A distributed analysis of lateral inflows in an Alaskan Arctic watershed underlain by continuous permafrost

Abstract

Lateral inflows control the spatial distribution of river discharge, and understanding their patterns is fundamental for accurately modelling instream flows and travel time distributions necessary for evaluating impacts of climate change on aquatic habitat suitability, river energy budgets, and fate of dissolved organic carbon. Yet, little is known about the spatial distribution of lateral inflows in Arctic rivers given the lack of gauging stations. With a network of stream gauging and meteorological stations within the Kuparuk River watershed in northern Alaska, we estimated precipitation and lateral inflows for nine subcatchments from 1 July to 4 August,2013, 2014, and 2015. Total precipitation, lateral inflows, runoff ratios (area-normalized lateral inflow divided by precipitation), percent contribution to total basin discharge, and lateral inflow per river kilometre were estimated for each watershed for relatively dry, moderate, or wet summers. The results show substantial variability between years and subcatchments. Total basin lateral inflow depths ranged 24-fold in response to a threefold change in rainfall between dry and wet years, whereas within-basin lateral inflows varied fivefold from the coastal plain to the foothills. General spatial trends in lateral inflows were consistent with previous studies and mean summer precipitation patterns. However, the spatially distributed nature of these estimates revealed that reaches in the vicinity of a spring-fed surficial ice feature do not follow general spatial trends and that the coastal plain, which is typically considered to produce minimal runoff, showed potential to contribute to total river discharge. These findings are used to provide a spatially distributed understanding of lateral inflows and identify watershed characteristics that influence hydrologic responses.

New insights into the drainage of inundated Arctic polygonal tundra using fundamental hydrologic principles

“…Additionally, the elevated ponded water in polygon centers produces hydrological gradients that result in sustained outward flow through the subsurface under the rims, a process that has been observed at multiple field sites (Helbig et al, 2013;Liljedahl and Wilson, 2016;Koch, 2016;Wales et al, 2020). This lateral flow controls landscape redistribution of water during the summer months (Helbig et al, 2013) and governs ponded water budgets (Koch et al, 2014;Koch, 2016) and makes up a notable portion of regional river discharge (King et al, 2020). The manner and timing with which polygonal tundra landscapes transition from inundated to drained has important implications for (1) transitions from atmospheric emissions of methane to carbon dioxide (Conway and Steele, 1989;Moore and Dalva, 1997;Zona et al, 2011;Zhu et al, 2013;O'Shea et al, 2014;Throckmorton et al, 2015;Wainwright et al, 2015;Lara et al, 2015;Vaughn et al, 2016), (2) dissolved organic carbon emissions to surface waters (Zona et al, 2011;Abnizova et al, 2012;Laurion and Mladenov, 2013;Larouche et al, 2015;Plaza et al, 2019), (3) biological succession (Billings and Peterson, 1980;Jorgenson et al, 2015;Wolter et al, 2016), and (4) ground surface deformation (Mackay, 1990;MacKay, 2000;Raynolds et al, 2014;Oehme, 2019).…”

Aufeis fields as novel groundwater‐dependent ecosystems in the arctic cryosphere

“…Like other large aufeis on the North Slope, the Kuparuk aufeis is formed from the discharge of a spring (Q $ 459 L/s; Parker and Huryn 2013). The aquifer feeding this spring is hypothesized to be recharged from a losing reach of the Kuparuk River $ 10+ km upstream of the aufeis field, a scenario supported by a recent hydrological budget for the greater Kuparuk River (King et al 2020). This talik is likely structured by a subsurface paleochannel (Poole et al 2002) that emerges on the floodplain surface as the spring's source and that is presumably a remnant of a drainage system associated with a Pleistocene glacier that terminated upstream of the present-day aufeis field (Hamilton 1978;Yoshikawa et al 2007).…”

“…This study focused on a large (e.g., > 5 km 2 by late winter) aufeis associated with the Kuparuk River (“Kuparuk aufeis ” hereafter, Fig. 1, 68.979442°N 149.711800°W; Yoshikawa et al 2007, King et al 2020, Terry et al 2020). The Kuparuk River rises in the foothills of the Brooks Range and flows northward across the Arctic Coastal Plain to the Arctic Ocean west of Prudhoe Bay.…”

“…During summer, an active layer (i.e., layer of sediment above the permafrost that thaws and freezes each year) with a maximum depth of 0.5 to 1.0 m develops (Nelson et al 1997). The permafrost below this active layer functions as an aquiclude with significant effects on runoff dynamics (King et al 2020). The Kuparuk River has been subject to intensive study as part of the U.S. National Science Foundation ‐ Long Term Ecological Research network (Bowden et al 2014).…”

New insights into the drainage of inundated ice-wedge polygons using fundamental hydrologic principles

“…vated ponded water in polygon centers produces hydrological gradients that result in sustained outward flow through the subsurface under the rims, a process that has been observed at several field sites (Helbig et al, 2013;Liljedahl and Wilson, 2016;Koch, 2016;Wales et al, 2020). This lateral flow controls landscape redistribution of water during the summer months (Helbig et al, 2013), governs ponded water budgets (Koch et al, 2014;Koch, 2016), and makes up a notable portion of regional river discharge (King et al, 2020). The manner and timing with which polygonal tundra landscapes transition from inundated to drained conditions have important implications for (1) transitions from atmospheric emissions of methane to carbon dioxide (Conway and Steele, 1989;Moore and Dalva, 1997;Zona et al, 2011;Zhu et al, 2013;O'Shea et al, 2014;Wainwright et al, 2015;Lara et al, 2015;Vaughn et al, 2016), (2) dissolved organic carbon emissions to surface waters (Zona et al, 2011;Abnizova et al, 2012;Laurion and Mladenov, 2013;Larouche et al, 2015;Plaza et al, 2019), (3) biological succession (Billings and Peterson, 1980;Jorgenson et al, 2015;Wolter et al, 2016), and (4) ground surface deformation (Mackay, 1990(Mackay, , 2000Raynolds et al, 2014;Nitzbon et al, 2019).…”