See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/260227480

Sedimentation Processes

Chapter · September 2014

DOI: 10.1007/978-94-017-8944-8_27

CITATIONS READS

6 13,242

3 authors, including:

Ilia S Ostrovsky Yosef Z Yacobi

Israel Oceanographic and Limnological Research Institute (IOLR) Israel Oceanographic and Limnological Research Institute (IOLR)
172 PUBLICATIONS   2,564 CITATIONS    98 PUBLICATIONS   3,490 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Formation of cyanobacteria Microcystis blooms in shallow and deep lakes: implementation of novel methodologies to study spatiotemporal organization of toxic
populations View project

Effects of climate and land-use changes on fish catches across lakes at a global scale View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ilia S Ostrovsky on 08 November 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Chapter 27
Sedimentation Processes

Ilia Ostrovsky, Yosef Z Yacobi and Nir Koren

Abstract  Sedimentation is a major process for removal of particulate material

from the water column and an important determinant accounting for the stability
of aquatic ecosystems. Gross sedimentation rates (GSRs) in Lake Kinneret (Israel),
regularly monitored from 1999 up to date with sedimentation traps, showed salient
temporal and spatial variability. In the lake center, the annual mean GSR ranged
from 1.9 to 6.0 g m−2 day−1. The accumulation rate of sediments at the lake centrum
during the study averaged from 2.6 to 4.3  mm  year−1, in agreement with values
obtained by sediment core dating. Organic matter (OM) content comprised 33–42 %
of the sinking particulate matter in sediment traps located in the lake center and was
1.5–2 times lesser in peripheral stations. The highest seasonal values of OM con-
tent in traps were associated with collapse of algal blooms. Algae and their debris
are the main components of OM and their fate in the water column can be well
traced by photosynthetic pigments. Chlorophyte signature pigments display much
lower degradability in the water column than those of diatoms and dinoflagellates
and leave a relatively persistent residue in the buried sediments. Analysis of sea-
sonal changes of algal signature pigments in the upper euphotic zone and those in
sedimentation traps allow us to follow the fate of dominant algal phyla in the water
column. We argue thatlarge individual algal cells may have better ability to sur-
vive in the deep non-stratified water column with limited light, while the ability to
retain and recycle in the euphotic epilimnion under conditions of nutrient limitation
may well confer an evolutionary advantage to small or buoyant algal populations.
Despite large variation in algal community composition, the ratio of OM sedimenta-
tion flux to primary production (i.e., the export ratio) alters only slightly throughout
the stratified period. Approximately 20 % of the OM supplied to the lake by primary
production found its way to the traps. A large decline of water level in recent years
affected the processes of particle resuspension and offshore translocation, which
caused prominent site-specific impacts on the sedimentation regime. We argue that
changes in sedimentation rates observed in the lake are related to fluctuations of
loads from the watershed and prominent water-level fluctuations.

I. Ostrovsky () · Y. Z Yacobi · N. Koren
The Yigal Allon Kinneret Limnological Laboratory, Israel Oceanographic
& Limnological Research, P.O. Box 447, 14950 Migdal, Israel
e-mail: [email protected]
Y. Z Yacobi
e-mail: [email protected]
T. Zohary et al. (eds.), Lake Kinneret, Ecology and Management, Aquatic Ecology Series 6, 485
DOI 10.1007/978-94-017-8944-8_27, © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014
486 I. Ostrovsky et al.

Keywords  Sedimentation rate · Phytoplankton pigments · Suspended particles ·

Primary production · Resuspension

Sedimentation is a major process by which particulate material is removed from the

water column and an important determinant accounting for the stability of aquatic
ecosystems (Håkanson and Jansson 1983; Bloesch 2004). Sedimenting organic par-
ticles fuel biogeochemical processes in the hypolimnion and bottom sediments, and
determine the burial rate of nutrients and pollutants. Understanding the fate of new-
ly produced particulate organic material (POM) in the water column is one of the
fundamental questions in limnology. In the context of organic carbon (OC) cycling,
a foremost issue is the proportion of primary production recycled within the upper
productive stratum versus the part of this material that is exported to deeper strata,
buried in sediments, or removed by other means from the ecosystem (Ostrovsky
et al. 1996; Wassmann 2004).

27.1 Gross Sedimentation Rate

Since 1999, gross sedimentation rate (GSR) is regularly monitored in Lake Kinneret
with sedimentation traps, moored at stations A, F, and M (for station location see
Fig. 32.1 in Chap. 32). GSR has a high spatial and temporal variability (Fig. 27.1).

Fig. 27.1   Multiannual variations of the mean (± standard error) gross sedimentation rates in sedi-
ment traps positioned ~ 1.5–2.5 m above the lake bottom (“low traps”) at three stations. Sta. A is a
pelagic station located in the lake center (ca 40-m depth), Sta. F is a deep peripheral station (20-m
depth), and Sta. M is a littoral station (ca 10-m depth). Station locations are indicated in Fig. 32.1,
Chap. 32; method details are given in Ostrovsky and Yacobi (2010). In winter 2002–2003 a rapid
rise of the water level occurred
27  Sedimentation Processes 487

Between 2003 and 2010, a 3- to 4-fold decrease in the annual GSR was observed at
the lake center (Sta. A, depth 40 m) and at the littoral (Sta. M, 10 m), while an oppo-
site trend was observed at a sublittoral station (Sta. F, 20 m). Since primary produc-
tion in Lake Kinneret is quite stable (Chap. 24), the decrease in GSR at Sta. A, where
resuspension is usually insignificant (Ostrovsky and Yacobi 1999, 2010), suggests
notable changes in the rate of POM export from the epilimnion downwards. The
observed strong positive correlation between GSR and the maximal annual water
level ( r = 0.81, P < 0.01) or with annual water inflow ( r = 0.75, P < 0.01) implies that
allochthonous particles, imported from the watershed and remaining long term in the
water column, affect the sedimentation processes. Another important factor strength-
ening the correlation between inflows and particle concentration is the external load
of nutrients and associated winter–spring dinoflagellate blooms. Over the past two
decades, dinoflagellate blooms have been highly correlated with riverine nutrient
loads (Zohary and Ostrovsky 2011) and their fluctuations could affect the GSR.
Resuspended materials may contribute up to 80–90 % of the measured GSR at the
shallower stations M and F (Ostrovsky and Yacobi 1999, 2010). Therefore, changes
in resuspension strongly affect the sedimentation regime at peripheral locations.
Since 2001, a conspicuous decrease in GSR has been recorded at the littoral Sta.
M ( r = − 0.96, P  < 0.001). This change could be associated with large water-level
fluctuations. A progressive decrease in water level exposes large areas of the bot-
tom sediments to energetic surface wave activity, which removes fine particles and
redeposits them at deeper locations. As a result, much coarser particles, which are
harder to resuspend, become dominant in the littoral. These changes in bottom sedi-
ment particle size distribution eventually reduced the contribution of resuspended
particles to GSR measured in the shallowest location.
GSR measured at Sta. F was influenced by material transport driven by a com-
bined effect of a fast-deepening thermocline and internal seiching that cause resus-
pension and redeposition of recently settled fine particles from the shallower area
toward the lake center (Ostrovsky and Yacobi 2010). A temporal increase in the
annual sedimentation rate at Sta. F ( r = 0.73, P < 0.01) over the last decade could be
associated with processes causing sediment redeposition and focusing in the lake.
We suppose that gradual decrease in the mean water level together with enlarged
water-level fluctuations were the main driving factors responsible for intensive re-
location of finer particles from the littoral and sublittoral areas. One can also specu-
late that the observed increase in the ratio between lake surface and the epilimnion
volume with the decrease in mean water level (Rimmer et al. 2011) leads to more
effective transfer of wind energy to the lake boundaries, which should enhance sedi-
ment resuspension (Ostrovsky et al. 2006).
Comparison of recent sedimentation trap measurements with previously pub-
lished data on GSR expressed in units of dry weight (DW) m−2 day−1 shows con-
spicuous changes over time (Table 27.1). Most of the data compiled in Table 27.1
are based on measurements made with sedimentation traps placed at Sta. A, 1–2.5 m
above the bottom sediments. However, the data for 1990–1996 were collected with
traps placed 15.5 and 26 m above the bottom (cf. Nishri and Koren 1993; Koren
and Klein 2000). Such positioning is expected to lead to notably lower GSRs than
those obtained with near-bottom traps (Ostrovsky and Yacobi 2010). At Sta. A, high
488 I. Ostrovsky et al.

Table 27.1   Mean annual gross sedimentation rate measured with sedimentation traps
Location Sedimentation rate, Trap location, m Period Reference
g DW m−2 day−1 above bottom
Sta. A 1.8–2.2 1 1972–1973 Serruya et al. (1974);
PS 2.5–7.3 1 Serruya (1978)
Sta. A 3.9–5.6 26 1990–1992 Nishri and Koren
(1993)
Sta. A 3.8–5.1 15.5 and 26 1995–1996 Koren and Klein
PS 4.8–15.2 1.5–2 (2000)
Sta. J 22–25 1.5–2
Sta. A 3.8–6.4 2.5 1999–2000 Eckert et al. (2003)
Sta. A 2.7–6.0 2.5 1999–2008 Present study
Sta. A 1.9–2.2 2.5 2009–2011 Present study
PS 5.2–21.6 1.5 1999–2011 Present study
Sta. A station at the deepest part of the lake (bottom depth of 38–44 m depending on water level),
PS peripheral stations excluding Sta. J (depth < 25 m), Sta. J station located south of the Jordan
River inlet (depth < 10 m)
Station locations are indicated in Fig. 32.1 of Chap. 32

