Lakes & Reservoirs: Research and Management 2001 6: 279–288

Optimizing sampling strategies for estimating mean water

quality in lakes using geostatistical techniques with
remote sensing
R. D. Hedger,1* P. M. Atkinson2 and T. J. Malthus1
1
Department of Geography, University of Edinburgh, Drummond Street, Edinburgh, EH8 9XP, United Kingdom and
2
Department of Geography, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, United Kingdom

Abstract
In planning a sampling regime, it is desirable that the sampling procedure should involve minimum estimation error for a
given sample size or minimum sampling effort for a given accuracy. Two approaches for matching sampling effort to accur-
acy may be used: a classical approach, which ignores spatial dependence between observations, and uses a random scheme;
and a geostatistical approach, which exploits spatial dependence, and uses a systematic scheme. Four Airborne Thematic
Mapper images of two British lakes were processed to provide a chlorophyll index, reflecting variations in chlorophyll-a con-
centration. Spatial structure was characterized using the variogram, and the modelled variogram was used in Kriging to plan
sampling regimes for estimating the mean chlorophyll. For a given sample size, the systematic scheme incurred less error
than the random scheme; and for a given error, the systematic scheme required smaller sample sizes than the random scheme.
The relative advantage of the systematic approach over the random sampling approach increased with an increase in sample
size and an increase in the proportion of variance in the data that was spatially dependent. This paper demonstrates that the
sampling regime must be calibrated to the spatial dynamics of the lake under investigation, and suggests that remote sensing
is the ideal means by which to determine such dynamics.

Key words
geostatistics, Loch Awe, Loch Ness, optimal sampling regimes, remote sensing.

