Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modeling Physical and Biogeochemical Controls on Dissolved Oxygen in Chesapeake Bay: Lessons Learned from Simple and Complex Approaches

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Modeling Coastal Hypoxia

Abstract

We compared multiple modeling approaches in Chesapeake Bay to understand the processes controlling dissolved oxygen (O2) cycling and compare the advantages and disadvantages of the different models. Three numerical models were compared, including: (1) a 23-compartment biogeochemical model coupled to a regional scale, salt- and water-balance box model, (2) a simplified, four-term model formulation of O2 uptake and consumption coupled to a 3D-hydrodynamic model, and (3) a 23-compartment biogeochemical model coupled to a 3D-hydrodynamic model. All three models reproduced reasonable spatial and temporal patterns of dissolved O2, leading us to conclude that the model scale and approach one chooses to apply depends on the scientific questions motivating the study. From this analysis, we conclude the following: (1) Models of varying spatial and temporal scales and process resolution have a role in the scientific process. (2) There is still much room for improvement in our ability to simulate dissolved O2 dynamics in coastal ecosystems. (3) An ever-increasing diversity of models, three of which are presented here, will vastly improve our ability to discern physical versus biogeochemical controls on O2 and hypoxia in coastal ecosystems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Boesch DF, Brinsfield RB, Magnien RE (2001) Chesapeake Bay eutrophication: scientific understanding, ecosystem restoration, and challenges for agriculture. J Environ Qual 30:303–320

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boicourt WC (1992) Influences of circulation processes on dissolved oxygen in the Chesapeake Bay. In: Smith DE, Leffler M, Mackiernan G (eds) Oxygen dynamics in the chesapeake bay, a synthesis of recent research. Maryland Sea Grant, College Park, Maryland

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady DC, Targett TE (2013) Movement of juvenile weakfish Cynoscion regalis and spot Leiostomus xanthurus in relations to diel-cycling hypoxia in an estuarine tidal tributary. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 491:199–219

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brown CW, Hood RR, Long W, Jacobs J, Ramers DL, Wazniak C, Wiggert JD, Wood R, Xu J (2013) Ecological forecasting in Chesapeake Bay: using a mechanistic–empirical modeling approach. J Mar Syst 125:113–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchheister A, Bonzek CF, Gartland J, Latour RJ (2013) Patterns and drivers of the demersal fish community of Chesapeake Bay. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 481:161–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cerco CF, Noel MR (2013) Twenty-one-year simulation of Chesapeake Bay water quality using the CE-QUAL-ICM eutrophication model. J Am Water Resour Assoc. doi:10.1111/jawr.12107

    Google Scholar 

  • Conley DJ, Paerl HW, Howarth RW, Boesch DF, Seitzinger SP, Havens KE, Lancelot C, Likens GE (2009) Controlling eutrophication: nitrogen and phosphorus. Science 323:1014–1015

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cornwell JC, Sampou PA (1995) Environmental controls on iron sulfide mineral formation in a coastal plain estuary. In: Vairamurthy MA, Schoonen MAA (eds) Geochemical transformations of sedimentary sulfur. American Chemical Society, Washington D.C

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowan JL, Boynton WR (1996) Sediment-water oxygen and nutrient exchanges along the longitudinal axis of Chesapeake Bay: seasonal patterns, controlling factors and ecological significance. Estuaries 19:562–580

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Di Toro DM, Fitzpatrick JJ, Thomann RV (1983) Documentation for water quality analysis simulation program (WASP) and model verification program (MVP). In: United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C

    Google Scholar 

  • Feng Y, Friedrichs MAM, Wilkin J, Tian H, Yang Q, Hofmann EE, Wiggert JD, Hood RR (2015) Chesapeake Bay nitrogen fluxes derived from a land-estuarine ocean biogeochemical modeling system: Model description, evaluation, and nitrogen budgets. J Geophys Res: Biogeosciences 120:1666–1695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fennel K, Hu J, Laurent A, Marta-Almeida M, Hetland R (2013) Sensitivity of hypoxia predictions for the Northern Gulf of Mexico to sediment oxygen consumption and model nesting. J Geophys Res: Oceans 1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene RM, Lehrter JC, Hagy JD (2009) Multiple regression models for hindcasting and forecasting midsummer hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico. Ecol Appl 19:1161–1175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hagy JD (2002) Eutrophication, hypoxia, and trophic transfer efficiency in Chesapeake Bay. Ph.D., University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, Maryland

