Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Biology > Aquatic Ecology final > Flashcards

Aquatic Ecology final Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
AP® Biology flashcards Biology 101 flashcards
1
Q

Aquaculture impacts

A 
escapement
waste discharge
fish health
water quality
coastal activities
global feedfish populations 
marine foodwebs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Captured/farmed fishery products flow chart

A

aquatic production (PP)– capture fisheries (discarded bycatch, human consumption)- fish meal - aquaculture (livestock) -human consumption (terrestrial agriculture)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Captured/farmed fishery products flow chart, negative feedbacks

A
  • feedbacks on PP

capture fisheries, fish meal, aquaculture

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Captured/farmed fishery products flow chart, aquaculture negative feedback

A

waste, habitat modification, pollution, impacts on population/food web dynamics, escaping feral species

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

PP proportion division from capture fisheries

A

approximately:
1/4 bycatch (waste)
1/4 fish meal
1/2 human consumption (straight)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

PP proportion division from fish meal

A

1/6 Aquaculture
2/6 (1/3) livestock
3/6 (1/2) human consumption

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

changes in total capture

A

increased substantially

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

human consumption from aquaculture & capture fisheries, 1997

A

~95 million metric tonnes (worldwide)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

environment issues from aquaculture

A

discharge degrades water quality
alter/degrade natural habitat
pressure from multi-uses on water system

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Biological issues with aquaculture

A

over-exploitation of organisms - food web consequences
chemical use (health concern)
introduction/transmission diseases, parasites, aliens
contamination

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

production quantity and value vs. year

A

exponential increase
huge increase since 1980’s
2004 quantity: ~60million tonnes
2004 value: $70 billion US

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

aquaculture production, china/asia/rest of world

A

China by far the hugest proportion and largest increase (50million tonne increase in 30yr), Asia ~20million tonne increase in 30 yrs, rest of world increased less than 10million tonne (an IS less than 10)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

world population 1950-2002

A

2.56billion –6.23billion

now ~7billion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

consumption per capita, 1950-2002

A

~doubled since 1950 (10-22kg per person/per year)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

changes in marine fish catch, 1950-2002

A

~20million tonnes – 80/90million tonnes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Utilization of fish, 2000’s

A 
40% fresh
30% non-food (feed)
18% frozen
7% cured
8% canned
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Changes in utilization of fish since 1960’s

A

increase in fresh fish- better transportation, maintenance

increase in frozen fish

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Canada’s Atlantic cod

A

1980-1990 catch was ~500,000 tonnes, 1995 drops off to nothing, overexploited to population collapse, still can not recover b/c niche space taken over

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

human fish consumption as a percent of total animal protein

A

worldwide 16%
N America 6.6%
Africa 21%
Far East 28% (Asia, healthier, cheaper, less fresh water needed)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

World farm salmon production, 1980-2003

A

BC, Norway, Chile, UK all increase in production

Norway MAJOR increase

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Changes in world farm salmon production, 1996-2002

A

Chile +235%
Norway +71% (but highest total value)
Scotland +89%
BC +96% (but lowest total value)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Changes in wild salmon, US + Canada, 1988-2002

A

chinook, chum, coho, sockeye- all decrease in production roughly 30%, decrease in at-vessel price/lb ~70%
pink production +11%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Changes in farmed Atlantic Salmon, US + Canada, 1988-2002

A

production: +895,000%
price: -61%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

mariculture

A

cultivation of marine organisms for food and other products in the open ocean

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

aquaculture by environment (2004)

A

Brackish 6%
Freshwater 43%
mariculture 51%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

what is grown in aquaculture

A

very diverse: crustaceans (shrimp, crab), finishes (carps, tilapia), filter feeders (mussels, oysters, scallops..), aquatic plants, carnivorous fish (salmon, bass, bream)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

World aquaculture production by volume, by country/continent, 2004 (the main players)

A

China 70%
Rest of Asia 22%
Other 9%
w/i Other: W Europe 3.5%, Latin America 2%, NA 1.27%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

World aquaculture production by value, by country/continent, 2004 (the main players)

A

China 51%
Rest of Asia 29%
Other 20%
w/i other: WE 8%, LA 7.5%, NA 1.86%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

fastest growing food producing industry

A

aquaculture

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

problem of rapidly increasing aquaculture

A

demand for feed ingredients increasing rapidly, supply limited

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

feed used in BC, 2000

A

65 million kg

to produce 49million kg farmed fish

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

what happens to feed

A

20% deposited as feces
unused feed deposited as solid
excretory release of dissolved material

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

chemical components of aquaculture feed

A

45-65% is Carbon
6-10% is N, 1-2% is P
total system loading unknown

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

whats so important about increased N, P

A

two most important nutrients responsible fro eutrophication

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Estimated loading to BCs coastal water from aquaculture

A

7.1 million kg of C
1.3 million kg of N
236,000kg P
all per year
may not be significant for entire system, but definitely important in enclosed bays

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

how salmon are unlike other ‘farm’ animals

A

carnivorous, feed is 45% fishmeal, 25% fish oil

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

cost of producing farm fish

A

2.8kg wild fish = 1kg farm fish

area required to produce the feed = 40-50,000X production area

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

Amount of PP being used for aquaculture

A

European industry - ~90% of North Seas’s PP

BC - 7.8million ha of ocean (278X area of all terrestrial BC horticulture)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

what’s underneath a fish farm???

A

black sediment - highly organic material, reductive, lacking oxygen

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

taxa richness vs [sulfide] (µM)

A

negative linear

appears well correlated, but also a pretty wide spread in the data

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

whats happening with the sulfide

A

increased Cord – increased sulfide accumulation– kill benthic inverts.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

rockfish near farms

A

found to have higher Hg content closer to fish farms

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

why rockfish?

