USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · ofr20091216

Water-quality monitoring in response to young-of-the-year smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) mortality in the Susquehanna River and major tributaries, Pennsylvania: 2008

Abstract

Mortalities of young-of-the-year (YOY) smallmouth bass ( Micropterus dolomieu ) recently have occurred in the Susquehanna River due to Flavobacterium columnare , a bacterium that typically infects stressed fish. Stress factors include but are not limited to elevated water temperature and low dissolved oxygen during times critical for survival and development of smallmouth bass (May 1 through July 31). The infections were first discovered in the Susquehanna River and major tributaries in the summer months of 2005 but also were prevalent in 2007. The U.S. Geological Survey, Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, and PPL Corporation worked together to monitor dissolved oxygen, water temperature, pH, and specific conductance on a continuous basis at seven locations from May through mid October 2008. In addition, nutrient concentrations, which may affect dissolved-oxygen concentrations, were measured once in water and streambed sediment at 25 locations. Data from water-quality meters (sondes) deployed as pairs showed daily minimum dissolved-oxygen concentration at YOY smallmouth-bass microhabitats in the Susquehanna River at Clemson Island and the Juniata River at Howe Township Park were significantly lower (p-value < 0.0001) than nearby main-channel habitats. The average daily minimum dissolved-oxygen concentration during the critical period (May 1–July 31) was 1.1 mg/L lower in the Susquehanna River microhabitat and 0.3 mg/L lower in the Juniata River. Daily minimum dissolved-oxygen concentrations were lower than the applicable national criterion (5.0 mg/L) in microhabitat in the Susquehanna River at Clemson Island on 31 days (of 92 days in the critical period) compared to no days in the corresponding main-channel habitat. In the Juniata River, daily minimum dissolved-oxygen concentration in the microhabitat was lower than 5.0 mg/L on 20 days compared to only 5 days in the main-channel habitat. The maximum time periods that dissolved oxygen was less than 5.0 mg/L in microhabitats of the Susquehanna and Juniata Rivers were 8.5 and 5.5 hours, respectively. Dissolved-oxygen concentrations lower than the national criterion generally occurred during nighttime and early-morning hours between midnight and 0800. The lowest instantaneous dissolved-oxygen concentrations measured in microhabitats during the critical period were 3.3 mg/L for the Susquehanna River at Clemson Island (June 11, 2008) and 4.1 mg/L for the Juniata River at Howe Township Park (July 22, 2008). Comparison of 2008 data to available continuous-monitoring data from 1974 to 1979 in the Susquehanna River at Harrisburg, Pa., indicates the critical period of 2008 had an average daily mean dissolved-oxygen concentration that was 1.1 mg/L lower (p-value < 0.0001) than in the 1970s and an average daily mean water temperature that was 0.8 °C warmer (p-value = 0.0056). Streamflow was not significantly different (p-value = 0.0952) between the two time periods indicating that it is not a likely explanation for the differences in water quality. During the critical period in 2008, dissolved-oxygen concentrations were lower in the Susquehanna River at Harrisburg, Pa., than in the Delaware River at Trenton, N.J., or Allegheny River at Acmetonia near Pittsburgh, Pa. Daily minimum dissolved-oxygen concentrations were below the national criterion of 5.0 mg/L on 6 days during the critical period in the Susquehanna River at Harrisburg compared to no days in the Delaware River at Trenton and the Allegheny River at Acmetonia. Average daily mean water temperature in the Susquehanna River at Harrisburg was 1.8 °C warmer than in the Delaware River at Trenton and 3.4 °C warmer than in the Allegheny River at Acmetonia. These results indicate that any stress induced by dissolved oxygen or other environmental conditions is likely to be magnified by elevated temperature in the Susquehanna River at Harrisburg compared to the Delaware River at Trenton or the Allegheny River at Acmetonia.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 40.18726672309203° to 41.03378713521864° latitude; -77.156982421875° to -76.6461181640625° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jeffrey J. Chaplin, J. Kent Crawford, Robin A. Brightbill. 2009. Water-quality monitoring in response to young-of-the-year smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) mortality in the Susquehanna River and major tributaries, Pennsylvania: 2008. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20091216

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona