To control eutrophication, reducing nutrient load is a key goal of ecosystem management. In systems in which the phytoplankton are strongly nutrient limited, the loading of nutrients (typically N and P) lead to large and often undesirable blooms of phytoplankton (Howarth, 1988). The sinking and decomposition of these blooms can lead to oxygen depletion in the sediments and bottom waters in systems in which the water column is physically stratified. The tidal-freshwater Hudson is neither stratified nor nutrient limited. Nutrient concentrations are high, but phytoplankton are limited by the other factors we have discussed here: light; deep mixing; and grazing. Thus lowering the input of these nutrients will not greatly affect phytoplankton or oxygen in this part of the river. On the other hand, if one were to try to manage the Hudson for water clarity by reducing the input of silts and clays, dramatic increases in phytoplankton would be expected (Caraco et al., 1997). If the
Hudson River lacked the suspended matter that now absorbs light, phytoplankton wouldbe able to use much of the pools of inorganic N and P that are now exported downstream. In a simulation model of this effect, Caraco et al. (1997) suggested that summertime chlorophyll-« would be as high as 70 to 80 |g liter-1 (about 20 times the present values) before self shading or P-limitation further limited bloom formation in the mid-Hudson region. Thus while the abatement of turbidity might seem desirable to improve the river aesthetically and for swimming, it is likely to also lead to dramatic increases in eutrophication.
Alpine, A. E., and Cloern, J. E. 1988, Phytoplankton growth rates in a light-limited environment, San Francisco Bay. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 44:167-73.
Baker, A. L., and Baker, K. K. 1979. Effects of temperature and current discharge on the concentration and photosynthetic activity of the phytoplankton in the upper Mississippi River. Freshwater Biology. 9:191-98.
Banse, K. 1976. Rates of growth, respiration and photosynthesis of unicellular algae as related to cell size: A review. Journal ofPhycology. 12:135-40.
Beardall, J., and Raven, J. A. 1990. Pathways and mechanisms of respiration in microalgae. Marine Microbial Food Webs. 4:7-30.
Bianchi, T., Findlay, S., and Dawson, R. 1993. Organic matter sources in the water column and sediments of the Hudson River Estuary: the use of plant pigments as tracers. Estuarine and Coastal Shelf Science. 36:359-76.
Bonnetto, C. A. 1983. Fitoplancton y produccion primaria del Parana Medio. Ecosur. 10:79-102.
Brock, T. D. 1979. Biology of microorganisms, 3rd edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 802 pp.
Cadee, G. C. 1986. Increased phytoplankton primary production in the Marsdiep Area (Western Dutch Wadden Sea). Netherlands Journal of Sea Research. 20:285-90.
Cadee, G. C., and Hegman, J. 1974. Primary production of phytoplankton in the Dutch Waddeen Sea. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research. 8:240-59.
Caraco, N. F., Cole, J. J., Raymond, P. A., Strayer, D. L., Pace, M. L., Findlay, S., and Fischer, D. T. 1997. Zebra mussel invasion in a large turbid river: Phytoplankton response to increased grazing. Ecology. 78:602.
Caraco, N. F., Lampman, G. G., Cole, J. J., Limburg, K. E., Pace, M. L., and Fischer, D. 1998. Microbial assimilation of DIN in a nitrogen rich estuary: implications for food quality and isotope studies. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 167: 59-71.
Caraco, N. F., Cole, J. J., Findlay, S. E. G., Fischer, D., Lampman, G. G., Pace, M. L., and Strayer, D. L. 2000. Dissolved oxygen declines in the Hudson River associated with the invasion of the zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha). Environmental Science and Technology. 34:1204-1210.
Cloern, J. E. 1984. Does the benthos control phytoplankton biomass in south San Francisco Bay. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 9:191-202.
Cloern, J. E. 1987. Turbidity as a control on phytoplankton biomass and productivity in estuaries. Continental Shelf Research. 7:1367-81.
Cloern, J. E., Cole, B. E., Wong, R. L. G., and Alpine, A. E. 1985. Temporal dynamics of estuarine phytoplankton: A case study of San Francisco Bay. Hydrobiology. 129:153-76.
Cole, B. E., and Cloern, J. E. 1984. Significance of biomass and light availability to phytoplankton productivity in San Francisco Bay. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 17:15-24.
Cole, J. J., Caraco, N. F., and Peierls, B. 1992. Can phytoplankton maintain a positive balance in a turbid, freshwater, tidal estuary? Limnology and Oceanography. 37:1608-1617.
Cole, J. J., and Caraco, N. F. 2001. Carbon in catchments: Connecting terrestrial carbon losses with aquatic metabolism. Marine and Freshwater Research. 52:101-110.
Cote, B., and Platt, T. 1983. Day to day variations in the spring-summer photosynthetic parameters of coastal marine phytoplankton. Limnology and Oceanography. 28:320-44.
Ertl, M. 1985. The effects of the hydrological regime on primary production in the main stream and the side arms of the River Danube. Archive für Hydro-biolia Supplement. 68:139-48.
Falkowski, P G., Dubinsky, Z., and Santostefano, G. 1985. Light-enhanced dark respiration in phytoplankton. Verhandlungen Internationale Vereinigung Limnologie. 22:2830-33.
Findlay, S. E. G., Sinsabaugh, R. L., Fischer, D. T., and Franchini, P 1998. Sources of dissolved organic carbon supporting planktonic bacterial production in the tidal-freshwater Hudson River. Ecosystems. 1:227-39.
Fisher, T. R., Carlson, P A., and Barber, R. T. 1982. Carbon and nitrogen primary productivity in three North Carolina estuaries. Estuarine and Coastal Shelf Science. 15:621-44.
Fisher, T. R., Peele, E. R., Ammerman, J. W., and Harding, Jr., L. W 1992. Nutrient limitation of phytoplankton in Chesapeake Bay. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 82:51-63.
Flemer, D. A. 1970. Primary production in the Chesapeake Bay Chesapeake Science. 11:117-29.
Flint, R. W, Powell, G. L., and Kalke, R. D. 1986. Ecological effects from the balance between new and recycled nitrogen in Texas coastal waters. Estuaries. 9:284-94.
Frederick, S. W., Heffner, R. L., Packard, A. T., Eldridge, P M., Eldridge, J. C., Schumacher, G. J., Eichorn, K. L., Currie, J. H., Richards, J. N., and Boody, O. C. 1.1976. Notes on phytoplankton distribution in the Hudson River Estuary. Hudson River Ecology: Fourth Symposium. Hudson River Environmental Society, Consolidated Edison Auditorium, NewYork, NY.
Frey, B. E., Small, L. F., and Lara-Lara, R. 1984. Water column primary production in the Columbia River Estuary. Columbia River Estuary Data Development Program, Astoria, Oregon.
Furnas, B. E., Hitchcock, G. L., and Smayda, T. J. 1976. Nutrient-phytoplankton relationships in Narra-gansett Bay during the summer bloom, in Wiley, M. (ed). Estuarine Process, Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press, pp. 118-133.
Garside, C., Malone, T. C., Roels, O. A., and Sharfstein, B. A. 1976. An evaluation of sewage derived nutrients and their influence on the Hudson River Estuary and New York Bight. Estuarine and Coastal Shelf Science. 4:281-99.
Geider, R. J., and Osborne, B. A. 1989. Respiration and microalgal growth: a review of the quantitative relationship between dark respiration and growth. New Phytologist. 112:327-41.
Gilmartin, M. 1964. The primary production of a British Columbia fjord. Journal of Fisheries Research Board of Canada. 21:505-37.
Gopinathan, C. P, Nair, R., and Nair, A. K. K. 1984. Quantitative ecology of phytoplankton in the Cochlin Backwater. Indian Journal of Fisheries. 31:325-36.
Haines, E. B., and Dunstant, W. M. 1975. The distribution and relation of particulate organic material and primary productivity in the Georgia Bight. Estuarine and Coastal Shelf Science. 3:431-41.
Harding, L. W., Jr., Meeson, B. W., and Fisher, T. R. 1986. Phytoplankton production in two east coast estuaries: Photosynthesis light functions and patterns of carbon assimilation in Chesapeake and Delaware Bays. Estuarine and Coastal Shelf Science. 23:773-806.
Harley, M., and Findlay, S.1994. Photosynthesis-irradiance relationships for three species of submersed macrophytes in the tidal freshwater Hudson River. Estuaries. 17:200-205.
Howarth, R. W 1988. Nutrient limitation of primary production in marine ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 19:89-110.
Howarth, R. W., Schneider, R., and Swaney, D. 1996. Metabolism and organic carbon fluxes in the tidal freshwater Hudson River. Estuaries. 19:848-65.