INTRODUCTION shores (George & Heaney 1978; George 1993; Chow-Fraser

Chlorophyll concentration within individual lakes varies spa-
tially at a wide range of spatial scales (Reynolds 1984; Harris
1986). There are many causes of this scale-dependent vari-
ation. Variation at macro-scales may result from differential
growth arising from systematic gradients in nutrient
throughput (Leigh-Abbott et al. 1978; George 1993; Steinman
et al. 1997; Pedrosa et al. 1999). Variation at smaller scales
may be related to the wind environment, according to the
interaction between phytoplankton buoyancy characteristics
and wind-induced hydrometry. Wind stress may initiate cur-
rents (Schallenberg et al. 1999), which may cause the accu-
mulation of positively buoyant species of phytoplankton in
downwelling areas at downwind shores, and negatively buoy-
ant species of phytoplankton in upwelling areas at upwind
*Corresponding author. Email: richard@stams.strath.ac.uk
Accepted for publication 26 June 2001.
1999). Alternatively, wind stress may increase turbulence to
such an extent that macro-scale spatial distributions are dis-
integrated into microscale spatial distributions (Kierstead &
Slobodkin 1953; George & Heaney 1978; Levasseur et al.
1983).
When estimating water quality properties of a lake, such
as the mean lake chlorophyll concentration, it is wise to
match the sampling strategy to the scale of spatial variation.
The simplest possible sampling strategies involve a single
observation within a lake (Foy et al. 1993; Bouvy et al. 1999;
Lugo et al. 1999). Bondarenko et al. (1996) detail how most
studies of Lake Baikal were based around samples of a single
observation. The drawback of using a single observation is
that it is unlikely to be representative of the lake as a whole.
Generally, lake sampling involves several to many obser-
vations, in an attempt to characterize some of the spatial
variation that occurs. Thus, fixed-point or continuous tran-
sect samples often have been implemented (George &
280
Heaney 1978; George 1981; Jones et al. 1995). Some authors
have been able to link sample size requirements to the spatial
distribution of water quality. Patalas and Salki (1993), for
instance, showed that it was necessary to increase sample
size with an increase in lake size to produce an estimate that
was representative of the population. George (1981) sug-
gested that, where it was possible to distinguish between per-
sistent variation and transient variation, it might be possible
to adjust sampling so as to minimize bias. Few authors, how-
ever, have quantified statistically the relationships between
the sample size or sampling interval, the spatial distribution
of the water quality property under investigation, and the
error associated with estimating the mean. Fewer still have
used the more advanced statistical techniques that are avail-
able, such as those of geostatistics.
With geostatistics, instead of basing the sampling
strategy on the dispersion variance of the entire sample, the
sampling strategy is based upon variance as a function of
distance and direction of separation (Atkinson et al. 1992,
1994). Key to this is the concept of auto-correlation: values
at positions near to one another are more likely to be similar
(and thus have less variance) than values at distances further
apart from one another. The bulk of the application of
geostatistics has been to terrestrial environments, although
application to aquatic environments is increasing (for exam-
ple, Simard et al. 1992; Hobert et al. 1997; Bellehumeur et al.
2000).
This paper explores the design of sampling strategies with
reference to spatial distributions of chlorophyll in two
British lakes (Loch Awe and Loch Ness). The first objective
is to show that systematic sampling regimes using geo-
statistics to interpolate regional mean water quality lead to
more accurate estimates than the random sampling regimes
using classical statistics that are more commonly implem-
ented. The second and main objective of this paper is to show
that it is necessary to sample lakes spatially with sampling
regimes (in particular sampling intensity) dependent upon
the spatial variation in water quality. Because this spatial vari-
ation is specific to lake boundary conditions such as mor-
phometry or wind regime (Olsen et al. 2000), it follows that
different sampling regimes will be required for different
lakes and for different times if the intention is to monitor
lake water quality with acceptable accuracy. That is, it will
be necessary to take into account the full dynamic nature of
the lake. The final objective is to highlight the role that
remote sensing may play in helping to optimize sampling.
STATISTICAL BACKGROUND
In the absence of remotely sensed data, the mean population
value of a given water quality property for the whole lake,
or the regional mean, is generally estimated from a small
R. D. Hedger et al.
number of lake observations because of cost considerations.
The sampling scheme used may be either random (no fixed
separation between the observations) or systematic (a fixed
separation).
The sample mean tends to differ from the population mean
as a consequence of lake water quality variation. In particu-
lar, the form of variation in lake water quality determines how
representative individual observations are of the population
mean. To determine how much confidence may be placed
in the estimate of the population mean, it is necessary to
quantify the standard error of the estimate (the square root
of the variance of the estimates around the true mean). Two
main approaches may be used: a classical approach and a
geostatistical approach.
In the classical approach, the regional mean is estimated
as follows:
n
 z(xi )
ẑ(B)  i1 (1)
n
where ẑ(B) is the estimated mean over area |B|, and
z(xi) are the values of variable Z at each observation xi, for
i  1 to n. Sampling is generally conducted using a random
sampling scheme to ensure lack of bias and to allow esti-
mation of the sampling error. For a random configuration,
the standard error of the estimate (S) is calculated as
follows:
√
n 2
S  (
i1
z(xi ) – ẑ(B) ) (2)
n
From equation 2 it is clear that the standard error varies as
the square root of 1/n–1.
The main disadvantage of a classical random sampling
approach is that it ignores any spatial dependence. If spatial
dependence exists, random sampling may lead to data
redundancy. For example, many observations may be
clustered in one area when perhaps one or two observations
might suffice. Thus, in the presence of spatial dependence,
random sampling is inefficient. Additionally, auto-correlated
data may violate independence assumptions of inferential
tests.
The geostatistical approach exploits the spatial depen-
dence or spatial structure between observations. The basis
of geostatistics lies in the Theory of Regionalized Variables
(Matheron 1971). A regionalized variable is one realization
of a random function (a spatial set of random variables) and
has properties intermediate between a truly random and a
truly deterministic variable. Regionalized variables may be
spatially autocorrelated, with the magnitude of this spatial
correlation varying according to distance and direction of
separation.
Estimating mean water quality in lakes 281

Estimation of the regional mean is performed using a

technique referred to as Kriging, which involves a weighted
average of the observations:
n
ẑ(B)   i z(xi ) (3)
i1
where ẑ(B) is the estimated value for area |B|, and i are the
weights. The weights are chosen to ensure unbiasedness
(the weights sum to one) and to minimize the estimation vari-
ance. The weights are calculated as follows:
n
 i (xi ,xj )    –(xi ,B) for all j (4)
i1
where (xi,xj) is the semivariance between the ith and jth
observations, (xi,B) is the integral semivariance between the
ith observation and area |B|, and a slack variable, , the
Lagrange multiplier. The Lagrange multiplier is necessary
to provide an extra degree of freedom for obtaining a Kriging Fig. 1. Procedures used in classical (random) sampling and geo-
estimate. Sampling may occur on different grid configur- statistical (systematic) sampling.
ations: an equilateral triangular grid is preferable in that
there is an equal distance between observations, and redun-
where (h) is the semivariance at lag h, c0 is the spatially
dancy is minimized, but a square grid is often used as it is
independent variance, c1 is the spatially dependent variance
more efficient computationally (although the diagonal dis-
of the exponential term, and a1 is the non-linear parameter.
tance between observations will be greater than the hori-
Alternatively, the exponential model assumes that that
zontal or vertical distance). The important point is that where
semivariance increases sharply from a lag of zero, and then
sampling is undertaken with a systematic scheme, the geo-
tails off asymptotically towards a sill:
statistical approach is necessary to allow estimation of the
standard error of the estimated mean. With the geostatistical (h)  c0  c1h (8)
approach, the standard error of the estimate is calculated as
follows: where c1 is the gradient. The procedures commonly used to