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagy JD, Boynton WR, Keefe CW, Wood KV (2004) Hypoxia in Chesapeake Bay, 1950–2001: long-term change in relation to nutrient loading and river flow. Estuaries 27:634–658

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hamidi SA, Bravo HR, Klump JV, Waples JT (2015) The role of circulation and heat fluxes in the formation of stratification leading to hypoxia in Green Bay, Lake Michigan. J Great Lakes Res 41:1024–1036

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Harding LW, Mallonee ME, Perry E (2002) Toward a predictive understanding of primary productivity in a temperate, partially stratified estuary. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 55:437–463

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hetland RD, DiMarco SF (2008) How does the character of oxygen demand control the structure of hypoxia on the Texas-Louisiana continental shelf? J Mar Syst 70:49–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irby ID, Friedrichs MAM, Friedrichs CT, Bever AJ, Hood RR, Lanerolle LWJ, Li M, Linker L, Scully ME, Sellner K, Shen J, Testa J, Wang H, Wang P, Xia M (2016) Challenges associated with modeling low-oxygen waters in Chesapeake Bay: a multiple model comparison. Biogeosciences 13:2011–2028

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Justíc D, Bierman VJ, Scavia D, Hetland RD (2007) Forecasting Gulf’s hypoxia: the next 50 years? Estuaries Coasts 30:791–801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp WM, Sampou PA, Garber J, Tuttle J, Boynton WR (1992) Seasonal depletion of oxygen from bottom waters of Chesapeake Bay: roles of benthic and planktonic respiration and physical exchange processes. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 85:137–152

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp WM, Smith EM, Marvin-DiPasquale M, Boynton WR (1997) Organic carbon balance and net ecosystem metabolism in Chesapeake Bay. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 150:229–248

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Laurent A, Fennel K (2014) Simulated reduction of hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico due to phosphorus limitation. Elementa. doi:10.12952/journal.elementa.000022

  • Lee YJ, Boynton WR, Li M, Li Y (2013) Role of late winter-spring wind influencing summer hypoxia in Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries Coasts 36:683–696

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Li M, Lee YJ, Testa JM, Li Y, Ni W, Kemp WM, Toro DMD (2016) What drives interannual variability of estuarine hypoxia: climate forcing versus nutrient loading? Geophys Res Lett 43:2127–2134

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Li M, Zhong L (2009) Flood-ebb and spring-neap variations of mixing, stratification and circulation in Chesapeake Bay. Cont Shelf Res 29:4–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li M, Zhong L, Boicourt WC (2005) Simulations of Chesapeake Bay estuary: sensitivity to turbulence mixing parameterizations and comparison with observations. J Geophys Res 110:C12004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li M, Zhong L, Harding LW (2009) Sensitivity of plankton biomass and productivity to variations in physical forcing and biological parameters in Chesapeake Bay. J Mar Res 67:667–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li Y, Li M, Kemp WM (2015) A budget analysis of bottom-water dissolved oxygen in Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries Coasts. doi:10.1007/s12237-12014-19928-12239

  • Liu Y, Scavia D (2010) Analysis of the Chesapeake Bay hypoxia regime shift: insights from two simple mechanistic models. Estuaries Coasts 33:629–639

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malone TC, Conley DJ, Fisher TR, Glibert PM, Harding LW, Sellner KG (1996) Scales of nutrient-limited phytoplankton productivity in Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries 19:371–385

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Malone TC, Kemp WM, Ducklow HW, Boynton WR, Tuttle JH, Jonas RB (1986) Lateral variation in the production and fate of phytoplankton in a partially stratified estuary. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 32:149–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller WD, Harding LW (2007) Climate forcing of the spring bloom in Chesapeake Bay. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 331:11–22

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy RR, Kemp WM, Ball WP (2011) Long-term trends in Chesapeake Bay seasonal hypoxia, stratification, and nutrient loading. Estuaries Coasts 34:1293–1309

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Newcombe CL, Horne WA (1938) Oxygen-poor waters of the Chesapeake Bay. Science 88:80–81

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Newell RIE, Kemp WM, Hagy JDI, Cerco CF, Testa JM, Boynton WR (2007) Top-down control of phytoplankton by oysters in Chesapeake Bay, USA: comment on Pomeroy et al. (2006). Mar Ecol Prog Ser 341:293–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Oguz T, Ducklow HW, Malanotte-Rizzoli P (2000) Modeling distinct vertical biogeochemical structure of the Black Sea: dynamical coupling of the oxic, suboxic, and anoxic layers. Global Biogeochem Cycles 14:1331–1352

