{"title":"Towards a quantitative definition of Cyanobacteria blooms","authors":"Diego Germán Frau","doi":"10.1139/er-2022-0121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cyanobacteria blooms represent a global problem with human health and economic and ecosystem nuisance effects. Until now, we have used arbitrary and sometimes confusing criteria to decide whether we are in the presence of a Cyanobacteria bloom. Through scientometric analysis of studies published between 1953 and 2022, I aimed to identify a threshold value that can be used to quantify Cyanobacteria blooms numerically. I considered several methodological approaches (field, field-experimental, and satellite data) and kinds of environments (coastal, marine, and continental ecosystems). The analysis revealed that 48% of the papers used “cyanobacteria bloom” or similar terms qualitatively without providing or employing a quantitative definition. These papers were focused on other topics related to the ecology of Cyanobacteria (78%), while some others (21%) defined blooms by using visual criteria (scum visualization or water discoloration). Of the other half (52%), a few were mathematical models or review papers (5%), while the rest (65%) defined blooms quantitatively. Of these, most reports (approximately 80%) were from eutrophic inland waters and reported mean values for blooms between 80 000 and 249 000 cells mL −1 or 41 and 69 µg L −1 of chlorophyll- a. Calculations were also carried out for oligotrophic to mesotrophic inland waters and marine-coastal waters, which had fewer reports available in the literature. This is a first attempt to identify a consensual definition based on values reported as blooms in nature, a threshold that can undoubtedly be useful in the future to make possible comparisons among several environments and temporal scales.","PeriodicalId":49208,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Reviews","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1139/er-2022-0121","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Cyanobacteria blooms represent a global problem with human health and economic and ecosystem nuisance effects. Until now, we have used arbitrary and sometimes confusing criteria to decide whether we are in the presence of a Cyanobacteria bloom. Through scientometric analysis of studies published between 1953 and 2022, I aimed to identify a threshold value that can be used to quantify Cyanobacteria blooms numerically. I considered several methodological approaches (field, field-experimental, and satellite data) and kinds of environments (coastal, marine, and continental ecosystems). The analysis revealed that 48% of the papers used “cyanobacteria bloom” or similar terms qualitatively without providing or employing a quantitative definition. These papers were focused on other topics related to the ecology of Cyanobacteria (78%), while some others (21%) defined blooms by using visual criteria (scum visualization or water discoloration). Of the other half (52%), a few were mathematical models or review papers (5%), while the rest (65%) defined blooms quantitatively. Of these, most reports (approximately 80%) were from eutrophic inland waters and reported mean values for blooms between 80 000 and 249 000 cells mL −1 or 41 and 69 µg L −1 of chlorophyll- a. Calculations were also carried out for oligotrophic to mesotrophic inland waters and marine-coastal waters, which had fewer reports available in the literature. This is a first attempt to identify a consensual definition based on values reported as blooms in nature, a threshold that can undoubtedly be useful in the future to make possible comparisons among several environments and temporal scales.
期刊介绍:
Published since 1993, Environmental Reviews is a quarterly journal that presents authoritative literature reviews on a wide range of environmental science and associated environmental studies topics, with emphasis on the effects on and response of both natural and manmade ecosystems to anthropogenic stress. The authorship and scope are international, with critical literature reviews submitted and invited on such topics as sustainability, water supply management, climate change, harvesting impacts, acid rain, pesticide use, lake acidification, air and marine pollution, oil and gas development, biological control, food chain biomagnification, rehabilitation of polluted aquatic systems, erosion, forestry, bio-indicators of environmental stress, conservation of biodiversity, and many other environmental issues.