US Long-Term Ecological Research Network

Cascade project at North Temperate Lakes LTER - High Frequency Data for Whole Lake Nutrient Additions 2013-2015

Abstract
High frequency continuous data for temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, chlorophyll a, and phycocyanin in Paul, Peter, and Tuesday lakes from mid-May to early September for the years 2013, 2014 and 2015. Inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus were added to Peter and Tuesday lakes each year while Paul Lake was an unfertilized reference.
Contact
Dataset ID
371
Date Range
-
LTER Keywords
Maintenance
complete
Methods
Methods are described in Wilkinson et al. 2018 (Ecological Monographs 88:188-203) and Pace et al. 2017 (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 114: 352-357). These publications including supplements should be consulted for details.
In Paul, Peter and Tuesday lakes two sondes were deployed at 0.75 meters near lake center. One sonde was a Hydrolab (model DS5X) with temperature, oxygen, pH, phycocyanin, and chlorophyll a sensors. One sonde was a Yellow Springs Instruments (YSI) 6600-V2-4 with temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, phycocyanin, and chlorophyll a sensors. Measurements were made every five minutes. Brief gaps in the data record due to calibration or sensor malfunction were interpolated using a bivariate autoregressive state-space model with the MARSS package in R version 3.9 to create a continuous daily time series.
Version Number
1

LTREB experimental chironomid mesocosms at Myvatn, Iceland

Abstract
During the summer of 2014, we conducted experiments testing whether increasing numbers of chironomid larvae would increase primary production and standing chlorophyll a concentrations. We incubated experimental mesocosms with varying numbers of chironomid larvae for 12 days in July. We tested sediments for chlorophyll a concentrations, as sediments are primarily composed of benthic diatoms. We tested the oxygen production in these mesocosms. We did this by sealing the mesocosms and incubating them in Lake Myvatn for 3 hours, and taking measurements of dissolved oxygen before and after the incubations.
We were also interested in whether this increase in food resources might translate to increased growth rates of chironomid larvae at high larval densities. After stocking experimental mesocosms with varying numbers of chironomid larvae, we set these mesocosms in Lake Myvatn for 12 days. We collected the larvae at the end of the 12 day experiment and obtained the average dry weights of the Chironomus islandicus larvae in each mesocosm.
We hypothesized that the tubes that chironomid larvae build would be a superior substrate for algal growth, as compared to loose sediments. Because there are two taxa (Chironomus islandicus and Tanytarsus gracilentus) that are overwhelmingly dominant at our study site, we wondered whether there would be differences in this effect between the two species. We stocked mesocosms with larvae from one of the two species, and mesocosms were then incubated in Lake Myvatn. We collected sediments and larval tubes from each mesocosm and tested their chlorophyll a concentrations.
We hypothesized that one mechanism that chironomid larvae might alleviate algal nutrient limitation by depositing concentrated nutrients near algae in the form of larval excretions. We collected chironomid larvae from Lake Myvatn and placed them in distilled water. We then sieved out the larvae and their fecal passings, and transported the water samples to Madison, WI, USA, where nutrient concentrations were analyzed
Contact
Dataset ID
334
Date Range
-
Methods
Please refer to the following manuscript for a description of methods:
Herren, Cristina M., Webert, Kyle C., Drake, Michael D., Vander Zanden, M. Jake, Einarsson, Árni, Ives, Anthony R., Gratton, Claudio. 2016. Positive feedback between chironomids and algae creates net mutualism between benthic primary consumers and producers, Ecology, DOI: 10.1002/ecy.1654
Short Name
Myvatn midge experiment chlorophyll
Version Number
11

LAGOS-NE v.1.054.1 - Lake water quality time series and geophysical data from a 17-state region of the United States

Abstract
Time series of mean summer total nitrogen (TN), total phosphorus (TP), stoichiometry (TN:TP) and chlorophyll values from 2913 unique lakes in the Midwest and Northeast United States. Epilimnetic nutrient and chlorophyll observations were derived from the Lake Multi-Scaled Geospatial and Temporal Database LAGOS-NELIMNO version 1.054.1, and come from 54 disparate data sources. These data were used to assess long-term monotonic changes in water quality from 1990-2013, and the potential drivers of those trends (Oliver et al., submitted). Summer was used to approximate the stratified period, which was defined as June 15 to September 15. The median number of observations per summer for a given lake was 2, but ranged from 1 to 83. The rules for inclusion in the database were that, for a given water quality parameter, a lake must have an observation in each period of 1990-2000 and 2001-2011. Additionally, observations must span at least 5 years. Each unique lake with nutrient or chlorophyll data also has supporting geophysical data, including climate, atmospheric deposition, land use, hydrology, and topography derived at the lake watershed (variable prefix iws) and HUC 4 (variable prefix hu4) scale. Lake-specific characteristics, such as depth and area, are also reported. The geospatial data came from LAGOS-NEGEO version 1.03. For more specific information on how LAGOS-NE was created, see Soranno et al. (2015).
