Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MUTHUPET LAGOON
ALONG VEDARANYAM COAST (TAMILNADU)
Muthupet Lagoon
Palk Strait
Government of India
Department of Ocean Development
Integrated Coastal and Marine Area Management (ICMAM)
Project Directorate, Chennai
August 2005
DEVELOPMENT TEAM
: Dr. G.V.M.Gupta
: Dr.Usha Natesan
Mr.Viswanathan
Mr.Soundar Rajan
Mr.Thulasiraman
: Prof.T.Balasubramanian
& Team
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The delta has evolved from the sediment piling on a basin that was formed
after northeast-southwest trending fault and transverse trough faults. The delta
formation commenced only after the Cretaceous. Palaeocene and Neocene
sediments dominate the filled up basin. Sedimentation during Mio-Pliocene was
continental. The eastern part of the basin, the Point Calimere region, suffered
subsidence during late tertiary while the western and southwestern parts, especially
Pattukkottai-Mannargudi line were gently uplifted. This also accounts for the depth to
basement, which has reached 1600m in the Pattukkottai-Mannargudi line, while at
the eastern part, the basement occurs only at a depth of 3500m accounting for huge
thickness of marine sediments. This is probably one of the main reasons for the
increasing shallowness of the lagoon in the Muthupet mangroves. The entire coastal
tract between Muthupet and Vedaranyam represents an east-west disposed arm of a
cuspate foreland bar, formed due to the action of the longshore currents. Formation
of sub-aerial deltas is a very recent phenomenon, not more than 100 years old.
India
Palk Strait
Sri
Lanka
Palk Strait
Muthupet Lagoon
Palk Strait
Cauvery
viz.,
Paminiyar,
Koraiyar,
Kandaparichanar,
Kilaithangiyar
and
Marakkakoraiyar discharge their water into the wetlands and form a large lagoon
before reaching the sea. Besides the lagoon, the wetland includes many tidal creeks,
channels and small bays, bordered by thick mangroves; and a number of manmade
canals dug across the mangrove wetlands, particularly in their western part and
fished intensively. The lagoon receives inflow of freshwater during northeast
monsoon (October-December) through the above drainage arteries occupied by
agricultural soils, mangrove swamps and aquaculture ponds. From February to
September, freshwater discharge into the mangrove wetland is negligible. The soil in
the lagoon is clayey silt and towards the landward side it is silty clay due to fresh silt
deposits.
The density of Muthupet mangroves is very high, but the true mangrove
species diversity is low when compared to the mangroves of Pichavaram (Muniyandi,
1985). The Muthupet mangrove wetland is characterized by the presence of
Avicennia marina, Aegiceras corniculatum, Excocaria agallocha, Acanthus ilicifolius,
Rhizophora mucronatoa and Lumnitzera racemosa. The species diversity in
Muthupet is dominated by single species Avicennia marina constituting more than
95% of the total population. The population of the other species in mangrove wetland
is very limited. In the Muthupet mangrove wetland, the zonation or spatial distribution
pattern of a flora shows two distinct zone viz., Avicennia zone and degraded zone.
The former is characterized by the presence of dense evergreen Avicennia marina 38 m followed by Aegiceras corniculatum and Excocaria agallocha as small bushed of
1-2 m. This zone occurs in the fringe area of tidal creeks, manmade fishing canals
and along the muddy shore of the Palk Strait. Palynological studies carried out in
Muthupet mangrove wetland indicate that true mangrove species belonging to
Rhizophoraceae were the dominant species about 150 years ago, but now they are
locally extinct (Caratini et.al., 1973). The problem of cattle grazing in mangrove forest
is very limited.
Six species of sea grasses, and 7 genera and 10 species of seaweeds were
observed in the lagoon. Decrease in water salinity during monsoon influences the
occurrence of fresh water hydrophytes. Kalidasan (1991) reported 76 species of
phytoplankton and 90 species of zooplankton. Diatoms are the dominant groups of
phytoplankton followed by dinoflagellates, chlorophyceans and cyanophyceans.
Among the Zooplankton, copepods dominate and other groups are tintinnids and
rotifers. Macrobenthos found at Muthupet are mollusks and polychaetes, and
crustaceans.
Most of the saltpans produce salts for industrial chemicals. Out of the 14
saltpans, the Salt Corporation of the Government of India owns 13, while the
Tamilnadu Salt Corporation Ltd. owns one. The saltpans located on the western part
of the Muthupet mangroves wetland draw seawater from the Palk Strait through
canals for salt production. The canals are about 2 m wide and 1 m deep and about
4 km long. The saltpans located on the eastern side of the Muthupet RF use highsaline groundwater which is pumped into the pans. The average salinity of the water
in the lagoon varies widely. During monsoon season, salinity varies from 5-15 PSU;
during summer, it touches a high of 45 PSU with higher values in the north and
eastern portion of the lagoon. In some parts of Muthupet mangroves wetlands, water
salinity as high as 75 PSU had been recorded (Selvam, 1992). Soil salinity ranges
from 12.5 to 125 PSU.
