1 / 49

Regression Analysis of Phosphorous Loading Data for the Maumee River, Water Years 2003-2005

Regression Analysis of Phosphorous Loading Data for the Maumee River, Water Years 2003-2005. Charlie Piette David Dolan Pete Richards. Department of Natural and Applied Sciences University of Wisconsin Green Bay. National Center for Water Quality Research, Heidelberg College.

cosima
Download Presentation

Regression Analysis of Phosphorous Loading Data for the Maumee River, Water Years 2003-2005

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Regression Analysis of Phosphorous Loading Data for the Maumee River, Water Years 2003-2005 Charlie Piette David Dolan Pete Richards Department of Natural and Applied Sciences University of Wisconsin Green Bay National Center for Water Quality Research, Heidelberg College

  2. Phosphorus and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement • Goal for reduction • Initial targets • Secondary targets

  3. Maumee River Watershed 5

  4. Maumee RiverFacts • Size • Contribution

  5. Data Source • USGS • NCWQR • Used data from WY 2003-2005

  6. Purpose of Our Research • ECOFORE 2006: Hypoxia Assessment in Lake Erie • Estimate TP loads to Lake Erie using data from Heidelberg College and effluent data from permitted point sources • Constructing a daily time series of phosphorus loading (Maumee River)

  7. Problems in Constructing a Time Series for the Maumee • Missing data • All three years missing some data • No major precipitation events were missed in water years 2003 and 2004 • 2005……..

  8. Water Year 2005 Data Overview • Missing an important time period • December 2004-January 2005, moving the lab • Very significant period of precipitation • 32.8 inches of snow in January ’05 • Third wettest January on record • Warm temps- 52˚F on New Year’s Day

  9. Importance of WY 2005 • Fifth largest peak flow in 73 year data record- 94,100 cfs • Orders of magnitude larger than average flows for the same time period in WY ’03 and ’04 • 3,437cfs and 10,039 cfs respectively • Need to model the missing data to complete the time series

  10. Objectives • Use statistical analysis to develop a model for predicting missing T.P. for the Maumee in WY 2005 • Calculate an annual load for WY 2005 using measured and predicted data • Compare estimated regression load to estimated load from another method • Assess effectiveness of final regression model on other Lake Erie Tributaries

  11. Reconstructing the Missing Concentration Data • Multiple regression w/ SAS • Producing an equation that can be used to model for the missing phosphorus concentrations

  12. Basic Regression Equation • Y=ßо + ß1X1 + ß2X2 + ……… ßpXp + E • The terms…..

  13. Basic Assumption of Regression • Linear relationship between dependent and independent variables

  14. Basic Assumptions: Continued • Normal distribution of residuals

  15. So, the data is suitable for regression analysis. What makes for a strong model? • Hypothesis for model significance • Hypothesis for parameter estimate significance • P-values- <.05 • R2 value • M.S.E.

  16. Beale’s Equation

  17. Beale’s Ratio Estimator • Daily load for sampled days • Mean daily load • Flow-adjusted mean daily load • Bias-corrected • X 365 = annual load estimate

  18. Beale Stratified Ratio Estimator • Stratification- flow or time • More accurate estimation • “It’s an art!”

  19. Beale Vs. Regression • Both a means to the same end- annual load estimate • Both relying on one main assumption- a linear relationship • Big difference- Beale is not good for reconstructing a time series

  20. Regression Analysis

  21. Data Analysis Step 1 • Transforming the data to log space

  22. Regression Model 1 • Log P-Conc = b0 + b1(Log Flow) + error • Most simple model • Historical use

  23. Regression Model 2 • Log P-Conc = b0 + b1(Log Flow) + b2(Season) + error • Addition of second independent variable “Season” • Dual Slope Analysis

  24. Purpose of adding “Season”

  25. Regression Model 3 • Log P-Conc = b0 + b1(Log Flow) + b2(Season) + b3(Season Effect) + error • Addition of “Season Effect” • Interaction variable

  26. Purpose of adding “Season Effect” • Interaction b/w two independent variables • Slope adjustment • Change in log TP concentration per unit flow during the winter season

  27. Results of Regression Models for the Maumee, WY 2005

  28. Selecting the Best Model for WY 2005 • Model 1 Results

  29. Selecting the Best Model for WY 2005 • Model 2 Results

  30. Selecting the Best Model for WY 2005 • Model 3 Results

  31. Results of Regression Model 3 for the Maumee, WY 2003-2004

  32. Model 3: Viable Option? • Looked like a good choice for WY 2005 • Ran with WY 2003-2004 data

  33. Estimating an Annual TP Load Using Regression Results

  34. Estimating an Annual Load With Regression • Used Model 3 • Need to bring the log TP concentrations out of log-space (back-transforming) • Back-transforming bias and estimated concentrations

  35. Bias Correction • To make up for the low bias…. • Total Phosphorus Concentration (ppm) = Exp[LogPredicted P Concentration + (Mean Square Error * .5)] • Estimating annual TP load from both measured and estimated data • Couple conversion factors……Annual Estimated Load in metric tons/year

  36. What did We Find???

  37. Major Purpose of Our Research • The main objective- developing a daily time series for accurately estimating an annual load for the Maumee in 2005

  38. How did the Regression Estimates Compare to the Beale Estimate? • 95% Confidence Intervals

  39. The Discrepancy

  40. Problem with Regression • Under-prediction • Low-flow bias

  41. Future Directions • Improving the regression model • Other independent variables • More years

  42. Thank You Any Questions?

More Related