Parameterization of the inherent optical properties of

Murchison Bay, Lake Victoria

Willy Okullo,1,2 Taddeo Ssenyonga,1,2 Børge Hamre,1 Øyvind Frette,1,* K. Sørensen,3

Jakob J. Stamnes,1 Andreas Steigen,4 and Knut Stamnes5
Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Allégaten 55, N-5007 Bergen, Norway
1

2Department of Physics, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda

3Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), P.O. Box 173, Oslo, Norway

4Department of Biology, University of Bergen, Box 7800, N-5020 Bergen, Norway

5Department of Physics and Engineering Physics, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, New Jersey 07030-5991, USA

*Corresponding author: oyvind.frette@ift.uib.no

Received 19 June 2007; revised 19 October 2007; accepted 22 October 2007;

posted 22 October 2007 (Doc. ID 84104); published 13 December 2007

Lake Victoria, Africa’s largest freshwater lake, suffers greatly from negative changes in biomass of
species of fish and also from severe eutrophication. The continuing deterioration of Lake Victoria’s
ecological functions has great long-term consequences for the ecosystem benefits it provides to the
countries bordering its shores. However, knowledge about temporal and spatial variations of optical
properties and how they relate to lake constituents is important for a number of reasons such as remote
sensing, modeling of underwater light fields, and long-term monitoring of lake waters. Based on statis-
tical analysis of data from optical measurements taken during half a year of weekly cruises in Murchison
Bay, Lake Victoria, we present a three-component model for the absorption and a two-component model
for the scattering of light in the UV and the visible regions of the solar spectrum along with tests of their
ranges of validity. The three-component input to the model for absorption is the chlorophyll-a (Chl-a),
total suspended materials concentrations, and yellow substance absorption, while the two-component
input to the model for scattering is the Chl-a concentration and total suspended materials. © 2007
Optical Society of America
OCIS codes: 010.4450, 290.5820, 300.1030.

1. Introduction nobacteria as the major group of planktonic algae [4],

Lake Victoria (Fig. 1) is the world’s second largest
freshwater lake and the largest in Africa with a sur-
face area of 68,800 km2. The lake is of great economic
importance to the countries (Kenya, Uganda, and
Tanzania) sharing it [1,2]. It provides food (fish); hy-
dropower generation; transport; tourism; water for
domestic, agricultural, and industrial use; waste wa-
ter disposal; and recreation [2,3]. However, during
the past two decades all these benefits of the lake
have been threatened by the fact that the lake has
undergone many profound ecological changes, includ-
ing a strong increase in the phytoplankton primary
production [4,5], replacement of diatoms by cya-
0003-6935/07/368553-09$15.00/0
© 2007 Optical Society of America
and extinction of up to half of the species of indige-
nous cichlid fish after the explosive increase of Nile
perch, which was introduced in the 1980s [3–5]. The
observed unwelcome cyanobacterial blooms are re-
portedly due to excess nutrient loading (eutrophica-
tion [6,7]) resulting from deforestation, intensified
agricultural and industrial activities throughout the
drainage basin of Lake Victoria, and overfishing [8].
This development has resulted in decreased oxygen
levels and prolonged periods of anoxia in deeper wa-
ters, increased oxygen levels and supersaturation in
the surface layers, and reduced transparency [9 –12].
Since the future output of Lake Victoria’s commer-
cial and subsistence fisheries depends on the ecolog-
ical health of the lake [3,5], it is of utmost importance
to acquire broad-based knowledge of the complex on-
going changes in the ecosystem of the lake. To that

