The metabolic regimes of 356 rivers in the United States

Appling, Alison P.; Read, Jordan S.; Winslow, Luke; Arroita, Maite; Bernhardt, Emily S.; Griffiths, Natalie A.; Hall, Robert O.; Harvey, Judson W.; Heffernan, James B.; Stanley, Emily H.; Stets, Edward G.; Yackulic, Charles B.

doi:10.1038/sdata.2018.292

Cited by 85 publications

(118 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

117

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Due to these improvements, there has been an increase in research interest and capabilities focused on stream metabolism (Appling et al. ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These advances include the development of durable and economically affordable dissolved oxygen (DO) sensors, allowing researchers to deploy DO logging sensors across a range of field conditions for extended periods of time (e.g., Roberts et al 2007, Roley et al 2014, Hall et al 2016) and advances in inverse modeling approaches capable of providing robust estimates of GPP and ER from DO time-series data (Holtgrieve et al 2010, Grace et al 2015, Appling et al 2018a). Due to these improvements, there has been an increase in research interest and capabilities focused on stream metabolism (Appling et al 2018b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Seeing the light: urban stream restoration affects stream metabolism and nitrate uptake via changes in canopy cover

Reisinger

Doody

Groffman

et al. 2019

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The continually increasing global population residing in urban landscapes impacts numerous ecosystem functions and services provided by urban streams. Urban stream restoration is often employed to offset these impacts and conserve or enhance the various functions and services these streams provide. Despite the assumption that “if you build it, [the function] will come,” current understanding of the effects of urban stream restoration on stream ecosystem functions are based on short term studies that may not capture variation in restoration effectiveness over time. We quantified the impact of stream restoration on nutrient and energy dynamics of urban streams by studying 10 urban stream reaches (five restored, five unrestored) in the Baltimore, Maryland, USA, region over a two‐year period. We measured gross primary production (GPP) and ecosystem respiration (ER) at the whole‐stream scale continuously throughout the study and nitrate (NO3−‐N) spiraling rates seasonally (spring, summer, autumn) across all reaches. There was no significant restoration effect on NO3−‐N spiraling across reaches. However, there was a significant canopy cover effect on NO3−‐N spiraling, and directly comparing paired sets of unrestored‐restored reaches showed that restoration does affect NO3−‐N spiraling after accounting for other environmental variation. Furthermore, there was a change in GPP : ER seasonality, with restored and open‐canopied reaches exhibiting higher GPP : ER during summer. The restoration effect, though, appears contingent upon altered canopy cover, which is likely to be a temporary effect of restoration and is a driver of multiple ecosystem services, e.g., habitat, riparian nutrient processing. Our results suggest that decision‐making about stream restoration, including evaluations of nutrient benefits, clearly needs to consider spatial and temporal dynamics of canopy cover and trade‐offs among multiple ecosystem services.

show abstract

“…Due to these improvements, there has been an increase in research interest and capabilities focused on stream metabolism (Appling et al. ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing the light: urban stream restoration affects stream metabolism and nitrate uptake via changes in canopy cover

Reisinger

Doody

Groffman

et al. 2019

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When short-term (i.e., from days to weeks and months) observations of DO are available, open-water methods still represent a most suitable tool to estimate ecosystem metabolism. However, recent developments in sensor technology have greatly increased the availability of long-term, highresolution stream monitoring (Appling et al 2018b;Bernhardt et al 2018). In this scenario, we propose the framework developed herein as a complementary tool to trace a broader picture of the set of ecosystem processes driving seasonal variations of stream metabolism.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling the coupled dynamics of stream metabolism and microbial biomass

Segatto¹,

Battin²,

Bertuzzo

2020

Limnology & Oceanography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estimating and interpreting ecosystem metabolism remains an important challenge in stream ecology. Here, we propose a novel approach to model, estimate, and predict multiseasonal patterns of stream metabolism (gross primary production [GPP] and ecosystem respiration [ER]) at the reach scale leveraging on increasingly available long-term, high-frequency measurements of dissolved oxygen (DO). The model uses DO measurements to estimate the parameters of a simple ecosystem model describing the underlying dynamics of stream autotrophic and heterotrophic microbial biomass. The model has been applied to four reaches within the Ybbs river network, Austria. Even if microbial biomasses are not observed, that is, they are treated as latent variables, results show that by accounting for the temporal dynamics of biomass, the model reproduces variability in metabolic fluxes that is not explained by fluctuations of light, temperature, and resources. The model is particularly data-demanding: to estimate the 11 parameters used in this formulation, it requires sufficiently long, for example, annual, time series, and significant scouring events. On the other hand, the approach has the potential to separate ER into its autotrophic and heterotrophic components, estimate a richer set of ecosystem carbon fluxes (i.e., carbon uptake, loss, and scouring), extrapolate metabolism estimates for periods when DO measurements are unavailable, and predict how ecosystem metabolism would respond to variations of the driving forces. The model is seen as a building block to develop tools to fully appreciate multiseasonal patterns of metabolic activity in river networks and to provide reliable estimations of carbon fluxes from land to ocean.

show abstract

“…Estimation of metabolism improved greatly when coupled with tracer estimates of gas exchange for the same stream reach (Marzolf et al, 1994), leading to comparative studies of stream metabolism (Mulholland et al, 2001). A recent improvement was the ability to estimate K via oxygen models (Holtgrieve et al, 2010), allowing comparisons of~500, 000 stream days of metabolism (Appling, Read, et al, 2018). This history drove terminology for gas exchange in rivers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gas exchange in streams and rivers

Hall

Ulseth

2019

WIREs Water

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gas exchange across the air–water boundary of streams and rivers is a globally large biogeochemical flux. Gas exchange depends on the solubility of the gas of interest, the gas concentrations of the air and water, and the gas exchange velocity (k), usually normalized to a Schmidt number of 600, referred to as k600. Gas exchange velocity is of intense research interest because it is problematic to estimate, is highly spatially variable, and has high prediction error. Theory dictates that molecular diffusivity and turbulence drives variation in k600 in flowing waters. We measure k600 via several methods from direct measures, gas tracer experiments, to modeling of diel changes in dissolved gas concentrations. Many estimates of k600 show that surface turbulence explains variation in k600 leading to predictive models based upon geomorphic and hydraulic variables. These variables include stream channel slope and stream flow velocity, the product of which, is proportional to the energy dissipation rate in streams and rivers. These empirical models provide understanding of the controls on k600, yet high residual variation in k600 show that these simple models are insufficient for predicting individual locations. The most appropriate method to estimate gas exchange depends on the scientific question along with the characteristics of the study sites. We provide a decision tree for selecting the best method to estimate k600 for individual river reaches to scaling to river networks. This article is categorized under: Water and Life > Nature of Freshwater Ecosystems Science of Water > Water Quality Water and Life > Methods

show abstract

The metabolic regimes of 356 rivers in the United States

Cited by 85 publications

References 47 publications

Seeing the light: urban stream restoration affects stream metabolism and nitrate uptake via changes in canopy cover

Seeing the light: urban stream restoration affects stream metabolism and nitrate uptake via changes in canopy cover

Modeling the coupled dynamics of stream metabolism and microbial biomass

Gas exchange in streams and rivers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About