Soranno P.A., Bissell E.G., Cheruvelil K.S., Christel S.T., Collins S.M., Fergus C.E., Filstrup C.T., Lapierre J.-F., Lottig N.R., Oliver S.K., Scott C.E., Smith N.J., Stopyak S., Yuan S., Bremigan M.T., Downing J.A., Gries C., Henry E.N., Skaff N.K., Stanley E.H., Stow C.A., Tan P.-N., Wagner T., and Webster K.E. 2015. Building a multi-scaled geospatial temporal ecology database from disparate data sources: fostering open science and data reuse. Gigascience 4: 28. doi: 10.1186/s13742-015-0067-4.
Dataset ID
333
Date Range
-
Methods
See Oliver et al. (submitted) and Soranno et al. (2015) for details on sources of data, methods of collection, and derivation of parameters
Oliver S.K., Collins S.M., Soranno P.A., Wagner T., Stanley E.H., Jones J.R., Stow C.A., Lottig N.R. Unexpected stasis in a changing world: Lake nutrient and chlorophyll trends since 1990. Submitted to Global Change Biology.
Soranno P.A., Bissell E.G., Cheruvelil K.S., Christel S.T., Collins S.M., Fergus C.E., Filstrup C.T., Lapierre J.-F., Lottig N.R., Oliver S.K., Scott C.E., Smith N.J., Stopyak S., Yuan S., Bremigan M.T., Downing J.A., Gries C., Henry E.N., Skaff N.K., Stanley E.H., Stow C.A., Tan P.-N., Wagner T., and Webster K.E. 2015. Building a multi-scaled geospatial temporal ecology database from disparate data sources: fostering open science and data reuse. Gigascience 4: 28. doi: 10.1186/s13742-015-0067-4 .
NTL Themes
Version Number
15

LAGOS - Chlorophyll, TP, and water color summer epilimnetic concentrations and lake and catchment data for inland lakes in WI, MI, NY, and ME – a subset of lake data from LAGOSLimno v.1.040.1

Abstract
This dataset includes lake total phosphorus (TP), true water color, and chlorophyll a (CHLa) concentrations from summer, epilimnetic water samples and is a subset of the larger LAGOS database (Lake multi-scaled geospatial and temporal database, described in Soranno et al. 2015). LAGOS compiles multiple, individual lake water chemistry datasets into an integrated database. We accessed LAGOSLIMNO version 1.040.0 for lake water chemistry data and LAGOSGEO version 1.02 for lake catchment geographic data. In the LAGOSLIMNO database, lake water chemistry data were collected from individual state agency sampling and volunteer programs designed to monitor lake water quality. Water chemistry analyses follow standard lab methods. In the LAGOSGEO database geographic data were collected from national scale geographic information systems (GIS) data layers. Lake catchments, defined as 'The area of land that drains directly into a lake, and into all upstream-connected, permanent streams to that lake exclusive of any upstream lake watersheds for lakes greater than or equal to 10 ha that are connected via permanent streams', were delineated for lakes greater than or equal to 4 ha. Lake-stream connectivity type was assigned to lakes greater than or equal to 4 ha using GIS tools that use the National Hydrology Dataset (See Soranno et al. 2015 for LAGOS geographic processing steps).
A subset of lake and geographic data was created to examine spatial variation in TP and water color relationships with CHLa across broad geographic extents using spatially-varying coefficient models with a Bayesian framework. Lakes were selected that had complete records for summer epilimnetic total TP, true water color, and CHLa. In addition we selected lakes with surface area greater than or equal to 4 ha and less than 10,000 ha to exclude very small and very large lakes from the analyses. The resulting dataset includes 838 lakes in Wisconsin, Michigan, New York, and Maine with 7395 observations. The majority of lakes in the data subset have only one water chemistry observation (~72% of lakes). There are 228 lakes with more than one water chemistry observation taken on different sampling occasions over time (average of 29 observations per lake with repeated measures). The dataset reports the original, individual measurements. The proportion of agriculture and wetlands in the lake catchment were derived from land cover and land use data in the National Land Cover Dataset (2006). For the analyses we withheld ten percent of the observations for model validation and to assess prediction accuracy. The remaining observations were used in the model building steps. The 'dataset' column in the data indicates whether the observation belongs to the model-building ('mb') or hold-out dataset ('h').