20 December 2007 ! Vol. 46, No. 36 ! APPLIED OPTICS 8553

 tities. The models are designed for Murchison Bay,
Lake Victoria, which contains a significant amount of
cyanobacteria. But we believe our models can be used
as a starting point in the construction of optical models
for other inland waters.
2. Data and Methods: In Situ Measurements of the
Biophysical Parameters
In our data collection we carried out measurements of
optical properties at six stations in Murchison Bay of
Lake Victoria (Fig. 1) for a period of six months from
July 2003 to January 2004. The locations of the sta-
tions are given in Table 1. (However, in this work we
used data only from stations 3, 4, 5, and 6, because at
Fig. 1. Map showing the measurement stations in Murchison
stations 1 and 2 data were not measured at the time
Bay, Lake Victoria (Uganda). of satellite overpass.)
A. Absorption and Scattering Coefficients
We used an ac-9 instrument from WET Labs to mea-
end, we begin by looking at the optical properties of sure continuous profiles from the surface to an average
the lake. For the surveillance of algal blooms we need depth of "15 m of the beam attenuation coefficient c
improved monitoring techniques with sufficient res- and the absorption coefficient a at 9 different chan-
olution to detect local variations in optical properties. nels with wavelengths of 412, 440, 488, 510, 532, 555,
In addition, we need reliable bio-optical models, 650, 676, and 715 nm. The scattering coefficient b at
which relate water constituents to inherent optical these wavelengths was retrieved from the relation
properties. Finally, we need a minimum of in situ
measurements of important optical parameters at se-
lected locations, which can aid us in long-term mon- b ! c " a. (1)
itoring of the lake. Thus, sufficient knowledge of
inherent optical properties together with improved Because the ac-9 instrument is calibrated in pure
bio-optical models and remote-sensing sensors with water, we added the scattering and absorption coef-
adequate spatial resolution are prerequisites for effi- ficients of pure water to the measured values to ob-
cient and reliable monitoring of algal blooms. tain the total scattering and absorption coefficients.
Bio-optical models that relate water constituents to By use of a reflective tube that collects scattered
inherent optical properties are of major importance in light, the ac-9 instrument measures absorption. How-
a number of scientific fields, e.g., in radiative transfer ever, light from the source scattered at angles larger
modeling to compute accurate underwater light lev- than 41.7° relative to the optical axis of the tube does
els for known values of the absorption and scattering not reach the detector. This light is partly scattered
coefficients. Such computations may be used to model back toward the source, and partly reaching the de-
the subsurface visual range, which is crucial for the tector end of the tube with an angle outside of the
quantification of vision-based feeding opportunities detector’s acceptance angle. Also some of the light
and predation risk in the pelagic habitat [13]. Also, leaks out through the quartz walls [19]. This gives an
such computations are important in primary produc- error in the measured absorption. To correct for this
tion modeling [14,15]. Further, in many remote- error, the manufacturer of the instrument suggests
sensing algorithms bio-optical models constitute an that one subtract the temperature-corrected ab-
integral part of the retrieval analysis [16 –18]. sorption coefficient at 715 nm from the absorption
In this work we present a bio-optical model con- coefficient measured at all other wavelengths. This
structed from a data set obtained from weekly mea- correction procedure is based on the assumption that
surements of optical properties and water constituents pure water is solely responsible for the absorption of
in Murchison Bay, Lake Victoria. We constructed a light at 715 nm. The temperature of the water in the
three-component model for absorption of light in the lake was approximately 20 °C–23 °C.
UV and visible regions of the solar spectrum with con-
centrations of chlorophyll-a (Chl-a), yellow substance
absorption coefficient, and total suspended material as Table 1. Locations of Measurement Stations in Murchison Bay
inputs. These three optically significant constituents
Station Location
are commonly measured during optical remote sensing
validation campaigns. We also constructed a two- 1 0° 15.627! N, 32° 37.549! E
component model for scattering of light in the UV and 2 0° 12.580! N, 32° 37.189! E
visible parts of the solar spectrum, with concentrations 3 0° 09.956! N, 32° 36.144! E
of Chl-a and total suspended material as inputs. Using 4 0° 08.215! N, 32° 36.380! E
5 0° 05.410! N, 32° 36.310! E
these models, one can predict the inherent optical
6 0° 02.343! N, 32° 37.080! E
properties of the lake from the three measured quan-

