Abstract
AbstractAt sites that have been sampled for decades, changes in field and laboratory methods happen over time as instrumentation and protocols improve. Here, we compare the influence of depth- and point-integrated sampling on total, fine (< 0.0625 mm), and coarse (≥ 0.0625 mm) suspended sediment (SS) concentrations in the Lower Mississippi and Atchafalaya Rivers. Using historical field method information, we identified seven sites to test such differences. We found SS samples collected using point-integration tended to have higher concentrations than those collected using depth-integration. However, the presence and magnitude of the bias were inconsistent across sites. Bias was present at the site with less-than-ideal conditions (i.e., non-trapezoidal channel, non-uniform flow) and non-existent at the ideal site location, indicating the bias between sampling methods depends on site sampling conditions. When present, the bias is greater at higher concentrations and at moderate to high flows. At the less-than-ideal site, point-integrated samples can have 16% (total) and 34% (coarse) higher concentrations than depth-integrated samples. When flow effects are removed, this translates to a bias of 19, 9, and 8 mg per liter for total, fine, and coarse SS. When a change in field methods occurs, comparison samples and a rigorous evaluation of those samples are warranted to determine the proper course of action for a particular site. Often, the effect and solution will not be known until several years of comparison samples have been collected under a variety of hydrologic conditions.
Funder
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Pollution,General Environmental Science,General Medicine
Reference39 articles.
1. Alexander, J. S., Wilson, R. C., & Green, W. R. (2012). A brief history and summary of the effects of river engineering and dams on the Mississippi River system and delta. U.S. Geological Survey Circular, 1375, 43p. https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1375
2. Allen, P. B., & Peterson, D. V. (1981). A study of the variability of suspended sediment measurements. Erosion and Sediment Transport Measurement (Proceedings of the Florence Symposium, June 1981), IAHS Publication Number 133, 203–211.
3. Allison, M. A., Demas, C. R., Ebersole, B. A., Kleiss, B. A., Little, C. D., Meselhe, E. A., Powell, N. J., Pratt, T. C., & Vosburg, B. M. (2012). A water and sediment budget for the Lower Mississippi-Atchafalaya River in flood years 2008–2018: Implications for sediment discharge to the oceans and coastal restoration in Louisiana. Journal of Hydrology, 432–433, 84–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.02.020
4. Chanat, J. G., Moyer, D. L., Blomquist, J. D., Hyer, K. E., & Langland, M. J. (2016). Application of a weighted regression model for reporting nutrient and sediment concentrations, fluxes, and trends in concentration and flux for the Chesapeake Bay Nontidal Water-Quality Monitoring Network, results through water year 2012. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2015–5133. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20155133
5. Davis, B. E., & the Federal Interagency Sedimentation Project (FISP). (2005). A guide to the proper selection and use of federally approved sediment and water-quality samplers. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2005–1087. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20051087
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献