Contrasting CO<sub>2</sub> concentration discharge dynamics in headwater streams: A multi‐catchment comparison

Dinsmore, Kerry J.; Wallin, Marcus B.; Johnson, Mark S.; Billett, Michael F.; Bishop, Kevin; Pumpanen, Jukka; Ojala, Anne

doi:10.1002/jgrg.20047

Cited by 61 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 82 publications

(103 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During storm events, such equilibrium and undersaturation states in 485 typically supersaturated aquatic systems may also be preceded by a pulse of elevated CO 2 486 degassing relative to baseflow rates (Looman et al 2016), as increased streamwater 487 velocity increases the gas transfer velocity due to higher streambed-generated shear stress 488 Dinsmore et al 2013). Thus, the combined influence on water-air gas 492 exchange rates of rainfall induced changes in gas transfer velocity as well as CO 2 * 493 concentration-discharge hysteresis patterns is temporally erratic.…”

Section: Respectively) 341 342mentioning

confidence: 99%

The carbon dioxide evasion cycle of an intermittent first-order stream: contrasting water–air and soil–air exchange

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The carbon dioxide evasion cycle of an intermittent first-order stream: contrasting water-air and soil-air exchange. Biogeochemistry, 132(1), pp. 87-102. (doi:10.1007/s10533-016-0289-2) This is the author's final accepted version.There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from it.http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/133460/ Ephemeral streams and wetlands are characterized by complex cycles of submersion and 26 emersion, which influence the greenhouse gas flux rates. In this study we quantify the 27 spatiotemporal variability in CO 2 and CH 4 concentrations and fluxes of an intermittent 28 first-order stream over three consecutive wet and dry cycles spanning 56 days, to assess 29 how hydrologic phase transitions influence greenhouse gas evasion. Water column excess 30 CO 2 ranged from -11 to 1600 µM, and excess CH 4 from 1 to 15 µM. After accounting for 31 temporal changes in the ratio of wet versus dry streambed hydraulic radius, total CO 2 -C 32 fluxes ranged from 12 to 156 mmol m -2 d -1 , with an integrated daily mean of 61 ± 25 33 mmol m -2 d -1 . Soil-air evasion rates were approximately equal to those of water-air 34 evasion. Rainfall increased background water-air CO 2 -C fluxes by up to 780% due to an 35 increase in gas transfer velocity in the otherwise still waters. CH 4 -C fluxes increased 19-36 fold over the duration of the initial, longer wet-cycle from 0.1 to 1.9 mmol m -2 d -1 . 37Temporal shifts in water depth and site-specific ephemerality were key drivers of carbon 38 dynamics in the upper Jamison Creek watercourse. Based on these findings, we 39 hypothesize that the cyclic periodicity of fluxes of biogenic gases from frequently 40 intermittent streams (wet and dry cycles ranging from days to weeks) and seasonally 41 ephemeral watercourses (dry for months at a time) are likely to differ, and therefore these 42 differences should be considered when integrating transient systems into regional carbon 43 budgets and models of global change.

show abstract

Section: Respectively) 341 342mentioning

confidence: 99%

The carbon dioxide evasion cycle of an intermittent first-order stream: contrasting water–air and soil–air exchange

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Quantifying evasion involves combining dissolved CO 2 concentrations and the gas transfer coefficient (KCO 2 ) ). Due to the limited numbers of direct measurements of the gas transfer coefficient (KCO 2 ) (Raymond et al, 2013;Wallin et al, 2011) and the considerable spatial and temporal (Crawford et al, 2013;Dinsmore et al, 2013a) variability in dissolved CO 2 concentrations observed across a wide range of northern latitude catchments, evasion, and the drivers of this flux are likely to be poorly quantified. To improve understanding of both lateral downstream export and vertical evasion of CO 2 from headwater streams the concentrations and sources of dissolved CO 2 need to be better quantified.…”

Section: F I Leith Et Al: Carbon Dioxide Transport In a Boreal Heamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To better understand the drivers of stream water CO 2 dynamics an increasing number of studies have made continuous, direct measurements of dissolved CO 2 concentrations in stream waters (using in situ, non-dispersive infra-red (NDIR) CO 2 sensors) giving new insights into diurnal, storm event and seasonal CO 2 dynamics (Dinsmore and Billett, 2008;Dinsmore et al, 2013a;Dyson et al, 2011;Johnson et al, 2006Johnson et al, , 2010. Much of the excess CO 2 in temperate and boreal streams originates from terrestrial areas through lateral subsurface transport through the soil , confirmed by isotope studies in peatland catchments Leith et al, 2014).…”