√
n calculate the standard error of the estimate by both classical
ˆ (B)   i –(xi ,B)   – –(B,B) (5) and geostatistical means are shown in Fig. 1.
i1
where –(B,B) is the average semivariance within area |B|,
the within-block variance. Semivariances are obtained from DATA AND INITIAL PROCESSING
the variogram, (h); a mathematical function that relates the Study areas
semivariance between pairs of random functions at a given Two lakes in the United Kingdom were investigated in this
lag, h (distance and direction of separation). Given data from study: Loch Awe (56°20 N, 5°05 W) and Loch Ness
a preliminary sample the sample variogram, ˆ , may be esti- (56°10 N, 4°35 W) as shown in Fig. 2. Loch Awe has a
mated using: surface area of 38.4 km2 and a maximum length of 41 km.
1 m(h) It is morphometrically complex, and may be divided into at
(h)
ˆ   { z(xi ) – z(xi  h)}2 (6) least two basins, with water and nutrient transport between
2m(h) i  1
them limited by a thin shallow section. Loch Ness is larger,
where m(h) is the number of pairs of observations at a given with a surface area of 56.4 km2 and a maximum length of
lag. Variograms may either be omnidirectional (the vario- 39 km. It is morphometrically simpler, consisting of one elon-
gram is estimated using data combinations in all directions) gated basin (Maitland 1981; George & Jones 1987; Maitland
or directional (the variogram is estimated for specific direc- et al. 1994).
tions). If used for Kriging, a continuous mathematical Both Loch Awe and Loch Ness are categorized as oligo-
model must be fitted to the sample variogram. Several stan- trophic (Maitland 1981), although there may be much spatial
dard models are available (McBratney & Webster 1986). For variation in chlorophyll concentration. The dominant causes
example, the linear model assumes that semivariance is pro- of macro-scale gradients in chlorophyll concentration within
portional to distance: these lakes have been attributed to the effects of long-term
nutrient gradients (Bailey-Watts & Duncan 1981; George &
(
(h)  co  c1 1 – exp ( )
–h
a1
(7) Jones 1987). This has been particularly the case for Loch
282
Awe, where the major stream inputs and outputs are near
to each other, so nutrient circulation largely bypasses most
of the lake. However, spatial distributions arising from the
effect of wind-forced water flows have also been noted, par-
ticularly for Loch Ness where there are few morphometric
obstructions to flows throughout the lake. For instance,
Jones et al. (1995) found a gradient in chlorophyll that was
in the opposite direction to that which would have been
created by differential growth, and concluded that this
gradient was caused by wind-forced convection.
Measurements
Spatial distributions of surface chlorophyll were deter-
mined from remotely sensed images. Remote sensing was
chosen as the ideal technique for determining spatial dis-
tributions because it enabled comprehensive coverage of the
whole of each lake, which would not have been possible
through surface sampling. The role of remote sensing in this
paper was to provide the preliminary sample data from which
the sample variogram was estimated (equation 6), to be used
subsequently in Kriging (equation 3).
Images were acquired by the Daedalus AADS-1268
Airborne Thematic Mapper (ATM) (Wilson 1995). This is
a multispectral scanner, which measures radiance in 11 wave-
length ranges, varying from optical wavelengths to thermal
wavelengths. Airborne Thematic Mapper images were used
to determine spatial distributions of chlorophyll because in
comparison to most optical satellite sensors, the spatial and
spectral resolutions of the ATM are high. The ground spatial
resolution of the ATM was 5 m. The five wavebands of the
ATM that operate in the optical wavelengths vary between
30 and 80 nm in width. Airborne rather than satellite remote
sensing was used because, first, airborne remote sensing
R. D. Hedger et al.
generally facilitates higher spatial resolution, and second,
imagining times of airborne remote sensing can be inter-
actively determined according to when the lake is not
obscured by cloud (imaging times not being fixed according
to orbital constraints as with satellites).
Both lakes were imaged on two occasions during 1997:
Loch Awe on 23 and 29 May, and Loch Ness on 24 May
and 3 June. This period was chosen to coincide with late
spring to early summer chlorophyll maxima in each lake.
The specific dates were chosen for pragmatic reasons: in par-
ticular, when the lakes were not completely obscured by
cloud cover. However, there was partial cloud cover in some
of the images, although this was always less than 10%.
Pixels representing land and cloud were masked out by
examining the digital numbers of pixels that were obviously
land or cloud. To mask land, thresholds in Waveband 8 (near-
infrared wavelengths: 910–1050 nm) were used because
water bodies absorb proportionally much more near-infrared
radiation than land bodies (Xin & Shih 1993; Malthus &
George 1997). To mask cloud, thresholds in Waveband 2
(blue wavelengths: 450–520 nm) were used because clouds
reflect proportionally much more radiation in this wave-
length range than terrestrial or liquid water surfaces
(Ackerman et al. 1998).
Estimating chlorophyll
The water quality property under consideration was
chlorophyll-a. This was chosen over other water quality
properties for several reasons. First, chlorophyll-a has a