A

not very migratory, good proxy for local condition

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

why higher Hg near fish farms?

A

oxygen reduction due to C loading = anoxic sediment– Hg methylated and converted to usable form (methyl mercury)– accumulates in tissues– produces neurological effects

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

levels of contaminants in farm produced, store bought, wild salmon

A

farmed & most of store bought ~ equal in all of the contaminants/carcinogens tested (PCB, dioxin, toxaphene, dieldrin), wild lower
some store bought appears to be wild but more is farmed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

fish utilization and supply (excluding China), trend

A

1950-2002
population linear increasing
food supply non changing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

changes in fishmeal use, 1988-2002

A

1988: Poultry 59%, aquaculture 10%, pigs 20%
2002: poultry 22%, aquaculture 46%, pigs 25%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

what are poultry being fed now

A

bluegreen algae (more deeply coloured yolk, carotenoids)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

fish oil use

A

1990: edible 76%, aquaculture 16%, industrial 8%
2002: edible 14%, aquaculture 81%, industrial 5%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

Other sources of fish feed

A

by-catch
fish processing by-products
plant products
livestock by-products

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

Canada salmon feed

A

lowest fishmeal and oil inclusion rate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

SA fish feed

A

41% of all fish used in feed, including: Anchoret, Chilean jack mackerel, South American pilchard
very important low trophic level fishes!!

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

top marine capture, 2002

A 
anchoveta (9.7mt)
pollock (2.7mt)
tuna (2.0mt)
capelin (2.0mt)
herring (1.9mt)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q

changes in salmon fishmeal/fish oil use

A

fishmeal +185%

fish oil +577%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
55
Q

changes in carp fishmeal/fish oil use

A

fishmeal 750%

oil 70%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q

changes in crustacean fishmeal/oil use

A

fishmeal 1363% increase

fish oil 2660% increase!

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q

overexploited species for fish feed

A

Peruvian anchovy- 6.2mt harvested 2003, recovering, overfished
Chilean jack mackerel- 1.7mt harvest 2003, fully fished, overfished
up to 11 species in this list are fully fished, unsustainable!

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q

SA harvest of feed fish

A

1960-70’s exploit anchoveta– collapse– SA pilchard takes over niche– exploit them– collapse– chilean jack mackerel moves in..

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
59
Q

natural cause of population decline in fish species

A

El Niño- huge decrease 1998

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q

capture-reduction

A

how much is caught relative to time vessel spends out (? maybe) .. lowest in El Niño yrs

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
61
Q

larger scale effects of harvesting fish feed

A

taking ~85% of sea predators food; seabirds, marine mammals

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

Effects of farming on wild salmon health

A

smolts travelling to ocean pass by fish farms, pick up significant infections rates; many farm fish have sea lice (infestation from low diversity, close quarters)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
63
Q

forage fish

A

prey fish/bait fish, small pelagic fish preyed on by larger predators for food

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
64
Q

areas of application for stable isotopes

A 
paleoclimate reconstruction (O2)
paleolimnology
terrestrial aquatic linkages
food web ecology
migratory studies
individual feeding behaviour
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
65
Q

paleolimnology, stable isotopes

A

historic patterns of productivity, mostly C, N

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
66
Q

terrestrial aquatic linkages, stable isotopes

A

terrestrial–> aquatic (lake management)

marine derived nutrients (salmon)–> terrestrial

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
67
Q

food web ecology, stable isotopes

A

contaminant transfer, ecology

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
68
Q

migratory studies, stable isotopes

A

birds, fish, zooplankton, mammals, C
how much time in open/coastal ocean
algae isotope ratio highly variable in open/coastal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
69
Q

individual feeding behaviour, stable isotope

A

niche shift, omnivore, trophic position
within single population
ex. stickleback - some neutral all the time, some pelagic all the time, all related to evolution, studiable by isotopes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
70
Q

∂13C ratios

A

C fractionates during photosynthesis, little-no fractionation up food chain
determine what food sources are based on ∂13C ratio

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
71
Q

∂13C determination of food source possible with following conditions

A

large isotopic separation (btw food sources)
over time food signatures are stable
two/few food sources

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
72
Q

examples of ∂13C determination of food source

A

middle of lake - very highly negative

close to littoral zone (terrestrial C) - less negative

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
73
Q

∂15N in food web ecology

A

tells trophic level, fractionated throughout trophic levels

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
74
Q

trophic enrichment of ∂15N

A

2.92+/- 0.8 ‰

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
75
Q

typical ∂15N signatures

A

algae 4-8‰
invertebrates 8-16‰
forage fish 10-14‰
predatory fish 10-18‰

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
76
Q

typical ∂13C signatures

A

off-shore -28‰ (depleted)

near-shore -14‰

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
77
Q

why is ∂15N fractionated up trophic level

A

preferential excretion of 14N

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
78
Q

high ∂15N

A

heavy

more positive

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
79
Q

atmospheric N2 ∂15N

A

0‰

hasn’t been fractionated by organisms

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
80
Q

enriched in ∂13C

A

heavy
less negative
∂13C never positive

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
81
Q

depleted in ∂13C

A

light
more negative
∂13C never positive

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
82
Q

inorganic fertilizer ∂15N

A

0‰

made from captured atmospheric N

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
83
Q

fractionation

A

in a chemical reaction one isotope proceeds at a quicker rate than the other due to a slight difference in mass (lighter synthesized faster/easier, more efficient)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
84
Q

two types of fractionation

A

animals- body tissue

algae

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
85
Q

animal tissue fractionation

A

14N is preferentially released so 15N increases relative to its food source

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
86
Q

algae fractionation

A

photosynthetic enzyme can process 12C molecules quicker than 13C, utilize it preferentially
based on size

