Laserfiche WebLink
3-5 <br />3.0 <br />2.5 <br />E 2.0 <br />a 1.5 <br />1.0 <br />0.5 <br />0.0 <br />PHASE 1, 1986- 1987 <br />® LESS THAN 25 um <br />N GREATER THAN 505 Y.m <br />25-505 µ.m <br />DAVIS PARK PARKER HEADGATE PALO CIBOLA IMPERIAL YUMA <br />DAM N10AB1 DAM ROCK VERDE DAM <br />Figure 4.-The <25-µm, 25- to 505-µm, and >505-µm size-fractions of POM during phase 1 at all sampling stations <br />(Oct. 1986 to June 1987). <br />Table 8.-F-test results based on ANOVA <br />between all stations and <25-µm dry <br />weight (DW), and <25-µm POM for <br />phase 1 (Oct. 1986 through June 1987). <br /><25-µm Dry weight, DW <br />15.77 Yuma A' <br />9.94 Imperial Dam B <br />5.87 Cibola B <br />4.71 Palo Verde Diversion Dam <br />238 Headgate Rock Dam <br />2.24 Parker Dam <br />2.23 Park Moabi <br />1.73 Davis Dam <br /><25-µm POM <br />2.42 Yuma A <br />1.40 Imperial Dam B <br />1.39 Cibola B <br />0.87 Palo Verde Diversion Dam B <br />.82 Parker Dam <br />.73 Davis Dam <br />.66 Park Moabi <br />.65 Headgate Rock Dam <br />Mean Station Tukey <br />g/m3 grouping <br />C <br />C <br />C <br />C <br />C <br />C <br />C <br />C <br />C <br />C <br />C <br />. Means with the same grouping are not signif- <br />icantly different at the 0.05 confidence level. <br />The >25-µm size-fraction POM accounted for 5 to 25 <br />percent of the total POM at all stations-increasing <br />at downstream stations in both magnitude and <br />percentile. The >25-µm size-fraction POM did not <br />fluctuate greatly between sampling periods at <br />upstream stations; generally it was less than 0.10 <br />g/m3 from Davis Dam to Palo Verde Diversion Dam. <br />This size-fraction showed an increase in POM at <br />stations downstream of Palo Verde Diversion Dam. <br />A peak occurred in the >25-µm size-fraction POM <br />in January 1987 at both Imperial Dam and Yuma <br />corresponding to increased flows. Mean concentra- <br />tions, g/m3, of the >25-µm POM were: <br />- Davis Dam (upstream) ...... 0.06 <br />- Park Moabi ................. .09 <br />- Parker Dam ................ .05 <br />- Headgate Rock Dam ........ .08 <br />- Palo Verde Diversion Dam ... .10 <br />- Cibola ..................... .46 <br />- Imperial Dam ............... .72 <br />- Yuma ...................... .73 <br />Mean concentrations at Yuma and Imperial Dam <br />were statistically different from the other stations, <br />as was the mean for Cibola (table 9). <br />The >505-µm POM-considered the coarse POM- <br />was the largest and most visible size-fraction, but <br />it accounted for less than 5 percent of total POM. <br />At Imperial Dam, the >505-µm POM ranged from <br />0.01 to 0.13 g/m3. The mean of 0.04 g/m3, at <br />Imperial Dam, represents the highest concentration <br />of this size-fraction compared with other stations; <br />but statistically, there were no differences between <br />12