Dataset ID
325
Data Sources
Date Range
-
Methods
Limnological water chemistry samples were collected through individual monitoring programs carried out or overseen by state agencies. Water chemistry analyses were performed using standard methods by individual labs. Methods for integrating the disparate state datasets are described in detail in Soranno et al. 2015 Building a multi-scaled geospatial temporal ecology database from disparate data sources: fostering open science and data reuse, GigaScience20154:28 DOI: 10.1186/s13742-015-0067-4
NTL Keyword
Version Number
14

North Temperate Lakes LTER High Frequency Water Temperature Data, Dissolved Oxygen, Chlorophyll, pH - Crystal Lake 2011 - 2014

Abstract
Data from the instrumented buoy on Crystal Lake include micrometeorological parameters, relative humidity, air temperature, wind velocity, wind driection (2 m height),and water temperatures, pH, chlorophyll, and dissolved oxygen measured by a sonde that is moving through the water column.
Dataset ID
303
Date Range
-
Maintenance
completed
Metadata Provider
Methods
Data from the instrumented buoy on Crystal Lake include micrometeorological parameters, relative humidity, air temperature, wind velocity, wind driection (2 m height),and water temperatures, pH, chlorophyll, and dissolved oxygen measured by a sonde that is moving through the water column.
Version Number
20

LTREB Biological Limnology at Lake Myvatn 2012-current

Abstract
These data are part of a long-term monitoring program in the central part of Myvatn that represents the dominant habitat, with benthos consisting of diatomaceous ooze. The program was designed to characterize import benthis and pelagic variables across years as midge populations varied in abundance. Starting in 2012 samples were taken at roughly weekly inervals during June, July, and August, which corresponds to the summer generation of the dominant midge,<em>Tanytarsus gracilentus</em>.
Creator
Dataset ID
296
Date Range
-
Maintenance
Ongoing
Metadata Provider
Methods
Benthic Chlorophyll Field sampling (5 samples) (2012, 2013)1. Take 5 cores from the lake2. Cut the first 0.75 cm (1 chip) of the core with the extruder and place in deli container. Label with date and core number.3. Place deli containers into opaque container (cooler) and return to lab. This is the same sample that is used for the organic matter analysis.In 2014, the method for sampling benthic chlorophyll changed. The calculation of chlorophyll was changed to reflect the different area sampled. Below is the pertinent section from the methods protocols. Processing after the collection of the sample was not changed.Take sediment samples from the 5 cores collected for sediment characteristics. Take 4 syringes of sediment with 10mL syringe (15.96mm diameter). Take 4-5cm of sediment. Then, remove bottom 2cm and place top 2cm in the film canister.Filtering1. Measure volume of material in deli container with 60mL syringe and record.2. Homogenize and take 1mL sample with micropipette. The tip on the micropipette should be cut to avoid clogging with diatoms. Place the 1mL sample in a labeled film canister. Freeze sample at negative 20 degrees Celsius unless starting methanol extraction immediately.3. Add 20mL methanol. This methanol can be kept cool in the fridge, although then you will need a second bottle of methanol for the fluorometer. Shake for 5 sec.4. After 6-18 hours, shake container for 5 sec.Fluorometer1. Allow the film canisters to sit at room temperature for approximately 15 min to avoid excessive condensation on the glass tubes. Shake tubes for 5 sec after removing from fridge but then be careful to let them settle before removing sample.2. Record the sample information for all of the film canisters on the data sheet.3. Add 4mL of sample to a 13x100mL glass tube.4. Insert the sample into the fluorometer and record the reading in the Fluor Before Acid column. The sample reading should be close to one of the secondary solid standards (42ug/L or 230ug/L), if not, dilute the sample to within 25 per cent of the secondary solid standards (30-54ug/L or 180-280ug/L). It is a good idea to quickly check 2mL of a sample that is suspected to be too high to get an idea if other samples may need to be diluted. If possible, read the samples undiluted.5. If a sample needs to be diluted, use a 1000 microLiter pipette and add 2mL of methanol to a tube followed by 2mL of undiluted sample. Gently invert the tube twice and clean the bottom with a paper towel before inserting it into the fluorometer. If the sample is still outside of the ranges above, combine 1 mL of undiluted sample with 3 mL of methanol. Be sure to record the dilution information on the data sheet.6. Acidify the sample by adding 120microLiters of 0.1 N HCl (30microLiters for every one mL of sample). Then gently invert the sample and wait 90 seconds (we used 60 seconds in 2012, the protocol said 90) before putting the sample into the fluorometer and recording the reading in the Fluor After Acid column. Be sure to have acid in each tube for exactly the same amount