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
87
Q

algae photosynthetic enzyme that processes carbon molecule

A

RUBISCO

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
88
Q

isotopic composition in foodweb

A

sediment: ~-30, towards terrestrial
inverts: ~-33, ~50/50 terrestrial/planktonic
piscivorous fish: ~-28/-30 pretty close to terrestrial

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
89
Q

littoral zone

A

near shore area where sunlight penetrates all the way to the sediment and allows aquatic plants (macrophytes) to grow

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
90
Q

Loch Ness Zooplankton, temporal shift in C signature reflecting food source

A

winter- low PP, most C is detrital, POM (less - ∂13C), zoop signature matches POM
summer- higher PP, signature drops to mirror to algae ∂13C (more - )

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
91
Q

reconstruct historic salmon runs with ∂15N

A

sedimentary ∂15N correlated to number of spawners
250,000spawners ~ 6‰
1mill spawners ~ 8.5‰

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
92
Q

∂15N sediment signature change in 1900

A

dramatically drops off, commercial fishing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
93
Q

significantly different ∂15N signatures along the river

A

higher ∂15N signature in root feeders, omnivores, detritivores, predators.. BELOW falls (input of high ∂15N source, salmon)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
94
Q

Class 1 lake

A

lack preferred lake trout prey, pelagic forage fish, causing lake trout to feed on zooplankton and zoobenthos

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
95
Q

class 2 lake

A

contain at least one species of pelagic forage fish, resulting in piscivory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
96
Q

class 3 lake

A

pelagic forage fish and glacis-marine relict invertebrate predator Myis relicta - elevates lake trout to fifth trophic level

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
97
Q

measuring trophic level by ∂15N ratio

A

gut contents
digestibility highly variable
assumptions made

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
98
Q

pelagic

A

Any water in a sea or lake that is neither close to the bottom nor near the shore

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
99
Q

pelagic zooplankton signatures

A

variable! needs to be established as a baseline

study found differences in calanoid copepods, Daphnia, Holopedium

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
100
Q

lake to lake isotope signatures

A

highly variable depending on inputs (human, animal, fertilizer, salmon)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
101
Q

PCB (ng/g wet mass) vs trophic position

A

liner increasing
class 1 at low end
class 2 in middle
class 3 at top end (most trophic positions)
appears to be due to increased % lipid with increased trophic level

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
102
Q

PCBs and lipids

A

lipophilic contaminants, accumulate in fat (lipophilicity)

unnatural, remain in bodies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
103
Q

∂15N trophic position vs. dietary trophic position

A

highly correlated = N good measure of trophic position

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
104
Q

Hg (µg/g) vs. Lake class

A 
higher in higher class
higher if smelt present in each individual class
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
105
Q

∂15N vs ∂13C, Arctic Lake System, Lake Trout

A

LT top predator - highest ∂15N, ~middle of ∂13C spread- consumes pelagic and littoral fish

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
106
Q

Log Hg (µg/g wet weight) vs. ∂13C

A

decreasing
terrestrial source has lower level of Hg
if LT feed more on nearshore/benthic than offshore/pelagic they will have lower Hg

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
107
Q

Hg consumption guideline

A

0.5µg/g

one meal per week (non pregnant adults)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
108
Q

[Hg] (µg/g) vs. ∂15N (‰) in Ontario, Quebec lakes

A

all Class 2 and 3 fish are above consumption guideline level of Hg
sport fishing species, widely consumed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
109
Q

US Hg blood levels

A

300,000-600,000 children/yr cord blood Hg level > 5.8µg/L, a level associated with loss of IQ

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
110
Q

cost of methyl mercury toxicity

A

lost productivity (lower IQ) $8.7bill/yr

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
111
Q

Daphnia spp. ∂15N (‰) vs levels of land-use (low, high)

A

low land use (Sooke lake) - 0-5‰

high land use (Shawnigan lake) - 6-13‰

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
112
Q

Sooke lake

A

our drinking water

fully protected

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
113
Q

Shawnigan lake

A

developed
lots of septic
highly enriched in ∂15N

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
114
Q

Caffeine (ng/L) vs. ∂15N in Mussel Tissue

A

linear positive
caffeine from septic contamination
robust indicator of fecal contamination

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
115
Q

Caffeine (ng/L) vs. Shoreline Development (lots/km^2), Shawnigan lake

A

linear positive

denser housing = more septic = fecal input = more caffeine

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
116
Q

∂15N (‰) vs. year, Sooke Lake and Shawnigan lake sediment cores

A

Shawn. has increased from ~1-3 as a result of human development
Sooke- has some spikes from building new dams/raising the dam- inundating land

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
117
Q

EBS

A

Eastern Bering Sea

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
118
Q

EBS 2002-2005

A

large-scale warming event

followed by 2yrs cooling event (2006-07)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
119
Q

EBS sampling

A

zooplankton from 186 stations each year
13,000 fish
600 zooplankton

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
120
Q

change in abundance of juvenile salmon and forage fish

A

increase in warm years
decrease in cold years
in salmon, juveniles, forage fish

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
121
Q

EBS zooplankton ∂15N

A

must be determined for baseline

higher in N EBS- upwelling? predatory?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
122
Q

Juvenile Sockeye Salmon ∂15N, EBS

A

warm years- up to 2 levels above zoop. = piscivory

cool years- remain small, stay near shore, can’t grow enough to move up food chain

