Dynamic hyporheic and riparian flow path geometry through base flow recession in two headwater mountain stream corridors

Ward, Adam S.; Schmadel, N. M.; Wondzell, Steven M.; Gooseff, M. N.; Singha, Kamini

doi:10.1002/2016wr019875

Cited by 33 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This area definition does not take into account the predominant mass transport and retention process within the HZ. The results shown here confirm that under dynamic flow conditions, the residence time and the length of hyporheic flow path may not be coupled (e.g., Schmadel et al, ; Ward et al, ). Furthermore, our simulations indicate that after the peak flow‐induced expansion of the HZ area, there is a faster contraction of the hydrodynamically defined HZ; however, biogeochemically defined HZ takes longer time to return back to preevent conditions.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 73%

Dynamic Hyporheic Zones: Exploring the Role of Peak Flow Events on Bedform‐Induced Hyporheic Exchange

Singh

Gomez‐Velez

et al. 2019

Water Resources Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discharge varies in space and time, driving hyporheic exchange processes in river corridors that affect biogeochemical cycling and ultimately control the dynamics of biogeochemical hot spots and hot moments. Herein, we use a reduced‐order model to conduct the systematic analysis of the interplay between discharge variability (peak flow intensities, duration, and skewness) and streambed topography (bedform aspect ratios and channel slopes) and their role in the flow and transport characteristics of hyporheic zones (HZs). We use a simple and robust conceptualization of single peak flow events for a series of periodic sinusoidal bedforms. Using the model, we estimate the spatial extent of the HZ, the total amount of exchange, and the residence time of water and solutes within the reactive environment and its duration relative to typical time scales for oxygen consumption (i.e., a measure of the denitrification potential). Our results demonstrate that HZ expansion and contraction is controlled by events yet modulated by ambient groundwater flow. Even though the change in hyporheic exchange flux (%) relative to baseflow conditions is invariant for different values of channel slopes, absolute magnitudes varied substantially. Primarily, peak flow events cause more discharge of older water for the higher aspect ratios (i.e., for dunes and ripples) and lower channel slopes. Variations in residence times during peak flow events lead to the development of larger areas of potential nitrification and denitrification in the HZ for longer durations. These findings have potential implications for river management and restoration, particularly the need for (re)consideration of the importance of hyporheic exchange under dynamic flow conditions.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 73%

Dynamic Hyporheic Zones: Exploring the Role of Peak Flow Events on Bedform‐Induced Hyporheic Exchange

Singh

Gomez‐Velez

et al. 2019

Water Resources Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Variation in one or both terms will manifest as changing importance of transient storage at the reach scale. In high‐gradient mountain streams, the hydrostatic pressure gradients across pools, steps, and riffles are largely time invariant, leading to functionally time‐invariant Q HEF for changes in discharge (Ward, Schmadel, et al, ; Ward, Schmadel, Wondzell, Gooseff, & Singha, ). Despite a time‐invariant Q HEF , these dynamics still manifest as apparent changes in late‐time tailing because of changes in Q .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Streambed restoration to remove fine sediment alters reach‐scale transient storage in a low‐gradient fifth‐order river, Indiana, USA

Ward

Morgan

White

et al. 2018

Hydrological Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hyporheic restoration is of increasing interest given the role of hyporheic zones in supporting ecosystem services and functions. Given the prevalence of sediment pollution to waterways, an emerging restoration technique involves the removal of sediment from the interstices of gravel‐bed streams. Here, we document streambed sediment removal following a large, accidental release of fine sediment into a gravel‐bed river. We use this as a natural experiment to assess the impact of fine sediment removal on reach‐scale measures of transient storage and to document the responses of reaches with contrasting morphology (restored vs. unrestored) to changing discharge one‐field season. We conducted a series of conservative solute tracer experiments in each reach, interpreting both summary statistics for the recovered in‐stream solute tracer time series. Additionally, we applied the transient storage model to interpret the results via model parameters, including a Monte Carlo analysis to measure parameter identifiability and sensitivity in each experiment. Despite the restoration effort resulting in an open matrix gravel bed in the restored reach, we did not find the significant differences in most time series metrics describing reach‐scale transport and transient storage. We hypothesize that this is due to enhanced vertical exchange with the gravel bed in the restored reach replacing lateral exchange with macrophyte beds in the unrestored reach, developing a conceptual model to explain our findings. Consequently, we found that the impact of reach‐scale removal of fine sediment is not measureable using reach‐scale solute tracer studies. We offer recommendations for future studies seeking to measure the impacts of stream restoration at the reach scale.