Apart from saltpans, 27 prawn farms are located close to the mangrove
forest, covering about 1000 acres. Of these, 796 acres are located on the western
side of the Muthupet mangrove wetlands and 204 acres on the eastern side. All
these farms draw water either from the sea through canals or from the mangrove
wetland. Water exchange is done once in 3 days. The water level maintained in the
farms is about 110 to 115 cm. About 250 to 350 kg of lime is used per 0.5 ha of pond
4.0 METHODOLOGY
In the management of coastal ecosystem, the first step would be to divide the
coastal zone based on its environmental sensitivity into four zones preservation,
conservation, utilization and development zones based on certain criteria.
Preservation zone is the area where no development is allowed and is protected from
degradation. In this zone, construction activity, waste disposal, dredging, etc., are not
permitted and controlled recreation is allowed. Conservation zone is essentially area
between the preservation and utilization/development zone. In
this
zone,
10
Basemap of Muthupet was prepared from SOI toposheets and updated with
PAN data. Ground Control Points were located using GPS and PAN data (June
2003) was geo-referenced to compute the water spread area of Muthupet lagoon.
11
for coastal deployment of these instruments whereas standard mooring frames were
used for lagoon deployments. Both tide and current were set to read at every 15
seconds and recorded the average of 10 minute interval. The data was recorded for
15, 15 and 30 days each in respective seasons. Data on bathymetry of the lagoon
(50 x 50 m grid) was collected using pole.
Water samples in the rivers, lagoon and coastal waters for different seasons
were collected in polyethylene bottles using Niskin samplers, ice preserved in the
field and immediately brought to laboratory for further analysis. Salinity and pH were
measured either in situ using calibrated probes (WTW) or in the lab by argentimetry
(salinity) with a reproducibility within 5% and 2%. Dissolved oxygen was measured
by Winklers method. A part of each water sample was filtered through 0.45 m
membrane filter and the filtrate was used to estimate dissolved nutrients following the
methods described by Grasshoff et al. (1999). Chlorophyll was measured
spectrophotometrically by extracting the pigments in 90% acetone.
12
New Lagoon
13
FIG 5. Lagoon and Coastal Stations location map for July 2004.
14
The lagoon is connected to the Palk Strait by a wide mouth located at the
southern part of the mangroves. Twenty years before, the mouth was about 2.5 km
wide and 2-2.5 m deep; today the mouth is just 1 km wide and not even 1 m deep.
Though the mouth is about 1 km wide, seawater enters the lagoon only through a
narrow passage about 100-200 m wide. Also the mouth never closed completely, but
there is a fear that this may happen soon, considering the rate at which the width of
the mouth is shrinking. It is found that no sand is deposited in the mouth region, it is
only the fine silt brought from the sea that is being deposited (Selvam et al., 2003).
15
16
High Tide
Lagoon
Shallow zone
New Lagoon
Mouth
Low Tide
17
The model output infers that the geometry of the lagoon contributes to the
bathymetry of the lagoon. The tidal water from mouth traverses a narrow channel
(though channel is 1 km wide, the effective navigable channel is only 200 m) for a
distance of about 3.5 km before it suddenly opened into wide lagoon, resulting in
dropping of tidal height and thereby current intensity. Added to this, good amount of
tidal water from mouth enters into the new lagoon (formed in recent years which also
harbours dense mangroves) situated close to the mouth. In other words the existing
mouth is the common entrance for neritic waters to both Muthupet lagoon and new
lagoon. The combined effects of geometry of lagoon and sharing of tidal water by
both the lagoons are clearly seen by dropping of peak tidal height from about 0.1 m
at mouth to about 0.035 m in the lagoon for the simulation period with a tidal phase
lag of 2 hrs between the mouth and Muthupet lagoon station (Fig.8). Because of
these weak tidal currents, there is no sufficient driving force to transport the
suspended matter out of the lagoon. Hence, the lagoon remains turbid for most part
of the year and this has a major role in controlling the chemistry and biology of the
lagoon.
FIG 8. Comparison of Tide at Mouth and Lagoon for the simulation period.
18
pH
Salinity
DO
SPM
NO2
NH3
NO3
PO4
Chl a
Spring
Mouth
8.27
31.89
4.69
384
0.26
0.34
3.36
0.50
0.039
CCP
8.28
37.81
5.15
386
0.82
0.23
3.76
0.73
0.039
Aqua
8.18
41.05
3.71
161
2.86
1.51
2.99
2.08
0.020
Neap
Mouth
8.47
33.93
5.30
227
0.37
0.58
1.38
0.20
0.014
CCP
8.43
41.05
5.28
238
0.24
0.48
3.08
0.58
0.023
Aqua
8.37
43.61
4.09
142
4.85
1.45
12.31
0.97
0.015
The salinity in the upstream areas are very high due to discharge/seepage of
high saline wastes from aquaculture ponds which decrease gradually during spring
and sharply during neap towards mouth (Table 1). Spring-neap tidal variation on
salinity at these stations is clearly seen with high values during neap due to less
dilution from sea end. Low DO and high nitrite and ammonia at aquaculture site are
the results of these activities indicating possible denitrification at this site. The
nutrient levels at chief corner point and mouth are much less than that observed at
aquaculture site indicating that the pollutants released upstream are not getting
dispersed to farther distances towards downstream, due to occurrence of insufficient
driving mechanism (either river discharge or tidal current), but settled to bottom at the
19
vicinity itself. All the stations are highly turbid although the aquaculture site is
relatively less turbid.