of time. This means doing one tube at a time or spacing them 30-60 seconds apart.7. Double check the results and redo samples, which have suspicious numbers. Make sure that the after-acidification values make sense when compared to the before acidification value (the before acid/after acid ratio should be approximately the same for all samples).Clean up1. Methanol can be disposed of down the drain as long as at least 50 times as much water is flushed.2. Rinse the film canisters and lids well with tap water and scrub them out with a bottle brush making sure to remove any remaining filter paper. Give a final rinse with distilled water. Pelagic Chlorophyll Field sampling (5 samples)1. Take 2 samples at each of three depths, 1, 2, and 3m with Arni&rsquo;s zooplankton trap. For the 1m sample, drop the trap to the top of the chain. Each trap contains about 2.5L of water when full. 2. Empty into bucket by opening the bottom flap with your hand.3. Take bucket to lab.Filtering1. Filter 1L water from integrated water sample (or until the filter is clogged) through the 47 mm GF/F filter. The pressure used during filtering should be low ( less than 5 mm Hg) to prevent cell breakage. Filtering and handling of filters should be performed under dimmed lighting.2. Remove the filter with forceps, fold it in half (pigment side in), and put it in the film canister. Take care to not touch the pigments with the forceps.3. Add 20mL methanol. This methanol can be kept cool in the fridge, although then you will need a second bottle of methanol for the fluorometer. Shake for 5 sec. and place in fridge.4. After 6-18 hours, shake container for 5 sec.5. Analyze sample in fluorometer after 24 hours.Fluorometer1. Allow the film canisters to sit at room temperature for approximately 15 min to avoid excessive condensation on the glass tubes. Shake tubes for 5 sec after removing from fridge but then be careful to let them settle before removing sample.2. Record the sample information for all of the film canisters on the data sheet.3. Add 4mL of sample to a 13x100mL glass tube.4. Insert the sample into the fluorometer and record the reading in the Fluor Before Acid column. The sample reading should be close to one of the secondary solid standards (42ug/L or 230ug/L), if not, dilute the sample to within 25 percent of the secondary solid standards (30-54ug/L or 180-280ug/L). It is a good idea to quickly check 2mL of a sample that is suspected to be too high to get an idea if other samples may need to be diluted. If possible, read the samples undiluted.5. If a sample needs to be diluted, use a 1000uL pipette and add 2mL of methanol to a tube followed by 2mL of undiluted sample. Gently invert the tube twice and clean the bottom with a paper towel before inserting it into the fluorometer. If the sample is still outside of the ranges above, combine 1 mL of undiluted sample with 3 mL of methanol. Be sure to record the dilution information on the data sheet.6. Acidify the sample by adding 120 microLiters of 0.1 N HCl (30 microLiters for every one mL of sample). Then gently invert the sample and wait 90 seconds (we used 60 seconds in 2012, the protocol said 90) before putting the sample into the fluorometer and recording the reading in the Fluor After Acid column. Be sure to have acid in each tube for exactly the same amount of time. This means doing one tube at a time or spacing them 30-60 seconds apart.7. Double check the results and redo samples, which have suspicious numbers. Make sure that the after-acidification values make sense when compared to the before acidification value (the before acid/after acid ratio should be approximately the same for all samples).Clean up1. Methanol can be disposed of down the drain as long as at least 50 times as much water is flushed.2. Rinse the film canisters and lids well with tap water and scrub them out with a bottle brush making sure to remove any remaining filter paper. Give a final rinse with distilled water. Pelagic Zooplankton Counts Field samplingUse Arni&rsquo;s zooplankton trap (modified Schindler) to take 2 samples at each of 1, 2, and 3m (6 total). For the 1m sample, drop the trap to the top of the chain. Each trap contains about 2.5L of water when full. Integrate samples in bucket and bring back to lab for further processing.Sample preparation in lab1. Sieve integrated plankton tows through 63&micro;m mesh and record volume of full sample2. Collect in Nalgene bottles and make total volume to 50mL3. Add 8 drops of lugol to fix zooplankton.4. Label bottle with sample date, benthic or pelagic zooplankton, and total volume sieved. Samples can be stored in the fridge until time of countingCounting1. Remove sample from fridge2. Sieve sample with 63 micro meter mesh over lab sink to remove Lugol&rsquo;s solution (which vaporizes under light)3. Suspend sample in water in sieve and flush from the back with squirt bottle into counting tray4. Homogenize sample with forceps or plastic pipette with tip cut off5. Identify (see zooplankton identification guide) using backlit microscope and count with