8554 APPLIED OPTICS ! Vol. 46, No. 36 ! 20 December 2007

 Because we wanted to compare our data with those Table 2. Chlorophyll-a and Total Suspended Material Concentrations
Retrieved From Filtration of Water Samples From Murchison Bay, Lake
inferred from measurements by the medium resolu- Victoria
tion imaging spectrometer (MERIS) instrument on
the European Space Agency’s (ESA’s) ENVISAT sat- Chl-a TSM
ellite, we carried out ac-9 surface measurements at Date Station ($g!1) (mg!1)
the time of the satellite overpass. At the same time 08!09!2003 4 45.69 9.25
we collected water samples just beneath the water 10!09!2003 6 4.82 2.40
surface for subsequent laboratory analysis. The sam- 01!10!2003 6 49.12 7.09
ples were transported to the laboratory at Makerere 07!10!2003 6 22.23 3.93
University in Kampala for further preparation and 13!10!2003 5 46.01 8.09
filtration for yellow substance or colored dissolved 23!10!2003 3 60.70 10.43
organic matter (CDOM), Chl-a, and total suspended 29!10!2003 5 38.02 6.88
material (TSM) following the MERIS validation pro- 30!10!2003 5 33.09 6.90
tocols. 05!11!2003 6 28.88 5.34
11!11!2003 4 23.76 4.85
18!11!2003 6 25.79 5.33
B. CDOM Absorption Coefficients 03!12!2003 4 33.35 7.51
Water samples were filtered through Nuclepore 10!01!2004 4 51.56 9.42
membrane filters (0.2 #m pore size). The CDOM sam- 20!01!2004 3 51.06 9.40
ples were stored in acid cleaned glass bottles in a
refrigerator until analysis. The absorption properties
of the filtered sample were determined for wave- 3. Parameterization of the Inherent Optical Properties
lengths between 200 and 900 nm using a dual-beam
PerkinElmer Lambda 40P spectrophotometer at the A. Absorption
Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), To find a parameterization of the total absorption
Oslo. The measurements were performed relative to coefficient a#$$, we divided it into three components
distilled water. From the absorbance A measured by in addition to the absorption aw#$$ by pure water:
the spectrophotometer at a given wavelength, the
corresponding CDOM absorption coefficient a was ob- a#$$ ! aw#$$ % ay#$$ % aalg#$$ % ainor#$$, (2)
tained from the formula a ! 2.303A!r, where r is the
cuvette path length. where ay#$$, aalg#$$, and ainor#$$ are the contributions
to the absorption coefficient from yellow substance,
C. Determination of Chlorophyll-a Concentration phytoplankton (algae), and inorganic materials, re-
Water samples were filtered through Whatman 25 spectively. We assumed that the absorption by yellow
mm GF!F filters and stored in a freezer until analy- substance can be expressed as an exponentially de-
sis. The samples were transported deep frozen to the caying function of wavelength " [22], given by the
NIVA Laboratories in Oslo. Chl-a concentrations equation
were determined using high-pressure liquid chro-
matography (HPLC) with a diode array detection ay#$$ ! a#$0$e"&#$"$0$, (3)
system. Pigments were extracted with the aid of soni-
fication in 90% acetone, clarified using centrifuga- where $0 is a reference wavelength, and # is the slope
tion, and analyzed following the method described in of ay#$$ in a semilogarithmic diagram. The physical
Jeffrey et al. [20] using detection by absorbance at basis for this equation is that yellow substance is a
440 nm. By using acetone as a solvent, we followed humic-type material similar to soil humic and fulvic
the MERIS validation protocols [21], but in doing so acids, whose absorption spectra are exponentially
we may have underestimated the absolute concentra- shaped [23]. Indeed, a large fraction of yellow sub-
tion of Chl-a due to the presence of cyanobacteria in stance may be derived from soil leaching [24,25].
Murchison Bay. The values of MC for the mass con- B. Scattering
centration of Chl-a retrieved from this analysis are
given in Table 2. The total scattering coefficient of water can be di-
vided into contributions from pure water bw#$$; par-
ticulate matter, consisting of phytoplankton (algae);
D. Determination of the Mass of Total Suspended and inorganic materials [26]. Yellow substance is by
Materials definition dissolved in water, and will therefore not
Water samples were filtered through Whatman contribute to the scattering. Thus, the scattering co-
47 mm GF!F prepared filters and stored in the re- efficient can be written as
frigerator until analysis. The measurements of TSM
were performed in accordance with the MERIS pro- b#$$ ! bw#$$ % balg#$$ % binor#$$, (4)
tocol [21]. The filters were dried in a hot oven at
75 °C, cooled in a dessicator, and weighed on a Sar- where balg#$$ and binor#$$ are the contributions due to
torious microbalance to obtain the TSM values given phytoplankton (algae) and inorganic particles, re-
in Table 2. spectively.