distinct effect on the reflectance spectrum from inland water,
notably absorption peaks at approximately 400 nm and
670 nm, when present in sufficient concentrations, making
it detectable by remote sensing (Dekker et al. 1992; Kirk
Fig. 2. Geographical position of
Lochs Awe and Ness.
Estimating mean water quality in lakes
1994). Second, spatial patterns of chlorophyll-a tend to be
complex, being a result of biological as well as physical and
chemical factors, so are ideal for evaluating sampling strat-
egies. Third, the spatial distribution of chlorophyll-a is impor-
tant in lakes and merits further study. Fourth, chlorophyll-a
is the most commonly used parameter in estimating phyto-
plankton biomass in lakes.
Ground reference data were not available and, at present,
it is not possible to estimate chlorophyll concentration from
ATM imagery without such data. Therefore, a simple wave-
band ratio exploiting reflectance maxima and minima was
used to produce a chlorophyll index (CI) as a surrogate for
chlorophyll-a concentration. Waveband 3 (green wave-
lengths: 520–600 nm) over Waveband 2 (blue wavelengths:
450–520 nm) was the chosen ratio because chlorophyll-a
absorbs relatively little in Waveband 3, and carotenoid pig-
ments absorb relatively greatly in Waveband 2. This wave-
length ratio has been found to be optimal for lakes with low
chlorophyll concentrations (George 1993, 1997), so was suit-
able for the oligotrophic lakes under consideration. As a
means of gauging chlorophyll concentration, this wavelength
ratio is adversely affected by the presence of high concen-
trations of suspended sediments or dissolved organic com-
pounds, and this may have had some effect, particularly for
Loch Ness. In this study, the wavelength ratio was multiplied
by one hundred as a means of reducing floating-point errors
when estimating variograms.
It is worth stating here that, with remote sensing, ‘ground’
data are required because the spatial distribution of a
given CI is likely to differ from the spatial distribution of
chlorophyll-a. For instance, variation in the vertical struc-
ture of near surface chlorophyll-a concentration may cause
variation in the CI that may not be correlated with variation
in surface chlorophyll concentration. Numerous sources of
error exist with remote sensing of water quality. Surface
waves alter the spectral characteristics of outgoing irradi-
ance (Han & Rundquist 1998). Reflectance of the lake bed
(Ester & Holloway 1992) or macrophytes (Armstrong 1993)
may also contribute to the outgoing irradiance.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
Spatial variation in the remotely sensed
images
Loch Awe and Loch Ness had similar mean chlorophyll
indices (Table 1). However, Loch Awe had a considerably
larger variance than Loch Ness, all dates considered. Loch
Awe variances were relatively similar on each of the two
dates. Variances, however, changed by a factor of approxi-
mately 2.5 between the two dates for Loch Ness.
The sample variograms for all the lakes were fitted well
in a weighted least squares sense by a linear combination
283
of the exponential and linear models together with a spatially
independent component (McBratney & Webster 1986):
(
(h)  co  c1 1 – exp ( ))
–h
a1
 mh (9)
where (h) is the semivariance at lag h, c0 is the spatially
independent variance, c1 is the spatially dependent variance
of the exponential component, a1 is the non-linear parameter,
and m is the gradient of the linear component (Oliver &
Webster 1991). Using these models, semivariance was
extrapolated down to a spatial scale of 0 m from the
remotely sensed data of 5 m pixel resolution.
Anisotropy was difficult to quantify because of the lake
shapes. For example, the length of Loch Ness is approxi-
mately 40-fold greater than its mean width, so a cross-lake
directional variogram can only span lags up to a fortieth of
an along-lake directional variogram. Slight anisotropy existed
in both lakes and on both occasions, but in all cases, the bulk
of the scale-dependent spatial variation was isotropic.
Greatest differences were between the lakes and between
the dates, with the omnidirectional variograms having dif-
ferent sills and reaching these sills at different lags (Fig. 3
and Table 2). For Loch Awe, the a1 coefficient of the expo-
nential model ranged between 1200 and 1300 m; whereas
for Loch Ness, the a1 coefficient of the exponential model
was much less (500 m). Likewise the sill variance (c0  c1)
of Loch Awe was much greater (approximately 30 CI2) than
for Loch Ness (approximately 10 CI2). The variogram for
Loch Awe on 23 May 1997 had a slightly smaller sill than
that on 29 May 1997, and it was not necessary to fit a linear
model component. The variogram for Loch Ness on 24 May
1997 had a sill that was less than half that on 3 June 1997,
and again it was not necessary to fit a linear component.
Sampling strategy
Optimal sampling strategy
In all cases, whether using a random (classical) or system-
atic (geostatistical) sampling scheme, an increase in sam-
ple size (through a decrease in the mean sample interval)
resulted in a decrease in the standard error of the estimate
(Fig. 4). This was a mathematical consequence of the for-
Table 1. Remotely sensed chlorophyll indices of Loch Awe and
Loch Ness
Lake Date Mean Variance
Loch Awe 23 May 1997 75.73 33.15
29 May 1997 84.59 35.37
Loch Ness 24 May 1997 72.90 3.36
3 June 1997 75.41 9.39
284 R. D. Hedger et al.