multiple-tally counter. i. Set magnification so that you can see both top and bottom walls of the tray. ii. Change focus depth to check for floating zooplankton that must be counted as well.6. Pipette sample back into Nalgene bottle, add water to 50mL, add 8 drops Lugol&rsquo;s solution, and return to fridgeSubsamplingIf homogenized original sample contains more than 500 individuals in the first line of counting tray, you may subsample under the following procedure.1. Return original sample to Nalgene bottle and add water to 50mL2. Homogenize sample by swirling Nalgene bottle3. Collect 10mL of zooplankton sample with Hensen-Stempel pipette4. Empty contents of Hensen-Stempel pipette into large Bogorov tray5. Homogenize sample in tray with forceps or plastic pipette with tip cut off6. Identify (see zooplankton identification guide) using backlit microscope and count with multiple-tally counter. i. Set magnification so that you can see both top and bottom walls of the tray. ii. Change focus depth to check for floating zooplankton that must be counted, too! 7. Pipette sample back into Nalgene bottle, add water to 50mL, add 8 drops Lugol&rsquo;s solution, and return to fridge Benthic Microcrustacean Counts Field samplingLeave benthic zooplankton sampler for 24h. Benthic sampler consists of 10 inverted jars with funnel traps in metal grid with 4 feet. Set up on bench using feet (on side) to get a uniform height of the collection jars (lip of jar = 5cm above frame). Upon collection, pull sampler STRAIGHT up, remove jars, homogenize in bucket and bring back to lab. Move the boat slightly to avoid placing sampler directly over cored sediment.Sample preparation in lab1. Sieve integrated samples through 63 micrometer mesh and record volume of full sample2. Collect in Nalgene bottles and make total volume to 50mL3. Add 8 drops of lugol to fix zooplankton.4. Label bottle with sample date, benthic or pelagic zooplankton, and total volume sieved. Samples can be stored in the fridge until time of countingCounting1. Remove sample from fridge2. Sieve sample with 63 micrometer mesh over lab sink to remove Lugol&rsquo;s solution (which vaporizes under light)3. Suspend sample in water in sieve and flush from the back with squirt bottle into counting tray4. Homogenize sample with forceps or plastic pipette with tip cut off5. Identify (see zooplankton identification guide) using backlit microscope and count with multiple-tally counter. i. Set magnification so that you can see both top and bottom walls of the tray. ii. Change focus depth to check for floating zooplankton that must be counted, too!6. Pipette sample back into Nalgene bottle, add water to 50mL, add 8 drops Lugol&rsquo;s solution, and return to fridgeSubsamplingIf homogenized original sample contains more than 500 individuals in the first line of counting tray, you may subsample under the following procedure.1. Return original sample to Nalgene bottle and add water to 50mL2. Homogenize sample by swirling Nalgene bottle3. Collect 10mL of zooplankton sample with Hensen-Stempel pipette4. Empty contents of Hensen-Stempel pipette into large Bogorov tray5. Homogenize sample in tray with forceps or plastic pipette with tip cut off6. Identify (see zooplankton identification guide) using backlit microscope and count with multiple-tally counter. i. Set magnification so that you can see both top and bottom walls of the tray. ii. Change focus depth to check for floating zooplankton that must be counted, too! 7. Pipette sample back into Nalgene bottle, add water to 50mL, add 8 drops Lugol&rsquo;s solution, and return to fridge Chironomid Counts (2012, 2013) For first instar chironomids in top 1.5cm of sediment only (5 samples)1. Use sink hose to sieve sediment through 63 micrometer mesh. You may use moderate pressure to break up tubes.2. Back flush sieve contents into small deli container.3. Return label to deli cup (sticking to underside of lid works well).For later instar chironomids in the section 1.5-11.5cm (5 samples)4. Sieve with 125 micrometer mesh in the field.5. Sieve through 125micrometer mesh again in lab to reduce volume of sample.6. Transfer sample to deli container or pitfall counting tray.For all chironomid samples7. Under dissecting scope, pick through sieved contents for midge larvae. You may have to open tubes with forceps in order to check for larvae inside.8. Remove larvae with forceps while counting, and place into a vial containing 70 percent ethanol. Larvae will eventually be sorted into taxonomic groups (see key). You may sort them into taxonomic groups as you pick the larvae, or you can identify the larvae while measuring head capsules if chironomid densities are low (under 50 individuals per taxanomic group).9. For a random sample of up to 50 individuals of each taxonomic group, measure head capsule, see Chironomid size (head capsule width).10. Archive samples from each sampling date together in a single 20mL glass vial with screw cap in 70 percent ethanol and label with sample contents , Chir, sample date, lake ID, station ID, and number of cores. Chironomid Cound (2014) In 2014, the method for sampling chironomid larvae changed starting with the sample on 2014-06-27; the variable &quot;top_bottom&quot; is coded as a 2. In contrast to previous measurements, the top and bottom core samples were combined and then subsampled. Below is the pertinent section of the protocols.Chironomid samples should be counted within 24 hours of collection. This ensures that larvae are as active and easily identified as possible, and also prevents predatory chironomids from consuming other larvae. Samples should be refrigerated upon returning from the field.