GSRs (4–6 g DW m−2 day−1) were observed from the early 1990s to the mid-2000s.
The GSRs for 1990–1996, collected for near-bottom locations, could be even larger
than numbers presented in Table 27.1. Much lower values of ~ 2 g DW m−2 day−1
were reported in 1972–1973 (Serruya et al. 1974; Serruya 1978) and in 2009–2011
(present study). We suggest that the enlarged GSR in the 1990s and earlier 2000s
were triggered by exceptionally high water-level fluctuations, which caused mas-
sive redeposition of the historically settled particulate material to reach a new equi-
librium with external forcing.
At peripheral locations, the measured GSRs were usually much higher and more
variable than at Sta. A. The highest GSRs were recorded near the Jordan River inflow
(Sta. J), where the contribution of allochthonous material delivered from the watershed
is high. Shteinman et al. (2000) indicated that larger particles settle close to the river
inflow and form a bar, while smaller particles are transported further into the lake.
Vertical profiles of turbidity measured in spring along a transect from the Jordan River
inflow to the lake center showed the presence of a thin (a few tens of centimeters)
turbid water layer above the bottom (Ostrovsky unpublished). This suggests spreading
of the fluvial material along the sloping bottom all the way down to the deepest part
of the lake by gravity flow, following the model suggested for the dispersion of cold
riverine water at the top of the thermocline or near the bottom (Serruya 1974).

27.2 Sedimentation of Particulate Inorganic Matter

Precipitation of CaCO3 is the major sedimentation component of particulate inor-

ganic material in Lake Kinneret. Spring decrease of alkalinity in the epilimnetic
water indicates that the annual mean CaCO3 sedimentation all over the lake ranges
27  Sedimentation Processes 489

Table 27.2   Comparison of published estimates of external loads of particulate matter

Source Average load, Sedimenta- Method Period Reference
t year−1 tion ratea,
g DW m2 day−1
Jordan River 74,000 1.2 Loads 1968–1970 Serruya (1971)
inflow
Jordan River 70,000 1.2 Sediment traps 1971–1978 Inbar (1982)
inflow
Jordan River 35,500 0.60 Loads 1970–1987 Authors’
inflow 14,500 0.25 Loads 1987–2011 assessment
Atmospheric 10,000–16,000 0.16–0.26 Dust traps 1993–1996 Ganor et al.
deposition (2003)
Atmospheric 10,000 0.17 Dust traps 2005 Chap. 19
deposition
a
Average annual sedimentation rates of material exported from the Jordan River or as atmospheric
deposits were calculated assuming equal distribution of loaded material over the whole lake area

from 0.7 to 1.4 g m−2 day−1, which comprises 20–70 % of the sedimentation flux of

inorganic particles measured at the center of the lake. Two allochthonous sources of
inorganic particulate material should also be considered: (1) loads of suspended sol-
ids provided by rivers and creeks (the Jordan River is the dominant source of inor-
ganic particles supplied from the watershed) and (2) dust (Table 27.2). Assuming a
uniform distribution of the autochthonous and allochthonous particles over the lake
bottom—the rates of particle contribution by the Jordan River, CaCO3 precipita-
tion, and dust settling were − 0.52, 1.09, and 0.17 g m−2 day−1, respectively, over the
period from 1999 to 2011. Taking into account that the average sedimentation rate
of inorganic material at Sta. A was 2.15 g m−2 day−1, the three mentioned sources of
inorganic material combined accounted for 83 % of the annual sedimentation flux
of inorganic components. Taking into account uncertainties in appraisal of these
components (e.g., part of fluvial particles is deposited near the river inlet zone; fine
particles may be focused in the deeper part of the lake), this rough balance well
portrays the main sources of sedimented material.
Previous studies suggested that material deposited at Sta. A contains, on aver-
age, about 50–60 % of CaCO3, 23–36 % of silicates, and 14–25 % of POM (Ser-
ruya 1978; Klein and Koren 1998). The measurements carried out in 1999–2011
resulted in a higher proportion of POM of 33–42 %. The higher values may be
partly explained by lesser diagenesis of organic particles in traps over a generally
shorter time of their exposure (1–2 weeks in 1999–2011 vs. 2–4 weeks in earlier
studies). Seasonal variations of trap material composition are event specific. A large
proportion of POM in trap material is characteristic of the time of algal bloom col-
lapse, while the inorganic fraction is usually high during a period of flood, which
supplies particles from the watershed, and during spring precipitation of CaCO3
(Koren and Ostrovsky 2002). Particles collected at shallower (peripheral) stations
are characterized by 1.5–2 times lower percentage of POM than that at Sta. A. This
is associated with wind- and internal wave-induced resuspension, which, on the one
hand, washes the lighter particles out of the shallower areas and, on the other hand,
490 I. Ostrovsky et al.

delivers the organic-depleted resuspended particles to the traps (Ostrovsky et  al.
1996; Ostrovsky and Yacobi 2010).

27.3 Sedimentation of Particulate Organic Matter

Organic matter sedimentation rates (OMSR), measured in the lake interior (Sta. A)
by means of sediment traps positioned within the quiescent part of the hypolimnion,
provide the most reliable assessments of POM fluxes from the upper productive
layer into the deeper layers (Ostrovsky and Yacobi 2010). The POM sedimentation
flux gradually declines from February until October (Fig. 27.2a). The ratio of this
flux to primary production, called the export ratio (ER), shows the proportion of
primary production settled from the upper productive layer. This ratio displays clear
seasonality (Fig. 27.2b) that is related to the composition of the phytoplankton and

Fig. 27.2   The annual pattern

of sedimentation parameters
in Lake Kinneret. Means
for 2005–2008: (a) organic
matter sedimentation rate
( OMSR), (b) export ratio,
calculated as the ratio
between the monthly aver-
ages of OMSR and primary
production at Sta. A, and (c)
mass ratio of chlorophyll
degradation product sedi-
mentation rate to chlorophyll
a sedimentation rate (Chl
a–degr: Chl a). Traps were
positioned at ~ 11 m above
the bottom to avoid oversam-
pling of particulate material
under turbulent conditions
in the benthic boundary
layer (Ostrovsky and Yacobi
2010). For details of primary
production measurements,
see elsewhere (Yacobi 2006).
Vertical bars show ± standard
error
27  Sedimentation Processes 491

to the physical regime in the lake. During holomixis (January–March), large-celled

algae (e.g., the diatom Aulacoseira granulata, and the dinoflagellate Peridinium
gatunense) dominate the phytoplankton and are hardly consumed by zooplankton
(Zohary 2004). The high sinking velocity of such cells is an apparent reason why
a high proportion of the phytoplankton reaches the lake bottom during warm win-
ter days with low wind speeds when turbulent mixing is subtle. We assume that
the temporal lag between algal production and sedimentation explains the high-
est proportion of POM in the settling material in February. Increased turbulence
that prevails throughout the well-mixed water column entrains large algal cells and
circulates them between the euphotic zone and the trap locations. The latter is ap-
parently the reason for the overestimation of sedimentation flux of negatively buoy-
ant particles in the non-stratified water column (Buesseler et al. 2007; Yacobi and
Ostrovsky 2012). Loading of large amount of clay particles from the watershed and
resuspension of particles from the bottom (specifically at the lake periphery) caused
by surface waves on windy days explains the occurrence of organic-poor particles
in the traps, and higher OMSR in winter and early spring. All these factors could ac-
count for the enlarged ER during complete (January–February) or partial holomixis
(December). A prominent drop in ER occurs promptly after thermal stratification
has established and the lower part of the water column becomes physically sepa-
rated from the upper productive layer. Following the establishment of stable strati-
fication, the ER declines from 27 to 18 % (Fig. 27.2b) and is explained by a shift
in dominance in algal community from large to small slow-sinking phytoplankton
species throughout the development of strong thermal stratification (Zohary 2004;
Yacobi and Ostrovsky 2012). Development of buoyant filamentous cyanobacteria
(e.g., Aphanizomenon, Cylindrospermopsis) in summer–fall since 1994 could also
contribute to the seasonal decrease in the ER due to the floating capacity of these
species (Walsby 1994). High turnover rates characteristic of small algal species also
enhance nutrient recycling within the euphotic zone and may be the reason for the
lowest rate of phosphorous loss from the epilimnion between July and November
(Ostrovsky and Yacobi 2010). The seasonal timing of minimal ER and the greatest
retention of limiting nutrients in the upper productive layer could be an outcome
of universal adaptation of planktonic communities to stratification, when nutrient
losses could not be replenished from internal or external sources. During the pe-
riod of rapid thermocline deepening in late fall–early winter, large areas of the lake
bottom, which were previously below the hypolimnion and where fresh organic
particles had accumulated, now become overlain by the metalimnion or even the
epilimnion. The interaction between internal waves, which are continuously pre-
sented in the metalimnion, with the exposed sediments cause massive resuspension
of deposited fine particles and their lateral transportation toward the deepest part
of the lake (Ostrovsky and Yacobi 1999; Ostrovsky 2000; Ostrovsky and Sukenik
2008). Such focusing of POM may explain high values of the ER computed for the
end of the stratified period (Fig. 27.2b). The average ER of ~ 20 % apprised for the
large part of the stratified period (March–October) when OMSR is the least biased
at Sta. A is the best estimate for the export flux of the newly produced POM from
the upper mixed layer. This value is typical for many productive lakes and the open
492 I. Ostrovsky et al.

ocean (Tilzer 1984; Baines et al. 1994; Bloesch and Uherlinger 1986; Laws et al.
2000; Ostrovsky and Yacobi 2010) and it probably reflects the adaptability of algal
communities to varying ambient conditions.

27.4 Sedimentation and the Fate of Phytoplankton

Pigments in the Water Column

A substantial component of POM is planktonic algae and their debris. The fate of
this material can be traced by the examination of photosynthetic pigments in par-
ticles prevailing in water, traps, and bottom sediments (Hurley and Armstrong 1990;
Leavitt and Hodgson 2003). Chlorophyll a (Chl a) is a pigment found universally
in all oxygenic photosynthesizers (algae, cyanobacteria, and higher plants) and is
usually used for quantification of phytoplankton biomass. Upon degradation, Chl
a yields an array of degradation products, which reflect diagenetic processing of
phytoplankton (Matile et al. 1999). Analysis of the seasonal variation of the ratio
between Chl a-degraded products and intact Chl a in sediment traps helps to eluci-
date the trophic efficiency by which algal material in the water column is utilized
(Ostrovsky and Yacobi 2010). This unitless ratio displayed similar seasonal dynam-
ics in all traps, irrespective of their location, with maximum values of 0.4–0.6 dur-
ing holomixis. The ratio had near-zero values from August to October (Fig. 27.2c),
when the algal community consisted of small or buoyant species that possess low
settling velocity (ca. tens of centimeters per day, Reynolds 2006) and are easily
consumed by zooplankton, and thus can be readily recycled within the epilimnion
(cf. low ER). The maximum values of the ratio during the holomixis are related to
dominance of large algae, too big for consumption by zooplankton. These algae
populate the entire water column such that a high proportion of their fragments may
be maintained in the well-mixed turbulent water for a long time.
To better understand the fate of specific algal groups in the lake, a trap-to-water
ratio (TWR) was developed (Yacobi and Ostrovsky 2008, 2012; Ostrovsky and Ya-
cobi 2010). It compares pigment indices in the trap (PItrap) and in the water of the
upper productive stratum (PIwater), as follows

PI trap Fi / Fref
TWR = = , (27.1)
PI water Ci / Cref

where Fi , Fref are the fluxes (in mg  m2 day−1) of the ith signature pigment and
common reference pigment in trap, respectively; Ci , Cref are the concentrations (in
mg m−3) of the ith signature pigment and reference common pigment in the upper
productive stratum, respectively. Like Chl a, β-carotene ( β-car) is found in all phy-
toplankton (save cryptophytes) and is thus suitable as a signature of total vegetative
biomass. We preferred using β-car as a reference pigment, as this compound is the
most stable algal pigment (Leavitt and Hodgson 2003). The TWR calculated on the
27  Sedimentation Processes 493

Table 27.3   Trap-to-water ratio (TWR) for different signature pigments in 2006
Pigment Signature for Jan–Mar Apr–Jun (strat- Sep–Oct
(holomixis, ified, suboxic (stratified, anoxic
oxic water) hypolimnion) hypolimnion)
Chl a All algal groups 1.3 0.9 0.7
Chl b Chlorophytes 2.6 1.4 0.9
Lutein + zeaxanthin Chlorophytes (mainly)a 2.6 0.9 0.8
Fucoxanthin Diatoms 2.4 0.3 0.4
Echineneone Cyanobacteria < 1 < 1 0.5
Peridinin Dinoflagellates 0.5 0.7 Not in traps
Chl c Dinoflagellates, diatoms 0.3 0.3 Not in traps
Ratios were calculated by Eq.  (27.1) using β-carotene as a reference pigment (modified from
Yacobi and Ostrovsky 2008). Numbers in italics refer to dominant algal groups
a
In this study, lutein (a signature pigment of chlorophytes) could not be analytically separated
from zeaxanthin (a signature pigment of cyanobacteria). From January to June the mixture of these
pigments reflect primarily chlorophytes since cyanobacteria were presented only in minor quanti-
ties (Yacobi and Ostrovsky 2008). This was also supported by a high correlation ( r2  > 0.9) between
concentrations of lutein + zeaxanthin and Chl b (indicatory of chlorophytes) in the samples

basis of β-car reflects the “freshness” of the newly settled algal material relative to
that in the euphotic zone.
We calculated the TWR for pigments that are signatures of phytoplankton groups
(Table 27.3). Although TWR changed in the three defined periods, the stability of
phytopigments appears as follows: β-carotene > lutein > Chlorophyll b (Chl b) >
Chl a > fucoxanthin > echinenone > Chlorophyll c (Chl c) > peridinin (Yacobi and
Ostrovsky 2008). This pattern agrees with results reported earlier (e.g., Hurley and
Armstrong 1990; Leavitt and Hodgson 2003) and suggests the following order of
algal preservation: chlorophytes > diatoms > cyanobacteria > dinoflagellates. Chl
c displayed the same pattern of degradability as peridinin reflecting a fast decom-
position of dinoflagellates in the water column although sometimes dinoflagellates
reach traps intact (Zohary et al. 1998). Fucoxanthin was harbored mainly by dia-
toms, which formed high concentrations in February, in June–July, and in Septem-
ber–November. Abrupt appearance and disappearance of the large centric diatom
Aulacoseira granulata is typical in winter. The species sinks massively, such that a
large part of the sinking population includes intact cells and determines high TWR
for fucoxanthin. In contrast, low TWR values for fucoxanthin in the summer and
autumn were associated with the dominance of small pennate diatoms (Zohary
2004) which have low thinking velocity; they are consumed by zooplankton and de-
compose mainly within the epilimnion. Chl b and lutein showed a prominent peak
in March–April, when relatively dense population of chlorophytes were eliminated
from the euphotic zone. The high TWR of Chl b and lutein indicates that chloro-
phyte, or debris originating in chlorophyte cells, accumulated in the traps in higher
rates than other algae that prevailed simultaneously in the epilimnion (Yacobi and
Ostrovsky 2012). During the stratified period, the TWR for Chl b and lutein are
slightly below 1, indicating better preservation of chlorophyte cells comparatively
to other phytoplankton groups. Echinenone TWR was mostly < 1 during the ho-
494 I. Ostrovsky et al.

lomixis and consistently low when the lake was stratified (Yacobi and Ostrovsky
2008). This indicates that echinenone is less stable than the signature pigments of
the chlorophytes and suggests that cyanobacteria recycle mainly in the upper part
of the water column. Thus, TWR > 1 is characteristic for most pigments during ho-
lomixis when algal cells settle down intact, while TWR < 1 is characteristic of pig-
ments in a stratified lake and suggests that cells mostly decompose in the epilimnion
before reaching the bottom (Yacobi and Ostrovsky 2008, 2012). These temporal
changes in TWR concur with the above described dynamics of Chl a-degraded
products and ER, as large individual cells may have better ability to survive in the
deep non-stratified water column with limited light, while the ability to retain and
recycle in the upper euphotic layer under conditions of nutrient limitation may well
confer an evolutionary advantage to small or buoyant algal populations.

27.5 The Burial of Sedimented Particles

Sediment accumulation (= burial) rate, SAR, can be most reliably assessed from
sedimentation flux estimates at Sta. A, because recurrently resuspended material
have minimal influence on trap measurements at this deep station (Ostrovsky and
Yacobi 2010). The computed SAR indicated twofold variations over the last decade:
from 2.5–3 mm year−1 during the drought of 2008–2011 to 5.7 mm year−1 in the
rainy 2003. The mean SARs based on trap measurements for the 1990s and early
2000s (4–5 mm year−1) well agree with sediment core dating (Table 27.4). Sobek
et al. (2011) found that SAR near the Jordan inlet (Sta. J) is ~ 1.5 times higher than
at the lake center. On the other hand, at peripheral stations, SARs are 1.5–2 times
lower than that at Sta. A. The latter corroborates our conclusion about relocation
of sedimented particles from shallow areas toward the lake center (Ostrovsky and
Yacobi 1999, 2010). Gradual increase in organic matter content in the uppermost
(few millimeters) layer of bottom sediments from the littoral to the lake center (Os-
trovsky and Yacobi 1999; Yacobi and Ostrovsky 2000) supports the notion of focus-
ing of lighter organic-rich particles in the deep part of the lake. At the same time,
much lower content of organic material in the uppermost layer during holomixis in
comparison with the stratified period suggests seasonal dissimilarity in chemical
and physical processes influencing the fate of settling and decomposition of organic
and inorganic particles in the water column. In particular, internal seiching strongly
influences the sedimentation regime during the stratified period (Ostrovsky et al.
1996, 1997; Ostrovsky and Yacobi 2010).
Overall, the dynamic sedimentation processes ultimately affect the amount of
suspended organic and inorganic material, concentrations of nutrients and pollut-
ants in the upper productive stratum by means of their export to lower strata and
bottom sediments. The anthropogenic increase in water demands and reduction of
precipitation in the region during the past decades altered the hydrological regimes
and material load from the watershed to Lake Kinneret (Ostrovsky et  al. 2013;
Chaps. 7 and 18). Such changes concurrently with the increase beyond natural in
27  Sedimentation Processes 495

Table 27.4   Sediment accumulation rates

Location Accumulation Method Layer Period Reference
rate, mm year−1 location in
sediments
Sta. A 2.8 137
Cs profiles Surface layer – Stiller and Assaf (1973)
PS 2.0–5.1 137
Cs profiles Surface layer Stiller and Assaf (1973)
Sta. A 3.5 Sediment trap Surface layer 1990–1992 Nishri and Koren (1993)
Sta. A 4 137
Cs profiles Surface layer Recent Nishri and Koren (1993)
KINU8 4.7 210
Pb dating 0–5 cm 1982–1993 Erel et al. (2001)
5.0 and δ13Corg ED 5–12 cm 1959–1982 Erel et al. (2001)
7.1 12–33 cm 1953–1959 Erel et al. (2001)
KINU8 4.3 δ13Corg ED 0–11 cm 1975–1993 Dubowski et al. (2003)
5.6 and 11–25 cm 1950–1975 Dubowski et al. (2003)
6.1 Corg content 25–59 cm 1872–1950 Dubowski et al. (2003)
Sta. A 3.6 210
Pb 0–40 cm 1890–2002 Hambright et al. (2004)
Sta. A 4.5 Mixed 0–10 cm Recent Sobek et al. (2011)
PS 2.0–2.8 210
Pb and 137Cs 0–10 cm Recent Sobek et al. (2011)
Sta. J 6.1 0–10 cm Recent Sobek et al. (2011)
Sta. A 4.3 ± 0.7a Sediment trap Surface layer 1999–2007 Present study
Sta. A 2.6 ± 0.3a Sediment trap Surface layer 2008–2011 Present study
Accumulation rates are presented as means and ranges, or means ± SD
KINU8 is a sampling station located ~ 2 km northwest of Sta. A, PS are peripheral stations, δ13 Corg
ED is event dating using δ13 C. Locations of Sta. A and Sta. J are indicated in Fig. 32.1, Chap. 32
a
Calculations are based on specific gravity of ash fraction = 2.65 g cm−3 and organic matter frac-
tion = 1 g cm−3; porosity in the upper 10-cm layer = 87 % (Sobek et al. 2011)

the amplitude of water-level fluctuations as well as long-term water-level decline

influenced the algal community and modified the GSRs and material redeposition
in the lake.

References

Baines SB, Pace ML, Karl DM (1994) Why does the relationship between sinking flux and plank-
tonic primary production differ between lakes and oceans? Limnol Oceanogr 39:213–226
Bloesch J (2004) Sedimentation and lake sediment formation. In: O’Sullivan PE, Reynolds CS
(eds) The lakes handbook, vol 2: lake restoration and rehabilitation. Blackwell, Malden,
pp 197–229
Bloesch J, Uehlinger U (1986) Horizontal sedimentation differences in a eutrophic Swiss lake.
Limnol Oceanogr 31:1094–1109
Buesseler KO, Lamborg CH, Boyd PW, Lam PJ, Trull T, Bidigare RR, Bishop JKB, Casciotti KL,
Dehairs F, Elskens M, Honda M, Karl DM, Siegel DA, Silver MW, Steinberg DK, Valdes J,
VanMooy B, Wilson S (2007) Revisiting carbon flux through the ocean’s twilight zone. Sci-
ence 316:567–570
Dubowski Y, Erez J, Stiller M (2003) Isotopic paleolimnology of Lake Kinneret. Limnol Oceanogr
48:68–78
Eckert W, Didenko J, Uri E, Eldar D (2003) Spatial and temporal variability of particulate phos-
phorus fractions in seston and sediments of Lake Kinneret under changing loading scenario.
Hydrobiologia 494:223–229
496 I. Ostrovsky et al.

Erel Y, Dubowski Y, Halicz L, Erez J, Kaufman A (2001) Lead concentrations and isotopic ratios
in the sediments of the Sea of Galilee. Environ Sci Technol 35(2):292–299
Ganor E, Foner HA, Gravenhorst G (2003) The amount and nature of the dustfall on Lake Kinneret
(the Sea of Galilee), Israel: flux and fractionation. Atmos Environ 37:4301–4315
Håkanson L, Jansson M (1983) Principles of lake sedimentology. Springer, Berlin
Hambright KD, Eckert W, Leavitt PR, Schelske CL (2004) Effects of historical lake level and land
use on sediment and phosphorus accumulation rates in Lake Kinneret. Environ Sci Technol
38:6460–6467
Hurley JP, Armstrong DE (1990) Fluxes and transformations of aquatic pigments in Lake Men-
dota, Wisconsin. Limnol Oceanogr 35:384–398
Inbar M (1982) Measurement of fluvial sediment transport compared with lacustrine sedimenta-
tion rates: the flow of the River Jordan into Lake Kinneret. Hydrol Sci J 27(4):439–449
Klein M, Koren N (1998) The influence of the thermocline on sedimentation in the deeper part of
Lake Kinneret, Israel. Limnologica 28:293–299
Koren N, Klein M (2000) Rate of sedimentation in Lake Kinneret, Israel: spatial and temporal
variations. Earth Surf Proc Landf 25:895–904
Koren N, Ostrovsky I (2002) Sedimentation in a stratified subtropical lake. Verh Int Ver Theor
Angew Limnol 27:2636–2639
Laws EA, Falkowski PG, Smith WO, Ducklow H, McCarthy JJ (2000) Temperature effects on
export production in the open ocean. Global Biogeochem Cycle 14(4):1231–1246
Leavitt PR, Hodgson DA (2003) Sedimentary pigments. In: Smol JP, Birks HJB, Last WM (eds)
Tracking environmental changes using lake sediments, vol 3: terrestrial, algal, and siliceous
indicators. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 295–325
Matile P, Hörtensteiner S, Thomas H (1999) Chlorophyll degradation. Annu Rev Plant Physiol
Plant Mol Biol 50:67–95
Nishri A, Koren N (1993) Sediment transport in Lake Kinneret. Verh Int Ver Theor Angew Limnol
25:290–292
Ostrovsky I (2000) The upper most layer of bottom sediments: sampling and artifacts. Ergeb Lim-
nol 55:243–256
Ostrovsky I, Sukenik A (2008) Spatial heterogeneity of biogeochemical parameters in a sub-
tropical lake. In: Mohanty PK (ed) Monitoring and modeling lakes and coastal environments.
Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherland, pp 79–90
Ostrovsky I, Yacobi YZ (1999) Organic matter and pigments in surface sediments: possible mech-
anisms of their horizontal distributions in a stratified lake. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 56:1001–1010
Ostrovsky I, Yacobi YZ (2010) Sedimentation flux in a large subtropical lake: spatio-temporal
variations and relation to primary productivity. Limnol Oceanogr 55:1918–1931
Ostrovsky I, Yacobi YZ, Walline P, Kalikhman I (1996) Seiche induced mixing: its impact on lake
productivity. Limnol Oceanogr 41:323–332
Ostrovsky I, Wynne D, Bergstein-Ben Dan T, Nishri A, Li H, Yacobi YZ, Koren N, Parparova R
(1997) Spatial distributions of biogeochemical parameters in surface sediments at the begin-
ning of the stratified period in a subtropical lake. Water Air Soil Pollut 99:497–505
Ostrovsky I, Rimmer A, Agnon Y, Koren N (2006) Sediment resuspension in the hypolimnion of
Lake Kinneret (Israel): the impact of water level fluctuation. Verh Int Ver Theor Angew Limnol
29:1625–1629
Ostrovsky I, Rimmer A, Yacobi YZ, Nishri A, Sukenik A, Hadas O, Zohary T (2013) Long-term
changes in the Lake Kinneret ecosystem: the effects of climate change and anthropogenic fac-
tors. In: Goldman CR, Kumagai M, Robarts RD (eds) Climate change and inland waters: im-
pacts and mitigation approaches for ecosystems and society. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK,
pp 271–293
Reynolds CS (2006) Ecology of phytoplankton. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Rimmer A, Gal G, Opher T, Lechinsky Y, Yacobi YZ (2011) Causes for long-term variations of
thermal structure in a warm lake. Limnol Oceanogr 56:974–988
Serruya C (1971) Lake Kinneret: the nutrient chemistry of the sediments. Limnol Oceanogr
16:510–521
 27  Sedimentation Processes 497

