Estuaries

, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 560–571

Attenuation of photosynthetically available radiation (PAR) in Florida Bay: Potential for light limitation of primary producers

  • Christopher R. Kelble
  • Peter B. Ortner
  • Gary L. Hitchcock
  • Joseph N. Boyer
Article

Abstract

Light attenuation in marine ecosystems can limit primary production and determine the species composition and abundance of primary producers. In Florida Bay, the importance of understanding the present light environment has heightened as major upstream water management restoration projects have been proposed and some are already being implemented. We analyzed a 2-yr (2001–2003) data set of the light attenuation coefficient (Kt) and its principal components (water, chromophoric dissolved organic matter [CDOM], tripton, phytoplankton) obtained at 40 stations within Florida Bay, calibrated synoptic underway data to produce high spatial resolution maps, examined the potential for light limitation, and quantified the individual effect of each component upon light attenuation. Tripton was the dominant component controlling light attenuation throughout Florida Bay, whereas the contribution of chlorophylla and CDOM to Kt was much smaller in all regions of Florida Bay. It was possible to accurately estimate the light attenuation coefficient from component concentrations, using either a mechanistic or a statistical model with root mean square errors of 0.252 or 0.193 m−1, respectively. Compared to other estuaries, Florida Bay had the lowest overall Kt and the greatest relative contribution from tripton. Comparing the recent data to a study of Florida Bay’s light environment conducted in 1993–1994, we found that overall water clarity in the Bay increased significantly, indicated by a nearly 3-fold decrease in Kv as a result of lower tripton concentrations, although the percent contribution of each of the components to Kt is unchanged. Only the northwest corner of Florida Bay, an area comprised of approximately 8% of the Bay’s total area, was found on average to have sufficient light attenuation to limit the growth of seagrasses. This is much less extensive than in 1993–1994, when seagrass growth was potentially limited by light at over 50% of the stations sampled.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Atlas, D. andT. T. Bannister. 1980. Dependence of mean spectral extinction coefficient of phytoplankton on depth, water color, and species.Limnology and Oceanography 25:157–159.Google Scholar
  2. Bannister, T. T. 1974. A general theory of steady state phytoplankton growth in a nutrient saturated mixed layer.Limnology and Oceanography 19:13–30.Google Scholar
  3. Boyer, J. N., J. W. Fourqurean, andR. D. Jones. 1997. Spatial characterization of water quality in Florida Bay and Whitewater Bay by multivariate analyses: Zones of similar influence.Estuaries 20:743–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyer, J. N., J. W. Fourqurean, andR. D. Jones. 1999. Seasonal and long-term trends in the water quality of Florida Bay (1989–1997).Estuaries 22:417–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Butler, M. J., J. H. Hunt, W. F. Hernkind, M. J. Childress, R. Bertelsen, W. Sharp, T. Matthews, J. M. Field, andM. G. Marshall. 1995. Cascading disturbances in Florida Bay, USA: Cyanobacteria blooms, sponge mortality, and implications for juvenile spiny lobsters,Panulirus argus.Marine Ecology Progress Series 129:119–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Christian, D. andY. P. Sheng. 2003. Relative influence of various water quality parameters on light attenuation in Indian River Lagoon.Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 57:961–971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark, C. D., J. Jimenez-Morais, G. Jones, E. Zanardi-Lamardo, C. A. Moore, andR. G. Zika. 2002. A time-resolved fluorescence study of dissolved organic matter in a riverine to marine transition zone.Marine Chemistry 78:121–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cloern, J. E. 1987. Turbidity as a control on phytoplankton biomass and productivity in estuaries.Continental Shelf Research 7:1367–1381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dortch, M. S., C. F. Cerco, A. M. Teeter, andR. T. McAdory. 1997. Work Plan for a Water Quality Model of Florida Bay. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army Engineer District Jacksonville, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  10. Duarte, C. M. 1991. Seagrass depth limits.Aquatic Botany 40:363–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Everglades Forever Act (EFA). 1994. Florida Statute 373.4592. Florida State Legislature, Tallahassec, Florida.Google Scholar
