Assessing cyanobacterial frequency and abundance at surface waters near drinking water intakes across the United States.

Megan M Coffer, Blake A Schaeffer, Katherine Foreman, Alex Porteous, Keith A Loftin, Richard P Stumpf, P Jeremy Werdell, Erin Urquhart, Ryan J Albert, John A Darling
Author Information
  1. Megan M Coffer: ORISE Fellow, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Durham, NC, USA; Center for Geospatial Analytics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA. Electronic address: coffer.megan@epa.gov.
  2. Blake A Schaeffer: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Durham, NC, USA.
  3. Katherine Foreman: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC, USA.
  4. Alex Porteous: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC, USA.
  5. Keith A Loftin: U.S. Geological Survey, Kansas Water Science Center, Lawrence, KS, USA.
  6. Richard P Stumpf: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
  7. P Jeremy Werdell: Ocean Ecology Laboratory, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA.
  8. Erin Urquhart: Science Systems and Applications, Inc., Ocean Ecology Laboratory, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA.
  9. Ryan J Albert: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC, USA.
  10. John A Darling: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Durham, NC, USA.

Abstract

This study presents the first large-scale assessment of cyanobacterial frequency and abundance of surface water near drinking water intakes across the United States. Public water systems serve drinking water to nearly 90% of the United States population. Cyanobacteria and their toxins may degrade the quality of finished drinking water and can lead to negative health consequences. Satellite imagery can serve as a cost-effective and consistent monitoring technique for surface cyanobacterial blooms in source waters and can provide drinking water treatment operators information for managing their systems. This study uses satellite imagery from the European Space Agency's Ocean and Land Colour Instrument (OLCI) spanning June 2016 through April 2020. At 300-m spatial resolution, OLCI imagery can be used to monitor cyanobacteria in 685 drinking water sources across 285 lakes in 44 states, referred to here as resolvable drinking water sources. First, a subset of satellite data was compared to a subset of responses (n = 84) submitted as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's fourth Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule (UCMR 4). These UCMR 4 qualitative responses included visual observations of algal bloom presence and absence near drinking water intakes from March 2018 through November 2019. Overall agreement between satellite imagery and UCMR 4 qualitative responses was 94% with a Kappa coefficient of 0.70. Next, temporal frequency of cyanobacterial blooms at all resolvable drinking water sources was assessed. In 2019, bloom frequency averaged 2% and peaked at 100%, where 100% indicated a bloom was always present at the source waters when satellite imagery was available. Monthly cyanobacterial abundances were used to assess short-term trends across all resolvable drinking water sources and effect size was computed to provide insight on the number of years of data that must be obtained to increase confidence in an observed change. Generally, 2016 through 2020 was an insufficient time period for confidently observing changes at these source waters; on average, a decade of satellite imagery would be required for observed environmental trends to outweigh variability in the data. However, five source waters did demonstrate a sustained short-term trend, with one increasing in cyanobacterial abundance from June 2016 to April 2020 and four decreasing.