The random sampling undertaken in the lagoon during September 2003 also
revealed hypersaline and extreme turbid conditions (Table 2). High salinity could be
attributed to zero runoff coupled with high evaporation. Lagoon waters are well
oxygenated but poor in nutrients and plankton. The poor nutrients can be attributed
to the lack of their supply from the terrain and upstream areas due to poor flushing
conditions. The plankton productivity as observed from chlorophyll concentrations are
also very less which is consistent with the nutrient levels. Owing to poor nutrient
availability and insufficient flushing conditions, the flux of nutrients from the lagoon to
Palk Strait are expected to be less during this season.
Table 2.Water quality at different stations in the lagoon during September 2003.
Station
pH
Salinity
DO
SPM
NO2
NH3
NO3
PO4
Chl a
8.26
42.01
6.16
175
0.02
0.14
0.06
0.24
0.016
8.15
42.21
4.25
125
0.02
0.69
1.23
0.24
0.003
8.07
45.21
5.52
194
0.90
ND
2.23
0.32
0.003
8.10
45.41
4.77
242
0.38
0.31
2.14
0.24
0.005
8.22
45.01
5.78
166
0.65
1.03
1.76
0.45
0.010
8.22
45.01
6.73
361
0.54
0.41
0.47
0.29
0.016
8.14
43.81
6.10
248
0.43
ND
0.33
0.33
0.016
8.10
43.61
5.70
219
0.65
0.28
0.42
0.71
0.010
7.97
40.21
5.62
388
2.81
0.44
1.23
0.48
0.010
10
7.98
41.21
5.24
1515
0.62
0.75
1.52
0.35
0.008
11
8.03
45.01
6.35
328
0.40
0.39
1.61
0.30
0.005
12
8.30
43.41
6.05
586
2.14
0.25
1.42
0.36
0.022
13
8.21
41.21
4.25
172
0.44
0.39
0.95
0.23
0.022
20
The monsoon discharge during this season carried the terrestrial and
upstream nutrients into the lagoon due to which the lagoon nutrients are several fold
higher than the dry period. Distributions of dissolved phosphorus and nitrogen in the
lagoon varied spatially. Dissolved inorganic phosphorus (DIP) dominated the
distribution of total dissolved phosphorus (TDP), but dissolved organic nitrogen
(DON) dominated over its inorganic fraction (Table 3). Among DIN species, nitrate
was the most predominant form. Extreme eastern side of the lagoon is very shallow
and exhibited 2 to 5 times high nitrite and nitrate concentrations than rest of the
lagoon. Concentrations of DIP and DIN were relatively high in the river inlets and low
at the mouth. These spatial patterns of nutrients reflect the influence of riverine flux
and tidal mixing. Hydrochemical variability is likely to influence the nutrient
biogeochemistry in the lagoon.
21
Table 3. Water quality at different stations in the lagoon during Nov-Dec 2003.
Station
pH
Salinity
DO
SPM
NO2
NH3
NO3
PO4
TP
TN
9.26
1.43
7.35
177
8.38
1.32
11.82
0.90
3.35
59.3
8.91
1.23
6.80
873
8.35
1.18
11.65
1.21
1.48
79.0
9.10
0.61
7.76
224
2.38
2.05
10.25
0.83
1.09
47.6
9.09
0.82
8.05
245
3.00
1.64
7.96
0.82
1.20
58.3
9.07
0.82
6.95
384
1.63
1.10
4.27
0.88
1.26
71.4
8.95
1.86
7.06
56
0.92
2.06
0.17
0.80
1.07
71.7
8.50
0.83
6.50
124
2.24
2.13
5.53
0.80
1.54
73.6
8.66
4.33
6.55
146
2.70
1.64
2.17
0.79
1.15
70.8
12
9.11
1.86
9.50
89
1.18
1.54
4.40
0.12
0.85
84.9
13
Mouth
9.01
6.18
9.80
88
1.54
1.22
3.38
0.37
1.28
72.1
--
9.62
--
356
0.03
0.07
0.90
0.33
2.00
40.5
-1
-3
During May 2004, five coastal transects each off Thondi (A), Gopalapattinam
(B), Athirampattinam (C), Muthupet (D) and Serthalaikaadu (E) were monitored. Each
transect covers four stations each having sonic depth of 5, 10, 15 and 20 m
respectively (Fig.4). There is no definite trend observed for any parameter with either
distance from coast or depth. Overall, the coastal waters exhibited low salinity (23-31
PSU) probably due to rain prior to this observation (Table 4). The waters are highly
oxygenated and close to saturation reflecting that the system is capable of respiring
additional load of organic matter. The nutrient levels in the coastal waters are much
less than those in the Muthupet lagoon. The low nutrient levels are the result of their
uptake by high density of phytoplankton (3.23 x 105 to 2.12 x 107 nos l-1).
Unfortunately, the collected chlorophyll samples were spoiled because of the failure
of refrigeration. Highest density of phytoplankton was noticed at 5 and 10 m off
Muthupet (Table 4) but it is too speculative to comment that it is due to discharge
from the Muthupet lagoon as this feature is not reflected in salinity and nutrient
22
levels. More over the extent of discharges from Muthupet lagoon into the Palk Strait
is not clear. It is to note that the average tide recorded at the mouth of Muthupet
lagoon is 30 cm whereas the same at 10 m station off this transect (about 8-10 km
from the mouth) is about 40 cm during this season indicating that the tidal current is
very weak and seasonally varying very high wind induced currents are required to
transport the lagoon discharges to longer distances in the Palk Strait.
Satellite remote sensing studies showed that Palk Strait is heavily turbid
coinciding with very low chlorophyll values (personal communication from NRSA).
But in reality, these reported high sediment values could be an effect of bottom
reflection due to shallowness by the satellite sensors. Owing to have gentle slope,
these shallow waters are also highly influenced by wind stress ie. high turbidity
during high winds and vice versa. The study period is characterised by low to
moderate winds due to which the coastal waters though relatively less in turbid
dominated by rich phytoplankton (Table 4). So, the time of passing of satellite and
wind intensities during that period need to be related to ascertain the real picture.
Based on the visual observation (green colour of water) and water quality data, it is to
be pointed out that Palk Strait is inherently highly productive but is masked by
turbidity cloud during windy times.
During July 2004, apart from lagoon observations, five near coastal transects
off Muthupet lagoon were monitored for water quality to elucidate the impact, if any
due to discharges from the lagoon on the immediate receiving environment. Out of
the five transects, one is selected off lagoon and the other two were located at 0.5
and 1.5 km on either side of this transect. Each transect comprises five stations each
separated by 1 km distance (Fig.5). The lagoon salinity during this season was high
compared to coastal waters (Table 5) but less to those observed during September
2003 (Table 2). Though both the periods correspond to dry season, the differences in
23
salinity is due to variable evaporation rates. The turbidity in the lagoon is very high
and relatively low in the nearshore waters which are comparable to our previous
observations. There are no significant differences in the oxygen and nutrients levels
in these two environments suggesting that the processes controlling their levels are
common. Nitrogen species is dominated by nitrate. Ammonia levels are very low
inferring less decomposition of biogenic material. However, chlorophyll levels in the
lagoon are relatively higher than the nearshore waters. The above results conclude
that the nearshore waters in this season are self sustained and not influenced by
lagoon.
24
24.1
25.8
-30.5
D1
8.60 8.50
D2
8.40 8.40
D3
--D4
8.30 8.50
Serthalaikaadu
25.8
30.8
-30.8
27.9
30.0
28.3
27.2
4.8
7.4
-4.8
8.6
7.4
7.0
6.8
6.4
6.8
6.6
7.0
7.4
7.8
9.0
7.6
DO
7.0
3.2
-8.2
7.4
7.2
7.0
6.8
7.0
9.0
7.2
7.6
6.4
7.6
7.6
8.2
67
81
-70
89
78
86
88
65
49
73
69
175
100
-85
72
62
61
71
54
41
72
63
54
61
78
129
SPM
71
77
63
66
0.68
0.21
-0.58
0.37
0.58
0.26
0.63
0.58
2.74
0.42
0.79
0.37
0.26
-0.37
0.26
0.16
ND
0.26
0.16
ND
0.79
0.37
0.89
ND
0.95
ND
NH3
0.53
0.21
1.05
0.53
E1
8.30 8.50 26.4 25.4
6.8
7.0
124 201 0.26 0.68
E2
8.30 8.60 24.1 23.6
6.8
6.4
79
92
1.37 0.42
E3
8.40 8.30 25.2 24.7
6.6
6.4
72
78
0.16 1.42
E4
8.60 8.20 23.8 24.5
7.0
6.8
66
77
ND
ND
ND : Non-Detectable.
-1
6 -1
Units: DO & SPM - mg l ; nutrients - M; Phytoplankton (PP) - nos x 10 l .
27.1
28.6
26.8
27.4
8.50
8.50
8.40
8.50
C1
8.60
C2
8.30
C3
8.50
C4
8.50
Muthupet
27.9
24.4
25.2
23.8
27.0
25.1
24.9
26.2
Salinity
S
B
23.9
24.1
23.6
25.9
B1
8.70 8.30
B2
8.60 8.60
B3
ND 8.40
B4
8.20 8.60
Athirampattinam
pH
25.9
25.3
27.2
26.4
A1
8.60 8.50
A2
8.50 8.50
A3
8.50 8.50
A4
8.20 8.60
Gopalapattinam
Thondi
Stn
0.26
0.28
0.07
0.07
ND
0.07
-0.22
0.07
0.04
0.09
0.15
ND
0.15
ND
ND
0.13
1.67
0.11
0.07
0.11
0.2
-0.24
ND
ND
0.02
0.09
0.09
ND
ND
0.07
0.02
0.02
ND
0.18
NO2
0.06
ND
0.09
0.02
Table 4. Water quality at different stations in the Palk Strait during May 2004.
1.32
3.22
3.65
2.17
1.07
2.7
-0.95
1.25
1.35
0.57
0.98
1.73
0.13
0.72
1.26
1.67
5.71
0.96
0.81
1.25
3.42
-2.41
1.04
1.17
1.24
0.98
0.76
ND
1.8
0.81
2.63
1.11
0.88
ND
NO3
0.44
1.2
1.08
1.05
0.08
0.09
ND
0.21
0.05
0.25
-0.15
0.07
0.14
0.17
0.09
0.05
0.08
0.15
0.45
0.25
0.11
0.09
0.03
0.28
0.06
-0.09
0.02
0.06
0.08
0.03
ND
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.08
0.05
ND
0.08
PO4
0.11
0.64
0.55
0.04
0.13
0.31
0.78
0.28
0.25
0.16
-0.72
0.19
0.06
0.13
0.19
0.13
0.19
0.06
0.44
0.38
0.59
0.34
0.16
TP
0.22
0.19
0.97
1.19
2.13
1.81
-1.22
0.34
1.19
0.56
0.41
0.69
0.91
0.19
0.72
0.16
0.16
0.06
0.41
TN
B
16.27 7.93
23.41 16.63
7.61 16.59
11.50 8.61
9.21 8.66
14.20 21.72
--14.94 16.13
10.58 10.95
13.98 13.88
10.63 7.88
11.55 15.26
14.43 10.31
19.57 10.31
10.04 8.11
13.93 7.51
17.64 15.21
24.42 7.97
8.94 11.64
11.04 22.27
-2.29
0.32
0.34
21.18
10.78
-6.67
3.94
3.88
0.64
2.37
2.19
0.40
6.66
6.31
2.05
0.86
2.04
2.47
PP
S
Table 5. Water quality at different stations in the lagoon during July 2004.
Stn
pH
Sal
SPM
DO
NO2
NH3
NO3
PO4
TP
TN
Chl
8.28
9.01
11.29
7.28
4.61
3.06
4.61
6.12
4.18
4.27
0.18
0.19
0.22
0.24
0.20
0.19
0.22
0.25
0.24
0.19
5.31
-6.50
5.50
4.19
7.69
7.38
8.44
8.00
8.44
20.62
29.38
41.23
34.02
18.55
42.78
39.17
28.35
37.62
41.23
---1.04
3.03
3.62
--2.76
3.07
0.15
0.24
0.24
0.22
0.26
0.11
0.15
0.15
0.11
0.14
0.17
0.15
0.18
0.26
0.22
0.15
0.15
0.19
0.24
0.22
0.31
0.33
0.41
0.29
0.35
4.63
5.13
5.75
4.75
4.25
3.56
3.50
3.69
3.44
3.06
2.63
3.69
3.88
3.44
3.56
4.00
3.75
2.63
3.00
3.31
3.25
3.44
3.31
3.06
2.44
22.16
32.47
40.72
48.96
76.28
23.71
24.22
25.25
19.07
14.95
11.85
13.92
16.49
18.55
20.62
25.77
18.55
9.28
12.37
17.01
25.25
18.55
10.31
11.85
14.43
0.21
0.22
0.09
0.08
0.30
0.17
0.13
0.14
0.18
0.18
0.25
0.16
0.04
0.09
0.13
2.69
2.20
1.40
0.78
0.14
0.74
1.01
1.49
1.16
0.91
Lagoon
R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6
R7
R8
R9
R10
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
D1
D2
D3
D4
D5
E1
E2
E3
E4
E5
Units:
8.46
8.40
8.34
8.39
8.40
8.41
8.45
8.34
8.11
8.32
31.43
31.62
31.25
31.43
45.76
37.94
38.84
41.55
36.31
36.85
8.43 31.62
74 7.68 1.32 0.02
7.89
8.39 31.43
74 8.00 1.22 0.04
6.34
8.40 31.07
75 7.35 0.98 0.02
2.54
8.45 30.53
80 8.32 1.10 0.04
3.23
8.44 32.52
84 8.32 1.00 0.06
5.47
8.36 29.27
72 7.35 1.00 0.01
3.15
8.25 29.27
77 8.00 1.00 0.01
3.62
8.37 29.45
85 7.35 1.22 0.02
4.31
8.52 29.81
81 8.97 0.89 0.02
5.00
8.31 31.80
77 8.00 0.79 0.04
5.60
8.28 32.88
67 10.26 0.45 0.02
1.08
8.17 35.05
78 8.00 0.15 0.02
4.74
8.49 32.70
86 8.00 1.22 0.02
6.47
8.39 33.06
75 8.32 1.01 0.03
5.99
8.40 37.58
72 8.64 1.00 0.02
5.60
8.06 32.16
159 6.39 1.01 0.02
3.88
8.10 32.52
120 8.32 1.02 0.02
2.80
8.04 32.88
82 6.71 1.03 0.01
0.04
8.03 32.88
80 5.42 1.26 0.01
0.05
8.08 36.85
87 8.00 0.77 0.01
0.04
8.08 31.07
134 8.32 0.54 0.10
3.58
8.03 31.62
118 8.00 0.58 0.01
3.88
8.06 32.70
95 8.64 0.59 0.10
3.79
8.09 33.42
92 8.32 0.66 0.05
4.70
8.10 36.49
94 7.35 0.57 0.13
5.82
DO & SPM mg l-1; nutrients - M; Chl a mg m-3.