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rucinski DK, Beletsky D, DePinto JV, Schwab DJ, Scavia D (2010) A simple 1-dimensional, climate based dissolved oxygen model for the central basin of Lake Erie. J Great Lakes Res 36:465–476

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sampou P, Kemp WM (1994) Factors regulating plankton community respiration in Chesapeake Bay. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 110:249–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scully ME (2010a) The importance of climate variability to wind-driven modulation of hypoxia in Chesapeake Bay. J Phys Oceanogr 40:1435–1440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scully ME (2010b) Wind modulation of dissolved oxygen in Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries Coasts 33:1164–1175

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Smith EM, Kemp WM (1995) Seasonal and regional variations in plankton community production and respiration for Chesapeake Bay. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 116:217–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor KE (2001) Summarizing multiple aspects of model performance in a single diagram. J Geophys Res 106:7183–7192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Testa JM, Brady DC, Di Toro DM, Boynton WR, Cornwell JC, Kemp WM (2013) Sediment flux modeling: nitrogen, phosphorus and silica cycles. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 131:245–263

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Testa JM, Kemp WM (2014) Spatial and temporal patterns in winter-spring oxygen depletion in Chesapeake Bay bottom waters. Estuaries Coasts 37:1432–1448

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Testa JM, Li Y, Lee YJ, Li M, Brady DC, Toro DMD, Kemp WM (2014) Quantifying the effects of nutrient loading on dissolved O2 cycling and hypoxia in Chesapeake Bay using a coupled hydrodynamic-biogeochemical model. J Mar Syst 139:139–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu J, Hood RR (2006) Modeling biogeochemical cycles in Chesapeake Bay with a coupled physical-biological model. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 69:19–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xue P, Chen C, Qi J, Beardsley RC, Tian R, Zhao L, Lin H (2014) Mechanism studies of seasonal variability of dissolved oxygen in Mass Bay: a multi-scale FVCOM/UG-RCA application. J Mar Syst. doi:10.1016/j.jmarsys.2013.1012.1002

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for the constructive comments from two anonymous reviewers and to Jim Hagy for sharing his box model code that we adapted for this analysis. Support from several grants and contracts have made this chapter possible, including the US National Science Foundation grants (i) DEB1353766 (OPUS; Kemp and Boynton) and (ii) CBET1360415 (WSC; Testa and Kemp), US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) grants (iii) NAO7NOS4780191, (Coastal Hypoxia Research Program; Kemp, M. Li, Di Toro) and (iv) NA15NOS4780184 (Testa, M. Li, Kemp), and (v) National Aeronautics and Space Administration grant NNX14AM37G (Kemp). This paper is contribution #5200 of the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science and CHRP Publication number 211.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, P.O. Box 38, Solomons, MD, 20688, USA

    Jeremy M. Testa

  2. College of Marine Science, University of South Florida, 140 7th Ave S, Saint Petersburg, FL, 33701, USA

    Yun Li

  3. Department of Oceanography, Naval Postgraduate School, 1 University Circle, Monterey, CA, 93943, USA

    Younjoo J. Lee

  4. Horn Point Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, 2020 Horns Point Rd, Cambridge, MD, 21613, USA

    Ming Li & W. Michael Kemp

  5. School of Marine Sciences, University of Maine, 193 Clark Cove Road, Walpole, ME, 04573, USA

    Damian C. Brady

  6. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Delaware, 356 DuPont Hall, Newark, DE, 19716, USA

    Dominic M. Di Toro

Authors
  1. Jeremy M. Testa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yun Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Younjoo J. Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ming Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Damian C. Brady
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dominic M. Di Toro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. W. Michael Kemp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeremy M. Testa .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA

    Dubravko Justic

  2. Louisiana State University , Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA

    Kenneth A. Rose

  3. Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M University Department of Oceanography, College Station, Texas, USA

    Robert D. Hetland

  4. Department of Oceanography, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

    Katja Fennel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Testa, J.M. et al. (2017). Modeling Physical and Biogeochemical Controls on Dissolved Oxygen in Chesapeake Bay: Lessons Learned from Simple and Complex Approaches. In: Justic, D., Rose, K., Hetland, R., Fennel, K. (eds) Modeling Coastal Hypoxia. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54571-4_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation