2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2020.115959
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A systematic literature review of forecasting and predictive models for cyanobacteria blooms in freshwater lakes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
111
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 172 publications
(133 citation statements)
references
References 199 publications
8
111
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Forecasting applications in which data assimilation calibrates parameters as more data are collected allow a lake-specific parameterization to emerge, thus improving forecast skill over time (following Thomas et al 2020a). Coupled hydrodynamic-ecosystem models can forecast numerous variables and may be able to perform better than empirical models when initial conditions are outside the historical envelope (Dietze 2017) as well as be used for forecast scenario development (Rousso et al 2020).…”
Section: Lesson 3: Let Your Forecasting Goals Guide Your Modeling Appmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Forecasting applications in which data assimilation calibrates parameters as more data are collected allow a lake-specific parameterization to emerge, thus improving forecast skill over time (following Thomas et al 2020a). Coupled hydrodynamic-ecosystem models can forecast numerous variables and may be able to perform better than empirical models when initial conditions are outside the historical envelope (Dietze 2017) as well as be used for forecast scenario development (Rousso et al 2020).…”
Section: Lesson 3: Let Your Forecasting Goals Guide Your Modeling Appmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the purpose of planning lake restoration, accounting for hydrodynamics, ecosystem functioning and sediment processes may be necessary (Trolle et al, 2011;Smits & van Beek, 2013;Hipsey et al, 2015;Zhang et al, 2015;Hu et al, 2016). Recently, the coupling of stateof-the-art lake models (Hipsey et al, 2020;Rousso et al, 2020) with sediment diagenetic models (e.g., Gudimov et al, 2016;Matisoff et al, 2016;Doan et al, 2018) has been promoted specifically to address gaps in lake resaturation planning (Markelov et al, 2019;Messina et al, 2020). A key future perspective is thus the improved integration of the required modeling infrastructure to test different restoration scenarios.…”
Section: Future Perspectivesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also, our model results pointed at average concentrations and responses, not at phytoplankton bloom or scum formation. Prediction of blooms with data-driven or process-based models still remains a challenge (Rousso et al 2020), and may require inclusion of processes that are not parameterised in our model, such as life cycles (Hense and Beckmann 2010) or selective grazing by zooplankton (Sommer et al 2012). This may be part of the reason for why the spring peak and occasional summer spikes in chlorophyll-a were missed by the model.…”
Section: Implications Beyond Lake Erkenmentioning
confidence: 99%