mulae for estimating standard error and variance. For every
sampling interval, the standard error estimated from sys-
tematic sampling using Kriging was less than the standard
error estimated from random sampling (with an equivalent
sample size) using classical statistics (Fig. 4). For Loch Awe
on 29 May 1997, the standard error arising from random
sampling using a classical approach with a mean sampling
interval of one kilometre was approximately one confidence
interval, whereas the standard error arising from systematic
sampling using a geostatistical approach with an equivalent
sampling interval was approximately 0.6 confidence interval.
These results were in agreement with past literature (e.g.
Webster et al. 1989; Atkinson 1991). Use of geostatistics
therefore always resulted in greater accuracy, but the
relative merits of the geostatistical and classical approaches
depended on the sampling interval and the relative propor-
tion of spatially dependent variation in the data. This may
be seen more clearly in Fig. 5, where the Kriged standard
errors are expressed as a percentage of the classical
standard errors and plotted against sampling interval. First,
the merit of the geostatistical approach increased with a
decrease in sampling interval. Second, the merit of the geo-
statistical approach increased with an increase in the ratio
of the resolved spatially dependent variance to the spatially
independent variance (c1/c0). For a given sampling interval,
Kriging standard errors of Loch Ness on 24 May 1997 were
not that much lower than classical standard errors because
a relatively high proportion of the variance was spatially inde-
pendent. In contrast, for a given sampling interval, the
Kriging standard errors for Loch Awe on 29 May 1997 were

