Search

Harmful algae and cyanobacteria blooms are increasing in frequency and intensity in freshwater systems due to anthropogenic impacts such as nutrient loading in watersheds and engineered alterations of natural waterways. There are multiple physical factors that affect the conditions in a freshwater system that contribute to optimal habitats for harmful algae and toxin-producing cyanobacteria. A growing body of research shows that climate change stressors also are impacting water-body conditions that favor harmful algae and cyanobacteria species over other phytoplankton. The overgrowth of these organisms, or a "bloom," increases the opportunity for exposure to toxins by humans, companion animals, livestock, and wildlife. As waters warm and precipitation patterns change over time, exposure to these blooms is projected to increase. Hence, it is important that states and tribes develop monitoring and reporting strategies as well as align governmental policies to protect their citizens and ecosystems within their jurisdiction. Currently, the policies and approaches taken to monitor and report on harmful algae and cyanobacteria blooms vary widely among states, and it is undetermined if any tribes have specific policies on harmful algae blooms. This paper synthesizes research on algal blooms in inland freshwater systems of the United States. This review examines how climate change contributes to trends in bloom frequency or severity and outlines approaches that states and tribes may use to monitor, report, and respond to harmful algae and cyanobacteria blooms. Significance Statement: Inland bodies of freshwater supply drinking water for humans and animals, water for irrigating crops, habitats for aquatic species, places of cultural significance for Indigenous peoples, and other important functions. Many of these bodies of water have been polluted with runoff from industry, including agriculture, and already support harmful algal blooms during warm conditions. Hot extremes associated with climate change are expected to increase the occurrence and duration of harmful algal blooms, and in some places, initiate blooms where none have been recorded previously. These toxic blooms are harmful to people, companion animals, livestock, and wildlife. It is important to review the interconnections among biological, climate, and water systems to monitor blooms and alert the public about their toxin production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, monthly, maximum seasonal, and maximum annual hydrometeorological (i.e., evaporation, lake water levels, and rainfall) data series from the Kariba catchment area of the Zambezi River basin, Zimbabwe, have been analyzed in order to determine appropriate probability distribution models of the underlying climatology from which the data were generated. In total, 16 probability distributions were considered and the Kolmogorov-Sminorv (KS), Anderson-Darling (AD), and chi-square (χ2) goodness-of-fit (GoF) tests were used to evaluate the best-fit probability distribution model for each hydrometeorological data series. A ranking metric that uses the test statistic from the three GoF tests was formulated and used to select the most appropriate probability distribution model capable of reproducing the statistics of the hydrometeorological data series. Results showed that, for each hydrometeorological data series, the best-fit probability distribution models were different for the different time scales, corroborating those reported in the literature. The evaporation data series was best fit by the Pearson system, the Lake Kariba water levels series was best fit by the Weibull family of probability distributions, and the rainfall series was best fit by the Weibull and the generalized Pareto probability distributions. This contribution has potential applications in such areas as simulation of precipitation concentration and distribution and water resources management, particularly in the Kariba catchment area and the larger Zambezi River basin, which is characterized by (i) nonuniform distribution of a network of hydrometeorological stations, (ii) significant data gaps in the existing observations, and (iii) apparent inherent impacts caused by climatic extreme events and their corresponding variability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]