Howarth, R. W., Marino, R., Swaney, D. P, and Boyer, E. W. (this volume). Wastewater and watershed influences on primary productivity and oxygen dynamics in the lower Hudson River estuary. In: J. S. Levinton and J. R. Waldman (eds.). The Hudson River Estuary. Cambridge University Press.
Howells, G. P, and Weaver, S. 1969. Studies on phytoplankton at Indian Point, in G. P Howells and G. J. Lauer (eds.), Hudson River Ecology: Proceeding of a symposium. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, pp. 231-61.
IES (Institute of Ecosystem Studies), Environmental Monitoring Program. 2001. Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Box AB, Millbrook, NY 12545, www.ecostudies.org.
Iqbal, M. 1983. An Introduction to Solar Radiation. New York: Academic Press, 153 pp.
Keller, A. 1988. Estimatingphytoplanktonproductivity from light availability and biomass in the MERL mesocosmsandNarragansettBay. MarineEcology Progress Series. 45:159-69.
Kobayashi, T., Williams, S., and Kotlash, A. 2000. Autotrophic picoplankton in a regulated coastal river in New South Wales. Proceedings of the Lin-nean Society of New South Wales. 122:79-88.
Kuparinen, J. 1987. Production and respiration of overall plankton and ultraplankton communities at the entrance to the Gulf of Finland in the Baltic Sea. Marine Biology. 93:591-607.
Lampman, G. G., Caraco, N. F., and Cole, J. J. 1999. Spatial and temporal patterns of nutrient concentration and export in the tidal Hudson River. Estuaries. 22:285-96.
Laws, E. A. 1975. The importance of respiration losses in controlling the size distribution of marine phytoplankton. Ecology. 56:419-26.
Levasseur, M., Therriault, J. C., and Legendre, L. 1984. Hierarchical control of phytoplankton succession by physical factors. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 19:211-22.
Malone, T. C. 1975. Phytoplankton productivity in the apex of the New York Bight: Environmental regulation of productivity/chlorophyll a. Limnology and Oceanography Special Symposium. 260-71.
Malone, T. C. 1977. Environmental regulation of phytoplankton productivity in the lower Hudson
Estuary. Estuarine and Coastal Shelf Science. 5:157-71.
Marshall, H. 1988. Seasonal phytoplankton composition and concentration patterns within the HudsonRiver. Technical Report 018/86b/011. Hudson River Foundation. New York, NY.
Pace, M. L., and Lonsdale, D. J. (this volume). Ecology of the Hudson River Zooplankton Community. In J. S. Levinton and J. R. Waldman (eds.). The Hudson River Estuary. Cambridge University Press.
Pennock, J. R., and Sharp, J. H. 1986. Phytoplankton production in the Delaware estuary: Temporal and spatial variability. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 34:143-55.
Peterson, D. H., and Festa, J. F. 1984. Numerical simulation of phytoplankton productivity in partially mixed estuaries. Estuarine and Coastal Shelf Science. 19:563-89.
Randall, J. M., and Day, Jr., J. W. 1987. Effects of river discharge and vertical circulation on aquatic primary production in a turbid Louisiana estuary. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research. 21: 231-42.
Raven, J. A., and Beardall, J. 1981. Respiration and photorespiration. Canadian Bulletin of Fisheries and Aquatic Science. 210:55-82.
Raymond, P. A., and Bauer, J. E. 2001. Riverine export of aged organic matter to the North Atlantic Ocean. Nature (London) 409:497-500.
Raymond, P. A., Caraco, N. F., and Cole, J. J. 1997. CO2 concentration and atmospheric flux in the Hudson River. Estuaries. 20:381-90.
Roland, F., and Cole, J. J. 1999. Regulation of bacterial growth efficiency in a large turbid estuary. Aquatic Microbial Ecology. 20:31-8.
Scott, B. D. 1978. Phytoplankton distribution and light attenuation in Port Hacking Estuary. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research. 29: 31-44.
Shaw, P J., and Purdie, D. A. 2001. Phytoplank-ton photosynthesis-irradiance parameters in the near-shore UK coastal waters of the North Sea: temporal variation and environmental control. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 216:83-94.
Shehata, S. A., and Bader, S. A. 1985. Effect of Nile River water-quality on algal distribution at Cairo, Egypt. Environment International. 11:465-74.
Sinada, F., and Karim, A. G. A. 1984. A Quantitative study of the phytoplankton in the Blue and White Niles at Khartoum. Hydrobiologia. 110: 47-55.
