Freshwater Composition and Connectivity of the Connecticut River Plume During Ambient Flood Tides

Abstract

The Connecticut River plume interacts with the strong tidal currents of the ambient receiving waters in eastern Long Island Sound. The plume formed during ambient flood tides is studied as an example of tidal river plumes entering into energetic ambient tidal environments in estuaries or continental shelves. Conservative passive freshwater tracers within a high-resolution nested hydrodynamic model are applied to determine how source waters from different parts of the tidal cycle contribute to plume composition and interact with bounding plume fronts. The connection to source waters can be cut off only under low-discharge conditions, when tides reverse surface flow through the mouth after max ambient flood. Upstream plume extent is limited because ambient tidal currents arrest the opposing plume propagation, as the tidal internal Froude number exceeds one. The downstream extent of the tidal plume always is within 20 km from the mouth, which is less than twice the ambient tidal excursion. Freshwaters in the river during the preceding ambient ebb are the oldest found in the new flood plume. Connectivity with source waters and plume fronts exhibits a strong upstream-to-downstream asymmetry. The arrested upstream front has high connectivity, as all freshwaters exiting the mouth immediately interact with this boundary. The downstream plume front has the lowest overall connectivity, as interaction is limited to the oldest waters since younger interior waters do not overtake this front. The offshore front and inshore boundary exhibit a downstream progression from younger to older waters and decreasing overall connectivity with source waters. Plume-averaged freshwater tracer concentrations and variances both exhibit an initial growth period followed by a longer decay period for the remainder of the tidal period. The plume-averaged tracer variance is increased by mouth inputs, decreased by entrainment, and destroyed by internal mixing. Peak entrainment velocities for younger waters are higher than values for older waters, indicating stronger entrainment closer to the mouth. Entrainment and mixing time scales (1–4 h at max ambient flood) are both shorter than half a tidal period, indicating entrainment and mixing are vigorous enough to rapidly diminish tracer variance within the plume.

Mixing of the Connecticut River Plume During Ambient Flood Tides: Spatial Heterogeneity and Contributions of Bottom‐Generated and Interfacial Mixing

“…Additional details on plume structure and results for other cases are included in Whitney et al. (2021). Ambient tidal currents continue to stretch the plume farther along the coast during late ambient flood (Figures 2d–2f).…”

“…Light wind periods are selected and then wind stress is set to zero to remove all immediate wind influence during the short nested runs. The low-discharge and spring-tide case from Whitney et al (2021) is analyzed; discharge is 250 m 3 /s and ambient tidal currents in the plume region are 1.0 m/s. ROMS source code, compilation files, and input files necessary to run ROMS and generate the ROMS output are included in the Whitney (2023) data set as described in the Open Research statement.…”

“…Instantaneous fields (in ROMS 'history' files) output at 30-min intervals are analyzed. As in Whitney et al (2021), results are presented in a rotated coordinate system with x directed approximately westward alongshore, y directed approximately southward offshore, and z positive upwards from the static surface. Analysis relies on model bottom depth (h), surface elevation (η, positive when above z = 0), salinity (Sal, measured on the Practical Salinity Scale), temperature (Temp), freshwater concentration (C), horizontal velocity components (u and v in the x and y directions, respectively), bottom stress components (τ bx and τ by , with magnitude τ b ) eddy viscosity for momentum (K m ), and eddy diffusivities (K Sal and K Temp for salinity and temperature, respectively).…”

“…There are no other passive tracer sources and no sinks. Note that the hourly tracers analyzed in Whitney et al (2021) to assess plume connectivity sum to the continuous tracer analyzed here. All analysis is completed with MATLAB using standard functions and routines in addition to custom routines.…”

“…The main objectives are (a) characterizing the spatial heterogeneity of turbulent buoyancy fluxes among different areas of the plume, (b) partitioning turbulent buoyancy fluxes into bottom-generated and interfacial shear contributions and rating their relative importance throughout the plume, and (c) quantifying contributions to plume-integrated mixing as the tidally influenced plume evolves. The high-resolution numerical modeling approach in Whitney et al (2021) is used. This study is a companion to similar analysis for idealized river plumes in Spicer et al (2021).…”