<strong>For first instar chironomids in top 1.5cm of sediment only (5 samples)</strong>1. Use sink hose to sieve sediment through 63&micro;m mesh. You may use moderate pressure to break up tubes.2. Back flush sieve contents using a water bottle into small deli container.3. Return label to deli cup (sticking to underside of lid works well).<strong>For larger instar chironomids in the section 1.5-11.5cm (5 samples)</strong>4. Sieve with 125&micro;m mesh in the field.5. Sieve through 125&micro;m mesh again in lab to reduce volume of sample and break up tubes.6. Transfer sample to deli container with the appropriate label.<strong>Subsample if necessary</strong>If necessary, subsample with the following protocol.a. Combine top and bottom samples from each core (1-5) in midge sample splitter.b. Homogenize sample thoroughly, collect one half in deli container, and label container with core number and &ldquo;1/2&rdquo;c. If necessary, split the half that remains in the sampler into quarters, and collect each in deli containers labeled with core number, &ldquo;1/4&rdquo;, and replicate 1 or 2d. Store all deli containers in fridge until counted, and save until all counting is complete&quot; Chironomid Size (head capsule width) 1. Obtain picked samples preserved in ethanol and empty onto petri dish.2. Sort larvae by family groups, arranging in same orientation for easy measurment.3. Set magnification to 20, diopter, x 50 times4. Take measurments for up to 50 or more individuals of each taxa. Round to nearest optical micrometer unit.5. Fill out data sheet for number of larvae in each taxa, Chironomid measurements for each taxa, date of sample, station sample was taken from, which core the sample came from, who picked the core, and your name as the measurer.6. Enter data into shared sheetSee &quot;Chironomid Counts&quot; for changes in sampling chironomid larvae in 2014.
Version Number
17

Wisconsin Lake Historical Limnological Parameters 1925 - 2009

Abstract
This dataset is a compilation of ten sources of data representing physical and chemical properties of 13,093 Wisconsin lakes. The goal was to compile a comprehensive resource of historical and more recent lake information which would be accessible by querying a single database. Due to the wide temporal extent (1925-2009), methods used for measuring lake parameters in this dataset have varied. A careful look at the available metadata and background information is recommended.Sampling Frequency: variesNumber of sites: 13,093
Contact
Dataset ID
263
Date Range
-
Maintenance
complete
Metadata Provider
Methods
1. Dataset: sr1 - Surface Water Resource Inventory (SWRI) Wisconsin. Temporal coverage: 1960-1980. Original description found in the preface of each Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) SWRI report, published by county.Data manipulation for incorporation into database: Original source of data is WDNR SWRI printed reports. An electronic version (MS Excel spreadsheet) of the data was available (the origin of this spreadsheet was unknown) and was used in preparation of this database. Some discrepancies observed between printed version and electronic version of the dataset: 1) in the printed reports, alkalinity is expressed either as methyl orange or methyl purple; varies from county to county. The electronic format does not contain any metadata or explanation regarding alkalinity. 2) in the printed reports, sometimes max depth provided, sometimes known depth, and sometimes Secchi depth- these values seem to have been transcribed as Secchi depth in the electronic dataset. 3) values of area, conductivity, alkalinity, and depth in electronic format have been rounded up from values in the books. 4) a field in the spreadsheet named "Cl" has no match in books and was not included in the final dataset. 5) color code was not defined in electronic format. It was deciphered and checked against a few lakes from different counties in the printed reports. Final color codes: 1 - Light brown. 2 - Medium brown. 3 - Dark brown. 4 - Clear. 