Isotopic evidence for widespread cold‐season‐biased groundwater recharge and young streamflow across central Canada

Jasechko, Scott; Wassenaar, Leonard I.; Mayer, Bernhard

doi:10.1002/hyp.11175

Cited by 87 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 85 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These values were then extracted from each of the groundwater sampling locations. The seasonality ratio was calculated after Jasechko et al (, ) as

\frac{{((), \frac{R}{P})}_{italicgrowing}}{{((), \frac{R}{P})}_{italicnongrowing}} = \frac{δ_{GW} - δ_{P ((), growing)}}{δ_{P ((), annual)} - δ_{P ((), growing)}} / \frac{δ_{GW} - δ_{P ((), nongrowing)}}{δ_{P ((), annual)} - δ_{P ((), nongrowing)}} .

where R and P represent groundwater recharge and precipitation fluxes, respectively. Subscripts growing and nongrowing indicate the growing season and nongrowing seasons, respectively.…”

Section: Background and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recharge seasonality based on stable isotopes: Nongrowing season bias altered by irrigation in Nebraska

Cherry

Gilmore

Mittelstet

et al. 2020

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sustainability of groundwater resources for agricultural and domestic use is dependent on both the groundwater recharge rate and the groundwater quality. The main purpose of this study was to improve the understanding of the timing, or seasonality, of groundwater recharge through the use of stable isotopes. Based on 768 groundwater samples collected from aquifers underlying natural resources districts in Nebraska, the isotopic composition of groundwater (δ2H and δ18O) was compared with that of precipitation by (a) mapping the isotopic composition of groundwater samples and (b) mapping a seasonality index for groundwater. Results suggest that for the majority of the state, groundwater recharge has a nongrowing season signature (October–April). However, the isotopic composition of groundwater suggests that in some intensively irrigated areas, human intervention in the water cycle has shifted the recharge signature towards the growing season. In other areas, a different human intervention (diversion of Platte River water for irrigation) has likely produced an apparent but possibly misleading nongrowing season recharge signal because the Platte River water differs isotopically from local precipitation. These results highlight the need for local information even when interpreting isotopic data over larger regions. Understanding the seasonality of recharge can provide insight into the optimal times to apply fertilizer, specifically in highly conductive soils with high leaching potential. In areas with high groundwater nitrate concentrations, this information is valuable for protecting the groundwater from further degradation. Although previous studies have framed nongrowing season recharge within the context of future climate change, this study also illustrates the importance of understanding how historical human intervention in the water cycle has affected groundwater recharge seasonality and subsequent implications for groundwater recharge and quality.

show abstract

“…These values were then extracted from each of the groundwater sampling locations. The seasonality ratio was calculated after Jasechko et al (, ) as

\frac{{((), \frac{R}{P})}_{italicgrowing}}{{((), \frac{R}{P})}_{italicnongrowing}} = \frac{δ_{GW} - δ_{P ((), growing)}}{δ_{P ((), annual)} - δ_{P ((), growing)}} / \frac{δ_{GW} - δ_{P ((), nongrowing)}}{δ_{P ((), annual)} - δ_{P ((), nongrowing)}} .

where R and P represent groundwater recharge and precipitation fluxes, respectively. Subscripts growing and nongrowing indicate the growing season and nongrowing seasons, respectively.…”

Section: Background and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recharge seasonality based on stable isotopes: Nongrowing season bias altered by irrigation in Nebraska

Cherry

Gilmore

Mittelstet

et al. 2020

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In general, they found that the snowmelt yield to groundwater recharge per unit of Recharge predominantly due to snowmelt (64 AE8%) Snowfall and Snowmelt precipitation is higher than that of rain-induced recharge. The dominance of snowmelt-induced groundwater recharge has been shown in the United States (Earman et al, 2006;O'Driscoll et al, 2005;Rose, 2003;Simpson et al, 1970;Winograd et al, 1998), in Canada (Jasechko et al, 2017;Maule et al, 1994;Mountain et al, 2015), in the Himalayas (Jeelani et al, 2010), in Switzerland (Halder, Decrouy, & Vennemann, 2013), in Spain (Kohfahl et al, 2008), in Georgia (Zappa et al, 2015), in Italy (Cervi et al, 2015;Penna, Engel, et al, 2014;Penna et al, 2017), and in Chile (Herrera et al, 2016). A recent analyses (Jasechko et al, 2014;Jasechko & Taylor, 2015) of published stable isotope data with the help of a global hydrologic model suggest that spring snowmelt due to winter precipitation dominates recharge in temperate and arid climates.…”