show abstract

“…In response to seasonal (e.g., snow-melt periods) or individual hydrologic events (e.g., storms), increases in stream discharge and stage are commonly attributed in part to corresponding increases in groundwater inflows to the stream corridor. An increase in stream discharge has been reported to decrease the role of individual features by causing the down-valley hydraulic gradient to become more uniform [Church and Zimmermann, 2007;Dunne and Leopold, 1978;Ward et al, 2016], but the increase in stage may force additional exchange across the streambed [Boano et al, 2013;Hassan et al, 2015;Trauth et al, 2015].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast, stream networks in mountainous catchments are characterized by network expansion and contraction due to different hydrologic periods (e.g., seasonal changes) [e.g., Godsey and Kirchner, 2014;Jencso et al, 2010Jencso et al, , 2009. In such confined mountainous valley settings, subsurface down-valley flow can represent a large portion of persistent flow paths [Castro and Hornberger, 1991;Jackman et al, 1984;Ward et al, 2013b], possibly explaining why order-ofmagnitude changes in stream discharge have been shown to have inconsequential impact on hyporheic exchange [e.g., Ward et al, 2014Ward et al, , 2016Ward et al, , 2017. Groundwater inflow driven by mountainous catchment topology (e.g., hillslope inputs as a function of lateral area), however, can cause spatial fragmentation of the hyporheic flow field [Caruso et al, 2016].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hydrologic controls on hyporheic exchange in a headwater mountain stream

Schmadel

Ward

Wondzell

2017

Water Resources Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The spatial and temporal scales of hyporheic exchange within the stream corridor are controlled by stream discharge and groundwater inflow interacting with streambed morphology. While decades of study have resulted in a clear understanding of how morphologic form controls hyporheic exchange at the feature scale, we lack comparable predictive power related to stream discharge and the spatial structure of groundwater inflows at the reach scale, where spatial heterogeneity in both geomorphic setting and hydrologic forcing are present. In this study, we simulated vertical hyporheic exchange along a 600 m mountain stream reach under high, medium, and low stream discharge while considering groundwater inflow as negligible, spatially uniform, or proportional to upslope accumulated area. Most changes to hyporheic flow path residence time or length in response to stream discharge were small (<5%), suggesting that discharge is a secondary control relative to morphologically driven hyporheic exchange. Groundwater inflow was a primary control and mostly caused decreases in hyporheic flow path residence time and length. This finding generally agrees with expectations from the literature; however, flow path response was not consistent across the study reach. Instead, we found that flow paths driven by large hydraulic gradients coinciding with large morphologic features were less sensitive to changes in groundwater inflow than those driven by hydraulic gradients similar to the valley gradient. Our results indicate that consideration of heterogeneous arrangement of morphologic features is necessary to differentiate between hyporheic flow paths that persist in time and those that are sensitive to changing hydrologic conditions.

show abstract

Dynamic hyporheic and riparian flow path geometry through base flow recession in two headwater mountain stream corridors

Cited by 33 publications

References 72 publications

Dynamic Hyporheic Zones: Exploring the Role of Peak Flow Events on Bedform‐Induced Hyporheic Exchange

Dynamic Hyporheic Zones: Exploring the Role of Peak Flow Events on Bedform‐Induced Hyporheic Exchange

Streambed restoration to remove fine sediment alters reach‐scale transient storage in a low‐gradient fifth‐order river, Indiana, USA

Hydrologic controls on hyporheic exchange in a headwater mountain stream

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About