Comparing fluorometric methods (in vivo vs extracted) for cyanoHAB monitoring in six Rhode Island ponds

Abstract Harmful algal blooms caused by cyanobacteria (cyanoHABs) are detrimental to human and environmental health and can be difficult to monitor without specialized training and equipment. A variety of instruments have been developed to measure cyanoHAB indicators (i.e., chlorophyll a or phycocyanin) that do not require advanced laboratory processes (e.g., pigment extraction). We compared measurements from five in vivo fluorometers (Turner Trilogy in-vivo module, Turner Fluorosense, Turner Cyanofluor, bbe AlgaeTorch, and bbe Phycoprobe) to results from solvent-based extractions for chlorophyll a and phycocyanin at six different waterbodies in Rhode Island. We found a strong relationship between extracted phycocyanin and in vivo fluorometers (R2 ranging from 0.78-0.96). We found less consistency between in vivo measurements of chlorophyll a and the extracted results (R2 between 0.34 and 0.82). Some variability in the chlorophyll a results can be explained by differences in the phytoplankton community across the different sampling sites. Phycocyanin results from in vivo fluorometry were also strongly related with cell counts, which implies that phycocyanin measurements from these instruments can be a good proxy for cell counts. Many federal, state, and local entities use cell counts of cyanobacteria to determine when to issue health or contact advisories for waterbodies. Producing accurate cell counts requires highly specialized training/equipment, processing time, and counts can vary greatly between technicians. The results from this study encourage further adoption of in vivo fluorometry and phycocyanin for cyanoHAB monitoring efforts. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.