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
123
Q

Juvenile Pink Salmon Trophic position above zooplankton, EBS

A

pink salmon normally zooplanktivorous..

in wam years- up to 2 levels above zoop., piscivorous

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
124
Q

Juvenile Chum Salmon trophic position above zooplankton, EBS

A

chum usually feed on jellies

warm event- up to 2levels above zoop., piscivorous

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
125
Q

Signatures in northern Bering Sea

A

warm year- less negative ∂13C, near terrestrial loading (from Yukon river)
cool year- more negative ∂13C, pelagic source
not really a pattern in ∂15N

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
126
Q

Signatures in Southern Bering sea

A

Warm- higher ∂15N, higher trophic position, trophic enrichment
Cool- lower ∂15N, lower trophic position

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
127
Q

sediment ∂15N profiles from NH lakes

A

26 profiles, almost all show drop in ∂15N since 1900 = depleted N signature from fertilizer use! recall (fertilizer is from atmospheric N2)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
128
Q

global fresh water

A

3%

99.7% of that 3% is unavailable (glaciers, deep aquifers)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
129
Q

Where is our available water

A

80% is in 20 large lakes

95% is in 145 lakes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
130
Q

water demand per person

A

1400-1800m^3/person/year

1.4-1.8million L

131
Q

unequal distribution of water

A

little water in some parts of China, France, unglaciated US

abundant in Canada, Scandinavia, NZ, Russia

132
Q

Water required for some crops

A 
70L for 1 apple
50L for 1 orange
140L for 1 cup coffee
2300L per kg rice
15,500L per kg beef
133
Q

water exchange times, lakes basin

A

days - centuries

balance of inflow, precipitation, evaporation

134
Q

water balance affected by

A

dams, diversions

135
Q

Aral Sea

A

1.3million km^2 watershed
before 1960, 4th largest lake in world 67,000km^2
Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan

136
Q

Aral Sea, 1920s

A

water diversion for agriculture (especially cotton), storage for hydroelectric power

137
Q

Aral Sea ppt

A

historically- 10ppt

Now- 34ppt (Ocean salinity!)

138
Q

Aral Sea, since 1960s

A

85% volume lost (42,000km^2 lost)
65% SA lost
lakeside towns now 100-150km away
former lake area dry, saline

139
Q

Affects of Aral Sea changes

A

all fish species gone
60,000 fishing jobs lost
massive ecological change- species extinctions
local climate substantially changed

140
Q

Aral sea historic harvest

A

48,000T/yr

largest fish processing plant in USSR

141
Q

Aral Sea 2000’s

A 
area 24,000
volume 175 
salinity 65-70
separated in to two lakes in 1993
2010, only 1 lake left
142
Q

Economic Consequences of Aral Sea loss

A

fishing, agriculture, cost of water rights

143
Q

Health Consequences of Aral sea loss

A 
highest child mortality in former USSR
life expectancy decrease 64-51yrs (in ~60yrs)
highest world rate of esophageal cancer
widespread DNA damage
birth abnormalities 5X EU, infertility
144
Q

What’s causing the health consequences, Aral Sea

A

large volume of agricultural chemicals, waste

carcinogenic salt/chemicals transported by wind

145
Q

Pesticide use in Aral sea area

A

72kg/ha

compared with US- 1.6kg/ha

146
Q

Valiant Dam Italy

A

265m concrete arch dam, steep walled mountain valley
built in 1960
limestone/clay layers = slides as reservoir filled

147
Q

Vainont Dam, 1963

A

debris slide
displaced 30x10^6 m^3 water over dam (1/4 of contents)
2500 deaths downstream

148
Q

China, S–>N water diversion

A

un-uniform water distribution
divert water from major S rivers to industrial in low water N
3X cost of Three Gorges
3 separate routes

149
Q

Three Gorges Dam, China

A

once largest in world

flood control, diversion of water to N, hydro power, transportation

150
Q

Three Gorges Dam problems

A

loss of agriculture, historical sites

changes to climate, public health, soil stability

151
Q

Dam changes to soil

A

when water bodies are made, soils release heavy metals they have been holding into water

152
Q

Colorado River, 1928

A

water treaty
7 states get 19km^3
Mexico 1.8km^3

153
Q

Colorado River, 1930’s

A

major water diversion to LA

154
Q

Colorado River, 1935

A

Hoover Dam

155
Q

Colorado River, 1960’s

A

Glen Canyon Dam
[salt] exceeds 1.5g/L
ruins Mexico agriculture (collapse)

156
Q

Response to Glen Canyon Dam - Mexican agriculture collapse

A

Yuma (Arizona) desalination plant

$1B/yr

157
Q

Ground Water

A 
give stability to ground
over draining creates space in ground 
sinkage
drawdown water table
subsidence
158
Q

Mexico City

A

built on a lakebed, elevation 2240m

Initially water flowed in and had to be diverted out

159
Q

Changes in Mexico City

A

rapid growth (more than 20million)
Had to pump in water but had very poor infrastructure (holes in pipes)
subsidence 1m/yr
buildings tilting, roads, pipes moving

160
Q

Canadian water

A

Great lakes: 240,000km^2
20+% of world FW
85% of NA water
45mill people in watershed (15mill Canada)

161
Q

Canadian water export

A

policy unclear (provincial vs. federal)
NAFTA may require selling water to US
potential profit, damage degradation loss

162
Q

Unclear water policy

A

freshwater is provincial jurisdiction

who can use water is federal - dept transportation, dept fisheries, dept fish&oceans