Section: F I Leith Et Al: Carbon Dioxide Transport In a Boreal Heamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Across five different northern latitude catchments, stream water CO 2 concentrations were shown to be strongly linked to discharge, with the highest 30 % of flow having the greatest impact on lateral CO 2 export (Dinsmore et al, 2013a). DIC export via the aquatic pathway over a 13-year period in a headwater Swedish catchment (the same catchment as this study) was positively correlated with precipitation with export varying from 2.3 to 6.9 g DIC-C m −2 yr −1 (Öquist et al, 2014).…”

Section: F I Leith Et Al: Carbon Dioxide Transport In a Boreal Heamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Carbon dioxide transport across the hillslope–riparian–stream continuum in a boreal headwater catchment

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Headwater streams export CO 2 as lateral downstream export and vertical evasion from the stream surface. CO 2 in boreal headwater streams generally originates from adjacent terrestrial areas, so determining the sources and rate of CO 2 transport along the hillslope-riparian-stream continuum could improve estimates of CO 2 export via the aquatic pathway, especially by quantifying evasion at higher temporal resolutions. Continuous measurements of dissolved CO 2 concentrations and water table were made along the hillslope-riparian-stream continuum in the Västrabäcken sub-catchment of the Krycklan catchment, Sweden. Daily water and CO 2 export from the hillslope and riparian zone were estimated over one hydrological year (October 2012-September 2013) using a flow-concentration model and compared with measured lateral downstream CO 2 export.Total water export over the hydrological year from the hillslope was 230 mm yr −1 compared with 270 mm yr −1 from the riparian zone. This corresponds well (proportional to the relative upslope contributing area) to the annual catchment runoff of 265 mm yr −1 . Total CO 2 export from the riparian zone to the stream was 3.0 g CO 2 -C m −2 yr −1 . A hotspot for riparian CO 2 export was observed at 30-50 cm depth (accounting for 71 % of total riparian export). Seasonal variability was high with export peaks during the spring flood and autumn storm events. Downstream lateral CO 2 export (determined from stream water dissolved CO 2 concentrations and discharge) was 1.2 g CO 2 -C m −2 yr −1 . Subtracting downstream lateral export from riparian export (3.0 g CO 2 -C m −2 yr −1 ) gives 1.8 g CO 2 -C m −2 yr −1 which can be attributed to evasion losses (accounting for 60 % of export via the aquatic pathway). The results highlight the importance of terrestrial CO 2 export, especially from the riparian zone, for determining catchment aquatic CO 2 losses and the importance of the CO 2 evasion component to carbon export via the aquatic conduit.

show abstract

“…Biological, climatic, and hydrogeological factors are all likely to influence dissolved CO 2 concentrations. However, the controls on dissolved CO 2 variability are currently poorly characterized [Dinsmore et al, 2013], highlighting specific needs for future research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural variations in calcite dissolution rates in streams: Controls, implications, and open questions

Covington

Gulley

Gabrovšek

2015

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Models of bedrock channel evolution typically assume that chemical erosion is negligible in comparison to mechanical erosion. While this assumption is reasonable for channels in silicate rocks, it is questionable within highly soluble strata such as carbonates. The magnitude and variability of calcite dissolution rates in streams has remained as a critical unknown for models of bedrock incision and karst conduit formation. Here we use U.S. Geological Survey data to estimate calcite dissolution rates from 77 different streams located in a wide range of settings. The calculated rates are commonly on the order of ∼1 mmyr−1, which is 1 to 2 orders of magnitude larger than previous estimates. We also find that PCO2 is the strongest control on at‐a‐site variability, though some sites also display dilution‐controlled variability. Typically, dissolution rates vary within a relatively narrow range, which has important implications for the relative importance of chemical and mechanical erosion.

show abstract

Contrasting CO₂ concentration discharge dynamics in headwater streams: A multi‐catchment comparison

Cited by 61 publications

References 82 publications

The carbon dioxide evasion cycle of an intermittent first-order stream: contrasting water–air and soil–air exchange

The carbon dioxide evasion cycle of an intermittent first-order stream: contrasting water–air and soil–air exchange

Carbon dioxide transport across the hillslope–riparian–stream continuum in a boreal headwater catchment

Natural variations in calcite dissolution rates in streams: Controls, implications, and open questions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Contrasting CO2 concentration discharge dynamics in headwater streams: A multi‐catchment comparison

Cited by 61 publications

References 82 publications

The carbon dioxide evasion cycle of an intermittent first-order stream: contrasting water–air and soil–air exchange

The carbon dioxide evasion cycle of an intermittent first-order stream: contrasting water–air and soil–air exchange

Carbon dioxide transport across the hillslope–riparian–stream continuum in a boreal headwater catchment

Natural variations in calcite dissolution rates in streams: Controls, implications, and open questions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Contrasting CO₂ concentration discharge dynamics in headwater streams: A multi‐catchment comparison