4.4 Article

Effects of Surface and Groundwater Interactions on Phosphorus Transport within Streambank Sediments

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Volume 39, Issue 2, Pages 548-557

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.2134/jeq2009.0313

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Monitoring to Support North Bosque River Model Refinement [582-6-70859-04]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Understanding internal stream P transfers is important in controlling eutrophication. To determine the direction of groundwater and surface water interactions and evaluate P retention within streambank sediments, groundwater well pairs, about 5-m deep, were installed at three locations along a second-order, eutrophic stream in north-central Texas. Well cores were analyzed for P, and groundwater levels were monitored for about 2 yr. Water levels in wells furthest upstream always indicated a losing stream, while wells further downstream showed a gaining stream except during flow reversals with storm events and periods with reservoir backwater. Total-P from well cores ranged from 54 to 254 mg kg(-1) and was typically high near surface, decreased downward until redoximorphic features were encountered and then increased notably with depth to near or above surface concentrations. Very little extractable P Occurred in sediments from the two upstream well sets; however, the set furthest downstream showed extractable P throughout with a high of 21 mg kg(-1) near the bottom. Repeated wetting-drying at sites A and B as noted by redoximorphic features may have shifted P into more stable sediment-bound forms. The decrease in extractable P at sites A and B compared to site C may be explained by conditions at C that were wetter and potentially anaerobic. Because the overall stream reach was more often losing than gaining, there appears to be a mass flow of P into streambank sediments. Streambank erosion may then transport this P downstream if not controlled.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available