Laserfiche WebLink
Table 12.-Range, mean x, and standard deviation s for total dry weight <br />(DW), total ash weight (AW), and total POM for phase 1 (Oct. 1986 through <br />June 1987). <br />Station` Total DW Total AW <br />g/m3 Total POM <br />Davis Dam Range 0.84-2.01 0.27-1.21 0.57-1.06 <br /> x 1.31 0.51 0.80 <br /> S 0.36 0.30 0.18 <br />Park Moabi Range 1.88-3.87 1.23-3.26 0.45-0.98 <br /> x 2.68 1.91 0.78 <br /> S 0.73 0.70 0.18 <br />Parker Dam Range 0.78-3.19 0.26-1.98 0.52-1.39 <br /> x 2.25 1.37 0.89 <br /> S 0.78 0.57 0.30 <br />Headgate Rock Dam Range 1.73-6.34 1.16-5.25 0.40-1.09 <br /> x 3.21 2.47 0.75 <br /> S 1.41 1.31 0.21 <br />Palo Verde Diversion Range 1.10-15.07 0.82-14.00 0.28-1.35 <br />Dam x 6.05 4.54 0.99 <br /> S 4.00 4.14 0.31 <br />Cibola Range 8.48-45.99 7.00-43.64 1.14-3.66 <br /> x 18.55 16.67 1.88 <br /> S 11.74 11.51 0.80 <br />Imperial Dam Range 12.59-97.88 10.60-94.63 1.50-3.24 <br /> x 28.76 26.61 2.15 <br /> S 28.19 27.73 0.57 <br />Yuma Range 11.61-124.26 9.57-119.71 2.04-4.78 <br /> x 43.82 40.74 3.14 <br /> S 43.03 41.73 1.28 <br />. Number of samples at all stations is 8 <br />As noted, total POM showed higher values in the <br />two tailwaters (Davis and Parker) than for the next <br />downstream station: <br />stream order. These data indicate that the concen- <br />tration of total mean annual POM in the lower <br />Colorado River is highly comparable to other streams <br />in Western United States. <br />• Davis Dam had a mean of 0.80 g/m3 while Park <br />Moabi was only 0.78 g/m3. <br />• Parker Dam had a mean of 0.89 g/m3 while <br />Headgate Rock Dam was only 0.75 g/m3. <br />• From Headgate Rock Dam to Yuma, POM showed <br />the same trend of generally increasing values pro- <br />ceeding downstream as noted in the total and <br />inorganic classes. The mean values for total POM <br />ranged from 0.75 g/m3 at Headgate to 3.14 g/m3 <br />at Yuma. <br />• Total POM at Cibola, Imperial Dam, and Yuma <br />stations were not significantly different from one <br />another but were significantly different (p<0.05) <br />from all other stations as shown in table 13. <br />Table 14 presents a comparison of mean annual POM <br />between phase 1 results for the lower Colorado River <br />and various western streams of similar size and <br />Composition of POM varied between size-fractions, <br />but generally can be categorized as: <br />- diatoms <br />- green algae <br />- other algae (including and dominated by <br />blue-greens) <br />- plant material (macrophyte fragments) <br />- animal material (mostly zooplankton) <br />- detrital material (defined by any and all of the above <br />categories) <br />The <25-µm POM was comprised generally of 95 <br />percent detrital material and 5 percent phytoplank- <br />ton-mainly diatoms at all stations. This size-fraction <br />represented the greatest concentration of POM-and <br />may be the most diverse-but the material was so <br />small, its origin or parental source could not be <br />determined. <br />14