163
Q

NAWAPA

A 
North America Water and Power Alliance
potential water diversion: Rocky Mt trench -- Texas
from Mackenzie river valley
240 dams
nuclear power to pump it
164
Q

GRAND Canal dam

A

Great Recycling and Northern Development channel

potentially divert from James Bay – Great lakes

165
Q

Dam/Diversion problems and education

A 
political
economical
public education important 
International co-operation
conservation
water re-use
166
Q

Dam impacts, land inundation

A

mobilizes DOC & Hg to food web
Hg accumulation in fish
neuro-degenerative symptoms
loading to ocean (of water) is decreasing, may increase ocean salinity

167
Q

MPA, IUCN definition

A

Any area of intertidal or subtotal domain, together with it’s overlying water and associated flora, fauna, historical and cultural features, which has been reserved by law or other effective means to protect part or all of the enclose environment.

168
Q

MPAs attempt to

A

protect sensitive habitat
conserve biodiv.
shelter vulnerable/endangered species
boost fisheries catch

169
Q

IUCN

A

international union for conservation of nature

170
Q

MPA coverage, now

A

less than 1% of worlds oceans

171
Q

Newfoundland Cod, historically

A

fished from small dories, land lines

spawning ground far offshore (unreachable)- natural protection, refuge

172
Q

dories

A

small, shallow-draft boat, 5 -7m, usually lightweight with high sides, flat bottom and sharp bows

173
Q

Fishing technology

A

no natural fish refuges
very long range & time
targeting capability

174
Q

Traditional fishery protection laws

A

species specific

i.e. Atlantic Cod

175
Q

MPA, allowable

A

no ocean dumping or dredging
no exploration for or development of non-renewables
fishing/extraction permitted

176
Q

fully protected MPA

A

“No-take zones”
“Areas of the ocean completely protected from all extractive and destructive activities”
no fishing, removal, dumping, dredging

177
Q

Coverage of ‘no-take’ zones

A

less than 0.1% of the worlds ocean

178
Q

Accidental MPA

A

Cape Canaveral

US gov’t creates security zone around Cape C. satellite launch zone

179
Q

MPA benefits

A 
Increase/Enhance:
fish abundance
fish size/age
reproductive output
species diversity
habitat complexity
fishery yields in adjacent grounds
overall biomass increase
180
Q

“Fishing the Edge”

A

fishing boats sitting right on edge of MPA

181
Q

Importance of letting fish grow big

A

reproductive output
large fish = higher reproductive output
23”in vermilion can produce 17X more young than 14”

182
Q

Sustaining Sea Otter, kelp forest

A

protects fish abundance, mussel growth, other inverts and crustaceans, changes to predatory sea bird resources

183
Q

Fish Abundance, sea otter presence

A

~5X higher w/ S.O. present

184
Q

Mussel Growth, sea otter

A

~2X w/ s.o. present

185
Q

Gull diet, sea otter

A

Diet is 90% fish w/ s.o. present

90% macro inverts. without sea otter

186
Q

Bald Eagle diet, sea otter

A

s. o. present: diet is fish, mammals, birds ~ equal

s. o. absent: ~70% of diet is seabirds

187
Q

control sea urchin populations

A

sea otter
predatory fish species
spiny lobsters

188
Q

urchin/kelp feedback

A

lack of predation– urchin population boom– urchins feed on kelp holdfast– kelp wash away in tide– habitat is lost

189
Q

Anacapa Island MPA

A

California - predatory fish, lobsters regaining populations- increased urchin predation- sustainable kelp forest

190
Q

Idealized MPA

A 
Equilibrium state:
maximized species diversity
many linkages in food web
redundancy
stability
191
Q

Ecological redundancy

A

organisms having several food sources

192
Q

“Spillover effect”

A

= export of adult fish out of MPA

high fish density within MPA - leave protected area (no physical boundary)

193
Q

MPA size determination

A

dependent on species to be protected
too large detracts from fishery
too small ineffective

194
Q

Sizes of MPAs

A

not self-sustaining
moderately self-sustaining
completely self-sustaining

195
Q

MPA not self-sustaining

A

most species lost
high periphery : area
unsustainable
small effect on recruitment and commercial fishing
too much loss out of reserve to be effective

196
Q

MPA moderately self-sustaining

A 
some species lost
adequate periph:area
some individuals retained
significant source of recruits to fished area
some reduction of fishing grounds
good balance of benefits for all
197
Q

MPA completely self-sustaining

A 
all species retained
low perish:area
small spillover
little recruitment outside reserve
severe reduction to fishing ground
little export
198
Q

Where should MPAs be?

A

vulnerable habitats
important habitat
species rich habitat
spawning grounds

199
Q

MPA and migratory species

A

doesn’t really protect migratory species, better for stationary species (ex. rock cod)
DOES increase salmon prey though

200
Q

MPA vulnerability

A

currents flow through, pollutants can flow through

MPAs necessary but not adequate

201
Q

Lake Victoria

A 
SA 69500km^2
depth Zm = 39m
several invasives: Nile Perch, water Hyacinth
overfishing (gillnets)
massive loss of endemics
loss of Oreochromis fishery
202
Q

Lake Victoria native population

A 
300 Cichlid fish
most diverse cichlid population
2/3 gone
highest vertebrate extinction rate
Oreochromis sp. (algal feeder) - major protein source
203
Q

Management troubles of Lake Victoria

A

shared by 3 countries that don’t get along

Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania

204
Q

Water hyacinth

A

mostly near shore environment- highly mixed/dynamic water bodies, sheltered small basins
clog up waterway

205
Q

Major aquatic plants (invasive)

A 
Hydrilla (US)
Elodea (Europe)
Eurasian milfoil (NA)
Purple loosestrife (NA)
Canary Reed Grass (NA)
take over shallow transparent water bodies
huge economic losses
206
Q

Invasive plant management

A

Herbicides
Mechanical harvesting
biological control

207
Q

Invasive plant management, biological control

A

introduce something else that will prey on it (kind of like how coopers hawk controls European starlings)

208
Q

Invasive plant management, mechanical harvesting

A

bulldozers!