Section: Rain-on-snowmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An impressive number of studies (Cervi et al, 2015;Earman et al, 2006;Herrera et al, 2016;Jasechko et al, 2014;Jasechko & Taylor, 2015;Jasechko, Wassenaar, & Mayer, 2017;Jeelani, Bhat, & Shivanna, 2010;Kohfahl et al, 2008;Lechler & Niemi, 2012;Maule, Chanasyk, & Muehlenbachs, 1994;Mountain, James, & Chutko, 2015;O'Driscoll et al, 2005;Penna, Engel, et al, 2014;Penna et al, 2017;Rose, 2003;Simpson, Thorud, & Friedman, 1970;Winograd et al, 1998;Zappa et al, 2015) have used a stable isotope approach to attribute percentages of snow and rain as sources for annual groundwater recharge (see a summary in Table 1). In general, they found that the snowmelt yield to groundwater recharge per unit of Recharge predominantly due to snowmelt (64 AE8%) Snowfall and Snowmelt precipitation is higher than that of rain-induced recharge.…”

Section: Rain-on-snowmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding snow hydrological processes through the lens of stable water isotopes

Beria¹,

Larsen²,

Ceperley³

et al. 2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Snowfall may have different stable isotopic compositions compared with rainfall, allowing its contribution to potentially be tracked through the hydrological cycle. This review summarizes the state of knowledge of how different hydrometeorological processes affect the isotopic composition of snow in its different forms (snowfall, snowpack, and snowmelt), and, through selected examples, discusses how stable water isotopes can provide a better understanding of snow hydrological processes. A detailed account is given of how the variability in isotopic composition of snow changes from precipitation to final melting. The effect of different snow ablation processes (sublimation, melting, and redistribution by wind or avalanches) on the isotope ratios of the underlying snowpack are also examined. Insights into the role of canopy in snow interception processes, and how the isotopic composition in canopy underlying snowpacks can elucidate the exchanges therein are discussed, as well as case studies demonstrating the usefulness of stable water isotopes to estimate seasonality in the groundwater recharge. Rain-on-snow floods illustrate how isotopes can be useful to estimate the role of preferential flow during heavy spring rains. All these examples point to the complexity of snow hydrologic processes and demonstrate that an isotopic approach is useful to quantify snow contributions throughout the water cycle, especially in high-elevation and highlatitude catchments, where such processes are most pronounced. This synthesis concludes by tracing a snow particle along its entire hydrologic life cycle, highlights the major practical challenges remaining in snow hydrology and discusses future research directions.

show abstract

“…More recently, research such as that outlined in Ala-Aho et al (2017) and Lyon et al (2010a) has leveraged the "predictable" isotopic chemistry of the snowpack, which creates a traceable hydrological signal at freshet. This builds on studies using snow isotopic composition to estimate the contribution of snowmelt in groundwater recharge (Earman et al 2006;Jasechko, Wassenaar, and Mayer 2017) and to understand the runoff generation processes (Carey and Quinton 2004;Laudon et al 2004). Fractionation in the phase changes of sublimation/condensation and freeze/thaw during percolation through snow (O'Neil 1968) has the potential to change the isotopic signal in the original precipitation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons learned from monitoring the stable water isotopic variability in precipitation and streamflow across a snow-dominated subarctic catchment

Lyon

Ploum

Velde³

et al. 2018

Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lessons learned from monitoring the stable water isotopic variability in precipitation and streamflow across a snow-dominated subarctic catchment Arctic, Antarctic and Alpine research, 50(1): e1454778 https://doi.org/10. 1080/15230430.2018.1454778 Access to the published version may require subscription. N.B. When citing this work, cite the original published paper. This empirical study explores shifts in stable water isotopic composition for a subarctic catchment located in northern Sweden as it transitions from spring freshet to summer low flows. Relative changes in the isotopic composition of streamflow across the main catchment and fifteen nested subcatchments are characterized in relation to the isotopic composition of precipitation. With our sampling campaign, we explore the variability in stream-water isotopic composition that originates from precipitation as the input shifts from snow to rain and as landscape flow pathways change across scales. The isotopic similarity of high-elevation snowpack water and early season rainfall water seen through our sampling scheme made it difficult to truly isolate the impact of seasonal precipitation phase change on stream-water isotopic response. This highlights the need to explicitly consider the complexity of arctic and alpine landscapes when designing sampling strategies to characterize hydrological variability via stable water isotopes. Results show a potential influence of evaporation and source water mixing both spatially (variations with elevation) and temporally (variations from post-freshet to summer flows) on the composition of stream water across Miellajokka. As such, the data collected in this empirical study allow for initial conceptualization of the relative importance of, for example, hydrological connectivity within this mountainous, subarctic landscape. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Isotopic evidence for widespread cold‐season‐biased groundwater recharge and young streamflow across central Canada

Cited by 87 publications

References 85 publications

Recharge seasonality based on stable isotopes: Nongrowing season bias altered by irrigation in Nebraska

Recharge seasonality based on stable isotopes: Nongrowing season bias altered by irrigation in Nebraska

Understanding snow hydrological processes through the lens of stable water isotopes

Lessons learned from monitoring the stable water isotopic variability in precipitation and streamflow across a snow-dominated subarctic catchment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About