8.0
BUDGETS:
27
By using salt as a conservative tracer, the water budget for the lagoon can be
derived from the balance of salt transported through the lagoon. The conceptual
model for transport of materials in the system is:
outputs
inputs
s
System
Net Sources
or Sinks
inputs
outputs
(Sources Sinks)
where, dM/dt is a change of mass of material of interest. Assuming that the system is
at steady state (dM/dt = 0), water and salt budgets for Muthupet Lagoon are
calculated and presented.
28
Inflow includes runoff, direct precipitation, ground water seepage, etc. and
removal includes evaporation. There was zero precipitation during the period of
survey and ground water seepage is assumed to be negligible, as the soil is clay.
Being the period of study as intense monsoon, the water flux due to evaporation was
assumed to be less than 5% of the water holding capacity of the lagoon and so
ignored (Gordon et al., 1996).
The water exchange time in the system () was calculated as the total water
volume of the system divided by the sum of the absolute value of residual flow and
mixing volume. Accordingly, the water exchange time for Muthupet lagoon is 1.4
days. The water budget of the lagoon was apparently controlled by both fresh water
inputs and exchange rates.
29
A summary of salinity and nutrient levels used for the budget estimations are
given in Table 6. System concentrations of nutrients were determined partly by
mixing flux and internal transformation in the lagoon. The residence times of nutrients
(DIP, DOP, DIN and DON), which are a function of their inventory and the residual
and exchange fluxes in the lagoon (Table 7), were longer than the exchange time of
the lagoon water. Eventhough the nutrient concentrations and their longer residence
times in the lagoon are sufficient to trigger the phytoplankton production, high
sediment resuspension (Table 2), due to wind driven mixing in the shallow body,
inhibit their growth.
Rivers
Lagoon
Ocean
Salinity (PSU)
0.83
2.06
9.62
DIP (M)
0.73
0.74
0.33
DOP (M)
0.37
0.48
1.67
DIN (M)
9.04
9.81
1.00
DON (M)
47.53
60.13
39.49
River flux
(103 mol d-1)
2.82
Residual flux
(103 mol d-1)
-2.07
Mixing flux
(103 mol d-1)
-1.22
(days)
2.2
DOP
1.43
-4.15
3.55
0.6
DIN
34.93
-20.88
-26.29
2.0
DON
183.64
-192.45
-61.60
2.3
30
31
Muthupet Lagoon
River discharge 3.86
Area
= 13.32 km2
Volume = 9.6 x 106 m3
Salinity = 2.06 PSU
Exchange Time () = 1.4 days
3.86
Residual flux
FIG 9. Water and Salt budgets for the Muthupet Lagoon. Water flux in
106 m3 d-1 and salt flux in 106 psu m3 d-1.
Muthupet Lagoon
River DIP 2.81
DIP = 0.74 M
DIP = 0.46
Exchange Time () = 2.2 days
2.06
Residual DIP
-1.21
Mixing DIP
FIG 10. Dissolved Inorganic Phosphate budget for the Muthupet Lagoon.
Flux in 103 mol d-1.
32
Muthupet Lagoon
River DOP 1.42
DOP = 0.48 M
DOP = -0.83
Exchange Time () = 0.6 days
4.15
Residual DOP
3.56
Mixing DOP
FIG 11. Dissolved Organic Phosphate budget for the Muthupet Lagoon.
Flux in 103 mol d-1.
Muthupet Lagoon
River DIN 34.94
DIN = 9.81 M
DIN = 12.23
Exchange Time () = 2.0 days
20.88
Residual DIN
-26.29
Mixing DIN
FIG 12. Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen budget for the Muthupet Lagoon.
Flux in 103 mol d-1.
Muthupet Lagoon
River DON
184
DON = 60.13 M
DON = 70.4
Exchange Time () = 2.3 days
192
Residual DON
-61.6
Mixing DON
FIG 13. Dissolved Organic Nitrogen budget for the Muthupet Lagoon.
Flux in 103 mol d-1.
33
DIP
0.46
0.03
DOP
-0.83
-0.06
DIN
12.23
0.92
DON
70.40
5.28
Nutrient
A comparison of nutrient fluxes from lagoon to Palk Strait between wet and
dry periods is illustrated in Table 9.
Wet Season
(Nov-Dec 2003)
2.07
Dry Season
(July 2004)
0.28
DOP
4.15
8.10
DIN
20.88
13.73
192.45
18.80
DON
3
-1
Units: 10 mol d
From the above table, it is very clear that the DIP and DON fluxes during wet
period are almost ten times higher whereas DIN fluxes are higher by 50% and DOP
fluxes are lower by 50% compared to dry season. This shows that nutrient inputs
from lagoon vary seasonally which could have significant influence on the
productivity of Palk Strait.
34
Case 1: The narrow and shallow outer channel immediately after the meeting point
of new lagoon is widened and deepened in line to have a free flow of tidal
exchange of water with Muthupet lagoon (Fig.13).
Case 2: Apart from Case 1, an exclusive new channel having 200 m width, 1 m
depth and 600 m length connecting the Palk Strait and existing navigation
channel of Muthupet lagoon is created (Fig.14).
35
Dredged area
Dredged area
New Channel
FIG 13. Simulated Bathymetry with dredging of existing and new channel.
improved to a great extent with the scenarios (Table 10) which will result in significant
improvement of nutrient influx into the lagoon.
Table 10. High Tidal Fluxes into the Muthupet Lagoon for different scenarios.
Existing
Water Level
(m)
1.067
Water Flux
(m3/s)
7.41
Lagoon Volume
(105 m3)
2.31
Case 1
1.081
9.05
3.04
Case 2
1.120
9.11
4.04
Case
Based on the simulation results with the modifications in the geometry of the
lagoon, the following results are expected:
37
Thus the above simulations clearly explains that with the implementation of
above alterations to the system the eco-restoraton of Muthupet lagoon is possible.
38
10.0
Muthupet lagoon and its adjacent Palk Strait can be classified as pristine
environments and are only influenced by natural processes. The developmental
activities around these areas are very scanty, among the commercial activities are
salt pans, aquaculture ponds, agriculture, etc. The upstream waters of lagoon
recorded highest salinity due to aquaculture activities whose impact on the water
quality is confined only to the near vicinity due to lack of sufficient flushing conditions.
Lagoon salinity is controlled largely by seasonal atmospheric temperature thereby
evaporation rates during dry periods and by monsoonal discharges. The lagoon is
totally fresh water dominated during NE monsoon when the drainage basins bring all
terrestrial material, that were accumulated during dry period, due to which nutrient
levels in lagoon raised by several folds. Both lagoon and Palk Strait are highly oxic
and may accommodate additional loads of organic matter for mineralisation.
Terrestrial inputs through runoff, mixing fluxes and internal processes were
dominant forcing mechanisms in maintaining lagoon nutrient concentrations. The
average inorganic N and P concentrations of lagoon during wet season were almost
equal to that of their river concentrations while organic phosphorus was lower by
30% and organic nitrogen was higher by 26%. The application of LOICZ budget
model for the wet season indicate negative residual and mixing fluxes of lagoon
water, directed towards the Palk Strait. The water exchange time of lagoon was
estimated at 1.4 days. However the nutrients, especially DIP, DIN and DON,
exchange time was higher by approximately 50% of water exchange time whereas
the same for DOP was half of water exchange time. The high residence time of
nutrients in the lagoon could not promote the planktonic growth due to masking
action by high suspended sediment. The nonconservative fluxes of nutrients showed
39
that lagoon was a source for DIP, DIN and DON primarily due to their release from
sediment whereas it was a sink for DOP as oceanic concentrations exceeded lagoon
concentrations. The nutrient fluxes from lagoon to Palk Strait are multi-fold high
during wet season which may enhance the productivity of coastal waters.
The existing channel for entry of neritic waters is common for both Muthupet
lagoon and adjoining new lagoon. The hydrodynamic model simulations revealed that
the existing bathymetry of navigation channel obstructs the free flow of tidal water
into Muthupet lagoon. However, the system is expected to bring significant changes
by dredging the existing navigation channel inline to maintain uniform channel width
and depth and creating artificial new channel of 200 m wide, 1 m deep and 600 m
length. The simulation results based on these alterations to the geometry of the
system explain improved flushing conditions which certainly have positive influence
towards its eco-restoration.
40
References
Billen, G., Somville, M., De Becker, E. and Servais, P., 1985. A nitrogen budget of
the Scheldt hydrographic basin. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research, 19: 223-230.
Buddemeier, R.W. and Maxwell, B.A., 2000. Typology: Low-budget Remote Sensing.
LOICZ Newletter No.15, LOICZ, Texel, The Netherlands, 1-4.
