Responses of Problematic Algae to Algaecide Exposures

100 Pages·2017·1.02 MB·English

Clemson University
TigerPrints
All Theses Theses
5-2010
Responses of Problematic Algae to Algaecide
Exposures
West Bishop
Clemson University, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at:https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses
Part of theCivil and Environmental Engineering Commons
Recommended Citation
Bishop, West, "Responses of Problematic Algae to Algaecide Exposures" (2010).All Theses. 772.
https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/772
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses by an authorized
administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please [email protected].
RESPONSES OF PROBLEMATIC ALGAE TO ALGAECIDE EXPOSURES

A Thesis
Presented to
the Graduate School of
Clemson University

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Science
Forest Resources

by
West M. Bishop
May 2010

Accepted by:
John H. Rodgers, Jr., Committee Chair
William W. Bowerman
Jack M. Whetstone
ABSTRACT
Excessive growths of algae can cause significant disruption of critical water
resource usages including: drinking, irrigation, recreation as well as be aesthetically
displeasing. Water resource managers are often compelled to take action to mitigate these
nuisance algal infestations. Algaecides can be efficient and effective management options
to rapidly suppress algal blooms and restore water usages. However, laboratory and field
data are required to accurately predict responses to an application as well as potential
risks to non-target organisms. Laboratory experiments were used to measure the
responses of problematic algae to algaecide exposures and evaluate the margin of safety
to sensitive, non-target organisms. These experiments allowed for prediction and
translation of an effective exposure to a specific field situation. The formulation of a
specific algaecide, water characteristics, and the distinct alga can influence an exposure
and subsequent response. Data regarding efficient and effective use of algaecides can
alleviate the obstructions incurred from algal infestations and restore critical water
resource usages.
ii
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this thesis to my family who have supported and put up
with me for many years. I would not be where I am without their assistance and support.
Wade Bishop, Sandra Bishop and Dr. Heidi Zubeck (my dear sister) as well as Dr. Brett
Zubeck (currently my only brother) and many other relatives of which I will not mention
by name, my sincere thanks. I must also greatly thank my dearest fiancé, Marguerite
Porter, who graciously has supported, nourished and encouraged me through all these
times. Her wonderful (sometimes crazy) family also deserves much recognition.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to acknowledge Applied Biochemists, an Arch Chemicals, Inc.
company. The unending support they provide to further students education and the
science of water resource management has enriched and benefited the lives of all of us
that require water. They have been the foundation for my education which will be the
cornerstone to what I will continually accomplish and attain. I find few words to express
my sincere appreciation for their devotion and sustenance. It is gratifying to be cognizant
of a corporation that is unselfish and willing to support. To the company and all of its
employees I have had the privilege to work with, I honor you.
Dr. Wayne Chao deserves recognition for his invaluable analytical assistance and
time devoted to helping students. I thank Dr. Horace Skipper for his graciousness in
letting me use his property for research. I acknowledge my committee members (Dr.
William Bowerman and Jack Whetstone) for their beneficial inputs to this research. I also
sincerely thank my advisor, Dr. John Rodgers, Jr., for his continual assistance, support
and guidance. The knowledge I have ascertained in my pursuit of this degree is
invaluable and has revealed to me how to learn. The decisions I have made, due to the
opportunities Dr. Rodgers has made available to me, have positively influenced what I
have become and will surely benefit what I will accomplish throughout my life.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE .................................................................................................................... i

ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... ii

DEDICATION ................................................................................................................ iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................. iv

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................... vii

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ ix

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1
Literature cited ......................................................................................... 6

II. COMPARATIVE RESPONSES OF TARGET AND NON-
TARGET SPECIES TO EXPOSURES OF A COPPER-
BASED ALGAECIDE............................................................................. 8

Abstract .................................................................................................... 8
Introduction .............................................................................................. 9
Materials and methods ........................................................................... 10
Results .................................................................................................... 14
Discussion .............................................................................................. 15
Acknowledgements ................................................................................ 18
Literature cited ....................................................................................... 19
List of figures ......................................................................................... 27

III. RESPONSES OF LYNGBYA MAGNIFICA GARDNER TO
AN ALGAECIDE EXPOSURE IN THE LABORATORY
AND FIELD........................................................................................... 31

Abstract .................................................................................................. 31
Introduction ............................................................................................ 32
Materials and methods ........................................................................... 35
Results .................................................................................................... 39
Discussion .............................................................................................. 42
v
Table of Contents (Continued)
Page

Conclusion ............................................................................................. 44
Acknowledgements ................................................................................ 45
Literature cited ....................................................................................... 46
List of figures ......................................................................................... 51

