Title |
Record-setting algal bloom in Lake Erie caused by agricultural and meteorological trends consistent with expected future conditions
|
---|---|
Published in |
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, April 2013
|
DOI | 10.1073/pnas.1216006110 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Anna M. Michalak, Eric J. Anderson, Dmitry Beletsky, Steven Boland, Nathan S. Bosch, Thomas B. Bridgeman, Justin D. Chaffin, Kyunghwa Cho, Rem Confesor, Irem Daloğlu, Joseph V. DePinto, Mary Anne Evans, Gary L. Fahnenstiel, Lingli He, Jeff C. Ho, Liza Jenkins, Thomas H. Johengen, Kevin C. Kuo, Elizabeth LaPorte, Xiaojian Liu, Michael R. McWilliams, Michael R. Moore, Derek J. Posselt, R. Peter Richards, Donald Scavia, Allison L. Steiner, Ed Verhamme, David M. Wright, Melissa A. Zagorski |
Abstract |
In 2011, Lake Erie experienced the largest harmful algal bloom in its recorded history, with a peak intensity over three times greater than any previously observed bloom. Here we show that long-term trends in agricultural practices are consistent with increasing phosphorus loading to the western basin of the lake, and that these trends, coupled with meteorological conditions in spring 2011, produced record-breaking nutrient loads. An extended period of weak lake circulation then led to abnormally long residence times that incubated the bloom, and warm and quiescent conditions after bloom onset allowed algae to remain near the top of the water column and prevented flushing of nutrients from the system. We further find that all of these factors are consistent with expected future conditions. If a scientifically guided management plan to mitigate these impacts is not implemented, we can therefore expect this bloom to be a harbinger of future blooms in Lake Erie. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 18 | 38% |
Canada | 9 | 19% |
United Kingdom | 4 | 8% |
Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
South Africa | 1 | 2% |
France | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 14 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 41 | 85% |
Scientists | 5 | 10% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 2% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 18 | 1% |
Canada | 5 | <1% |
Netherlands | 2 | <1% |
France | 1 | <1% |
Germany | 1 | <1% |
Brazil | 1 | <1% |
South Africa | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
Other | 4 | <1% |
Unknown | 1191 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 235 | 19% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 201 | 16% |
Student > Bachelor | 185 | 15% |
Researcher | 168 | 14% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 63 | 5% |
Other | 135 | 11% |
Unknown | 239 | 19% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Environmental Science | 338 | 28% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 225 | 18% |
Engineering | 98 | 8% |
Earth and Planetary Sciences | 92 | 8% |
Chemistry | 35 | 3% |
Other | 131 | 11% |
Unknown | 307 | 25% |