  12. Florida Forever Act (FFA). 2000. Florida Statute 259.105. Florida State Legislature, Tallahassee, Florida.Google Scholar
  13. Fonseca, M. S. 1989. Sediment stabilization byHalophila decipiens in comparison to other seagrasses.Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 29:501–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fourqurean, J. W. andM. B. Robblee. 1999. Florida Bay: A history of recent ecological changes.Estuaries 22:335–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fourqurean, J. W., A. Willsie, C. D. Rose, andL. M. Rutten. 2001. Spatial and temporal pattern in seagrass community composition and productivity in south Florida.Marine Biology 138:341–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gallegos, C. L. 2001. Calculating optical water quality targets to restore and protect submersed aquatic vegetation: Overcoming problems in partitioning the diffuse attenuation coefficient for photosynthetically active radiation.Estuaries 24:381–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gordon, H. R. andA. Y. Morel. 1983. Remote Assessment of Ocean Colour for Interpretation of Satellite Visible Imagery, A Review. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
  18. Hansen, M. and N. T. Dewitt. 2000. 1890 and 1990 Bathymetry of Florida Bay. United States Geological Survey open-file report #00-374. St. Petersburg, Florida.Google Scholar
  19. Hoge, F. E., A. Vodacek, andN. V. Blough. 1993. Inherent optical properties of the ocean: Retrieval of the absorption coefficient of chromophoric dissolved organic matter from fluorescence measurements.Limnology and Oceanography 38:1394–1402.Google Scholar
  20. Hunt, J. H. In Press.A Synthesis of Research on Florida Bay. Technical Report ###. Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, St. Petersburg, Florida.Google Scholar
  21. Kenworthy, W. J. andM. S. Fonseca. 1996. Light requirements of seagrassesHalodule wrightii andSyringodium filiforme derived from the relationship between diffuse light attenuation and maximum depth distribution.Estuaries 19:740–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kirk, J. T. O. 1980. Spectral absorption properties of natural waters: Contribution of soluble and particulate fractions to light absorption in some inland waters of southeastern Australia.Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 31:287–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kirk, J. T. O. 1994. Light and Photosynthesis in Aquatic Ecosystems, 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.Google Scholar
  24. Lawrence, D., M. J. Dagg, H. Liu, S. R. Cummings, P. B. Ortner, andC. R. Kelble. 2004. Wind events and benthic-pelagic coupling in a shallow subtropical bay in Florida.Marine Ecology Progress Series 266:1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lorenzen, C. J. 1972. Extinction of light in the ocean by phytoplankton.Journal du Conseil 34:262–267.Google Scholar
  26. McKee, D., A. Cunningham, andK. Jones. 1999. Simultaneous measurements of fluorescence and beam attenuation: Instrument characterization and interpretation of signals from stratified coastal waters.Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 48:51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McPherson, B. F. andR. L. Miller. 1987. The vertical attenuation of light in Charlotte Harbor, a shallow, subtropical estuary, south-western Florida.Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 25:721–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McPherson, B. F. andR. L. Miller. 1994. Causes of light attenuation in Tampa Bay and Charlotte Harbor, Southwestern Florida.Water Resources Bulletin 30:43–53.Google Scholar
  29. Moore, C. A., C. T. Farmer, andR. G. Zika. 1993. Influence of the Orinoco River on hydrogen peroxide distribution and production in the eastern Caribbean.Journal of Geophysical Research 98:2289–2299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nuttle, W. K., J. W. Fourqurean, B. J. Cosby, J. C. Zieman, andM. B. Robblee. 2000. The influence of net freshwater supply on salinity in Florida Bay.Water Resources Research 36:1805–1822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Parsons, T. R. 1961. On the pigment composition of eleven species of marine phytoplankters.Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 18:1017–1025.Google Scholar
  32. Phlips, E. J. andS. Badylak. 1996. Spatial variability in phytoplankton standing stock and composition in a shallow inner-shelf lagoon, Florida Bay, Florida.Bulletin of Marine Science 58:203–216.Google Scholar
  33. Phlips, E. J., S. Badylak, andT. C. Lynch. 1999. Blooms of the picoplanktonic cyanobacterium synechococcus in Florida Bay, a subtropical inner-shelf lagoon.Limnology and Oceanography 44:1166–1175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Phlips, E. J., T. C. Lynch, andS. Badylak. 1995. Chlorophylla, tripton, color, and light availability in a shallow tropical innershelf lagoon, Florida Bay, USA.Marine Ecology Progress Series 127:223–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Robblee, M. B., T. R. Barber, P. R. Carlson, M. J. Durako, J. W. Fourquerean, L. K. Muehlstein, D. Porter, L. A. Yarbro, R. T. Zieman, andJ. C. Zieman. 1991. Mass mortality of the tropical seagrassThalassia testudinum in Florida Bay (USA).Marine Ecology Progress Series 71:297–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Shoaf, W. T. andB. W. Lium. 1976. Improved extraction of chlorophylla andb from algae using dimethyl sulfoxide.Limnology and Oceanography 21:926–928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Smith, N. P. 1997. An introduction to the tides of Florida Bay.Florida Scientist 60:53–67.Google Scholar
  38. Stedmon, C. A., S. Markager, andH. Kaas. 2000. Optical properties and signatures of chromophoric dissolved organic matter (CDOM) in Danish coastal waters.Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 51:267–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sverdrup, H. U., M. W. Johnson, andR. H. Fleming. 1954. The Oceans: Their Physics, Chemistry, and General Biology. Prentice Hall, Englewood Hills, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  40. Tilmant, J. T. 1989. A history and an overview of recent trends in the fisheries of Florida Bay.Bulletin of Marine Science 44:3–22.Google Scholar
  41. Turney, W. J. andB. F. Perkins. 1972. Molluscan distribution in Florida Bay. Sedimenta III. Report; University of Miami, Miami, Florida.Google Scholar
  42. Vant, W. N. 1990. Causes of light attenuation in nine New Zealand estuaries.Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 31:125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wang, J. D., J. Van De Kreeke, N. Krishnan, andD. Smith. 1994. Wind and tide response in Florida Bay.Bulletin of Marine Science 54:579–601.Google Scholar
  44. Wanless, H. R. andM. G. Tagett. 1989. Origin, growth, and evolution of carbonate mud-banks in Florida Bay.Bulletin of Marine Science 44:454–489.Google Scholar
  45. Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). 2000. Public Law 106-541 Title VI, section 601. Government Publishing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  46. Young, R. A., T. L. Clarke, R. Mann, andD. J. P. Swift. 1981. Temporal variability of suspended particulate concentrations in New York Bight.Journal of Sedimentology and Petrology 51:293–306.Google Scholar
  47. Zieman, J. C., J. W. Fourqurean, andT. A. Frankovich. 1999. Seagrass die-off in Florida Bay: Long-term trends in abundance and growth of turtle grass,Thalassia testudinum.Estuaries 22:460–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zieman, J. C., J. W. Fourqurean, andR. L. Iverson. 1989. Distribution, abundance, and productivity of seagrasses and macroalgae in Florida Bay.Bulletin of Marine Science 44:292–311.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Estuarine Research Federation 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher R. Kelble
    • 1
    • 2
  • Peter B. Ortner
    • 2
  • Gary L. Hitchcock
    • 1
  • Joseph N. Boyer
    • 3
  1. 1.Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric SciencesUniversity of MiamiMiami
  2. 2.Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological LaboratoryNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationMiami
  3. 3.Southeast Environmental Research CenterFlorida International UniversityMiami

Personalised recommendations