20 December 2007 ! Vol. 46, No. 36 ! APPLIED OPTICS 8555

 We assumed that the dry mass Malg of algae is
proportional to the mass MC of Chl-a retrieved from
the water samples, so that
Malg ! pMC, (5)
where p is a proportionality constant. Subsequently,
we derived the mass of inorganic particles plus algae
containing pigments other than Chl-a from the dif-
ference Minor ! MTSM " Malg.
We assumed that the absorption and scattering
coefficients of algae and inorganic particles are pro-
portional to the masses Malg and Minor of these con-
stituents. With these assumptions we can express
Eqs. (2) and (4) as
a#$$ ! aw#$$ % ay#$$ % '1#$$pMC % '2#$$
( #MTSM " pMC$, (6)
b#$$ ! bw#$$ % )1#$$pMC % )2#$$
( #MTSM " pMC$, (7)
where '1, '2, )1, and )2 are regression coefficients to
be determined from matching Eqs. (6) and (7) to the
measured data. For the proportionality constant we
used p ! 160. The value of p will in general depend on
season and geographic position. For Murchison Bay
the value of p is not measured. However, lower values
of p than 160 yielded unphysical values in the regres-
sion analysis.
4. Results and Discussion
In our parameterization we used measured values of
the absorption and scattering coefficients in the pho-
tosynthetically active radiation (PAR) region and
modeled values in the UV region. Because the mea-
sured scattering coefficient (with contributions from
suspended materials, which include phytoplankton,
mineral particles, and undissolved organic matter)
was found to vary smoothly with wavelength [27], we
fitted b as a function of wavelength in the PAR spec-
tral region to the measured values according to the
formula
b#$$ ! b#$o$ %&
$o n
$
, (8)
where $o ! 550 nm, and where the average value of
n was 0.74. We used this formula to determine ex-
trapolated values of b in the UV spectral region.
Using the model for b(") in Eq. (8), the scattering
phase function measured by Petzold in turbid marine
waters [28] as representative for Murchison Bay, and
the solar zenith angle for each measurement, we
calculated a#$$ in the UV spectral region using
the discrete-ordinate radiative transfer (DISORT)
method for the coupled atmosphere-water (CAW) sys-
tem [29] for a number of different values for the re-
gression coefficients '1#$$ and '2#$$ in Eq. (6). By
comparing these calculated underwater irradiance
8556 APPLIED OPTICS ! Vol. 46, No. 36 ! 20 December 2007
values with measured underwater irradiances in the
UV spectral region, we determined (through the use
of a simple inversion algorithm) the optimal values
for '1#$$ and '2#$$. The irradiances were measured
using a Norwegian Institute of Air Research (NILU)
UV irradiance meter collecting one minute averages
at discrete depths. In the simulations we used a stan-
dard atmosphere with a 300 DU ozone column and an
aerosol optical depth of 0.15 at 550 nm. Because the
total absorption coefficient a#$$ is an unknown input
parameter to CAW-DISORT, it was, as a first guess,
set equal to 0.79 times the diffuse attenuation coef-
ficient Kdmeas inferred from the underwater UV radi-
ation measurements. Here 0.79 is approximately the
average of $, $ being the absolute value of the cosine
of the polar angle of the radiation in the water. Then,
CAW-DISORT was iteratively rerun with varying
a#$$ until the difference between the computed dif-
fuse attenuation coefficient Kdcomp and Kdmeas was less
than 1%. For each rerun a#$$ was updated through
multiplication by the ratio of Kdmeas to Kdcomp, i.e.,
ai%1#$$ ! ai#$$Kdmeas!Kdcomp. Note that CAW-DISORT
is a multistream radiative transfer model that han-
dles the angular distribution of the light field and
therefore the final retrieved value of a#$$ does not rely
on the average value of $.
In our model for absorption, we subtracted the ab-
sorption by yellow substance and pure water from the
total absorption in order to obtain a linear model
y ! '1x1 % '2x2, (9)
where x1 and x2 are two predictors [30] given by x1
! pMC, x2 ! #MTSM " pMC$, and y ! a " ay " aw.
Using a statistical multiple linear regression, we
obtained the least-square estimates of '1 and '2
by minimizing the sum of the squared deviations
'i!1
n
#yi " '1xi1 " '2xi2$2. Here n is the number of data
points, which was 14 in our case.
The square of the multiple correlation of y on the
predictors #x1, x2$ is given by
'1Sx1y % '2Sx2y
R2 ! , (10)
Sy2
where
n
Sx1y ! ' #xi1 " x!1$#yi " ȳ$, (11)
i!1
n
Sx2y ! ' #xi2 " x̄2$#yi " ȳ$, (12)
i!1
n
Sy2 ! ' #yi " ȳ$2 (13)
i!1
represent the proportion of variability in y ! a " ay
" aw, which can be explained by the predictor vari-
ables using the multiple regression model. Table 3
shows the mean value of y! ! a " ay " aw, the values
 Table 3. Model for the Absorption Coefficient in the UV and Visible cients )1 and )2 and the value of R2 for each channel
Regions [cf. Eq. (6)]
of the ac-9 instrument. These values were obtained
a#$$ ! aw#$$ % ay#$$ % '1pMC % '2#MTSM " pMC$ by a method of multiple linear regression modeling
similar to that described above for the absorption
Channel %1 %2 coefficient. The multiple linear regression model for b
(nm) a " ay " aw (m2!g(1)) (m2!g(1)) R2 follows from Eq. (7), i.e.,
305 0.5255 0.0207 0.3784 0.09
312 1.3279 0.1493 0.4403 0.28
y ! )1x1 % )2x2, (14)
320 1.2259 0.1353 0.4115 0.26
where x1 and x2 are two predictors given by x1 !
340 1.5154 0.1894 0.3887 0.41
380 1.4874 0.1921 0.3414 0.44
pMC, x2 ! #MTSM " pMC$, and y ! b " bw. As shown
412 1.7403 0.2275 0.4012 0.63 by the values of R2 in Table 4, our model for b is
440 1.6491 0.2223 0.3462 0.69 satisfactory. It represents a good fit to the measured
488 1.0383 0.1425 0.2050 0.71 data in the visible spectral region, and the extrapo-
510 0.8962 0.1209 0.1824 0.74 lation into the UV spectral region is good as well.
532 0.6287 0.0868 0.1192 0.72 Figure 2 shows the contribution of each predictor
555 0.6440 0.0860 0.1292 0.77 (constituent) to the absorption or scattering coeffi-
650 0.3274 0.0450 0.0626 0.59 cient, as represented by the regression coefficients '1
676 0.5690 0.0751 0.1204 0.52 and '2 or )1 and )2. In the upper panel, we see the
contributions of algae (represented by '1) and inor-
ganic matter (represented by '2) to the absorption
coefficient, and we note that absorption by inorganic
of the regression coefficients '1 and '2, and the value matter (plus organic particulate matter other than
of R2 for each channel of the ac-9 instrument. We note phytoplankton) [26] dominates over absorption by al-
that the three-component linear model for the ab- gae. For both predictors (constituents) there is a local
sorption represents a fair fit to the measured data in
the visible region, as shown by the values of R2 in
Table 3. However, the extrapolation into the UV re-
gion gives R2 values that are distinctly smaller than
those in the visible region. The small values of R2 in
the UV region could be attributed to the fact that as
one moves toward shorter wavelengths the contribu-
tion by yellow substance to the total absorption be-
comes more significant and dominant over the
contribution given by particulate matter (see Fig. 5,
upper panel). Therefore, the correlation between
a " ay " aw and particulate matter is expected to be
poor in the UV region.
Table 4 shows the mean value b " bw of the scat-
tering coefficient, the values of the regression coeffi-

