Recent advances in understanding the interaction of groundwater and surface water

Abstract

The most common image of the interaction of groundwater and surface water is that of the interaction of streams with a contiguous alluvial aquifer. This type of system has been the focus of study for more than 100 years, from the work of Boussinesq (1877) to the present, and stream‐aquifer interaction continues to be the most common topic of papers discussing the interaction of groundwater and surface water. However, groundwater and surface water interact in a wide variety of landscapes from alpine to coastal. Within these landscapes, ground‐water systems range in scale from local to regional, and the types of surface water include streams, lakes, wetlands, and oceans. Given the broad spectrum of the topic of groundwater and surface water interaction, an overview of studies of this topic could be organized according to surface water type, landscape type, scale of hydrologic systems, or field and analytical methods. All these factors are discussed, but this paper is organized according to landscape type because of the great increase in studies of the interaction of groundwater and surface water in landscapes other than riverine systems in the last 15 years. Furthermore, discussing studies by landscape type facilitates comparison of methods and results from different geologic and climatic settings. The general landscapes discussed are mountain terrane, riverine systems, coastal terrane, hummocky terrane, and karst terrane.

Quantifying and modelling the contribution of streams that recharge the Querença-Silves aquifer in the south of Portugal

“…A wide range of methods are available to assess GW-SW interactions, based on hydrograph separation (see review by Brodie and Hosteler, 2005), modelling (Sophocleus and Perkins, 2000;, tracing (Lerch, 2005), temperature (Constantz et al, 2008), and water balance (Salvador et al, 2012), among others (see review by Winter, 1995 andBrodie et al, 2007). The most commonly used approach may be hydrograph separation (Opsahl et al, 2007).…”

Numerical simulation of floodplain hydrology

“…Although there have been extensive studies of hillslope/channel water fluxes, flow paths, and residence times for rivers and riparian zones in upland catchments, relatively little attention has been paid to lowland rivers that have wide, low-gradient floodplains. Previous research into lowland floodplain hydrology has concentrated largely on the effect of bank storage on the propagation of flood waves downreach [Pinder and Sauer, 1971;Kondolf et al, 1987;Hunt, 1990; Goviindaraju and Koelliker, 1994; Hogarth et al, 1997] and surface water recharge of alluvial aquifers (see Winter [1995] for a thorough review). Floodplain hydrology is also important in processes such as flood generation and chemistry [Gillham, 1984;Castro and Hornberger, 1991;Buttle and Sami, 1992], the mode of floodplain inundation [Hughes, 1980;Junk et al, 1989;Mertes, 1997], and the role of floodplains as nutrient buffer zones [Peterjohn and Correll, 1984;Pinay and Descamps, 1988;Haycock and Burt, 1993].…”

Hydrologic flow paths control dissolved organic carbon fluxes and metabolism in an Alpine stream hyporheic zone

“…The template that affects hydrologic fluxes across these adjacent units is scale dependent and includes aquifer and hydraulic properties [e.g., Winter, 1995], streambed topography [Harvey and Bencala, 1993], and roughness features ranging from sand waves [Thibodeaux and Boyle, 1987] to gravel bars [Prestegaard, 1983]. Knowledge of the interfacial fluxes and their underlying mechanisms is a key requirement toward the understanding of stream biogeochemistry.…”