Chlorophyll-a determinations in mesocosms under varying nutrient and temperature treatments: in-situ fluorescence sensors versus in-vitro measurements [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]

Abstract

Harmful algal blooms (HABs) are a significant threat to freshwater ecosystems, and monitoring for changes in biomass is therefore important. Fluorescence in-situ sensors enable rapid and high frequency real-time data collection and have been widely used to determine chlorophyll-a (Chla) concentrations that are used as an indicator of the total algal biomass. However, conversion of fluorescence to equivalent Chla concentrations is often complicated due to biofouling, phytoplankton composition and the type of equipment used. Here, we validated measurements from 24 Chla and 12 phycocyanin (cyanobacteria indicator) fluorescence in-situ sensors (Cyclops-7F, Turner Designs) against spectrophotometrically (in-vitro) determined Chla and tested a data-cleaning procedure for eliminating data errors and impacts of non-photochemical quenching. The test was done across a range of freshwater plankton communities in 24 mesocosms (i.e. experimental tanks) with a 2x3 (high and low nutrient x ambient, IPCC-A2 and IPCC-A2+50% temperature scenarios) factorial design. For most mesocosms (tanks), we found accurate (r2 ≥ 0.7) calibration of in-situ Chla fluorescence data using simple linear regression. An exception was tanks with high in-situ phycocyanin fluorescence, for which multiple regressions were employed, which increased the explained variance by >16%. Another exception was the low Chla concentration tanks (r2 < 0.3). Our results also show that the high frequency in-situ fluorescence data recorded the timing of sudden Chla variations, while less frequent in-vitro sampling sometimes missed these or, when recorded, the duration of changes was inaccurately determined. Fluorescence in-situ sensors are particularly useful to detect and quantify sudden phytoplankton biomass variations through high frequency measurements, especially when using appropriate data-cleaning methods and accounting for factors that can impact the fluorescence readings. Nevertheless, corroborating these data with in-vitro Chla assessments would provide additional validation for the early warnings provided by sensor data.

Keywords

• phytoplankton bloom detection
• phycocyanin fluorescence
• in-vivo method
• spectrophotometry
• high frequency data
• time series
• eng