MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W407219943

Assessment of E. coli and Microcystins in Cladophora Mats in the Nearshore Waters of Grand Traverse Bay, Little Traverse Bay, and Saginaw Bay

2010· article· en· W407219943 sur OpenAlexfundno aff
Richard R. Rediske, James G O'Keefe, Kate Rieger, Jeremy D. Rediske

Notice bibliographique

RevueScholarWorks - GVSU (Grand Valley State University) · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEarth and Planetary Sciences
ThématiqueMarine and coastal ecosystems
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesMichigan Department of Natural ResourcesAlberta Water Research InstituteNorthwestern University
Mots-clésBayTraverseCladophoraOceanographyFisheryEnvironmental scienceGeologyAlgaeEcologyBiology
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

An assessment of the ability of Cladophora mats to sequester E. coli and microcystin LR and RR was conducted in the near-shore waters of Grand Traverse Bay (7 sites), Little Traverse Bay (2 sites), and Saginaw Bay (8 sites). The sampling locations were at public beach access points where Cladophora mats were previously observed. The goals of this research were to determine the spatial and temporal variability of E. coli populations in Cladophora mats in these recreational waters and if cyanotoxins (microcystin LR and RR) are sequestered in the detached algae. The collection of Cladophora samples was coordinated with local beach monitoring programs to facilitate the comparison with ambient water bacteria concentrations. This project provided important data for the assessment of public health impacts and the development of beach management programs to address the problems associated with Cladophora accumulations. Based on the results from this investigation, Saginaw Bay appears to be more heavily impacted by detached Cladophora than Grand Traverse/Little Traverse Bays. Mean E. coli concentrations in detached Cladophora were higher in Saginaw Bay (2,796 cfu/g dwt) than Grand Traverse Bay/Little Traverse Bay (1,775cfu/g dwt); however, the difference was not statistically significant (Mann-Whitney ρ=0.40). Cladophora deposits exhibited spatial and temporal variability in both systems. At most beaches in Grand Traverse Bay, Cladophora deposits were limited to small pockets at 1 location. Clinch Park had only one site with Cladophora on the last sampling event and two locations at the Traverse City State Park were free of detached algal accumulations. In contrast, Cladophora deposits in Saginaw Bay covered approximately 1 meter (m) of the shoreline at most beaches. Two locations in Saginaw Bay also had no accumulations of Cladophora during the study period (White’s Beach and Pinconning Park). Differences in Cladophora accumulation between Saginaw Bay and Grand Traverse Bay/Little Traverse Bay may be attributed to higher total phosphorus levels in Saginaw Bay. Levels of E. coli in detached Cladophora in both systems were similar to concentrations previously reported in the Great Lakes (1,000 cfu/g dwt – 60,000 cfu/g dwt). In Saginaw Bay, the highest levels of E. coli in detached Cladophora were consistently found at beaches near the Saginaw River. Even within individual sites, locations near tributaries and drains at Wenona Beach and South Linwood Beach were significantly higher than locations farther away from a point source. This relationship also was noted in Grand Traverse Bay, where the location near Mitchell Creek at the Traverse City State Park, had elevated E. coli concentrations in detached Cladophora compared to the other beach locations. These results suggest that Cladophora can trap bacteria from point sources and also be stimulated by nutrient discharges. Two locations, Pinconning Park and White’s Beach, had very limited Cladophora growth. Both locations had Chara growing on the lake bottom. Chara is known to exhibit allelopathic activity that can limit the growth of other aquatic plants. No correlation was found between E. coli levels in the open water (designated beach monitoring locations) and the near-shore zone, where the detached Cladophora samples were taken. As noted in previous studies, Cladophora appears to hold trapped E. coli and does not release the entrained bacteria into the offshore water. This investigation was the first to document the accumulation of microcystins in the detached Cladophora of Saginaw Bay. Total microcystins in detached Cladophora had a grand mean of 57 μg/g dwt for the study period. Saginaw Bay has a history of Microcystis blooms in the late vi summer months that produce both microcystin LR and RR. Since Microcystis has a high requirement for sunlight, cyanobacteria may become stressed when they are trapped in the detached algae mats. While accidental ingestion by humans of microcystins trapped in Cladophora is unlikely, these compounds can act as skin irritants. Walking through Cladophora accumulations to get to deeper water may provide sufficient exposure to cause irritation in sensitive individuals if microcystins are present. Although the data suggest that swimming areas (1 m depth) are not impacted by the E. coli accumulations in detached Cladophora, entrained bacteria and cyanotoxins may pose a hazard to children playing in the nearshore water and beach sand. Current regulations discourage beach grooming and altering the nearshore zone. The presence of elevated bacteria and microcystin levels in the nearshore environment of Saginaw Bay suggests that the current policy should be reevaluated to balance potential impacts to public health with the ecosystem services provided by coastal wetlands.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,063
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,949

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,008
Tête enseignante GPT0,199
Écart entre enseignants0,190 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueScholarWorks - GVSU (Grand Valley State University)Même sujetMarine and coastal ecosystemsTravaux en français237 207