Table 4. Model for the Scattering Coefficient in the UV and Visible

Regions [cf. Eq. (7)]

b#$$ ! bw#$$ % )1#$$pMC % )2#$$#MTSM " pMC$

Channel &1 &2

(nm) b " bw (m2!g("1)) (m2!g("1)) R2
305 9.0299 1.1387 2.1514 0.82
312 8.8845 1.1219 2.1107 0.82
320 8.7252 1.1034 2.0662 0.82
340 8.3554 1.0605 1.9635 0.82
380 7.7181 0.9860 1.7886 0.82
412 7.1230 0.9202 1.6126 0.80
440 6.7047 0.8635 1.5239 0.82
488 6.2257 0.8090 1.3936 0.80
510 6.9255 0.8892 1.5787 0.82
532 6.0566 0.7904 1.3438 0.79
555 6.3177 0.8180 1.4206 0.80
650 5.1245 0.6749 1.1095 0.78
676 4.8209 0.6383 1.0302 0.79
Fig. 2. Regression coefficients for absorption (upper part) and
715 5.0309 0.6656 1.0758 0.77
scattering (lower part); see Eqs. (6) and (7).

20 December 2007 ! Vol. 46, No. 36 ! APPLIED OPTICS 8557

absorption maximum at 676 nm, and the absorption
coefficient increases with decreasing wavelength.
Note however that the absorption due to inorganic
matter increases more rapidly with decreasing wave-
length, and that the absorption due to algae increases
to a maximum value at 440 nm and then decreases as
the wavelength decreases. This behavior is typical for
absorption by chlorophyll and inorganic particles.
The lower panel shows the contributions of algae and
inorganic matter to the scattering coefficient. We note
that scattering by inorganic matter dominates over
scattering by algae. Both for phytoplankton and in-
organic matter (plus organic particulate matter other
than phytoplankton) the scattering increases with
decreasing wavelength. Note that the regression co-
efficient )2#$$ in Table 4 has a local maximum at
510 nm. This is due to exceptionally high values of
the scattering coefficient at 510 nm, which could be
attributed to some problems in this channel of the
ac-9 instrument (see Fig. 4).
Figure 3 shows typical vertical profiles of the ab-
sorption coefficient a and the scattering coefficient b
in Murchison Bay, Lake Victoria. The profiles are
characteristic for the vertical distribution of particles
in an upper layer of the water with high values of
both a and b down to 3 m, and a deeper layer with
relatively constant, lower values of both a and b down
to 10 m. Below 10 m both a and b are decreasing
because of lower concentrations of algal cells due to
lower light intensities. Note that at a depth of 13.5 m
there is a tendency of higher values of both a and b
than immediately above and below this depth. This is
probably due to resuspended sediments or a subsur-
face phytoplankton maximum at this depth [31].
Figure 4 shows the total surface layer absorption
and scattering coefficients in Murchison Bay. The
absorption coefficient in the upper panel represents
measured values in the PAR region and modeled val-
ues in the UV region. Similarly, the scattering coef-
ficient in the lower panel consists of measured values
Fig. 3. Profiles of measured absorption and calculated scattering
in the PAR region and modeled values in the UV
coefficients at the nine channels of the ac-9 instrument from sta-
spectral region. In the upper panel of Fig. 4 we ob- tion 5. The wavelengths of the channels are 412, 440, 488, 510, 532,
serve the absorption peak at 676 nm, indicating the 555, 650, 676, and 715 nm, as indicated by the code shown in the
dominance of the absorption by Chl-a in the red part upper part of the figure. The constant value of absorption coeffi-
of the spectrum. Toward the UV spectral region we cient at a wavelength of 715 nm comes from the use of this channel
note an exponential increase in the absorption, which as a baseline correction (procedure described in Section 2). The
is attributed to both yellow substance [32] and par- measured scattering coefficients are obtained from measured ab-
ticulate matter [33,34]. In the lower panel of Fig. 4, sorption and attenuation coefficients by use of Eq. (1).
the scattering coefficient is seen to generally increase
as the wavelength decreases. This is due to high con-
centrations of small particles [35,36]. Note however and that the absorption by yellow substance is very
that the scattering at 510 nm is relatively high for all small or negligible at wavelengths near the red
measurements. As mentioned previously this is prob- chlorophyll absorption peak. Absorption by yellow
ably due to some problems in this channel of the ac-9 substance becomes significant and dominates over
instrument. absorption by particulate matter at wavelengths
Figure 5 (upper panel) shows the total absorption shorter than 340 nm. Our data show that Murchison
coefficient and the absorption coefficients due to Bay of Lake Victoria has relatively low concentra-
particulate matter and yellow substance averaged tions of yellow substance compared to similar inland
over measurements taken immediately beneath the waters, such as Lake Ginninderra and Lake Wyan-
surface. Note that the absorption by particulate gan, both in Australia [37–39]. This is probably due to
matter dominates over the absorption by yellow the fact that Lake Victoria, with a large surface area,
substance at all wavelengths longer than 340 nm, has a low shoreline length to volume ratio, and there

