4.7 Article

Dynamic response of surface water-groundwater exchange to currents, tides, and waves in a shallow estuary

期刊

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-OCEANS
卷 118, 期 4, 页码 1749-1758

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/jgrc.20154

关键词

surface water-groundwater exchange; coastal hydrogeology; benthic exchange; Delaware Inland Bays; estuary; groundwater

资金

  1. National Science Foundation through the Christina River Basin Critical Zone Observatory [EAR-0724971, EAR-0910756]
  2. Delaware Sea Grant College [R/HRCC-2, NA10OAR4170084]
  3. Directorate For Geosciences
  4. Division Of Earth Sciences [0910756, 0724971] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In shallow, fetch-limited estuaries, variations in current and wave energy promote heterogeneous surface water-groundwater mixing (benthic exchange), which influences biogeochemical activity. Here, we characterize heterogeneity in benthic exchange within the subtidal zone of the Delaware Inland Bays by linking hydrodynamic circulation models with mathematical solutions for benthic exchange forced by current-bedform interactions, tides, and waves. Benthic fluxes oscillate over tidal cycles as fluctuating water depths alter fluid interactions with the bed. Maximum current-driven fluxes (similar to 1-10cm/d) occur in channels with strong tidal currents. Maximum wave-driven fluxes (similar to 1-10cm/d) occur in downwind shoals. During high-energy storms, simulated wave pumping rates increase by orders of magnitude, demonstrating the importance of storms in solute transfer through the benthic layer. Under moderate wind conditions (similar to 5m/s), integrated benthic exchange rates due to wave, current, and tidal pumping are each similar to 1-10m3/s, on the order of fluid contributions from runoff and fresh groundwater discharge to the estuary. Benthic exchange is thus a significant and dynamic component of an estuary's fluid budget that may influence estuarine geochemistry and ecology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据