209
Q

Nile Perch

A

large piscivorous fish
introduced in 1960 for British sport fishing
up to 300lbs

210
Q

Lessons of Lake Victoria

A

introduction of one species changed entire trophic dynamics of one of the largest lakes in the world

211
Q

% of total catch vs year (Lake Victoria)

A

haplochromines (cichlid) majority of prey catch until ~’74
1974-1980 majority is haplo. and omena
after 1980 majority is Nile perch and omena

212
Q

Omena

A

anchovy-like minnow

213
Q

Standing stock estimates, Lake Victoria

Kg/ha vs year

A

Native - ~60 in 1970’s down to ~0 in 80’s, 90’s
Introduced- ~30 in 80’s –> ~70 in 90’s
almost entirely introduced species

214
Q

Oxygen in Lake victoria

O2 (mg/L) vs Month

A

surface ~10 all year
bottom: less than 5 all year, anoxic in winter, highest in summer
loss of haplochromines (algal readers) changed oxygen structure
bottom up control

215
Q

Eastern Bullfrog

A

widely introduced for aquaculture (restaurants) Europe, Asia, Japan
replace/consume prey of/ infect native amphibians

216
Q

spread of Eastern Bullfrog

A

California 1905
Burnaby 1940
Elk Lake 1960’s

217
Q

Eastern Bullfrog diet

A

omnivores

insects, fish, ducklings, rodents

218
Q

Invasive Zooplankton

A

Daphnia lumholtzii (Europe-NA)
Bythotrepes (NA)
Cercopagus (black sea-baltic)
Mysis relicta (Ghost shrimp, glacial relict)

219
Q

Success of invasive species

A

distinct features that give them the advantage

ex. sharp spine, anti predator mechanisms, larger T/resource/habitat ranges

220
Q

Mysis relicta foodweb changes

A

introduced to Flathead river-lake ecosystem to increase kokanee population. Only feed at night, competition for kokanee’s resources.. decreases kok. pop., lake trout, bears, eagles, copepods, cladocerans (water flea)

221
Q

Invasive filter feeders

A 
Zebra, Quagga mussels
introduced from ship ballast from E Europe, 1988
few predators (dicks, 1 fish)
widespread through Mississippi
major financial impact
larvae continue to spread with boats
222
Q

Why are so many eggs released in St. Lawrence seaway

A

ships have to release ballast to rise in canal

223
Q

Effects of increased mussles

A

clog water pipes, make great lakes more oligotrophic, affect fish productivity

224
Q

Origin of foreign fish

A

mostly from:

South America, Asia, Africa, Central America

225
Q

Laurentian Great Lakes

A 
most important NA water source
SA 244,000km^2
V 23,000km^3
21% worlds water
84% NA water 
1/3 of Canadian Population
226
Q

Great Lakes fish introductions

A

1600’s Carp
1930’s Lamprey, alewife
1960’s Pacific Salmon
Rainbow smelt, reffe, goby (ballast water), zebra mussels

227
Q

Lamprey, alewife introduction great leaks

A

1930’s
upper lakes via Welland canal
loss of lake trout, whitefish
alewife - zooplanktiverous–> anoxia

228
Q

Welland Canal

A

waterways connecting Atlantic ocean to great lakes

229
Q

Pacific Salmon introduction to great lakes

A

1960’s
chinook, coho
introduced to deal with alewife (biological control)
salmon spawn upstream, don’t go to ocean, very contaminated

230
Q

VI fish introductions

A

Sunfish
Rainbow Trout
Small Mouth Bass
Yellow Perch

231
Q

Other introduced species

A 
Asian carp/Grass carp
Cormorants
Bang
Nutria
Didymospenia
232
Q

Asian Carp, Grass carp

A

introduced to control aquatic plants, took over

biological control

233
Q

Cormorants

A

Lake Ontario
efficient gobies consumer (invasive fish)
fewer sport fish

234
Q

Bangia

A

filamentous algae forming extensive growth

235
Q

Nutria

A

‘river rat’ -kinda looks beaver/marmot like
very efficient foragers
cause enormous damage
from SA

236
Q

Didymospenia

A

filamentous diatom
choking river beds
decrease use of rivers as spawning grounds

237
Q

Caulerpa taxifolia

A

mediterranean
1984 first discovered
1990 1ha authorities informed (in writing)
1994 declared major threat 1500Ha
1998 UN law to battle invader 4600Ha
1999 covers 97% of suitable surfaces France, Monaco, Italy

238
Q

Invasive cats

A 
feral populations, one of worst invasive mammalian predators
direct predation 
competition
hybridization
disease transmission
ecologic process alteration
behavioural change
239
Q

Google Earth/GIS

A

can be used to study introduction/coverage of invasive w/ time
google earth found to be 84% accurate at detection

240
Q

fate of invasives, possible outcomes

A

Transport– introduction – success (fail) –spread (fast/slow) – impact (nuisance/non-nuisance)

241
Q

dysentry

A

infection of the intestines resulting in severe diarrhea with the presence of blood and mucus in the feces