8558 APPLIED OPTICS ! Vol. 46, No. 36 ! 20 December 2007


Fig. 4. Surface absorption (upper part) and scattering (lower
part) coefficients in Murchison Bay, Lake Victoria for all cruises at
stations 3, 4, 5, and 6. The dashed-dotted curves are extrapolated
and the solid curves are measured.
is no big river in the Murchison Bay area. Therefore,
it is likely to be less influenced by the near-shore
wetlands [40]. For comparison purposes, let us con-
sider the absorption by CDOM at 440 nm. For
Murchison Bay, Lake Victoria, the average absorp-
tion coefficient is ay#440$ ! 0.45 m"1, for Lake George
(Australia) it is in the range ay#440$ ! 0.69 "
3.04 m"1, and for Lake George (Uganda) [41,42] the
average is ay#440$ ! 3.7 m"1. Because Lake Victoria
is shallow, it contains large amounts of suspended
material derived from soil erosion in the catchment
as well as resuspended sediments due to wind-
induced turbulence. Thus, the absorption due to non-
living particulate matter exceeds the absorption by
yellow substance. This situation is similar to that in
parts of Lake George in Australia [41] with low val-
ues of ay#440$. Note also that for all constituents, the
absorption increases with decreasing wavelength,
with maximum values at, respectively, 440 and
676 nm for the contributions due to algae and inor-
ganic matter (plus organic particulate matter other
Fig. 5. Mean values of measured (solid curves) and extrapolated
(dashed-dotted) surface absorption coefficients (upper part) and
the measured surface values of the absorption coefficients of yellow
substance (lower part) in Lake Victoria for all cruises at stations 3,
4, 5, and 6.
than phytoplankton), whereas the absorption by yel-
low substance increases exponentially.
Figure 5 (lower panel) shows a plot of the surface
values of the absorption coefficient for yellow sub-
stance against wavelength for all cruises at stations
3, 4, 5, and 6. The mean and standard deviation of
the slope # [Eq. (3)] for the curves of ay#$$ in a
semilogarithmic diagram are 0.016 and 0.001 nm"1,
respectively. Note that # is relatively constant at
the four measurement stations, and that its mean
value is comparatively close to the mean slope ob-
tained for the Western Norwegian Samnanger fjord
[26] #& ! 0.017 nm"1$, and equal to the mean slope
obtained for inland waters in Australia [41] #& !
0.016 nm"1$.
5. Conclusions
We have developed a three-component model for the
absorption coefficient and a two-component model for
the scattering coefficient in Murchison Bay, Lake Vic-
toria, Uganda. The inputs to the model for absorption
are the total suspended material and the Chl-a con-
20 December 2007 ! Vol. 46, No. 36 ! APPLIED OPTICS 8559
centrations and yellow substance absorption. The
three-component model for the absorption coefficient
enables us to include absorption by yellow substance,
which gives the main contribution to the shortwave
absorption in inland waters. The absorption model
also makes it possible to include absorption by inor-
ganic matter (plus organic particulate matter other
than phytoplankton), which gives the largest contri-
bution to the total absorption in Lake Victoria. Un-
like one-component models, which often give only the
absorption by pure water when the Chl-a concentra-
tion tends to zero, our three-component model gives a
finite value for the absorption coefficient (in addition
to the contribution by pure water) for the limit in
which the Chl-a concentration tends to zero. This
background value represents the mean value for the
absorption coefficient due to concentrations of nonal-
gal particulates, which do not covary with the Chl-a
concentration. The parameterization of our model for
the absorption coefficient is given by Eq. (6).
Because yellow substance is dissolved in water and
does not contribute to the scattering, we have excluded
concentrations of yellow substance in our model for
the scattering coefficient. This means that the two-
component model for the scattering coefficient has
Chl-a concentration and mass of total suspended ma-
terial (TSM) as inputs. As with the three-component
model for a, the two-component model for b gives a
finite value for b in the limit as the concentration
of Chl-a vanishes, and this value represents the
scattering coefficient due to nonalgal particulates
(minerals). The parameterization of our model for
scattering is given by Eq. (7). Generally, in Lake
Victoria light in the visible region is mostly absorbed
and scattered by particulate matter and less by dis-
solved matter. This behavior is typical of a water type
that has high turbidity due to the presence of non-
phytoplankton particles [43].