Pandian, C., 1985, Icthyofauna of Muthupet estuary with special reference to pearl
spot, Etroplus suratensis Bloch., Ph.D. Thesis.
Dupra, V., Smith, S.V., Crossland, J.I.M. and Crosslands, C.J., 2000. Estuarine
systems of the South China Sea region: carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus fluxes.
LOICZ Reports and Studies No.14, LOICZ, Texel, The Netherlands, 156 pp.
GESAM, 1987. Land/sea boundary flux of contaminants: contributions from rivers.
GESAMP Reports and Studies No.32, Unesco, Paris, 49 pp.
Gordon, D.C. Jr., Boudreau, P.R., Mann, K.H., Ong, K.H., Silvert, W.L., Smith, S.V.,
Wattayakorn, G., Wulff, F. and Yanagi, T., 1996. LOICZ Biogeochemical Modelling
Guidelines. LOICZ Reports and Studies No.5, LOICZ, Texel, The Netherlands, 96 pp.
Grasshoff, K., Ehrhardt, M. and Kremling, K. (eds.) 1999. Methods of Seawater
Analysis, Verlag Chimie, Weinheim, 143-187.
Hall, J., Smith, S.V. and Boudreau, P.R. (eds.)., 1996. Report on the international
workshop on continental shelf fluxes of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus. LOICZ
Reports and Studies 9, LOICZ, Texel, The Netherlands, 50 pp.
Kaul, L.W. and Froelich, Jr., P.N., 1984. Modeling estuarine nutrient geochemistry in
a simple system. Geochimica Cosmochimica Acta, 48: 1417-1433.
McKee, L.J., Eyre, B.D. and Hossain, S., 2000. Transport and retention of nitrogen
and phosphorus in the sub-tropical Richmond River estuary, Austriali A budget
approach. Biogeochemistry, 50: 241-278.
Moffat, A.S., 1998. Global nitrogen overload problem grows critical. IscienceI, 179:
988-989.
Pernetta, J.C. and Milliman, J.D., 1995. LOICZ Implementation Plan, IGBP Report
No.33, IGBP, Stockholm, 215 pp.
Rabalais, N.N., Turner, R.E., Justic, D., Dortch, Q., Wiseman, Jr., W.J. and Sen
Gupta, B.K., 1996. Nutrient changes in the Mississippi River and system responses
on the adjacent continental shelf. Estuaries, 19: 386-407.
Ramasamy, S.M., Balaji, S., Venkatsubramanian, V. and Paul, M.A., 1995,
Evidences of neotechtanism along Coromandel coast of Tamilnadu using IRS
imagery. Interface, Bulletin of the National Remote Sensing Agency, pp.5-6.
41
Ramasamy, S.M. and Ravikumar, R., 2002, GIS based visualization of land-ocean
interactive phenomenon along Vedaranniyam coast, Tamilnadu, India, ISG
Newsletter, Vol.9, No.1 & 2, pp.72-77.
Sardessai, S.,1993. Dissolved, particulate and sedimentary humic acids in the
mangroves and estuarine ecosystem of Goa, west coast of India. Indian J. Mar. Sci.,
22: 54-58.
Sarma, V.V.S.S., Dileep Kumar, M. and Manerikar, M. 2001. Emission of carbon
dioxide from a tropical estuarine system, Goa, India. Geophys. Res. Lett., 28: 12391242.
Selvam, V., 1992, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Madras.
Selvam, V., Gnanappazham, L., Navamuniyammal, M., Ravichandran, K.K. and
Karunagarn, V.M. 2002. Atlas of mangrove wetlands of India, Part-I Tamilnadu,
M.S.Swaminathan Research Foundation, India.
Selvam, V., Ravichandran, K.K., Karunagaran, V.M., Mani, Evanjalin, G.J.B., 2003,
Coastal wetlands: Mangrove Conservation and Management, Joint Mangrove
Management in Tamilnadu: Process, Experiences and Prospects, Part I: Simulation
Analysis Pichavaram and Muthupet Mangrove Wetlands, M.S.Swaminathan
Research Foundation, p.71
Smith, S.V., Hollibaugh, J.T., Dollar, S.J. and Vink, S., 1991. Tomales Bay
metabolism: C-N-P stoichiometry and ecosystem heterotrophy at the land-sea
interace. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 33: 223-257.
Smith, S.V. and Crossland, C.J. (eds.), 1999. Australian estuarine system: carbon,
nitrogen and phosphorus fluxes. LOICZ Reports and Studies No.12, LOICZ, Texel,
The Netherlands, 182 pp.
Smith, S.V., Marshall Crossland, J.I. and Crossland, C.J. (eds.), 1999. Mexican and
Central American coastal lagoon systems: carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus fluxes.
LOICZ Reports and Studies No.13, LOICZ, Texel, The Netherlands, 115 pp.
Yanagi, T., 1999. Seasonal variations in nutrient budgets of Hakata Bay. Journal of
Oceanography, 55: 439-448.
42