Environmental Management

, Volume 50, Issue 4, pp 664–678 | Cite as

Water Quality and Plankton in the United States Nearshore Waters of Lake Huron

  • Peder M. Yurista
  • John R. Kelly
  • Samuel E. Miller
  • Jon D. Van Alstine


Our goal in the development of a nearshore monitoring method has been to evaluate and refine an in situ mapping approach to assess the nearshore waters across the Great Lakes. The report here for Lake Huron is part of a broader effort being conducted across all five Great Lakes. We conducted an intensive survey for the United States nearshore of Lake Huron along a continuous shoreline transect (523 km) from Port Huron, Michigan, to Detour Passage. A depth contour of 20 m was towed with a conductivity-temperature depth profiler, fluorometer, transmissometer, and laser optical plankton counter. Multiple cross-contour tows (10–30 m) on the cruise dates were used to characterize the variability across a broader range of the nearshore. The cross-contour tows were comparable with the alongshore contour indicating that the 20-m contour does a good job of representing the nearshore region (10–30 m). Strong correlations were observed between water quality and spatially associated watershed land use. A repeat tow separated by several weeks investigated temporal variability in spatial patterns within a summer season. Strong correlations were observed across each variable for the temporal repeat across broad- and fine-scale spatial dimensions. The survey results for Lake Huron nearshore are briefly compared with a similar nearshore survey in Lake Superior. The biomass concentrations of lower food web components of Lake Huron were notably approximately 54–59 % of those in Lake Superior. The towed instrumentation survey supported the recent view of a change in Lake Huron to an ultra-oligotrophic state, which has been uncharacteristic in recent history.


Lake Huron Nearshore Assessment Towing Conductivity-temperature depth profiler Laser-optical plankton counter 



We thank the USEPA Great Lakes National Program Office for ship time on the R/V Lake Guardian. We thank R. Barbiero for many good comments that helped improve the manuscript; M. Starus for editorial review; and three anonymous reviewers for comments that helped us improve the manuscript. This work was funded entirely by the USEPA. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the USEPA.