IV. EXPOSURE, DOSE, AND RESPONSE OF LYNGBYA
WOLLEI EXPOSED TO COPPER-BASED
ALGAECIDES IN LABORATORY TOXICITY
EXPERIMENTS: THE CRITICAL BURDEN CONCEPT .................. 56

Abstract .................................................................................................. 56
Introduction ............................................................................................ 57
Materials and methods ........................................................................... 59
Results .................................................................................................... 63
Discussion .............................................................................................. 66
Conclusions ............................................................................................ 69
Acknowledgements ................................................................................ 71
Literature cited ....................................................................................... 72
List of figures ......................................................................................... 78

V. Summary and Conclusions .......................................................................... 86

vi
LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

2.1 Description of experimental design of toxicity tests for five
animal species exposed to Algimycin®-PWF (Johnson et al.
2008) ...................................................................................................... 22

2.2 Description of experimental design of toxicity tests for eight
algal species exposed to Algimycin®-PWF ........................................... 23

2.3 Margins of safety associated with Algimycin®-PWF exposures
for five animal species compared with eight algal species.
Margin of safety was defined as the ratio of the
concentration of algaecide that adversely affects a non-
target animal species (96-h LC value) to the concentration
50
required to control the growth of the algal species (EC ). A
90
MOS of ≥ 1 indicates less potential for non-target species
risks ........................................................................................................ 24

2.4 Algimycin®-PWF 96-h EC and EC values for algal toxicity
50 90
tests (µg Cu/ L) ...................................................................................... 25

2.5 Algimycin®-PWF 96-h LOEC and LC values for animal
50
toxicity tests (µg Cu/ L; Johnson et al. 2008) ........................................ 26

3.1 Site water characteristics for Dr. Skipper’s pond pre- and post-
treatment. ............................................................................................... 49

3.2 Physical properties and fate characteristics of Algimycin®-
PWF, Cutrine® -Ultra, Clearigate®, and Phycomycin® SCP ................. 50

4.1 Physical properties and fate characteristics of Algimycin®-
PWF, Clearigate®, and copper sulfate pentahydrate .............................. 75

4.2 Experimental design for experiments one, two, and three,
altering the aqueous copper concentration, exposure
volume, and mass of algae exposed, respectively .................................. 76

vii
List of Tables (Continued)

Table Page

4.3 Critical burden of copper (mg Cu sorbed/ g algae) necessary to
achieve control (i.e. EC ) of Lyngbya wollei exposed to
90
three algaecide formulations containing copper
(Algimycin®-PWF, Clearigate®, and copper sulfate
pentahydrate). Results from experiments one, two, and
three are shown, altering aqueous algaecide concentration,
water volume, and mass of algae, respectively. Confidence
intervals for critical burden measurements in copper sulfate
exposures were not applicable (NA) because control was
not achieved ........................................................................................... 77
viii
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

2.1 Responses, in terms of chlorophyll a, of algal species exposed
to Algimycin® PWF in 96-h laboratory toxicity tests ............................ 28

2.2 Responses, in terms of cell densities, of algal species exposed
to Algimycin® PWF in 96-h laboratory toxicity tests ............................ 29

2.3 Responses, in terms of mortality, of animal species exposed to
Algimycin® PWF in 96-h laboratory toxicity tests (Johnson
et al. 2008) ............................................................................................. 30

3.1 Response of Lyngbya magnifica in Dr. Skipper’s Pond, in
terms of chlorophyll a, to laboratory exposures of Cutrine®-
Ultra, Clearigate®, Algimycin® PWF, and Phycomycin®
SCP in 7 day laboratory toxicity experiments ....................................... 52

3.2 Response of Lyngbya magnifica in Dr. Skipper’s Pond, in
terms of biomass, to laboratory exposures of Cutrine®-
Ultra, Clearigate®, Algimycin® PWF, and Phycomycin®
SCP in 7 day laboratory toxicity experiments ....................................... 53

3.3 Response of Lyngbya magnifica in Dr. Skipper’s Pond, in
terms of chlorophyll a, to laboratory and field exposures of
Phycomycin® SCP pre-treatment and 1, 4, 7, 10 and 21
days after treatment ................................................................................ 54

3.4 Response of Lyngbya magnifica in Dr. Skipper’s Pond, in
terms of biomass, to laboratory and field exposures of
Phycomycin® SCP pre-treatment and 1, 4, 7, 10 and 21
days after treatment. ............................................................................... 55

4.1 Amount of copper adsorbed and absorbed by Lyngbya wollei in
experiment one with a series of aqueous copper
concentrations from three different algaecide formulations
(Clearigate®, Algimycin® PWF, and copper sulfate
pentahydrate).......................................................................................... 80

ix