Comparison of Partitioning and Efficacy Between Copper Algaecide Formulations: Refining the Critical Burden Concept
Filamentous mat-forming algae are increasingly impairing freshwater resources. To restore water utility, reactive management programs often involve application of copper-based algaecides. Copper algaecide formulations can differ significantly, and this research outlined an advanced approach to evalu...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Water, air, and soil pollution air, and soil pollution, 2018-09, Vol.229 (9), p.1-17, Article 300 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 17 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 9 |
| container_start_page | 1 |
| container_title | Water, air, and soil pollution |
| container_volume | 229 |
| creator | Bishop, West M. Richardson, Robert J. Willis, Ben E. |
| description | Filamentous mat-forming algae are increasingly impairing freshwater resources. To restore water utility, reactive management programs often involve application of copper-based algaecides. Copper algaecide formulations can differ significantly, and this research outlined an advanced approach to evaluate formulation efficiency for controlling filamentous algae. Two common algal species (
Lyngbya wollei
,
Pithophora varia
) were used to assess copper internalization and adsorption as well as relation to control among copper formulations. Captain® XTR achieved control (7-day EC
85
) of
L. wollei
with internal copper concentrations of 0.78 and 0.76 mg Cu/g based on chlorophyll
a
content or filament viability, respectively. Cutrine® Ultra achieved control of
L. wollei
based on filament viability only at 0.85 mg Cu/g. Internalized copper concentrations required for control following Captain XTR exposures were similar for
P. varia
, 0.81 and 0.95 mg Cu/g, whereas Cutrine Ultra and copper sulfate did not elicit control nor attain the critical internal copper threshold. The relationship between internalized copper and responses, among all formulations, was significant (
P
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11270-018-3958-z |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2091561202</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A551390775</galeid><sourcerecordid>A551390775</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c421t-cab68a57923243e2ce8d1ff84d7fda3fc0b0d0f024e69ed04924be32d052a5963</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU9LJDEQxcOyws7qfoC9BTy3mz-dTmdvY6O7gqCInkMmqcxGepI26UH005uxFzxZl4Li_arq8RD6SckZJUT-KpQySRpC-4Yr0TevX9CKCskbpjj7ilaEtKrplFTf0PdSHkkt1csVKkPaTSaHkiJOHt-aPIc5pBjiFpvo8IX3wRr7gs9hfgaIeEjTBBmvx60BGxzgy5R3-9EcoPIb34EP7_D8D_CQ6y5rRny-z-6djRam-QQdeTMW-PG_H6OHy4v74W9zffPnalhfN7ZldG6s2XS9EVIxzloOzELvqPd966R3hntLNsQRT1gLnQJXDbJ2A5w5IpgRquPH6HTZO-X0tIcy68e0z7Ge1IwoKjrKCKuqs0W1NSPoEH2as6mWjYNdsClWQ3W-FoJyRaQUFaALYHMqJYPXUw47k180JfoQhl7C0DUMfQhDv1aGLUyp2riF_PHK59AbxoqOBA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2091561202</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Partitioning and Efficacy Between Copper Algaecide Formulations: Refining the Critical Burden Concept</title><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Bishop, West M. ; Richardson, Robert J. ; Willis, Ben E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bishop, West M. ; Richardson, Robert J. ; Willis, Ben E.</creatorcontrib><description>Filamentous mat-forming algae are increasingly impairing freshwater resources. To restore water utility, reactive management programs often involve application of copper-based algaecides. Copper algaecide formulations can differ significantly, and this research outlined an advanced approach to evaluate formulation efficiency for controlling filamentous algae. Two common algal species (
Lyngbya wollei
,
Pithophora varia
) were used to assess copper internalization and adsorption as well as relation to control among copper formulations. Captain® XTR achieved control (7-day EC
85
) of
L. wollei
with internal copper concentrations of 0.78 and 0.76 mg Cu/g based on chlorophyll
a
content or filament viability, respectively. Cutrine® Ultra achieved control of
L. wollei
based on filament viability only at 0.85 mg Cu/g. Internalized copper concentrations required for control following Captain XTR exposures were similar for
P. varia
, 0.81 and 0.95 mg Cu/g, whereas Cutrine Ultra and copper sulfate did not elicit control nor attain the critical internal copper threshold. The relationship between internalized copper and responses, among all formulations, was significant (
P
< 0.0001) with
R
2
values of 0.920 and 0.935 for
L. wollei
and 0.807 and 0.826 for
P. varia
based on filament viability and chlorophyll
a
