Model

  • Jean Painchaud
  • Denis Lefaivre
  • Gilles-H. Tremblay
  • Jean-Claude Therriault
Conference paper
Part of the Coastal and Estuarine Studies book series (COASTAL, volume 36)

Abstract

A box model was used to study the importance of biogeochemical vs physical processes on suspended particulate matter (SPM), attached and free bacteria, chlorophyll a and dissolved PO4 in the Upper St. Lawrence Estuary (USLE), Flux calculation revealed that SPM distribution was in a steady state and that the dynamics of attached bacteria were closely related to that of SPM. The estuary was a sink for free bacteria and chl a, whereas PO4 was essentially controlled by estuarine hydrodynamics. Turn-over time values showed that the upstream portion of the estuary was the most biogeochemically active.

Keywords

Suspend Particulate Matter Water Residence Time Turbidity Maximum Attached Bacterium Lawrence Estuary 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cloem JE (1987) Turbidity as a control on phytoplankton biomass and productivity in estuaries. Continent Shelf Res 7:1367–1381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Hobbie JE, Daley RJ, Jasper S (1977) Use of Nuclepore filters for counting bacteria by epifluorescence microscopy. Appl environ Microbiol 33:1225–1228PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Jackson RH, Williams PJleB, Joint IR (1987) Freshwater phytoplankton in the low salinity region of the River Tamar estuary. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 25:299–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Lucotte M, d’Anglejan B (1986) Seasonal control of the Saint-Lawrence maximum turbidity zone by tidal-flat sedimentation. Estuaries 9:84–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lucotte M, d’Anglejan B (1988) Seasonal changes in the phosphorus-iron geochemistry of the St. Lawrence Estuary. J Coast Res 4:339–349Google Scholar
  6. Officer CB (1980) Box models revisited. In: Estuarine and wetland processes with emphasis on modelling, p.65. Plenum New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Painchaud J, Lefaivre D, Therriault J-C (1987) Box model analysis of bacterial fluxes in the St.Lawrence Estuary. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 41:241–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Painchaud J, Therriault (in prep) Uncoupling between bacteria and phytoplankton in the Upper St. Lawrence Estuary: dominance of bacterial biomassGoogle Scholar
  9. Parsons TR, Maita Y, Lalli CM (1984) A manual of chemical and biological methods for seawater analysis, 1st edn. Pergamon, Oxford New York TorontoGoogle Scholar
  10. Serodes J-B, Troude J-P (1984) Sedimentation cycle of a freshwater tidal flat in the St. Lawrence Estuary. Estuaries 7:119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Silverberg N, Sundby B (1979) Observations in the turbidity maximum of the St.Lawrence Estuary. Can J Earth Sci 16:939–950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Wright RT, Coffin RB (1984) Measuring microzooplankton grazing on planktonic marine bacteria by its impact on bacterial production. Microb Ecol 10:137–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean Painchaud
    • 1
  • Denis Lefaivre
    • 1
  • Gilles-H. Tremblay
    • 1
  • Jean-Claude Therriault
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut Maurice-LamontagneMinistère des Pêches et des OcéansMont-JoliCanada

Personalised recommendations