5 - TurbidIssues specific to the electronic format: 13822 records originally. After eliminating all records without WBICs (Water Body Identification Code) or with duplicate WBICs, the dataset reduced to 12638 records with unique WBICs. Of these, 151 records (with area &gt;10 acres) had no or zero data for some chemical parameters. Checked these records using WDNR SWRI reports. Eliminated any record that couldn't be resolved using the books and WDNR WBICs file.. Most records contain both alkalinity and conductivity data, although some do not contain both parameters. Final dataset sr1 has 12383 records2. Dataset: sr2 - Pieter Johnson. Temporal coverage: not specified. Original description: Combination of WDNR Register of Waterbodies (ROW) file, Wisconsin Lakes Book (wilk), and SWRI. Selected lakes with areas &gt;= 10 acres, and lakes in at least 2 of the 3 datasets. Lakes with missing WBIC were not included. Lakes with missing surface area were not included.Data manipulation for incorporation into database: Received original dataset from Jake Vander Zanden (UW-Madison, Center Data manipulation for incorporation into database: Received original dataset from Jake Vander Zanden (UW-Madison, Center for Limnology). The dataset was used in the following publication: Johnson, P.T., J.D. Olden, M.J. Vander Zanden. 2008. Dam invaders: impoundments facilitate biological invasions in freshwaters. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6:357-363. Original dataset contained 5213 records; . Eliminated 8 records without WBIC, legal (TRS) description, and no values for lake characteristics. Note: Many records are repeated from sr1 dataset. Final dataset sr2 has 5205 records.3. Dataset: sr3 - Biocomplexity Project. Temporal coverage: 2001-2004. Original description: Data Set Title: Biocomplexity; Coordinated Field Studies: Chemical Limnology. Investigators: Steve R. Carpenter, Jim Kitchell, Timothy K. Kratz, John J. Magnuson. Contact:NTL LTER Information Manager; Center for Limnology, 680 N Park St, Madison, WI, 53706-1492, USA;(phone) 608-262-2573;(fax) 608-265-2340;(email) infomgr@lter.limnology.wisc.edu; 62 Vilas County lakes were sampled from 2001-2004 (approximately 15 different lakes each year)Data manipulation for incorporation into database: Original dataset had 62 records. Replicate samples per lake averaged to single measurements. Two records represented a single lake (Little Rock, North and South basins); these were merged into one record. Final dataset sr3 has 61 records.4. Dataset: sr4 - Landscape Position Project. Temporal coverage: 1998. Original description: Data Set Title: Landscape Position Project: Chemical Limnology. Investigators: Ben Greenfield, Thomas Hrabik, Timothy K. Kratz, David Lewis, Amina Pollard, Karen Wilson. Contact: NTL LTER Information Manager; Center for Limnology, 680 N Park St, Madison, WI, 53706-1492, USA;(phone) 608-890-3446;(fax) 608-265-2340;(email) infomgr@lter.limnology.wisc.edu; Parameters characterizing the chemical limnology and spatial attributes of 51 lakes were surveyed as part of the Landscape Position Project.Data manipulation for incorporation into database: WBICs added. Ward Lake removed from data. Parameters values over multiple sampling events were averaged. Info regarding depth at which samples were taken was not retained. Final dataset sr4 has 50 records.5. Dataset: sr5 - Lillie and Mason. Temporal coverage: 1979. Original description: printed report WI DNR Technical Bulletin no.138. 1983. Limnological characteristics of Wisconsin LakesData manipulation for incorporation into database: Original file containing 667 records received from Paul Garrison (WDNR). 88 records lacked WBICs but 65 of these were assigned using WDNR lakes shapefile, matching names and areas of lakes. Final 23 records without WBICs were removed. Note: Since lake / impoundment classification doesn't seem to match Johnson's dataset (sr2), it was not included. Note from Richard Lathrop (WDNR): total P measurements are probably unreliable due to method used not being sensitive enough. Final dataset sr5 has 644 records.6.Dataset: sr6 - EPA- Eastern Lakes Survey (1984): Temporal coverage: 1984. Original description: Data Set Title: National Surface Water Survey: Eastern Lake Survey-Phase I. The Eastern Lake Survey-Phase I (ELS-I), conducted in the fall of 1984, was the first part of a long-term effort by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency known as the National Surface Water Survey. It was designed to synoptically quantify the acid-base status of surface waters in the United States in areas expected to exhibit low buffering capacity. The effort was in support of the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP). The survey involved a three-month field effort in which 1612 probability sample lakes and 186 special interest lakes in the northeast, southeast, and upper Midwest regions of the United States were sampled.Data manipulation for incorporation into database: Original dataset, downloaded from EPA website, has over 100 parameters. Only a small subset of interest was retained. Original documentation for full dataset available is available. Dataset includes 285 Wisconsin lakes. WBICs were assigned using geographic coordinates from dataset. WBIC for one lake could not be determined and was excluded.. Note regarding conductivity parameter: value represents calculated conductivity, as the sum of concentrations of each major cation and anion. It is not a parameter measured in the field or lab. Actual formula