Patterns and sources of thermal heterogeneity in small mountain streams within a forested setting

Danehy, Robert J.; Colson, C.M.; Parrett, Kimberly B.; Duke, Steven D.

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.12.006

Cited by 45 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Malcolm et al, 2008;Brown et al, 2010;Roth et al, 2010;Imholt et al, 2012;Garner et al, 2014a) or, conversely, that forest removal results in temperature increases (e.g. Macdonald et al, 2003;Rutherford et al, 2004;Danehy et al, 2005;Moore et al, 2005; Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union. Gomi et al, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What causes cooling water temperature gradients in a forested stream reach?

Garner

Malcolm

Sadler

et al. 2014

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Previous studies have suggested that shading by riparian vegetation may reduce maximum water temperatures and provide refugia for temperature-sensitive aquatic organisms. Longitudinal cooling gradients have been observed during the daytime for stream reaches shaded by coniferous trees downstream of clear cuts or deciduous woodland downstream of open moorland. However, little is known about the energy exchange processes that drive such gradients, especially in semi-natural woodland contexts without confounding cool groundwater inflows. To address this gap, this study quantified and modelled variability in stream temperature and heat fluxes along an upland reach of the Girnock Burn (a tributary of the Aberdeenshire Dee, Scotland) where riparian land use transitions from open moorland to semi-natural, predominantly deciduous woodland. Observations were made along a 1050 m reach using a spatially distributed network of 10 water temperature data loggers, 3 automatic weather stations and 211 hemispherical photographs that were used to estimate incoming solar radiation. These data parameterised a high-resolution energy flux model incorporating flow routing, which predicted spatio-temporal variability in stream temperature. Variability in stream temperature was controlled largely by energy fluxes at the water-columnatmosphere interface. Net energy gains occurred along the reach, predominantly during daylight hours, and heat exchange across the bed-water-column interface accounted for < 1 % of the net energy budget. For periods when daytime net radiation gains were high (under clear skies), differences between water temperature observations increased in the streamwise direction; a maximum instantaneous difference of 2.5 • C was observed between the upstream reach boundary and 1050 m downstream. Furthermore, daily maximum water temperature at 1050 m downstream was ≤ 1 • C cooler than at the upstream reach boundary and lagged by > 1 h. Temperature gradients were not generated by cooling of stream water but rather by a combination of reduced rates of heating in the woodland reach and advection of cooler (overnight and early morning) water from the upstream moorland catchment. Longitudinal thermal gradients were indistinct at night and on days when net radiation gains were low (under overcast skies), thus when changes in net energy gains or losses did not vary significantly in space and time, and heat advected into the reach was reasonably consistent. The findings of the study and the modelling approach employed are useful tools for assessing optimal planting strategies for mitigating against ecologically damaging stream temperature maxima.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What causes cooling water temperature gradients in a forested stream reach?

Garner

Malcolm

Sadler

et al. 2014

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Stream water temperature depends largely on atmospheric conditions because of the dominant effects of sensible and latent heat exchanges between the water surface and the atmosphere (Evans et al, 1998;Danehy et al, 2005;Mayer, 2012). Atmospheric conditions include incoming solar radiation, air temperature, wind speed, humidity, and precipitation (Caissie, 2006).…”

Section: Atmospheric Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Groundwater input and the concurrent heat exchange are important factors that control stream water temperature, which have been studied widely (Alexander and Caissie, 2003;Danehy et al, 2005;Brown et al, 2006b;Birkinshaw and Webb, 2010;Chang and Psaris, 2013). Specifically, groundwater input was shown to lower the maximum temperature (Malard et al, 2001;Danehy et al, 2005;Chang and Psaris, 2013) (Constantz, 1998); hence, stabilizing stream water temperature (Brown et al, 2006b).…”

Section: Landscape Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, groundwater input was shown to lower the maximum temperature (Malard et al, 2001;Danehy et al, 2005;Chang and Psaris, 2013) (Constantz, 1998); hence, stabilizing stream water temperature (Brown et al, 2006b). Thus effect is most prominent in upper reaches of streams (Crisp, 1997).…”

Section: Landscape Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Stream water temperature varies because of heat energy fluxes and exchanges, and it reflects natural variations of the surrounding environmental conditions (Danehy et al, 2005). Its response to environmental conditions is influenced by regional incidents and anthropogenic activities such as forest harvesting, wild fires, and reservoir and wastewater discharges (Bartholow et al, 2004;Mahlum et al, 2011;Groom et al, 2011;Xin and Kinouchi, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Atmospheric Conditions, Landscape Characteristics, and Anthropogenic Factors Affecting Stream Water Temperature

Yoshiyama

Senge

2015

RAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Temperature variation generates interspecific synchrony but spatial asynchrony in survival for freshwater fish communities

Pregler,

Lu,

Valentine

et al. 2023

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Identifying environmental drivers of demographic variation is key to predicting community‐level impacts in response to global change. Climate conditions can synchronize population trends and can occur both spatially for populations of the same species, and across multiple species within the same local community. The aim of this study was to investigate patterns of temporal variation in survival for freshwater fish communities in two geographically close but isolated sites and to understand the amount of variation accounted for by abiotic covariates including metrics of water temperature and stream flow. Using mark‐recapture data, we estimated bi‐monthly apparent survival in a Bayesian Cormack‐Jolly‐Seber framework. The model included random effects to quantify temporal variance to understand species synchrony with the rest of the fish community and between sites. Study species included bluehead chub (Nocomis leptocephalus), creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), and striped jumprock (Moxostoma rupiscartes) in the southeastern USA. Results showed that survival varied over time and periods of low survival were associated with higher mean water temperature. However, temporal patterns of survival differed among species and between sites, where survival was synchronous among species within a site but asynchronous between sites for the same species despite their spatial proximity. Study streams differed in summer thermal regimes, which resulted in contrasting summer survival patterns, suggesting sensitivity of these fishes to warming. We found that interspecific synchrony was greater than spatial synchrony, where regional drivers such as temperature may interact with local habitat leading to differences in survival patterns at fine spatial scales. Finally, these findings show that changes in the timing and magnitude of environmental conditions can be critical in limiting vital rates and that some populations may be more resilient to climate variation than others.

show abstract

Patterns and sources of thermal heterogeneity in small mountain streams within a forested setting

Cited by 45 publications

References 44 publications

What causes cooling water temperature gradients in a forested stream reach?

What causes cooling water temperature gradients in a forested stream reach?

Atmospheric Conditions, Landscape Characteristics, and Anthropogenic Factors Affecting Stream Water Temperature

Temperature variation generates interspecific synchrony but spatial asynchrony in survival for freshwater fish communities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About