Table 2. Coefficients of the best fitted variogram functions of chlorophyll indices of Loch Awe and Loch Ness

c0 c1 a1 m
Lake Date Model (CI) (CI) (m) (CI)

Loch Awe 23 May 1997 Exponential 1 41 1200 0

29 May 1997 Exponential  linear 1.5 32.5 1300 3.0 E-05
Loch Ness 24 May 1997 Exponential 1.1 2.4 500 0
3 June 1997 Exponential  linear 1.5 7.1 500 5.0 E-05

CI, chlorophyll index; c0, spatially independent variance; c1, spatially dependent variance of the exponential term; a1, non-linear parameter;
m, metres; gradient of the linear component.

Fig. 3. Variograms of chlorophyll indices of Loch Awe and Loch Ness. Thin lines represent sample variograms and thick lines represent variogram
functions.
Estimating mean water quality in lakes
much less than the classical standard errors because only
a small proportion of the variance was spatially independent.
For lakes with little spatially dependent variation there will
be little advantage in using geostatistics.
Calibrating the sample strategy according
to lake spatial dynamics
Two additional features in Figs 4 and 5 can be identified.
First, for a given sampling interval, the standard error of the
estimate increased with an increase in variance in the data.
For instance, Loch Awe produced greater standard errors
than Loch Ness for a given mean sampling interval. This
suggests that for long-term monitoring, a sample of greater
spatial density, and smaller mean sampling interval, would
be required in Loch Awe than Loch Ness to achieve the same
accuracy (although it would be preferable to have several
additional remotely sensed images to verify this). Second,
for a given mean sampling interval, the standard error in
each lake varied between the dates. This shows the response
of spatial distributions of chlorophyll to processes occurring
Fig. 4. Standard errors as a func-
tion of sample interval for Loch
Awe and Loch Ness plotted as a
function of mean sample interval.
Dashed lines represent classical
standard errors and solid lines rep-
resent Kriging standard errors.
Fig. 5. Kriging standard errors as
a percentage of the classical
standard errors plotted as a func-
tion of mean sample interval for
Loch Awe (23 May and 29 May
1997) and Loch Ness (24 May 1997
and 3 June 1997).
285
within the temporal domain. When conducting long-term
monitoring, it may be necessary to change sample regimes
temporally in response to changes in boundary conditions.
For instance, if at one time of year it is known that a turbu-
lent wind environment causes homogenization then a
smaller sample size may be resorted to. Alternatively, if at
another time of year it is known that a more quiescent wind
environment allows the formation of macro-scale gradients,
then a larger sample size will be necessary.
Many sampling regimes have used constant spatial
intensities with respect to time (Lind et al. 1992; Branco
& Senna 1996; Wei et al. 2000). The results of this paper
suggest that there are strong drawbacks to this approach,
as sample errors will change temporally in response
to changes in spatial distributions. Instead of keeping
spatial intensities constant, it is necessary to calibrate
the sample strategy according to the spatial dynamics
(that is, the type of spatial distributions produced by
boundary conditions such as wind) of the lake under
investigation.
286
Determining lake spatial dynamics via
remote sensing
Remote sensing is the ideal technique for determining lake
spatial dynamics because it is an effective medium for obtain-
ing spatially comprehensive and contiguous data. Thus, it is
the ideal data-source by which to estimate a sample vario-
gram for use in subsequent sampling. The sample variogram
could be estimated by surface sampling, but with less accur-
acy because a surface sample would inevitably be less
comprehensive.
The limitation of remote sensing is that, although it is very
effective for obtaining data in the spatial domain, it may be
lacking in its ability to obtain data in the temporal domain
because of operational constraints. Perhaps the greatest
operational constraint for many areas of the world is cloud
cover, which prevents images being acquired. For example,
mean annual cloud cover was greater than 70% for the lakes
considered in this paper. This limited the number of days
when we could obtain images to just two per lake, even
though we had several weeks access to the NERC ATM.
Another constraint is financial cost, which varies markedly,
depending upon both platform (blimp, helicopter or aero-
plane) and sensor (camera or scanner). Cheap systems exist,
using airborne blimps with cameras (Guichard et al. 2000),
but to cover large areas and to acquire multispectral data,
powered aircraft and scanners are required, which will
inevitably lead to cost increases. In most cases, sustained
acquisition of remotely sensed data will prove expensive and
this may hinder its implementation (Saynwittgenstein 1992).
Operational constraints therefore make long-term monitor-
ing of lakes through remote sensing difficult. It is proposed
in this paper that remote sensing has an effective part to play
in long-term monitoring of lake water quality only when it
is integrated with surface sampling. That is, the high spatial
information content provided by remote sensing may com-
plement the high temporal information content of surface
sampling through calibration of the sampling strategy. The
more remotely sensed imagery that becomes available for
the lake under consideration, the better can the scheme
be optimized to that lake. Ideally, the imagery should be
acquired to reflect some of the temporal change in spatial
distributions. For example, it would be preferable to acquire
images at times when the lake under investigation is
experiencing different wind events.
CONCLUSION
In this paper, the systematic scheme has been shown to be
optimal. The systematic scheme is always more efficient
than a random sampling scheme, because, for a given sample
size, a smaller estimation variance is obtained. The relative
advantage of the geostatistical approach over the classical
R. D. Hedger et al.
approach is lake-specific, and depends on, first, sample
spacing, and, second, the ratio of the spatially dependent
component of the variation (c1) to the non-spatially depen-
dent component of the variation (c0) in the data. Where there
is a large proportion of spatially dependent variance within
the data or the intention is to use a large number of obser-
vations relative to the scale of the spatial variation, then
systematic sampling using the geostatistical approach should
result in savings over random sampling. The geostatistical
approach allows the investigator to determine the number
of observations required to achieve a tolerable accuracy or,
where resources are limited, the accuracy achievable with
a fixed number of data. This can be determined prior to the
actual survey.
The sample scheme should be calibrated according to the
spatial dynamics of the lake under investigation. Remote
sensing is the ideal means for obtaining information on such
spatial dynamics because it can provide spatially contiguous
and comprehensive data (although repeated temporal cover-
age may be limited). The information obtained from remote
sensing can then be used to calibrate the sample scheme
for subsequent monitoring of the lake under investigation
by surface sampling.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research was funded by the Natural Environment
Research Council (Grant GT04/95/FS/85).
REFERENCES
Ackerman S. A., Strabala K. I., Menzel W. P., Frey R. A.,
Moeller C. C. & Gumley L. E. (1998) Discriminating clear
sky from clouds with MODIS. J. Geophys. Res. –
Atmospheres 103, 32141–57.
Armstrong R. A. (1993) Remote-sensing of submerged
vegetation canopies for biomass estimation. Int. J. Remote
Sens. 14, 621–27.
Atkinson P. M. (1991) Optimal ground-based sampling for
remote sensing investigations: estimating the regional
mean. Int. J. Remote Sens. 12, 559–657.
Atkinson P. M., Webster R. & Curran P. J. (1992) Cokriging
with ground-based radiometry. Remote Sens. Environ. 41,
45–60.
Atkinson P. M., Webster R. & Curran P. J. (1994) Cokriging
with airborne MSS imagery. Remote Sens. Environ. 50,
335–45.
Bailey-Watts A. E. & Duncan P. (1981) The phytoplankton.
In: The ecology of Scotland’s largest lochs: Lomond, Awe,
Ness, Morrar and Shiel (ed. P. S. Maitland) pp. 91–118.
Junk, The Hague.
Bellehumeur C., Marcotte D. & Legendre P. (2000)
Estimation of regionalised phenomena by geostatistical
Estimating mean water quality in lakes
methods: lake acidity on the Canadian Shield. Environ.
Geol. 39, 211–20.
Bondarenko N. A., Guselnikova N. E., Logacheva N. F. &
Pomazkina G. V. (1996) Spatial distribution of phyto-
plankton in Lake Baikal, Spring 1991. Freshwat. Biol. 35,
517–23.
Bouvy M., Molica R., De Oliveira S., Marinho M. & Beker
B. (1999) Dynamics of a toxic cyanobacterial bloom
(Cylindrospermopsis raciborskii) in a shallow reservoir in
the semi-arid region of northeast Brazil. Aquat. Microb.
Ecol. 20, 285–97.
Branco C. W. C. & Senna P. A. C. (1996) Relations among
heterotrophic bacteria, chlorophyll-a, total phytoplankton,
total zooplankton and physical and chemical features in
the Paranoa reservoir, Brasilia, Brazil. Hydrobiologia 337
(1–3), 171–81.
Chow-Fraser P. (1999) Seasonal, interannual, and spatial vari-
ability of total suspended solids in a degraded coastal wet-
land of Lake Ontario. J. Great Lakes Res. 25, 799–813.
Dekker A. G., Malthus T. J., Wijnen M. M. & Seyhan E. H.
J. (1992) Remote Sensing as a tool for assessing water
quality in Loosdrecht lakes. Hydrobiologia 233, 137–59.
Ester L. & Holloway J. (1992) Estimators of bottom
reflectance spectra. Int. J. Remote Sens. 13 (2), 393–7.
Foy R. H., McGlynn K. & Gibson C. E. (1993) Chlorophyll-a
and nutrients in Lough-Erne, Biology and Environment.
Proc. R. Irish Acad. 93B, 163–74.
George D. G. (1981) Wind-induced water movements in the
South Basin of Windermere. Freshwat. Biol. 11, 36–60.
George D. G. (1993) Physical and chemical scales of pattern
in freshwater lakes and reservoirs. Sci. Total Environ.
135, 1–15.
George D. G. (1997) The airborne remote sensing of phyto-
plankton chlorophyll in the lakes and tarns of the English