242
Q

Water contamination

A

millions die worldwide/yr

rural/slums- high dysentry

243
Q

amount of people in rural communities without access to safe water

A

77%

safe is in don’t die from it

244
Q

children under 5 that die from diarrhea in rural/slum communities, due to unsafe water

A

35/1000

245
Q

Women and school, rural/slum communities

A

40% complete 3years

intense effort to collect water

246
Q

Water contamination, Canada

A

many sick, 7 dead in Walkerton, Not

~1000 small communities on boil water advisories (all the time)

247
Q

Water quality parameters of concern

A

pathogenic bacterie/protozoans (intestine disease)
excessive nutrients/algae (neuro/hepato toxins, carcinogenic byproducts)
harmful chemicals

248
Q

anthropogenic harmful chemicals in drinking water

A

pesticides, herbicides, metals, antibiotics, pharma-care products
chemical/biological/microbial waste from agriculture, livestock, industry, households

249
Q

why larger communities at lower risk of water contamination

A

adequate resources
expertise operator training and treatment
money
able to own and control entire watershed

250
Q

example of dharma-care water contaminant, St. Lawrence Seaway

A

endocrine disrupters causing fish to not develop sex

251
Q

Siem Reap River (cambodia), water contamination

A

throw waste into same small waterbody that is used for drinking

252
Q

Bangladesh water crisis

A

well water becoming contaminated with arsenic from contaminated groundwater = ulcers, amputations, gangrene, carcinoma, pigmentation issues

253
Q

Bangladesh water contamination, solution?

A

develop ponds to harvest rain water and use slow sand filters to clean water to entire village

254
Q

BC water utilities

A

3500 registered systems
over 90% unfiltered, only chlorination
most small, rural systems
most have no control over environment/source quality
higher rate of enteric illness than rest of Canada

255
Q

Canada boil water advisories

A

over 1000 communities

higher for aboriginal communities

256
Q

enteric illness in BC, Ontario/Quesbec, Praries, Atlantic

rater per 100,000 vs time

A

All have decreased by ~50/100,000 from 1987-97
BC ~50/100,000 more than O/Q/P
BC ~100/100,000 more than Atlantic

257
Q

distance from water treatment plant

A

the further away you are the more at risk you are, may need second treatment

258
Q

economic returns from the biosphere

A

protecting/sustaining the environment lowers health costs

259
Q

Land-use activities

A 
agriculture
farming
waste disposal 
pesticides/herbicides
harvesting
residential/industrial activities
260
Q

Land-use activities cause loading of

A 
pathogens
nutrients
metals/organics
humic compounds
pharmaceuticals
261
Q

Surface/ground water protection and management must

A

Develop strategies to reduce loading
understand transport and fat of microbes and chemicals
Enhance community knowledge and understanding

262
Q

Effects on/of water for public health

A

land-use activities
loading
quality of source
quality of output (tap)

263
Q

Affect quality of source water

A 
pathogens
algae
toxins
TOC/DOC
taste/odour
chemicals (drugs)
264
Q

Natural process affecting water quality

A

small vs larger grazer system
recall: large fish = large grazers = smaller microorganisms (bacteria/algae/pathogens) which also = better water quality! (another problem of fishing down the food web?)

265
Q

processes that affect surface water quality

A 
wildlife
recreation
forestry 
livestock
drylands farming
mining
industrial
urbanization
climate
266
Q

Wildlife and surface water quality

A

beaver, otter, rabbit, ungulates, waterfowl

Protistan parasites

267
Q

Recreation and water quality

A

boating, ATVs, hiking, camping, pets, cottages, skiing

sediments, pathogens, hydrocarbons, herbicides

268
Q

Forestry and surface water quality

A

roads, clear cutting, camps, storage areas, stream crossings, slash burning
microbes, turbidity, organic loading

269
Q

livestock operations and surface water quality

A

clearing, manure, feedlot, recreation, soil erosion

microbes, nutrients, turbidity

270
Q

drylands farming and surface water quality

A

clearing, pest/weed management, soil erosion

pesticide, herbicide, turbidity, salt

271
Q

mining and surface water quality

A

clearing, roads, waste rock, tailings, dust, living/operations
turbidity, metals, acid mine drainage

272
Q

Industrial practices on surface water quality

A

wastewater effluent, contaminated sites, roads

turbidity, chemicals

273
Q

Urbanization and surface water quality

A

sewage, water extraction, roads, pets, clearing

nutrients, chemicals, turbidity, pathogens

274
Q

surface water quality is a measure of

A

parasites, bacteria, viruses, turbidity, nutrients, algal toxins, pH, hardness, alkalinity, natural organics, metals, hydrocarbons, chemicals

275
Q

water treatments

A 
no treatment
filtration
sedimentation
flocculation
chlorination
chloramination
ozonation
UV irrdiation
276
Q

contamination in water distribution system (after treatment)

A

intrusion
regrowth
permeation
leaching

277
Q

Intrusion, contamination in water distribution system

A 
Pressure drop
faulty pipes/gaskets
cross-connections
unprotected tanks
contaminated soil/groundwater
278
Q

regrowth, contamination in distribution system

A

distance from treatment plant
nutrient availability
regrowth conditions (biofilm)
regrowth in tanks/pipes

279
Q

Permeation, contamination in distribution system

A

organic compounds
plastic pipes
elastomers

280
Q

leaching, contamination in distribution system

A

piping material corrosion
pipe lines
tank lines/seals

281
Q

flocculation

A

rocess wherein colloids come out of suspension in the form of floc or flake; either spontaneously or due to the addition of a clarifying agent

