Biophysical interactions control the progression of harmful algal blooms in Chesapeake Bay: a novel Lagrangian particle tracking model with mixotrophic growth and vertical migration
Open accessAbstract
Climate change and nutrient pollution contribute to the expanding global footprint of harmful algal blooms. To better predict their spatial distributions and disentangle biophysical controls, a novel Lagrangian particle tracking and biological (LPT‐Bio) model was developed with a high‐resolution numerical model and remote sensing. The LPT‐Bio model integrates the advantages of Lagrangian and Eulerian approaches by explicitly simulating algal bloom dynamics, algal biomass change, and diel vertical migrations along predicted trajectories. The model successfully captured the intensity and extent of the 2020 Margalefidinium polykrikoides bloom in the lower Chesapeake Bay and resolved fine‐scale structures of bloom patchiness, demonstrating a reliable prediction skill for 7–10 d. The fully coupled LPT‐Bio model initialized/calibrated by remote sensing and controlled by ambient environmental conditions appeared to be a powerful approach to predicting transport pathways, identifying bloom hotspots, resolving concentration variations at subgrid scales, and investigating responses of HABs to changing environmental conditions and human interference.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Existing coupled physical-biological models used for HAB modeling and prediction currently do not resolve M. polykrikoides' ecologically important pattern of DVM behavior.
“Existing coupled physical-biological models used for HAB modeling and prediction (Hofmann et al., 2021; Xiong et al., 2022) currently do not resolve M. polykrikoides’ ecologically important pattern of DVM behavior.”
From Diel vertical migration rates of the dinoflagellate species Margalefidinium polykrikoides in a lower Chesapeake Bay tributary (2024) · cites this paper as Xiong et al., 2022
Cites
Gilerson, A. A., Gitelson, A. A., Zhou, J., Gurlin, D., Moses, W., Ioannou, I., & Ahmed, S. A. (2010) · Optics Express · doi:10.1364/oe.18.024109 · Cited by 403 · see citing works
Park, J. G., Jeong, M. K., Lee, J. A., Cho, K.-J., & Kwon, O.-S. (2001) · Phycologia · doi:10.2216/i0031-8884-40-3-292.1 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Wolny, J. L., Tomlinson, M. C., Schollaert Uz, S., Egerton, T. A., McKay, J. R., Meredith, A., Reece, K. S., Scott, G. P., & Stumpf, R. P. (2020) · Frontiers in Marine Science · doi:10.3389/fmars.2020.00337 · Cited by 80 · cited 2× · see citing works
“2021) and the satellite-derived Red Band Difference (RBD) was used as a proxy of relative chlorophyll fluorescence to highlight areas with high algal biomass (Wolny et al. 2020; Jordan et al. 2021).”
MethodSelf-citationUnderstanding controls on Margalefidinium polykrikoides blooms in the lower Chesapeake Bay
Hofmann, E. E., Klinck, J. M., Filippino, K. C., Egerton, T., Davis, L. B., Echevarría, M., Pérez-Vega, E., & Mulholland, M. R. (2021) · Harmful Algae · doi:10.1016/j.hal.2021.102064 · Cited by 18 · cited 8× · see citing works
“Yet, no LPT models to date have incorporated nutrient limitation and mixotrophic growth, factors that may contribute to the competitive success of dinoflagellate groups (Mulholland et al. 2018; Hofmann et al. 2021; Qin et al. 2021).”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialSelf-citationLim, Y. K., Kim, J. H., Ro, H., & Baek, S. H. (2022) · Harmful Algae · doi:10.1016/j.hal.2022.102315 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Storm-induced coastward expansion of Margalefidinium polykrikoides bloom in Chesapeake Bay
Xiong, J., Shen, J., & Wang, Q. (2022) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114187 · Cited by 7 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Satellite images recorded the complete bloom cycle, including the uncommon phenomenon of M. polykrikoides export from the lower CB to coastal Atlantic waters following Tropical Storm (TS) Isaias (Xiong et al. 2022).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Clayton, S., Chrabot, J. B., Echevarria, M., Gibala-Smith, L., Mogatas, K., Bernhardt, P., & Mulholland, M. R. (2024) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2024.1378552 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Xiong, J., Shen, J., Qin, Q., Tomlinson, M. C., Zhang, Y. J., Cai, X., Ye, F., Cui, L., & Mulholland, M. R.
- Affiliations
- William & Mary (US)
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (US)
- Environmental Protection Agency (US)
- Old Dominion University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Xiong, Jilian
- ORCID
- Venue
- Limnology and Oceanography Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2023-01-19
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 498-508
- ISSN
- 2378-2242 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4319836335
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 5 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 3.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Limnology and Oceanography Letters (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- ODU Digital Commons (Old Dominion University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- NOAA Institutional Repository (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Marine and coastal ecosystems
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Oceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Aquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
- Keywords
- harmful algal blooms, Lagrangian particle tracking, mixotrophic growth, diel vertical migration, Margalefidinium polykrikoides, bloom prediction, biophysical interactions, Chesapeake Bay, nutrient pollution, climate change
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