lake District. Int. J. Remote Sens. 18, 1971–75.
George D. G. & Heaney S. I. (1978) Factors influencing the
spatial distribution of phytoplankton in a small productive
lake. J. Ecol. 66, 135–55.
George D. G. & Jones D. H. (1987) Catchment effects
on the horizontal distribution of phytoplankton in five
of Scotland’s largest freshwater lochs. J. Ecol. 75,
43–59.
Guichard F., Bourget E. & Agnard J. P. (2000) High-
resolution remote sensing of intertidal ecosystems: a
low-cost technique to link scale-dependent patterns
and processes. Limnol. Oceanogr. 45, 328–38.
Han L. & Rundquist D. C. (1998) The impact of a wind-
roughened water surface on remote sensing measure-
ments of turbidity. Int. J. Remote Sens. 19, 195–202.
Harris G. P. (1986) Phytoplankton Ecology: structure, function
and fluctuation. Chapman & Hall, London.
287
Hobert J. P., Altman N. S. & Schofield C. L. (1997) Analyses
of fish species with spatial covariate. J. Am. Stat. Assoc.
92, 846–54.
Jones R. I., Fulcher A. S., Jayakody J. K. U. et al.(1995)
The horizontal distribution of plankton in a deep
oligotophic lake – Loch Ness, Scotland. Freshwat. Biol.
33, 161–70.
Kierstead H. & Slobodkin L. B. (1953) The size of water
masses containing plankton blooms. J. Mar. Res. 12,
141–44.
Kirk T. O. (1994) Light and photosynthesis in aquatic eco-
systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Leigh-Abbott M. R., Coil J. A., Powell T. M. & Richerson
P. J. (1978) Effects of a coastal front on the distribution
of chlorophyll in Lake Tahoe, California-Nevada.
J. Geophys. Res. 83, 4668–72.
Levasseur M., Therriault J. C. & Legendre L. (1983) Tidal
currents, winds and the morphology of phytoplankton
structures. J. Mar. Res. 41, 655–72.
Lind O. T., Doyle R., Vodopitch D. S., Trotter B. G. & Limon
J. G. (1992) Clay turbidity–regulation of phytoplankton
production in a large, nutrient-rich tropical lake. Limnol.
Oceanogr. 37, 549–65.
Lugo A., Gonzalez M. E., Sanchez M. D. & Alcocer J. (1999)
Distribution of Leptodiaptomus movamexicanus
(Copepoda: Calanoida) in a Mexican hyposaline lake.
Rev. Biol. Trop. 47, 141–48.
Maitland P. S. (1981) Introduction and catchment analysis.
In: The Ecology of Scotland’s Largest Lochs: Lomond, Awe,
Ness, Morrar and Shiel (ed. P. S. Maitland). Junk, The
Hague.
Maitland P. S., Boon P. J. & McLusky D. S. (1994) The
Freshwaters of Scotland. A Natural Resource of Inter-
national Significance. Wiley, Chichester.
Malthus T. J. & George D. G. (1997) Airborne remote
Sensing of macrophytes in Cefni reservoir, Anglesey, UK.
Aquat. Bot. 58, 317–33.
Matheron G. F. (1971) La thèorie des variables règionalisèes
et ses applications. Technical Report Fascicule 5,
Les Cahiers du Centre de Morphologie Mathématique
de Fontenebleau. Ecole Supèrieure des Mines de
Paris.
McBratney A. B. & Webster R. (1986) Choosing functions
for semi-variograms of soil properties and fitting them to
sampling estimates. J. Soil Sci. 37, 617–39.
Oliver M. A. & Webster R. (1991) How geostatistics can help
you. Soil Use Manage. 7, 206–17.
Olsen N. R. B., Hedger R. D. & George D. G. (2000) 3D
Numerical modelling Microcystis distribution in a water
reservoir. American Society of Civil Engineers J. Environ.
Eng. 126, 949–53.
288
Patalas K. & Salki A. (1993) Spatial variation of crustacean
plankton in lakes of different size. Can. J. Fish. Aquat.
Sci. 50, 2622–40.
Pedrosa P., Calasans C. V. C. & Rezends C. E. (1999)
Particulate and dissolved phases as indicators of lino-
logical and ecophysiological spatial variation in Cima Lake
system, Brazil: a case study. Hydrobiologia 411, 89–101.
Reynolds C. S. (1984) The Ecology of Freshwater
Phytoplankton. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Saynwittgenstein L. (1992) Barriers to the use of remote
sensing in providing environmental information. Environ.
Monit. Assess. 20, 159–66.
Schallenberg M., James M., Haves I. & Howard-Williams C.
(1999) External forcing by wind and turbid inflows on a
deep glacial lake and implications for primary production.
NZ J. Mar. Freshwat. Res. 33, 311–31.
Simard Y., Legendre P., Lavoie G. & Marcotte D. (1992)
Mapping, estimating biomass, and optimizing sampling
programs for spatially autocorrelated data: case study of
R. D. Hedger et al.
the Northern Shrimp (Pandalus borealis). Can. J. Fish.
Aquat. Sci. 49, 33–45.
Steinman A. D., Meeker R. H., Rodusky A. J., Davis W. P. &
Mcintire C. D. (1997) Spatial and temporal distribution
of algal biomass in a large subtropical lake. Arch.
Hydrobiol. 139, 29–50.
Webster R., Curran P. J. & Munden W. (1989) Spatial correl-
ation in reflected radiation from the ground and its impli-
cations for sampling and mapping by ground-based
radiometry. Remote Sens. Environ. 29, 67–78.
Wei B., Sugirura N. & Maekawa T. (2000) Evaluation of
trophic state of eutrophicated lake and biotic response
from algal community level. Environ. Tech. 21, 1047–1053.
Wilson A. K. (1995) NERC Scientific Services Airborne
Remote Sensing Facility User Guide Handbook. Natural
Environment Research Council, Swindon.
Xin J. N. & Shih S. F. (1993) Lake surface temperature esti-
mation using NOAA satellite APT data. Int. J. Remote
Sens. 14, 1325–37.