content, respectively. Formulation efficiency, internalized copper versus total amended, was greatest with Captain XTR (average 0.17), followed by Cutrine Ultra (0.13), and copper sulfate (0.09). By measuring the efficiency of a specific algaecide and the corresponding amount required to achieve control of targeted algal biomass, management objectives can be achieved while decreasing environmental loads of copper, number of treatments, and operational costs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0049-6979</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-2932</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11270-018-3958-z</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Adsorption ; Algae ; Algal mats ; Algicides ; Analysis ; Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution ; Chlorophyll ; Chlorophyll a ; Climate Change/Climate Change Impacts ; Control ; Copper ; Copper sulfate ; Earth and Environmental Science ; Efficiency ; Environment ; Environmental monitoring ; Formulations ; Freshwater ; Freshwater resources ; Hydrogeology ; Inland water environment ; Internalization ; Operating costs ; Resource management ; Soil Science & Conservation ; Sulfates ; Viability ; Water Quality/Water Pollution</subject><ispartof>Water, air, and soil pollution, 2018-09, Vol.229 (9), p.1-17, Article 300</ispartof><rights>Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2018 Springer</rights><rights>Water, Air, & Soil Pollution is a copyright of Springer, (2018). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c421t-cab68a57923243e2ce8d1ff84d7fda3fc0b0d0f024e69ed04924be32d052a5963</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c421t-cab68a57923243e2ce8d1ff84d7fda3fc0b0d0f024e69ed04924be32d052a5963</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1774-0585</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11270-018-3958-z$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11270-018-3958-z$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bishop, West M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Richardson, Robert J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willis, Ben E.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Partitioning and Efficacy Between Copper Algaecide Formulations: Refining the Critical Burden Concept</title><title>Water, air, and soil pollution</title><addtitle>Water Air Soil Pollut</addtitle><description>Filamentous mat-forming algae are increasingly impairing freshwater resources. To restore water utility, reactive management programs often involve application of copper-based algaecides. Copper algaecide formulations can differ significantly, and this research outlined an advanced approach to evaluate formulation efficiency for controlling filamentous algae. Two common algal species (
Lyngbya wollei
,
Pithophora varia
) were used to assess copper internalization and adsorption as well as relation to control among copper formulations. Captain® XTR achieved control (7-day EC
85
) of
L. wollei
with internal copper concentrations of 0.78 and 0.76 mg Cu/g based on chlorophyll
a
content or filament viability, respectively. Cutrine® Ultra achieved control of
L. wollei
based on filament viability only at 0.85 mg Cu/g. Internalized copper concentrations required for control following Captain XTR exposures were similar for
P. varia
, 0.81 and 0.95 mg Cu/g, whereas Cutrine Ultra and copper sulfate did not elicit control nor attain the critical internal copper threshold. The relationship between internalized copper and responses, among all formulations, was significant (
P
< 0.0001) with
R
2
values of 0.920 and 0.935 for
L. wollei
and 0.807 and 0.826 for
P. varia
based on filament viability and chlorophyll
a
content, respectively. Formulation efficiency, internalized copper versus total amended, was greatest with Captain XTR (average 0.17), followed by Cutrine Ultra (0.13), and copper sulfate (0.09). By measuring the efficiency of a specific algaecide and the corresponding amount required to achieve control of targeted algal biomass, management objectives can be achieved while decreasing environmental loads of copper, number of treatments, and operational costs.</description><subject>Adsorption</subject><subject>Algae</subject><subject>Algal mats</subject><subject>Algicides</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution</subject><subject>Chlorophyll</subject><subject>Chlorophyll a</subject><subject>Climate Change/Climate Change Impacts</subject><subject>Control</subject><subject>Copper</subject><subject>Copper sulfate</subject><subject>Earth and Environmental Science</subject><subject>Efficiency</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Environmental monitoring</subject><subject>Formulations</subject><subject>Freshwater</subject><subject>Freshwater resources</subject><subject>Hydrogeology</subject><subject>Inland water environment</subject><subject>Internalization</subject><subject>Operating costs</subject><subject>Resource management</subject><subject>Soil Science & Conservation</subject><subject>Sulfates</subject><subject>Viability</subject><subject>Water Quality/Water Pollution</subject><issn>0049-6979</issn><issn>1573-2932</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU9LJDEQxcOyws7qfoC9BTy3mz-dTmdvY6O7gqCInkMmqcxGepI26UH005uxFzxZl4Li_arq8RD6SckZJUT-KpQySRpC-4Yr0TevX9CKCskbpjj7ilaEtKrplFTf0PdSHkkt1csVKkPaTSaHkiJOHt-aPIc5pBjiFpvo8IX3wRr7gs9hfgaIeEjTBBmvx60BGxzgy5R3-9EcoPIb34EP7_D8D_CQ6y5rRny-z-6djRam-QQdeTMW-PG_H6OHy4v74W9zffPnalhfN7ZldG6s2XS9EVIxzloOzELvqPd966R3hntLNsQRT1gLnQJXDbJ2A5w5IpgRquPH6HTZO-X0tIcy68e0z7Ge1IwoKjrKCKuqs0W1NSPoEH2as6mWjYNdsClWQ3W-FoJyRaQUFaALYHMqJYPXUw47k180JfoQhl7C0DUMfQhDv1aGLUyp2riF_PHK59AbxoqOBA</recordid><startdate>20180901</startdate><enddate>20180901</enddate><creator>Bishop, West M.</creator><creator>Richardson, Robert J.</creator><creator>Willis, Ben E.