  1. Auer MT, Gatzke TL (2004) The spring runoff event, thermal bar formation, and cross margin transport in Lake Superior. Journal of Great Lakes Research 30:64–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbiero RP, Balcer M, Rockwell DC, Tuchman ML (2009) Recent shifts in the crustacean zooplankton community of Lake Huron. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 66:816–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barbiero RP, Lesht BM, Warren GJ (2011) Evidence for bottom-up control of recent shifts in the pelagic food web of Lake Huron. Journal of Great Lakes Research 37:78–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beletsky D, Saylor JH, Schwab DJ (1999) Mean circulation in the Great Lakes. Journal of Great Lakes Research 25:78–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bottrell HH, Duncan A, Gliwicz ZM, Grygierek E, Herzig A, Hillbricht-Ilkowska A et al (1976) A review of some problems in zooplankton production studies. Norwegian Journal of Zoology 24:419–456Google Scholar
  6. Csanady GT (1970) Dispersal of effluents in the Great Lakes. Water Research 4:79–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Danz NP, Regal RR, Niemi GJ, Brady V, Hollenhorst T, Johnson LB et al (2005) Environmentally stratified sampling design for the development of Great Lakes environmental indicators. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 102:41–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Danz NNP, Niemi GJ, Regal RR, Hollenhorst T, Johnson LB, Hanowski JM et al (2007) Integrated measures of anthropogenic stress in the U.S. Great Lakes Basin. Environmental Management 39:631–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Edsall TA, Charlton MN (1997) Nearshore waters of the Great Lakes. State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference 1996 Background Paper. ISBN 0-662-26031, EPA 905-R-97-015aGoogle Scholar
  10. Great Lakes National Program Office (2003) Standard operating procedure for zooplankton analysis. United States Environmental Protection Agency GLNPO, LG403Google Scholar
  11. Hains JJ, Kennedy RH (2002) Rapid collection of spatially-explicit in situ water quality data using a programmable towed vehicle. Journal of Freshwater Ecology 17:99–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Herman AW, Beanlands B, Phillips EF (2004) The next generation of optical plankton counter: the laser-OPC. Journal of Plankton Research 26:1135–1145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Isaaks EH, Srivastava RM (1989) Applied geostatistics. Oxford University Press Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Kelly JR (2009) Chapter 5.1. Nutrients and the Great Lakes nearshore, circa 2002-2007. In: Nearshore areas of the Great Lakes. Background paper, State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference 2008. Environment Canada and United States Environmental Protection Agency, ISBN 978-1-100-13562-5, EPA/905/R-09/013, Cat. No. En164-19/2009EGoogle Scholar
  15. Kelly JR, Yurista PM (in review) Development of an integrated assessment of large lakes using towed in situ sensor technologies: Linking nearshore conditions with adjacent watersheds. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and ManagementGoogle Scholar
  16. Kelly TJ, Czuczwa JM, Sticksel PR, Sverdrup GM (1991) Atmospheric and tributary inputs of toxic substances to Lake Erie. Journal of Great Lakes Research 17:504–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kelly JR, Albro CS, Geyer WR (1994) High-resolution mapping studies of water quality in Boston Harbor and Massachusetts Bay during 1994. MWRA Environmental Quality Department Technical Reports Series No. 96-1. Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, Boston, MAGoogle Scholar
  18. Liebig JR, Vanderploeg HA, Ruberg SA (2006) Factors affecting the performance of the optical plankton counter in large lakes: Insights from Lake Michigan and laboratory studies. Journal of Geophysical Research 111:C05S02. doi: 10.1029/2005JC003087
  19. Mackey SD, Goforth RR (2005) Foreword: special issue on Great Lakes nearshore and coastal habitats. Journal of Great Lakes Research 31(Suppl 1):1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Minns CK, Wichert GA (2005) A framework for defining fish habitat domains in Lake Ontario and its drainage. Journal of Great Lakes Research 31(Suppl 1):6–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nalepa TF, Pothoven SA, Fanslow DL (2009) Recent changes in benthic macroinvertebrate populations in Lake Huron and impact on the diet of lake whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis). Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management 12:2–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Niemi GJ, Kelly JR, Danz NP (2007) Environmental indicators for the coastal region of the North American Great Lakes: introduction and prospectus. Journal of Great Lakes Research 33(special issue 3):1–12Google Scholar
  23. Pearson RF, Swackhamer DL, Eisenreich SJ, Long DT (1998) Atmospheric inputs of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibensofurans to the Great Lakes: compositional comparison of PCDD and PCDF in sediments. Journal of Great Lakes Research 24:65–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Peterson SA, Urquhart NS, Welch EB (1999) Sample representativeness: a must for reliable regional lake condition estimates. Environmental Science and Technology 33:1559–1565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Prosser CL (1991) Environmental and metabolic animal physiology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Rao YR, Schwab DJ (2007) Transport and mixing between the coastal and offshore water in the Great Lakes: a review. Journal of Great Lakes Research 33:202–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ricker WE (1982) Computation and uses of central trend lines. Canadian Journal of Zoology 62:1897–1905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Riley SC, Roseman EF, Nichols SJ, O’Brien TP, Kiley CS, Schaeffer JS (2008) Deepwater demersal fish community collapse in Lake Huron. Transaction of the American Fisheries Society 137:1879–1890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Saylor JH, Sloss PW (1976) Water volume transport and oscillatory current flow through the Straits of Mackinac. Journal of Physical Oceanography 6:229–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sprules WG, Jin EH, Herman AW, Stockwell JD (1998) Calibration of an optical plankton counter for use in fresh water. Limnology and Oceanography 43:726–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stevens DL, Olsen AR (2004) Spatially balanced sampling of natural resources. Journal of the American Statistical Association 99:262–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Stoddard JL (2005) Use of ecological regions in aquatic assessments of ecological condition. Environmental Management 34(Suppl 1):S61–S70Google Scholar
  33. SURFER (2002) Surface mapping system. Golden Software, Golden, CO, USAGoogle Scholar
  34. SYSTAT (2004) The system for statistics. Systat Software, Chicago, IL, USAGoogle Scholar
  35. United States Environmental Protection Agency (1992) Great lakes monitoring and research strategy. EPA/620/R-92/001. EPA, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  36. USGS (2010) 2007 minerals yearbook Michigan. Available at: Accessed 3 Nov 2011
  37. Yule DL, Adams JV, Stockwell JD, Gorman OT (2008) Factors affecting bottom trawl catches: implications for monitoring the fishes of Lake Superior. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 28:109–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yurista PM, Kelly JR (2009) Spatial patterns of water quality and plankton from high-resolution continuous in situ sensing along a 537-km nearshore transect of western Lake Superior, 2004. In: Munawar M, Munawar IF (eds) State of lake superior. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management Society, Burlington, pp 439–471Google Scholar
  39. Yurista PM, Kelly JR, Miller SE (2005) Evaluation of optically acquired zooplankton size-spectrum data as a potential tool for assessment of condition in the Great Lakes. Environmental Management 35:34–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Yurista PM, Kelly JR, Miller S (2006) Comparisons of zooplankton community size structure in the Great Lakes. Journal of Geophysical Research 111:C05S02. doi: 10.1029/2005JC002971 Google Scholar
  41. Yurista PM, Kelly JR, Miller S (2009) Lake Superior zooplankton biomass: alternate estimates from a probability-based net survey and spatially extensive LOPC surveys. Journal of Great Lakes Research 35:337–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yurista PM, Kelly JR, Miller SE (2011) Lake superior: nearshore variability and a landscape driver concept. Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management 14:345–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC (outside the USA) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peder M. Yurista
    • 1
  • John R. Kelly
    • 1
  • Samuel E. Miller
    • 1
  • Jon D. Van Alstine
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Mid-Continent Ecological DivisionUnited States Environmental Protection AgencyDuluthUSA
  2. 2.USDA Forest Service, Kawishiwi Ranger DistrictElyUSA

Personalised recommendations