Keywords

References

  1. Front Microbiol. 2018 Mar 21;9:451 [PMID: 29619011]
  2. Water Res. 2017 Oct 1;122:455-470 [PMID: 28624729]
  3. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276-82 [PMID: 23092060]
  4. Environ Monit Assess. 2006 May;116(1-3):543-62 [PMID: 16779611]
  5. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2005 Mar 15;203(3):231-42 [PMID: 15737677]
  6. Water Res. 2017 Nov 1;124:454-464 [PMID: 28787682]
  7. Sci Total Environ. 2021 Jun 20;774:145462 [PMID: 33609824]
  8. Ecol Indic. 2017 Sep;80:84-95 [PMID: 30245589]
  9. Environ Monit Assess. 2020 Dec 2;192(12):808 [PMID: 33263783]
  10. Sci Rep. 2019 Dec 4;9(1):18310 [PMID: 31797884]
  11. Water Res. 2020 Aug 15;181:115902 [PMID: 32505885]
  12. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Jan 10;114(2):352-357 [PMID: 28028234]
  13. Ecol Indic. 2021 Sep 1;128:1-107822 [PMID: 35558093]
  14. Sci Rep. 2017 Jan 11;7:40326 [PMID: 28074871]
  15. Ecol Indic. 2020 Apr 1;111:105976 [PMID: 34326705]
  16. Data Brief. 2019 Nov 16;28:104826 [PMID: 31871980]
  17. Ecol Lett. 2015 Apr;18(4):375-84 [PMID: 25728551]
  18. Toxins (Basel). 2018 Oct 26;10(11): [PMID: 30373126]
  19. Ecol Lett. 2017 Jan;20(1):98-111 [PMID: 27889953]
  20. Harmful Algae. 2017 Jul;67:144-152 [PMID: 28755717]
  21. Toxins (Basel). 2018 Jan 20;10(1): [PMID: 29361682]
  22. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2018 Aug;16(8):471-483 [PMID: 29946124]
  23. Geohealth. 2020 Aug 25;4(9):e2020GH000254 [PMID: 32864541]
  24. Toxins (Basel). 2015 Jun 12;7(6):2198-220 [PMID: 26075379]
  25. Mar Pollut Bull. 2014 Oct 15;87(1-2):311-322 [PMID: 25148755]
  26. Environ Model Softw. 2018;109:93-103 [PMID: 31595145]
  27. Harmful Algae. 2016 Apr;54:174-193 [PMID: 28073475]
  28. J Environ Qual. 2018 Jan;47(1):113-120 [PMID: 29415096]
  29. Ecotoxicology. 2018 Aug;27(6):752-760 [PMID: 29934736]
  30. Opt Express. 2010 Nov 8;18(23):24109-25 [PMID: 21164758]
  31. Toxins (Basel). 2020 May 20;12(5): [PMID: 32443714]
  32. Harmful Algae. 2016 Apr;54:160-173 [PMID: 28073474]
  33. Environ Sci Technol. 2009 Apr 1;43(7):2627-33 [PMID: 19452927]
  34. Psychol Bull. 1992 Jul;112(1):155-9 [PMID: 19565683]

Grants

  1. EPA999999/Intramural EPA

MeSH Term

Cyanobacteria
Drinking Water
Environmental Monitoring
Eutrophication
Lakes
United States

Chemicals

Drinking Water

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0waterdrinkingcyanobacterialimagerywaterssatellitefrequencyacrosscansourcesourcesabundancesurfacenearintakesUnitedStatesquality20162020resolvabledataresponsesUCMR4bloomstudysystemsserveCyanobacteriabloomsprovideAgency'sOLCIJuneAprilusedsubsetqualitative2019100%short-termtrendsobservedpresentsfirstlarge-scaleassessmentPublicnearly90%populationtoxinsmaydegradefinishedleadnegativehealthconsequencesSatellitecost-effectiveconsistentmonitoringtechniquetreatmentoperatorsinformationmanagingusesEuropeanSpaceOceanLandColourInstrumentspanning300-mspatialresolutionmonitorcyanobacteria685285lakes44statesreferredFirstcomparedn = 84submittedpartUSEnvironmentalProtectionfourthUnregulatedContaminantMonitoringRuleincludedvisualobservationsalgalpresenceabsenceMarch2018NovemberOverallagreement94%Kappacoefficient070Nexttemporalassessedaveraged2%peakedindicatedalwayspresentavailableMonthlyabundancesassesseffectsizecomputedinsightnumberyearsmustobtainedincreaseconfidencechangeGenerallyinsufficienttimeperiodconfidentlyobservingchangesaveragedecaderequiredenvironmentaloutweighvariabilityHoweverfivedemonstratesustainedtrendoneincreasingfourdecreasingAssessingDrinkingInlandRemotesensingSourceWater

Similar Articles

Cited By