used to calculated conductivity was not discovered. Final dataset sr6 has 284 records7. Dataset: sr7 - Environmental Research Lab Duluth (ERLD). Temporal coverage: 1979-1982. Original description: ERLD Lake Survey. Contact(s): NTL LTER Information Manager; Center for Limnology, 680 N Park St, Madison, WI, 53706-1492, USA;(phone) 608-262-2573;(fax) 608-265-2340;(email) infomgr@lter.limnology.wisc.edu; Chemical survey of 832 lakes in Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Ontario conducted by ERL-Duluth and UMD between 1979 and 1982 for evaluation of trophic state and sensitivity to acid deposition Glass, G.E. and Sorenson, J.A. (1994) USEPA ERLD-UMD acid deposition gradient-susceptibility database. U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory - Duluth and University of Minnesota at Duluth, MN.Data manipulation for incorporation into database: Dataset included 428 Wisconsin records for which WBICs were included. Note: Original dataset had several errors in WBIC assignment: 1179900 was assigned to three different water bodies; correct WBICs are: 1503000, 1502400, 1481100; also 1515800 changed to 1516000. Lake Clara had 5 different stations for most parameters sampled. First station that had values for all parameters was included in final dataset. Final dataset sr7 has 428 records.8. Dataset: sr8 - Birge-Juday Historical Dataset. Temporal coverage: 1925-1941. Original description: Birge-Juday Historical Lake Data. Investigator(s): Edward A. Birge, Chauncy Juday. Contact: NTL LTER Information Manager; Center for Limnology, 680 N Park St, Madison, WI, 53706-1492, USA;(phone) 608-262-2573;(fax) 608-265-2340;(email) infomgr@lter.limnology.wisc.edu; Data collected by Birge, Juday, and collaborators, mostly in north-central Wisconsin, from 1925 through 1941; generally one sample per lake during the summer, but on some lakes, especially around Trout Lake Station, samples were taken on several successive years. Note that not all variables were measured on all lakes (scarce data for nutrients and ions). Documentation: Johnson, M.D. (1984) Documentation and quality assurance of the computer files of historical water chemistry data from the Wisconsin Northern Highland Lake District (the Birge and Juday data).WDNR Technical Report. Number of sites: 608 (generally one sampling point per lake; occasionally, several sampling points per lake on multibasin, large lakes).Data manipulation for incorporation into database: Original dataset downloaded from UW-Madison, Center for Limnology LTER website. Values averaged for lakes with multiple samples. WBICs assigned to 577 lakes via GIS spatial join using site coordinates and WDNR lake shapefile. Note from Johnson, M.D. (1984): the units for alkalinity (fixed CO2) changed from cc/L to mg/L sometime between Aug 1926 and May 1927. 17 entries were originally cc/l. Thus there might be inconsistencies in the alkalinity data. Final dataset sr8 has 577 records.9. Dataset: sr9 - USGS National Water Inventory System (NWIS). Temporal coverage: 1969-2009. Original description: U.S. Geological Survey. This file contains selected water-quality data for stations in the National Water Information System water-quality database (http://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/). Explanation of codes found in this file are followed by the retrieved data. The data you have secured from the USGS NWIS Web database may include data that have not received Director's approval and as such are provisional and subject to revision. The data are released on the condition that neither the USGS nor the United States Government may be held liable for any damages resulting from its authorized or unauthorized use.Data manipulation for incorporation into database: Data downloaded for 240 lakes for the following parameters: calcium, conductivity, alkalinity, pH. Original parameter codes (USGS NWIS schema): p00915 p00095 p00400 p00916 p29801 p39086 p90095. Data are averaged for multiple measurements. WBICs assigned via GIS spatial join using site coordinates and WDNR lake shapefile. Final dataset sr9 has 240 records.10. Dataset: sr10 - WI Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Temporal coverage: 1969-2009 Original description: available at http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/swims/Data manipulation for incorporation into database: Original data received from Jennifer Filbert (WDNR). Data were extracted from WDNR Surface Water Integrated Monitoring System (SWIMS) database (http://dnr.wi.gov/org/water/swims/). Lakes represented had one or more of the following parameters: Secchi depth, calcium, conductivity, alkalinity, pH, total P, turbidity,, chlorophyll a. Data were averaged where multiple measurements were available. Final dataset sr10 has 53 records.The Data Source data table contains a summary of the 10 data sources with information on temporal coverage and record counts. It also includes information on the availability of calcium and conductivity data from the data sources.
Short Name
WILIMN1
Version Number
25
Subscribe to chlorophyll a