[Coral-List] Portable, easy to use water testing kits
wijgerde at coralpublications.com
Wed Feb 15 07:55:05 EST 2017
I've often used the DR/890 colorimeter by Hach-Lange. It can measure nitrate
and phoshate down to 0.02 mg/L. For nitrate, you use the cadmium reduction
method. For phosphate, the ascorbic acid method. If you make standards for
nitrate (0.02 to 0.10 mg/L for example) in a seawater analogue (using pro
analysis salts), it works fine. Phosphate is ready to go in both fresh and
seawater using the factory cal curve.
From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
[mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Douglas Fenner
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 7:30 PM
To: Benjamin Cowburn
Cc: coral list
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Portable, easy to use water testing kits
You can still use turbidity or visibility measures if you want, since
nutrients often cause the growth of phytoplankton which reduce visibility.
Reduced water circulation in harbors also can allow nutrients to build
instead of being flushed by open ocean water. A gradient of visibility from
the inner bay to the open ocean can point towards a source area. You can
always measure nutrients directly as well as visibility/turbidity. I can't
advise on how best to measure nutrients or chemical pollutants, but I'm sure
others can. I'm under the impression that some nutrient test kits for fresh
water don't work in salt water.
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Benjamin Cowburn <
benjamindcowburn at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Doug,
> Sediment is something I want to test, but I think nutrients are an
> important and separate point. The goal is for this test to be used for
> regular monitoring by a govt. dept. in East Africa, hence it needs to
> be simple and easy to use and cheap enough to do regularly. The area
> where I'm working is very arid, so freshwater plumes are not really a
> thing. We are concerned about nutrients and pollution for a big city
> and port. How would you suggest we detect the pollution?
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Douglas Fenner <
> douglasfennertassi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> A review of indicators of water quality on the Great Barrier Reef
>> by Fabricius et al found that turbidity (or water clarity or
>> visibility) was the best single indicator among 38 tested. They
>> write in their abstract "Turbidity was the best predictor of biota"
>> It is very low tech, cheap, quick and easy to take. Disadvantages
>> are that it doesn't impress people as being fancy technical science,
>> and it can't differentiate causes, like plankton and nutrients, vs
>> sediment, vs chemical pollution, etc. One of the problems for
>> testing with things like nutrients is that they come in pulses, and
>> you have to test frequently to catch pulses. Also, it would take a
>> lot of expensive sampling to detect spatial patterns, and if you
>> don't have the spatial pattern you can miss the hot spots (and clean
>> areas). At least sediment may be visible from the shore or a boat or
>> a plane and so the spatial and temporal patterns can be seen. A
>> simple photo can show you patterns that would take hundreds or
>> thousands of samples to detect. Runoff is typically fresh water, so
>> it floats on the surface and at least initially the finest sediment
>> is suspended in that water at the surface, making it easy to see from
>> the air. Sediment pulse events might suggest some aspects of the
>> spatial and temporal patterns of nutrient runoff as well, since they
>> may both be correlated with rain-produced runoff events. Of course, some
rivers might have lots of sediment runoff but little nutrient runoff, and
others the opposite.
>> Cheers, Doug
>> Fabricius et al 2012. A bioindicator system for water quality on
>> inshore coral reefs of the Great Barrier Reef. Marine Pollution Bulletin
>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 6:36 AM, Benjamin Cowburn <
>> benjamindcowburn at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> I'm trying to find an easy and robust way of checking water quality
>>> nutrients) on a reef. I've found various kits available for
>>> aquarists e.g.
>>> Are these appropriate for use in the field? Any recommendations or
>>> suggestions of how to do water quality testing, without a dedicated
>>> lab would be welcome!
>>> Benjamin Cowburn
>>> Coral-List mailing list
>>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>> Douglas Fenner
>> Contractor for NOAA NMFS, and consultant "have regulator, will
>> PO Box 7390
>> Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799 USA
>> phone 1 684 622-7084 <(684)%20622-7084>
>> Join the International Society for Reef Studies. Membership includes
>> a subscription to the journal Coral Reefs, and there are discounts
>> for pdf subscriptions and developing countries. Coral Reefs is the
>> only journal that is ALL coral reef articles, and it has amazingly
>> LOW prices compared to other journals. Check it out!
>> "Belief in climate change is optional, participation is not."- Jim
>> Beever. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not to their
>> facts."- Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
>> Last year was- again- the hottest year on record.
>> 99 Reasons 2016 was a good year. https://medium.com/future-cru
>> -8420debc2823#.9iznf7pfk Check items 42-59.
>> 43. Global carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels did not
>> grow at all in 2016, for the third year in a row. Scientific
>> 44. renewables now account for more newly installed capacity than any
>> other form of electricity in the world, including coal.. Gizmodo
Contractor for NOAA NMFS, and consultant "have regulator, will travel"
PO Box 7390
Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799 USA
phone 1 684 622-7084
Join the International Society for Reef Studies. Membership includes a
subscription to the journal Coral Reefs, and there are discounts for pdf
subscriptions and developing countries. Coral Reefs is the only journal
that is ALL coral reef articles, and it has amazingly LOW prices compared to
other journals. Check it out! www.fit.edu/isrs/
"Belief in climate change is optional, participation is not."- Jim Beever.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not to their own facts."-
Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
Last year was- again- the hottest year on record.
99 Reasons 2016 was a good year.
Check items 42-59.
43. Global carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels did not grow at
all in 2016, for the third year in a row. Scientific American
44. renewables now account for more newly installed capacity than any other
form of electricity in the world, including coal.. Gizmodo
Coral-List mailing list
Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7998 / Virus Database: 4756/13955 - Release Date: 02/15/17
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7998 / Virus Database: 4756/13954 - Release Date: 02/14/17
More information about the Coral-List