Serruya S (1974) The mixing patterns of the Jordan River in Lake Kinneret. Limnol Oceanogr
19:175–181
Serruya C (1978) Sediment chemistry. In: Serruya C (ed) Lake Kinneret, momographiae biologi-
cae. Junk, Amsterdam, pp 205–215
Serruya C, Edelstein M, Pollingher U, Serruya S (1974) Lake Kinneret sediments: nutrient compo-
sition of the pore water and mud water exchanges. Limnol Oceanogr 19:489–508
Shteinman B, Wynne D, Kamenir Y (2000) Study of sediment dynamics in the Jordan River-Lake
Kinneret contact zone using tracer methods. The hydrology–geomorphology interface: rainfall,
floods, sedimentation, land use. Proceedings of the Jerusalem Conference, May 1999. IAHS
Publ. 261, pp 275–284
Sobek S, Zurbrügg R, Ostrovsky I (2011) The burial efficiency of organic carbon in the sediments
of Lake Kinneret. Aquat Sci 73:355–364
Stiller M, Assaf G (1973) Sedimentation and transport in Lake Kinneret traced by 137Cs. In: Hy-
drology of lakes. Proceedings Helsinki Symposium, July 1973. IAHS Publ. 109, pp 397–403
Tilzer MM (1984). Estimation of phytoplankton loss rates from daily photosynthetic rates and
observed biomass changes in Lake Constance. J Plankton Res 6:309–324
Walsby AE (1994) Gas vesicles. Microbiol Rev 58:94–144
Wassmann P (2004) Eutrophication, primary production and vertical export. In: Wassmann P, Olli
K (eds) Drainage basin nutrient inputs and eutrophication: an integrated approach. University
of Tromsø, Norway, pp 126–138 (available at http://hdl.handle.net/10037/2389)
Yacobi YZ (2006) Temporal and vertical variation of chlorophyll a concentration, phytoplankton
photosynthetic activity and light attenuation in Lake Kinneret: possibilities and limitations for
simulation by remote-sensing. J Plankton Res 28:725–736
Yacobi YZ, Ostrovsky I (2000) Lake Kinneret sediments: spatial distribution of chloropigments
during holomixes. Arch Hydrobiol 55:457–469
Yacobi YZ, Ostrovsky I (2008) Downward flux of organic matter and pigments in Lake Kinneret
(Israel): relationships between phytoplankton and the material collected in sediment traps. J
Plankton Res 30:1189–1202
Yacobi YZ, Ostrovsky I (2012) Sedimentation of phytoplankton: role of ambient conditions and
life strategies of algae. Hydrobiologia 698:111–120
Zohary T (2004) Changes to the phytoplankton assemblage of Lake Kinneret after decades of
predictable repetitive pattern. Freshw Biol 49:1355–1371
Zohary T, Ostrovsky I (2011) Ecological impacts of excessive water level fluctuations in stratified
freshwater lake. Inland Waters 1:47–59
Zohary T, Pollingher U, Hadas O., Hambright KD (1998) Bloom dynamics and sedimentation of
Peridinium gatunense in Lake Kinneret. Limnol Oceanogr 43:175–186

View publication stats