↓ Skip to main content

Tracking cyanobacteria blooms: Do different monitoring approaches tell the same story?

Overview of attention for article published in Science of the Total Environment, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
188 Mendeley
Title
Tracking cyanobacteria blooms: Do different monitoring approaches tell the same story?
Published in
Science of the Total Environment, October 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.023
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isabella Bertani, Cara E. Steger, Daniel R. Obenour, Gary L. Fahnenstiel, Thomas B. Bridgeman, Thomas H. Johengen, Michael J. Sayers, Robert A. Shuchman, Donald Scavia

Abstract

Cyanobacteria blooms are a major environmental issue worldwide. Our understanding of the biophysical processes driving cyanobacterial proliferation and the ability to develop predictive models that inform resource managers and policy makers rely upon the accurate characterization of bloom dynamics. Models quantifying relationships between bloom severity and environmental drivers are often calibrated to an individual set of bloom observations, and few studies have assessed whether differences among observing platforms could lead to contrasting results in terms of relevant bloom predictors and their estimated influence on bloom severity. The aim of this study was to assess the degree of coherence of different monitoring methods in (1) capturing short- and long-term cyanobacteria bloom dynamics and (2) identifying environmental drivers associated with bloom variability. Using western Lake Erie as a case study, we applied boosted regression tree (BRT) models to long-term time series of cyanobacteria bloom estimates from multiple in-situ and remote sensing approaches to quantify the relative influence of physico-chemical and meteorological drivers on bloom variability. Results of BRT models showed remarkable consistency with known ecological requirements of cyanobacteria (e.g., nutrient loading, water temperature, and tributary discharge). However, discrepancies in inter-annual and intra-seasonal bloom dynamics across monitoring approaches led to some inconsistencies in the relative importance, shape, and sign of the modeled relationships between select environmental drivers and bloom severity. This was especially true for variables characterized by high short-term variability, such as wind forcing. These discrepancies might have implications for our understanding of the role of different environmental drivers in regulating bloom dynamics, and subsequently for the development of models capable of informing management and decision making. Our results highlight the need to develop methods to integrate multiple data sources to better characterize bloom spatio-temporal variability and improve our ability to understand and predict cyanobacteria blooms.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 188 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 185 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 36 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 15%
Student > Master 24 13%
Student > Bachelor 17 9%
Other 10 5%
Other 28 15%
Unknown 45 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 65 35%
Engineering 23 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 2%
Other 17 9%
Unknown 57 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 October 2016.
All research outputs
#23,180,363
of 25,809,966 outputs
Outputs from Science of the Total Environment
#26,886
of 30,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,335
of 328,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science of the Total Environment
#287
of 332 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,809,966 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,520 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,027 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 332 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.