282
Q

airborne ammonia

A

72% of the variability in airborne ammonia explained by expansion of swine population
1988-1998: 0.1 - 0.4ppm

283
Q

N:P ratios based on source

A 
highest: runoff of unfertilized field
forest runoff
rainfall
manure seepage
sewage
284
Q

controls on algal biomass and blooms

A

nutrients
seasonality of nutrient input
physical properties of receiving system
structure of the foodweb

285
Q

% Total phytoplankton biomass vs. Lot TP (µg/L)

A

with an increase in TP shift to dominance of cyanobacteria (blue/green algae blooms)

286
Q

Mycrostin concentration (µg/L)

A

linearly increasing with TP, Toxigenic biomass, and TN

-increase # of algae = increase # of toxin producing algae

287
Q

major sources of P

A

septic, sewage, storm water, fertilizers

288
Q

biomagnification of BMAA example

A

cyanobacteria– cycad– flying foxes – Chamorro people

neuro-degenerative & hepato-degenerative disease

289
Q

concentrations of BMAA biomagnified

A

cyano. 0.3µg/g
cycad 37µg/g
flying fox 3556µg/g
x10^2 per “trophic level”

290
Q

Coagulation/flocculation

A

removes colloidal particles by adding coagulants

291
Q

sedimentation

A

Floc settles down to the bottom

292
Q

disinfection

A

kill bacteria and other organisms

293
Q

filtration

A

remove particles through filters

294
Q

disinfection byproducts

A

formed during treatment and disinfection

295
Q

water treatment steps

A

source water–coagulation/flocculation– sedimentation–filtration– disinfection– storage

296
Q

Victoria water treatment

A

only disinfection (UV)

297
Q

Increasing disinfection

A

increases disinfection byproducts, carcinogenic

298
Q

Risk vs. Disinfection Level

A

Microbial curve is decreasing
DBPs curve is increasing
trade-off.. ideally in lower level of both risks

299
Q

some DBPs

A 
disinfection by-products
Chloroform
Chloroacetic acid
Chloro... 
Formaldehyde
Acetone 
Acetic acid
Benzoic acid
300
Q

DBPs produced by

A
  1. Chlorine (produces almost all, strongest disinfectant)

Ozone, ClO2, Chloramines

301
Q

Disinfection by-products and birth weight

A

∆Birth weight (g) vs Concentration (µg/L)

THM, chloroform - decrease function

302
Q

THM

A

trihalomethane (chloroform)

303
Q

∂13C as a tracer for water condition

A

less negative ∂13C (lighter?) – disturbed watershed

more negative – pristine water source

304
Q

Caffeine

A

fecal bacteria enriched with caffeine, linear increasing (ng/L)
Mussel Tissue- high caffeine rates for high ∂15N

305
Q

Ibuprofen (ng/L) vs. Caffeine (ng/L)

A

lakes all in the low left corner, ocean outfall very high in both

306
Q

molecular fingerprinting

A

take DNA profile of E. coli and compare to animals- tell which animal produced the e.coli
gut bacteria specific to animal
can tell where specific contaminant came from

307
Q

Shawnigan Lake facts

A

extensive development since 1900, more since 1970
forest harvesting
septic inputs
changes in fisheries from alien species

308
Q

Sooke Lake facts

A

protected since 1900
raised three time (1910, 1970, 2002)
Introduction of Leech river water through Deception in 1988

309
Q

chloramination

A

treatment of drinking water with a chloramine disinfectant. Both chlorine and small amounts of ammonia are added to the water one at a time which react together to form chloramine

310
Q

main nutrient linked to algal blooms and toxins

A

phosphorous

311
Q

Lake sediments

A

preserve past records

  • can be used to see watershed changes and water quality
  • sinking of plankton biomass
312
Q

molecular fingerprinting

A

take DNA profile of E. coli and compare to animals- tell which animal produced the e.coli
gut bacteria specific to animal
can tell where specific contaminant came from

313
Q

Shawnigan Lake facts

A

extensive development since 1900, more since 1970
forest harvesting
septic inputs
changes in fisheries from alien species

314
Q

HPLC

A

High Performance Liquid Chromatography

315
Q

chloramination

A

treatment of drinking water with a chloramine disinfectant. Both chlorine and small amounts of ammonia are added to the water one at a time which react together to form chloramine

316
Q

main nutrient linked to algal blooms and toxins

A

phosphorous

317
Q

Lake sediments

A

preserve past records

  • can be used to see watershed changes and water quality
  • sinking of plankton biomass
318
Q

sediment core procedure

A

select study area and sampling site– take sediment cores– section sediment core– data analysis– analyze data

319
Q

sediment core data analysis

A

Pigment detection and quantification using HPLC

320
Q

HPLC

A

High Performance Liquid Chromatography

321
Q

Total algal biomass (mg/g organic matter) vs. year, Sooke and Shawnigan lake sediment cores

A

Sooke lake relatively straight

Shawnigan 3-10X higher biomass than Sooke, large spikes

322
Q

carotenoid pigment vs. year, Sooke and Shawnigan lake sediment cores

A

Shawnigan higher than sooke

Sooke watershed protection sustained excellent water quality over 100yrs

323
Q

Zeaxanthin pigment (bluegreen algae mg/g) vs. year, Sooke and Shawnigan lake sediment cores

A

Sooke pretty close to 0 over most of range, almost entirely less than 0.01
Shawn.- all over 0.01, up to 0.04

324
Q

∂15N vs. year, Sooke and Shawnigan lake sediment cores

A

~equal until 1920’s
both have increased
Shawnigan higher from human/animal loading

Biology (15 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions