Salinity and Sediment Salinity and Sediment Contaminants Contaminants

and the Reflectance & Green-upand the Reflectance & Green-upof of Phragmites australisPhragmites australis

Ildiko Pechmann & Francisco ArtigasIldiko Pechmann & Francisco Artigas

New Jersey Meadowlands Commission – Meadowlands Research New Jersey Meadowlands Commission – Meadowlands Research InstituteInstitute

9th Wetlands & Watersheds Workshop9th Wetlands & Watersheds Workshop

Atlantic City, NJAtlantic City, NJ

Oct. 23-26 2006Oct. 23-26 2006

Project OverviewProject OverviewBackground:Background:

•Relationship between pigment Relationship between pigment concentration and light reflectance from concentration and light reflectance from leavesleaves•Light reflectance from leaves is modulated Light reflectance from leaves is modulated by stressor factorsby stressor factors

Hypothesis:Hypothesis:•The light reflected from plants can be The light reflected from plants can be used as a surrogate variable to used as a surrogate variable to determine salinity and metal determine salinity and metal concentration in the sediments.concentration in the sediments.

ObjectivesObjectivesOverallOverall:: - Find if metal toxicity alters or modifies - Find if metal toxicity alters or modifies

chlorophyll content in a way that plants under chlorophyll content in a way that plants under metal stress show differences in reflectancemetal stress show differences in reflectance

SpecificSpecific::- Measure salinity and metals at seven distinct - Measure salinity and metals at seven distinct

study sitesstudy sites- Measure metal uptake by leaves over the - Measure metal uptake by leaves over the growing seasongrowing season- Measure light reflectance from leaves and - Measure light reflectance from leaves and

canopies over the growing seasoncanopies over the growing season

- Find if there is a relationship between metal - Find if there is a relationship between metal content in leaves and light reflectancecontent in leaves and light reflectance

Field WorkField WorkSampling (May 2 – July 20)

– Leaf samples– Sediment samples– Leaf reflectance (field data)– Canopy reflectance (field data)

Parameters Parameters measuredmeasured

Test plant:Test plant: Phragmites australisPhragmites australis

Leaves:Leaves:

-metal concentration (Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Hg, Ni, Pb, metal concentration (Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Hg, Ni, Pb, Zn)Zn)

-reflectancereflectanceCanopy: Canopy:

-reflectancereflectance

Sediment:Sediment:

-metal concentration (Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Hg, Ni, Pb, metal concentration (Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Hg, Ni, Pb, Zn)Zn)

-Salinity [ppt]Salinity [ppt]

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

salin

ity

KG BA BB KP DB DA CT

Site

Salinity in the sediment

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Cr

[mg/

kg]

KG BA BB KP DB DACT

05/02

08/22

sites

date

Chromium

0

200

400

600

800

Cu

[mg/

kg]

KG BA BB KP DB DA CT

05/02

08/22

site

date

Copper

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Pb [

mg/

kg]

KG BA BB KP DB DACT

05/02

08/22

site

date

Lead 0102030405060708090

100

Hg

[mg/

kg]

KG BA BB KP DB DA CT

05/02

08/22

site

date

Mercury

Contaminants in the sediment in Contaminants in the sediment in May and AugustMay and August

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Zn

[mg/

kg]

KG BA BB KP DB DACT

05/02

08/22

site

date

Zinc

CdCd CrCr CuCu FeFe HgHg NiNi PbPb ZnZn

CdCd Correlation 1 0.869 0.387 0.085 0.816 0.833 -0.298 0.991

Sig. . 0.011 0.391 0.856 0.025 0.020 0.517 0.000

CrCr Correlation   1 0.131 -0.039 0.964 0.861 -0.369 0.880

Sig.   . 0.779 0.934 0.000 0.013 0.416 0.009

CuCu Correlation     1 0.915 0.175 0.492 -0.168 0.446

Sig.     . 0.004 0.707 0.262 0.718 0.316

FeFe Correlation       1 0.005 0.322 -0.171 0.162

Sig.       . 0.991 0.482 0.714 0.729

HgHg Correlation         1 0.924 -0.318 0.852

Sig.         . 0.003 0.487 0.015

NiNi Correlation           1 -0.332 0.889

Sig.           . 0.467 0.007

PbPb Correlation             1 -0.259

Sig.             . 0.575

ZnZn Correlation               1

Sig.               .

Metal-metal relationship in the Metal-metal relationship in the sedimentsediment

Cr, Cd, Hg and Zn tend to coexist in the Cr, Cd, Hg and Zn tend to coexist in the sedimentsediment

Calculating Toxic UnitsCalculating Toxic Units

- Metal concentrations in sediment were - Metal concentrations in sediment were transformed in transformed in toxic units (TU)toxic units (TU) according to the according to the E-RM (Effect Range Median) values E-RM (Effect Range Median) values (Long&Morgan, 1990)(Long&Morgan, 1990)- Toxicity ranged between 0 and 80 TU depending - Toxicity ranged between 0 and 80 TU depending on how much the metal concentrations exceeded on how much the metal concentrations exceeded the E-RM criteria.the E-RM criteria.

- Summary of TUs were calculated for each - Summary of TUs were calculated for each sampling site and related to reflectance sampling site and related to reflectance parametersparameters

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

toxic

ity

KG BA BB KP DB DA CT

Site

Site comparison based on sediment toxicity

PeakFit v.4.12PeakFit v.4.12

Spectral data analysisSpectral data analysis

Vegetation IndicesVegetation Indices

-Greenness Ratio:-Greenness Ratio:ρGREEN ρGREEN ρREDρRED

-Red Edge -Red Edge Inflection Point Inflection Point (REIP)(REIP)

-NDVI:-NDVI:ρNIR – ρREDρNIR – ρREDρNIR + ρREDρNIR + ρRED

NDVI values for Canopies Arranged by Date

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

5/2 5/9 5/23 5/30 6/6 6/16 6/29 7/7 7/20

Date

ND

VI

KG

BA

BB

KP

DB

DA

CT

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

salin

ity

KG BA BB KP DB DA CT

Site

Salinity in the sediment

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

toxic

ity

KG BA BB KP DB DA CT

Site

Site comparison based on sediment toxicity

KG

BA

BB

KP

DB

DA

CT

05020509

05220531

06060616

06290707

0719

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Zn [m

g/kg]

sites

date

Zinc

KG

BA

BB

KP

DB

DA

CT

05020509

05220531

06060616

06290707

0719

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

Pb [mg/kg]

sites date

Lead

KG

BA

BB

KP

DB

DA

CT

05020509

05220531

06060616

06290707

0719

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

Cu [m

g/kg]

sites date

Copper

Metal in the leavesMetal in the leaves

Leaf Red Edge Inflection Point Leaf Red Edge Inflection Point versus sediment toxicityversus sediment toxicity

710

711

712

713

714

715

716

717

718

719

720

721

722

723

724

725

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

toxicity

loca

tion

of

the

infl

ecti

on p

oint

[nm

]

leaf

Canopy Red Edge Inflection Point Canopy Red Edge Inflection Point versus metal toxicityversus metal toxicity

R = 0.62

725

726

727

728

729

730

731

732

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90toxicity

loca

tion o

f th

e i

nfl

ect

ion p

oint

[nm

]

canopy

ConclusionConclusion

• The most saline site – CT - showed a delayed green-up

• The most contaminated sites – DA; DB - showed an early flowering

• However the canopy reflectance measurements showed relationship with sediment toxicity.

• Our results indicated that there were no changes in the leaf reflectance due to the metal toxicity

Future ResearchFuture Research

•Focus on differences in light reflectance due to theFocus on differences in light reflectance due to the

plant architecture and canopy texture as they relateplant architecture and canopy texture as they relate

to bio-geological conditions in the sediment.to bio-geological conditions in the sediment.

•Continue to use remote sensors to classify stress Continue to use remote sensors to classify stress levels levels

in in Phragmites Phragmites communities.communities.

•Also use remote sensors to look at phenology (i.e. Also use remote sensors to look at phenology (i.e.

flowering and green-up timing) to identifyflowering and green-up timing) to identify

Phragmites Phragmites stands under heavy metal stressstands under heavy metal stress

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements

The Meadowlands Environmental Research Institute

-Dr. Jin Young Shin

-Yefim Levinsky

-So Yeon

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements

The Meadowlands Environmental Research The Meadowlands Environmental Research InstituteInstitute

-Dr. Jin Young ShinDr. Jin Young Shin

-Yefim LevinskyYefim Levinsky

-So YeonSo Yeon