Stephanie Rivera Ecological Principles Ecosystem Assignment December 2, 2011 The Chesapeake Bay Estuary Ecosystem

The Chesapeake Bay estuary has an average depth of less than 30 feet in the main stem of the Bay (Lipson 2006). Deep holes can go far as 174 feet, but the majority of bottom life thrives at depths of less than 20 feet (Lippson 2006). Like all estuaries, the Chesapeake Bay has a wide range of salinity, from fresh water to nearly as salty as ocean water (Lippson 2006). Midway down the Bay the salinity concentration averages about 15 parts of salt to 1,000 parts of water (15 ppt); this is about half the salinity of the ocean (Lipson 2006). In spring when freshwater flows are the highest, salinity may run about 2 ppt lower than average (Lippson 2006). In the fall when freshwater flows are the lowest salinities may run 2 to 6 ppt higher (Lippson 2006). This wide range in salinity provides suitable habitats for both freshwater species in the upper main stem and ocean species towards the mouth of the estuary (Lipson 2006). Water temperature in the Bay fluctuates greatly throughout the year from 34F in the winter to 84F in the summer (Chesapeake Bay Program 2009). During spring and summer, the Bays surface water is much warmer than deeper waters, effecting dissolved oxygen levels (Weinberg 2010). Dissolved oxygen concentrations vary greatly in the Bay. Oxygen-needs vary for individual species, but scientists believe most species need a dissolved oxygen concentration of 5.0 mg/L to thrive (Weinberg 2010). Aquatic species need from 1 mg/L dissolved oxygen concentration to 6 mg/L (Weinberg 2010). The pH of the Bay averages from 7.5-8.5 (Maryland DNR 2011). PH levels can range from 9.5, indicating an algal bloom, to below 6.5, indicating acid rain deposits

in the water shed (Maryland DNR 2011). Current water clarity measures from 0 meters to 2 meters using a secchi disk (Maryland DNR 2011). Turbidity is usually high where fresh water and ocean water mixing occurs (Maryland DNR 2011). There are many communities of plants and animals in the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem from 16 species of underwater grasses to 360 species of fish (Weinberg 2010). The primary producers in the Bay are phytoplankton (Weinberg 2010). Major groups of phytoplankton in the Bay include dinoflagellate Pyrrophycophyta, diatom Bacillariophyta, green alga Chlorophyta, Blue-green algae (Cyanophyta), golden-brown alga Chrysophya, cryptomonads (Cryptophyta), and microflagellates (Prasinophyta, Euglenophycota, Protozoa) (Weinberg 2010). Net primary productivity in marine environments like the Chesapeake Bay is limited primarily by nitrogen and secondarily by phosphorus (Howarth 1988). Nitrogen and phosphorus are absorbed by phytoplankton (Howarth 1988). The species with the greatest total biomass are white perch Morone americana in the upper Bay and Atlantic croaker Micropogonius undulates in the middle and low Bay (Jung 2005). There are also significant contributions to the biomass of the middle Bay by striped bass Morone saxatilis, weak fish Cynoscion aregalis and spot Leiostomus xanthurus (Jung 2005). The most important consumers in the Bay are blue fish Pomatomus saltatrix and summer flounder Paralichthys dentatus (Bersier 2002). Small filter feeders like Atlantic menhaden Brevoortia tyrannus and bay anchovies Anchoa mitchilli are also important because they link the lower food web with higher-level predators, thus keeping energy and nutrients flowing through the food web (Weinberg 2010).

One major factor that I believe limits the productivity of the Chesapeake Bay is variation in levels of phosphorus and nitrogen (Boesch 2001). The high levels of these chemicals, caused by storm water runoff, agricultural lands, wastewater treatment plants and other forms of humancaused pollution, cause detrimental algal blooms (Boesch 2001). Varying levels of nitrogen and phosphorus have negative effects on phytoplankton, the primary producer, therefore limiting the growth of other species (Weinberg 2010). Studies show that reduction of these nutrients will increase diversity and native species abundances of submerged aquatic vegetation (Ruhl 2010). Greater SAV coverage will increase the functionality of the ecosystem and benefit invertebrates, waterfowl and important fisheries (Ruhl 2010). In addition to direct human impacts like nitrogen and phosphorus levels, there are indirect human impacts that affect the bay. Climate change has a major impact because of the Bays sensitivity to atmospheric concentration CO2, sea level, temperature, precipitation and storm frequency and intensity (Pyke 2009). Scientists have detected significant warming and sea-levelrise trends in the Bay during the 20th century and expect similar changes through the 21st century (Pyke 2009).

Figure 1 Location of the Chesapeake Bay estuary system including the benthic habitat scores for various stations in the Bay (Weinberg 2009).

Figure 2 Observed changes in Chesapeake Bay surface water temperature from 1935 to 2007. (Pyke 2008).

Figure 3. Vertical structure of the food chain for the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem (Chesapeake Bay Program 2009).

Figure 4. Food web graph representing the trophic interactions among the 33 major taxa of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. Taxa are arranged according to their trophic level (consumers above prey). Dashed line = example of a maximal food chain; dotted line = example of a closed omnivorous link (Bersier 2002).

Taxa key: 1 = phytoplankton; 2 = bacteria attached to suspended particles; 3 = sediment bacteria; 4 = benthic algae; 5 = free bacteria in water column; 6 heterotrophic microflagellates; 7 = microzooplankton; 8 = zooplankton; 9 = ctenophores; 10 sea nettles, Chrysaora quinquecirrha; 11 = other suspension feeders; 12 = Mya; 13 = oysters, Crassostrea virginica; 14 other polychaetes; 15 = Nereis; 16 = Macoma spp.; 17 = meiofauna; 18 = crustacean deposit feeders; 19 = blue crabs Callinectes sapidus; 20 fish larvae; 21 = alewife Alosa pseudoharengus and herring (Clupeidae Fam.); 22 = bay anchovy Anchoa mitchilli; 23 menhaden Brevoortia tyrannus; 24 = shad Alosa sapidissima; 25 = atlantic croaker Micropogonius undulates; 26 = hog choker Trinectes maculatus; 27 = spot Leiostomus xanthurus; 28 = white perch Morone americana; 29 = catfish Ariusfelis; 30 = blue fish Pomatomus saltatrix; 31 = weak fish Cynoscion aregalis; 32 = summer flounder Paralichthys dentatus; 33 = striped bass Morone saxatilis.

Bibliography Bersier, Louis-Flix, Carolin Banaek-Richter and Marie-France Cattin. 2002. Quantitative Descriptors of Food-Web Matrices. Ecology. 83 (9): 2394-2407.

Boesch, D.F. 2001. Chesapeake Bay eutrophication: scientific understanding, ecosystem restoration, and challenges for agriculture. Journal of Environmental Quality. 30 (2): 303-302. Jung, Sukgeun and Edward D. Houde. 2005. Fish biomass size spectra in Chesepeake Bay. Estuaries. 28 (2): 226-240. Lippson, Alice Jane., Lippson, Robert L. 2006. Life in the Chesapeake Bay. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press. Maryland Department of Natural Resources. 2011. Eyes on the Bay. http://mddnr.chesapeakebay.net/eyesonthebay/currentconditions.cfm NOAA. no date. Habitats. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Chesapeake Bay Office. http://chesapeakebay.noaa.gov/habitats. Pyke, Chris. 2009. The Implications of Climate Change for the Chesapeake Bay. Science Progress. http://scienceprogress.org/2009/01/the-implications-of-climate-change-for-thechesapeake-bay/ Ruhl, Henry A. 2010. Long-term reductions in anthropogenic nutrients link to improvements in Chesapeake Bay habitat. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA. 107 (38): 16566-16570.
Weinberg, Howard. Benthic habitat (index of biological integrity) (2009). Chesapeake Bay Program, 2010. http://www.chesapeakebay.net/maps.aspx?menuitem=16827