“…On 8 and 12 August 2016, we collected pore waters for detailed chemical analysis into sterile 60-ml amber borosilicate bottles, placed each bottle on ice in the field, froze them within 2 hr of collection and transported them to Colorado State University for analysis (described below). We feel our EEMS results are robust because (1) SUVA 254 values (<3.0 L·mg-C −1 ·m −1 ) were below the threshold where significant alterations have previously been found , (2) DOM chemical composition and aromatic characteristics are similar to previously reported values for unfrozen samples collected from the same sampling location (Imnavait watershed, Ward & Cory, 2015) and from other active layer soil horizons (low Arctic, Waldrop et al, 2010), (3) DOC concentrations are within range of groundwater samples collected the year prior from the same watershed (1,500-2,000 μM vs. 300-2,100 μM, respectively, Neilson et al, 2018) and DOC concentrations in unfrozen soil-water samples (Waldrop et al, 2010;Ward & Cory, 2015), (4) our NMR results support those found using EEMS, and (5) we observed no evidence of flocculation or production of brown particles in thawed samples, which is characteristic of abiotic particle formation and OM precipitation Giesy & Briese, 1978). More specifically, freeze-thaw dynamics may alter fluorescent DOM composition and concentration (>10%) when sample aromaticity is high (SUVA 254 > 3.5 L·mg-C −1 ·m −1 ; Fellman, D'Amore, & Hood, 2008; Pokrovsky et al, 2018), although evidence is mixed (Coble et al, 2014;Otero et al, 2007;Spencer et al, 2010).…”