| Literature DB >> 26006121 |
Ying Wang1,2, Hong Jiang3,4, Jiaxin Jin5,6, Xiuying Zhang7,8, Xuehe Lu9,10, Yueqi Wang11.
Abstract
Carrying abundant nutrition, terrigenous freshwater has a great impact on the spatial and temporal heterogeneity of phytoplankton in coastal waters. The present study analyzed the spatial-temporal variations of Chlorophyll-a (Chl-a) concentration under the influence of discharge from the Yangtze River, based on remotely sensed Chl-a concentrations. The study area was initially zoned to quantitatively investigate the spatial variation patterns of Chl-a. Then, the temporal variation of Chl-a in each zone was simulated by a sinusoidal curve model. The results showed that in the inshore waters, the terrigenous discharge was the predominant driving force determining the pattern of Chl-a, which brings the risk of red tide disasters; while in the open sea areas, Chl-a was mainly affected by meteorological factors. Furthermore, a diversity of spatial and temporal variations of Chl-a existed based on the degree of influences from discharge. The diluted water extended from inshore to the east of Jeju Island. This process affected the Chl-a concentration flowing through the area, and had a potential impact on the marine environment. The Chl-a from September to November showed an obvious response to the discharge from July to September with a lag of 1 to 2 months.Entities:
Keywords: SeaWiFS; Yangtze River estuary; chlorophyll-a; discharge; spatial-temporal variations
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26006121 PMCID: PMC4454977 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph120505420
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Study area and the average annual Chl-a concentration from 1998 to 2010 obtained from Sea-viewing Wide Field-of-view Sensor (SeaWiFS) data. The point in the left picture indicates the location of the Datong hydrological gauging station. The points in different colors in the right picture indicate the sites of in situ Chl-a concentration measurements for four seasons.
Figure 2Chl-a concentrations from remote sensing technique before and after reconstruction by Data Interpolating Empirical Orthogonal Functions (DINEOF). Note the image from September 1997 for example.
Figure 3Comparison of the in situ Chl-a concentration with SeaWiFS remote sensing data for the entire time frame and for four seasons. The dots indicate the matchup between in situ data and satellite data before DINEOF interpolation, and the triangles indicate the matchup with the reconstructed data after DINEOF interpolation.
Comparison of the in situ Chl-a concentration with reconstructed SeaWiFS remote sensing data. Slope and Intercept are the linear regression results from the satellite retrievals vs. the in situ ones.
| Target | Count | Slope | Intercept |
|
| RMSE/mg/m3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Annual | 58 | 0.67 | 0.71 | 0.57 | 0.0001 | 2.32 |
| Before DINEOF | 40 | 0.79 | 0.36 | 0.61 | 0.0001 | 1.78 |
| After DINEOF | 18 | 0.56 | 1.26 | 0.54 | 0.0001 | 2.53 |
| Spring | 13 | 0.71 | 0.90 | 0.81 | 0.0001 | 2.44 |
| Summer | 21 | 0.36 | 0.97 | 0.43 | 0.0010 | 2.62 |
| Autumn | 18 | 2.02 | −0.39 | 0.90 | 0.0001 | 2.23 |
| Winter | 6 | 1.28 | −0.14 | 0.59 | 0.0740 | 0.61 |
Figure 4Monthly average variation trend of Chl-a concentration. Error bars show the standard deviation intervals of the mean.
Figure 5Distribution of correlation coefficient of the monthly average discharge and monthly average SeaWiFS-retrieved Chl-a.
Figure 6Monthly average of Chl-a concentration in each zone and discharge observed at the Datong hydrological gauging station.
Fitted parameters of sinusoidal models in various zones and Yangtze River discharge. B/A, the rate of change; R2, the model coefficient of determination; Significance, Significance level ().
| Target | A | B | C | D | E | B/A |
| Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zone 1 | 0.41 | 0.0003 | 0.14 | 12.05 | 0.77 | 0.0006 | 0.93 | 5.72 |
| Zone 2 | 0.85 | 0.0004 | 0.22 | 12.08 | 0.79 | 0.0005 | 0.90 | 4.83 |
| Zone 3 | 1.52 | 0.0005 | 0.12 | 12.22 | 0.62 | 0.0003 | 0.42 | 2.79 |
| Zone 4 | 3.82 | 0.0023 | 0.93 | 11.94 | −2.19 | 0.0006 | 0.73 | 3.19 |
| Zone 5 | 4.30 | 0.0020 | 1.18 | 11.98 | −2.28 | 0.0005 | 0.79 | 2.51 |
| Discharge | 35616.21 | −115.79 | 13358.16 | 11.92 | −2.48 | -0.0033 | 0.83 | 7.19 |
The time difference of wave pattern between discharge and each zone (Differ).
| Zone | Zone 1 | Zone 2 | Zone 3 | Zone 4 | Zone 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Differ/Month | 6.21 | 6.25 | 5.92 | 0.56 | 0.38 |
Correlation coefficients between Chl-a concentration and amount of the summer Yangtze discharge from 1998 to 2007 with and without time lag.
| Target | Discharge | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ||
|
|
| 0.371 | |||||||||||
|
| −0.112 | −0.280 | |||||||||||
|
| 0.108 | −0.074 | 0.212 | ||||||||||
|
| −0.331 | −0.432 | −0.119 | 0.002 | |||||||||
|
| −0.148 | −0.101 | 0.092 | −0.238 | −0.714 | ||||||||
|
| 0.126 | 0.138 | 0.280 | 0.243 | −0.375 | 0.223 | |||||||
|
| −0.284 | −0.010 | −0.022 | −0.146 | 0.034 | 0.088 | −0.508 | ||||||
|
| 0.175 | 0.220 | 0.213 | −0.300 | −0.516 | −0.439 | −0.371 | 0.091 | |||||
|
| 0.452 | 0.205 | 0.367 | 0.268 | −0.086 | 0.290 | |||||||
|
| −0.001 | −0.163 | −0.044 | 0.013 | 0.341 | 0.386 | 0.617 | 0.233 | |||||
|
| 0.636 | 0.569 | 0.341 | 0.339 | 0.032 | 0.416 | 0.562 | 0.625 | 0.169 | ||||
|
| 0.308 | 0.186 | 0.302 | 0.362 | 0.035 | 0.034 | 0.240 | −0.031 | 0.118 | 0.460 | 0.384 | 0.239 | |
, Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level; *, Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level.
Figure 7Correlation coefficients (r) between Chl-a concentration and discharge from July to November. Chl-a concentration had a time lag of 0 (A); 1 (B); and 2 (C) months after the discharge.