USGS Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70269643

Identifying conditions associated with outliers produced by three different chlorophyll fluorometers: A comparison of instrumentation and development of correction formulae

Emily T. Richardson·Tamara E. C. Kraus·Crystal Lee Sturgeon·Katy O’Donnell·Brian A. Bergamaschi
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Measurements of chlorophyll concentration reported by fluorometers (fChl) are used in environmental research and monitoring, as inputs to models, and in the interpretation of remote sensing data. Researchers and managers benefit from understanding how to interpret and ensure the accuracy of fChl data collected by in situ fluorometers. Although fChl values produced by different manufacturers are often in agreement with discrete laboratory-derived Chlorophyll a (Chl a ) concentration measurements, there are instances in which results significantly differ. Further, when measuring fChl side by side, different fluorometers may report values that differ significantly from each other, despite passing calibration checks prior to deployment. We compared environmental conditions and phytoplankton species composition associated with instances in which fChl measurements from three different fluorometers (EXO2 Total Algae Smart Sensor, YSI Inc./Xylem Inc., Yellow Springs, Ohio; FluoroProbe III, bbe Moldaenke GmbH, Kiel, Germany; WETStar, Sea-Bird Scientific, Bellevue, Washington) were significantly different from laboratory-derived Chl a concentrations. Results indicated that elevated primary productivity, as indicated by high pH, dissolved oxygen, and the ratio of Chl a to phaeophytin, were correlated with underestimated fChl values recorded by each sensor. After removing outliers, we determined unique correction guidance for each of the three sensors and demonstrated that after applying correction formulae, fChl measurements produced by each sensor became directly comparable.

Explore related subjects

Limnology & Oceanography: MethodsArticle
90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 37.110093240321405° to 38.781445775867496° latitude; -122.591638749212° to -121.1569041318973° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Emily T. Richardson, Tamara E. C. Kraus, Crystal Lee Sturgeon, Katy O’Donnell, Brian A. Bergamaschi. 2025-07-10. Identifying conditions associated with outliers produced by three different chlorophyll fluorometers: A comparison of instrumentation and development of correction formulae. https://doi.org/10.1002/lom3.10705

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2021

Assessment of multiple ecosystem metabolism methods in an estuary

Ecosystem metabolism is a key ecological attribute and easy to describe, but quantifying metabolism in estuaries is challenging. Properly scaling measurements through time and space requires consideration of hydrodynamics and mixing water from heterogeneous sources, making any estimation uncertain. Here, we compared three methods for modeling ecosystem metabolism in a portion of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Metabolism estimates based on laboratory incubations, continuous in situ buoys, and an oxygen isotope approach all indicated the system was net heterotrophic, and calculated rates were comparable in magnitude when averaged over the 2-month study. Daily metabolic rates based on in situ buoys were the most variable, likely due to horizontal and vertical advection and poor portrayal of the dissolved oxygen budget. After temporally averaging in situ buoy estimates or smoothing the dissolved oxygen time series for tidal effects, rates were more comparable to the other methods, which may be necessary to account for tidal advection and unbalanced contributions from subhabitats within the metabolic footprint. Incubation-based rates represent the finest temporal and spatial scale and only account for pelagic processes, which may explain why incubation-based rates were lower than the other two methods. The oxygen isotope method provided temporally and spatially integrated rates that were bracketed by the other two methods and may be a valuable tool in systems matching the model requirements. Because uncertainty arises in each method from a number of assumptions and scaling calculations, the resolution of metabolic rates in estuaries is likely coarser and more variable than in other aquatic ecosystems.

California↗