</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1774-0585</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180901</creationdate><title>Comparison of Partitioning and Efficacy Between Copper Algaecide Formulations: Refining the Critical Burden Concept</title><author>Bishop, West M. ; Richardson, Robert J. ; Willis, Ben E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c421t-cab68a57923243e2ce8d1ff84d7fda3fc0b0d0f024e69ed04924be32d052a5963</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Adsorption</topic><topic>Algae</topic><topic>Algal mats</topic><topic>Algicides</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution</topic><topic>Chlorophyll</topic><topic>Chlorophyll a</topic><topic>Climate Change/Climate Change Impacts</topic><topic>Control</topic><topic>Copper</topic><topic>Copper sulfate</topic><topic>Earth and Environmental Science</topic><topic>Efficiency</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Environmental monitoring</topic><topic>Formulations</topic><topic>Freshwater</topic><topic>Freshwater resources</topic><topic>Hydrogeology</topic><topic>Inland water environment</topic><topic>Internalization</topic><topic>Operating costs</topic><topic>Resource management</topic><topic>Soil Science & Conservation</topic><topic>Sulfates</topic><topic>Viability</topic><topic>Water Quality/Water Pollution</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bishop, West M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Richardson, Robert J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willis, Ben E.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Access via ABI/INFORM (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Water, air, and soil pollution</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bishop, West M.</au><au>Richardson, Robert J.</au><au>Willis, Ben E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Partitioning and Efficacy Between Copper Algaecide Formulations: Refining the Critical Burden Concept</atitle><jtitle>Water, air, and soil pollution</jtitle><stitle>Water Air Soil Pollut</stitle><date>2018-09-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>229</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>17</epage><pages>1-17</pages><artnum>300</artnum><issn>0049-6979</issn><eissn>1573-2932</eissn><abstract>Filamentous mat-forming algae are increasingly impairing freshwater resources. To restore water utility, reactive management programs often involve application of copper-based algaecides. Copper algaecide formulations can differ significantly, and this research outlined an advanced approach to evaluate formulation efficiency for controlling filamentous algae. Two common algal species (
Lyngbya wollei
,
Pithophora varia
) were used to assess copper internalization and adsorption as well as relation to control among copper formulations. Captain® XTR achieved control (7-day EC
85
) of
L. wollei
with internal copper concentrations of 0.78 and 0.76 mg Cu/g based on chlorophyll
a
content or filament viability, respectively. Cutrine® Ultra achieved control of
L. wollei
based on filament viability only at 0.85 mg Cu/g. Internalized copper concentrations required for control following Captain XTR exposures were similar for
P. varia
, 0.81 and 0.95 mg Cu/g, whereas Cutrine Ultra and copper sulfate did not elicit control nor attain the critical internal copper threshold. The relationship between internalized copper and responses, among all formulations, was significant (
P
< 0.0001) with
R
2
values of 0.920 and 0.935 for
L. wollei
and 0.807 and 0.826 for
P. varia
based on filament viability and chlorophyll
a
content, respectively. Formulation efficiency, internalized copper versus total amended, was greatest with Captain XTR (average 0.17), followed by Cutrine Ultra (0.13), and copper sulfate (0.09). By measuring the efficiency of a specific algaecide and the corresponding amount required to achieve control of targeted algal biomass, management objectives can be achieved while decreasing environmental loads of copper, number of treatments, and operational costs.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><doi>10.1007/s11270-018-3958-z</doi><tpages>17</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1774-0585</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0049-6979 |
| ispartof | Water, air, and soil pollution, 2018-09, Vol.229 (9), p.1-17, Article 300 |
| issn | 0049-6979 1573-2932 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2091561202 |
| source | SpringerNature Journals |
| subjects | Adsorption Algae Algal mats Algicides Analysis Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution Chlorophyll Chlorophyll a Climate Change/Climate Change Impacts Control Copper Copper sulfate Earth and Environmental Science Efficiency Environment Environmental monitoring Formulations Freshwater Freshwater resources Hydrogeology Inland water environment Internalization Operating costs Resource management Soil Science & Conservation Sulfates Viability Water Quality/Water Pollution |
| title | Comparison of Partitioning and Efficacy Between Copper Algaecide Formulations: Refining the Critical Burden Concept |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T05%3A49%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Partitioning%20and%20Efficacy%20Between%20Copper%20Algaecide%20Formulations:%20Refining%20the%20Critical%20Burden%20Concept&rft.jtitle=Water,%20air,%20and%20soil%20pollution&rft.au=Bishop,%20West%20M.&rft.date=2018-09-01&rft.volume=229&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=17&rft.pages=1-17&rft.artnum=300&rft.issn=0049-6979&rft.eissn=1573-2932&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11270-018-3958-z&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA551390775%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2091561202&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A551390775&rfr_iscdi=true |