Sirois, D. L., and Frederick, S. W 1978. Phytoplankton and primary production in the lower Hudson River Estuary. Estuarine and Coastal Shelf Science. 7:413-423.
Smith, T. E., Stevenson, R. J. Caraco, N. F., and Cole, J. J. 1998. Changes in phytoplankton community structure during the zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) invasion of the Hudson River (New York). Journal of Plankton Research. 20:1567-79.
Stockner, J. G., and Cliff, D. D. 1979. Phytoplankton ecology of Vancouver Harbor. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada. 36:1-10.
Stone, S., and Ganf, G. 1981. The influence ofprevious light history on the respiration of four species of freshwater phytoplankton. Archive fur Hydrobio-lia Supplement. 91:435-62.
Strayer, D. L. (this volume). Alien species in the Hudson River. In: J. S. Levinton and J. R. Waldman (eds.). The Hudson River Estuary. Cambridge University Press.
Strayer, D. L., Caraco, N. F., Cole, J. J., Findlay, S., and Pace, M. L. 1999. Transformation of freshwater ecosystems by bivalves: a case study of zebra mussels in the Hudson River. Bioscience. 49:19-27.
Swaney, D., Howarth, R. W., and Butler, T. J. 1999. A novel approach for estimating ecosystem production and respiration in estuaries: Application to the oligohaline and mesohaline Hudson River. Limnology and Oceanography. 44 (6):1522-29.
Turner, R. E., Woo, S. W, and Jitts, H. R. 1979. Phytoplankton production in a turbid, temperate salt marsh estuary. Estuarine and Coastal Shelf Science. 9:603-613.
Williams, P J. le B., Raine, C. T., and Bryan, J. R. 1979. Agreement between the carbon-14 and oxygen methods of measuring phytoplankton production: reassessment of the photosynthetic quotient. OceanologicaActa. 2:411-416.
Williams, P. J. le B., and Robertson, J. E. 1991. Overall planktonic oxygen and carbon dioxide metabolism: the problem of reconciling observations and calculations of photosynthetic quotients. Journal of Plankton Research. 13:153-69.
10 Wastewater and Watershed Influences on Primary Productivity and Oxygen Dynamics in the Lower Hudson River Estuary
Robert W. Howarth, Roxanne Marino, Dennis P. Swaney, and Elizabeth W. Boyer
The Hudson estuary suffered from low dissolved oxygen concentrations over much of the twentieth century, but by the mid 1990s, all dry-weather discharges from sewage treatment plants in the New York City region received secondary treatment. This greatly reduced labile organic carbon (BOD) loadings, and resulted in dissolved oxygen concentrations that in most recent years have met New York State standards. Between the1970s and the 1990s, the estuary switched from sewage as the primary input of labile organic matter to phytoplankton primary production as the major input. Further improvement in water quality is desirable, with the goal of reducing the tropic status of the estuary from hypereutrophic to moderately eu-trophic. This will require upgrading of sewage treatment plants to nutrient reduction technology, at an estimated cost of $112 to $277 million per year, and a substantial reduction in nitrogen loading from combined sewer overflows and from nonpoint sources.
abstract Primary productivity in the saline Hudson River estuary is strongly regulated by water residence times in the estuary. Nutrient loads and concentrations are very high, and when residence times are more than two days, production is extremely high. When water residence times are less than two days, production rates are low to moderate. Residence times are controlled both by freshwater discharge into the estuary and by tidal mixing, so residence times are longest and production is highest during neap tides when freshwater discharge is low. Freshwater discharge was generally high in the 1970s, which kept primary production low. In contrast, freshwater discharge rates were lower in the 1990s, and the estuary became hy-pereutrophic.
Nutrient loading per area of estuary to the saline portion of the Hudson is probably the highest for any major estuary in North America. As of the 1990s, approximately 58 percent of the nitrogen and 81 percent of the phosphorus came from wastewater effluent and other urban discharges in the New York City metropolitan area. Some 42 percent of the nitrogen and 19 percent of the phosphorus came from upriver tributary sources. For nitrogen, these tributary inputs are dominated by nonpoint sources, with atmospheric deposition from fossil fuel combustion and agricultural sources contributing equally. Human activity has probably increased nitrogen loading to the Hudson estuary twelve-fold and phosphorus loading fifty-fold or more since European settlement. Nitrogen and phosphorus loadings to the estuary have decreased somewhat since 1970 due to universal secondary treatment of dry-weather wastewater effluents and a ban on phosphates in detergents.
Was this article helpful?