Our models for absorption and scattering were con-
structed for the visible part of the spectrum, but the
absorption due to yellow substance was measured
also in the UV spectral region. Our models are spe-
cially tailored to Murchison Bay of Lake Victoria, but
we believe they can be used as a starting point in the
construction of optical models for other inland wa-
ters. One benefit of our models is that useful infor-
mation about the optical properties of Lake Victoria
may be obtained from spectral data recorded by sat-
ellite sensors since our bio-optical models are based
on local information.
Improvements of our models may be obtained by
not using linear relationships between predictors
(constituents) and the absorption and scattering co-
efficients. Also, from a remote-sensing point of view,
it is important to determine the backscattering
properties of water, since we need this information
to predict the upwelling radiance from the water
surface. To that end, we may need to explore to
what extent it may be possible to extract the volume
scattering function from data measured by the ac-9
instrument or from an instrument providing com-
8560 APPLIED OPTICS ! Vol. 46, No. 36 ! 20 December 2007
plementary information. This is a very challenging
problem that must be left for future research.
This work is supported by the Norwegian State
Educational Loan Fund and the Norwegian Pro-
gramme for Development, Research and Education
project 33!02. We thank Barbro Silde and Merete
Grung, both in NIVA, for analysis of HPLC, TSM,
and CDOM samples, and an anonymous reviewer
for valuable suggestions.
References
1. M. J. Ntiba, W. M. Kudoja, and C. T. Mukasa, “Management
issues in the Lake Victoria watershed,” Lakes and Reservoirs:
Research and Management 6, 211–216 (2001).
2. R. Ogutu-Ohwayo, R. E. Hecky, A. S. Cohen, and L. Kaufman,
“Human impacts on the African Great, Lakes,” Environ. Biol.
Fishes 50, 117–131 (1997).
3. D. K. Branstrator, L. Mwebaza-Ndawula, and J. P. Montoya,
“Resource-consumer relationships in Lake Victoria, East
Africa,” Hydrobiologia 493, 27–34 (2003).
4. D. Verschuren, T. C. Johnson, H. J. Kling, D. N. Edington, P. R.
Leavitt, E. T. Brown, M. R. Talbot, and R. E. Hecky, “History
and timing of human impact on Lake Victoria,” Proc. R. Soc.
London Ser. B 269, 289 –294 (2002).
5. J. H. Wanink and J. J. Kashinde, “Short-term variations in
pelagic photosynthesis demand well-timed sampling to moni-
tor long-term limnological changes in Lake Victoria,” Hydro-
biologia 377, 177–181 (1998).
6. L. R. Ferber, S. N. Levine, A. Lini, and G. P. Livingston, “Do
cyanobacteria dominate in eutrophic lakes because they fix
atmospheric nitrogen?” Freshwater Biol. 49, 690 –708 (2004).
7. H. B. O. Lung’ayia, A. M’Harzi, M. Tackx, J. Gichuki, and J. J.
Symoens, “Phytoplankton community structure and environ-
ment in the Kenyan waters of Lake Victoria,” Freshwater Biol.
43, 529 –543 (2000).
8. S. L. Taylor, S. C. Roberts, C. J. Walsh, and B. E. Belinda E.
Hatt, “Catchment urbanisation and increased benthic algal
biomass in streams: linking mechanisms to management,”
Freshwater Biol. 49, 835– 851 (2004).
9. R. E. Hecky, “The eutrophication of Lake Victoria,” Verh. Int.
Ver. Limnol. 25, 39 – 48 (1993).
10. P. B. O. Ochumba and D. I. Kibaara, “Observations on blue-
green algal blooms in the open waters of Lake Victoria,
Kenya,” Afr. J. Ecol. 27, 23–34 (1989).
11. M. Gophen, P. B. O. Ochumba, U. Pollingher, and L. S. Kauf-
man, “Nile perch (Lates niloticus) invasion in Lake Victoria
(East Africa),” Verh. Int. Ver. Limnol. 25, 856 – 859 (1993).
12. R. Mugidde, “The increase in phytoplankton primary produc-
tivity and biomass in Lake Victoria (Uganda),” Verh. Int. Ver.
Limnol. 25, 846 – 849 (1993).
13. D. Aksnes and A. Utne, “A revised model of visual range in
fish,” Sarsia 82, 137–147 (1997).
14. M. Skogen, E. Svendsen, J. Berntens, D. Aksnes, and K. Ul-
vertad, “Modelling the primary production in the North-sea
using a coupled 3-dimensional physical-chemical-biological
ocean model,” Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci. 41, 545–565 (1995).
15. H. Eilertsen and O. Holm-Hansen, “Effect of high latitude UV
radition on phytoplankton and nekton modelled from field
measurements by simple algorithms,” Adv. Space Res. 19,
173–182 (2000).
16. J. Fischer and R. Deorffer, “An inverse technique for remote
detection of suspended matter, phytoplankton and yellow
substance from CZCS measurements,” Polar Res. 7, 21–26
(1987).
17. Ø. Frette, J. J. Stamnes, and K. Stamnes, “Optical remote
 sensing of marine constituents in coastal waters: a feasibility
study,” Appl. Opt. 37, 8318 – 8326 (1998).
18. Ø. Frette, S. Erga, J. J. Stamnes, and K. Stamnes, “Optical
remote sensing of waters with vertical structure,” Appl. Opt.
40, 1478 –1487 (2001).
19. J. Piskozub, P. Flatau, and J. Zaneveld, “Monte Carlo study of
the scattering error of a quartz reflective absorption tube,” J.
Atmos. Ocean. Technol. 18, 438 – 445 (2001).
20. S. W. Jeffrey, R. F. Mantoura, and S. W. Wright, “Phytoplank-
ton pigments in oceanography,” in Monographs on Oceano-
graphic Methodology (SCOR!UNESCO, 1997), Vol. 10.
21. R. Doerffer, “Protocols for the validation of MERIS water prod-
ucts,” ESA Doc. PO-TN-MEL-GS-0043, GKSS (European
Space Agency, 2002).
22. N. Jerlov, Optical Oceanography (Elsevier, 1968).
23. W. H. Flaig, B. C. R. Beutelspacher, and R. Reitz, “Chemical
composition and physical properties of humic substances,” in
Soil Components: Organic Compounds, J. E. Gieseking, ed.
(Springer, 1975), Vol. 1, pp. 1–21.
24. E. T. Gjessing, Physical and Chemical Characteristics of
Aquatic Humus (Ann Arbor Science, 1976).
25. J. T. O. Kirk, Light and Photosynthesis in Aquatic Ecosystems
(Cambridge, 1983).
26. B. Hamre, Ø. Frette, S. R. Erga, J. J. Stamnes, and K.
Stamnes, “Parameterization and analysis of the optical ab-
sorption and scattering coefficients in a Western Norwegian
fjord-A case II water study,” Appl. Opt. 42, 883– 892 (2003).
27. E. H. S. Van-Duin, G. Blom, F. J. Los, R. Maffione, C. F.
Zimmerman, R. Cerco, M. Dortch, and E. P. H. Best, “Modeling
underwater light climate in relation to sedimentation, resus-
pension, water quality and autotrophic growth,” Hydrobiologia
444, 25– 42 (2001).
28. T. Petzold, “Volume scattering functions for selected ocean
waters,” SIO Ref. 72–78 (Scripps Institution of Oceanography,
1972).
29. Z. Jin and K. Stamnes, “Radiation transfer in nonuniformly
refracting layered media: atmosphere-ocean system,” Appl.
Opt. 33, 431– 442 (1994).
30. G. K. Bhattacharya and R. A. Johnson, Statistical Concepts
and Methods (Wiley, 1977).
31. C. D. Mobley, Light and Water: Radiative Transfer in Natural
Waters (Academic, 1994).
32. A. Bricaud, A. Morel, and L. Prieur, “Absorption by dissolved
organic matter of the sea (yellow substance) in the UV and
visible domains,” Limnol. Oceanogr. 26, 43–53 (1981).
33. A. Bricaud, A. Morel, M. Babih, K. Allali, and H. Claustre,
“Variation in light absorption by suspended particles with
chlorophyll a concentration in oceanic (case 1) waters: analysis
and implications for bio-optical models,” J. Geophys. Res. 103,
31033–31044 (1998).
34. C. Duarte, S. Augusti, and M. Satta, “Partioning particulate
light absorption: a budget for a Mediterranean bay,” Limnol.
Oceanogr. 43, 236 –244 (1998).
35. E. Boss, W. Pegau, W. Gardner, J. Zaneveld, A. Barnard, M.
Twardowski, G. Chang, and T. Dickey, “Spectral particulate
attenuation and particle size distribution in the bottom bound-
ary layer of a continental shelf,” J. Geophys. Res. 106, 9509 –
9516 (2001).
36. A. Morel, Y. Ann, F. Partensky, D. Vaulot, and H. Claustre,
“Prochlorococcus and Synechococcus: a comparative study of
their optical properties in relation to their size and pigmenta-
tion,” J. Mar. Res. 51, 617– 649 (1993).
37. J. T. O. Kirk, “Yellow substance (gelbstoff) and its contribution
to the attenuation of photosynthetically active radiation in
some inland and coastal Southeastern Australian waters,”
Aus. J. Mar. Freshwater Res. 27, 61–71 (1976).
38. J. T. O. Kirk, “Use of a quanta meter to measure attenuation
and underwater reflectance of photosynthetically active radi-
ation in some inland and coastal Southeastern Australian wa-
ters,” Aus. J. Mar. Freshwater Res. 28, 9 –21 (1977).
39. J. T. O. Kirk, “Spectral absorption properties of natural wa-
ters: contribution of the soluble and particulate fractions to
light absorption in some inland and coastal Southeastern Aus-
tralian waters,” Aus. J. Mar. Freshwater Res. 31, 287–296
(1980).
40. P. Bukaveckas and M. Robbins-Forbest, “Role of dissolved or-
ganic carbon in the attenuation of photosynthetically active
radiation in Adirondack lakes,” Freshwater Biol. 43, 339 –354
(2000).
41. J. T. O. Kirk, Light and Photosynethesis in Aquatic Ecosystem
(Cambrigde, 1994).
42. J. F. Talling, “Generalized and specialized features of phyto-
plankton as a form of photosynthetic cover,” in Prediction and
Measurement of Photosynthetic Productivity (Wageningen:
Pudoc, 1970), pp. 431– 445.
43. S. W. Effler, R. K. Gelda, J. A. Bloomfield, S. O. Quinn, and
D. L. Johnson, “Modeling the effects of tripton on water clarity:
Lake Champlain,” J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage. 127, 224 –
234 (2001).
20 December 2007 ! Vol. 46, No. 36 ! APPLIED OPTICS 8561