impact of sampling frequency on annual load estimation amber spackman jones utah water research lab...
Post on 19-Dec-2015
218 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Impact of Sampling Frequency on Annual
Load Estimation
Amber Spackman JonesUtah Water Research Lab
Nancy MesnerWatershed Science
Jeff HorsburghUtah Water Research Lab
Ron RyelWildland Resources
David StevensUtah Water Research Lab
• Environmental processes can have fine scale.
• Low frequency samples are unrepresentative.
• Omits important events.• Requires complex load calculations.
Limitations of “Traditional” Sampling
High Frequency Monitoring
Advantages: • overall cost
reduction• minimization of
human error• improved
turnaround time• additional sites• extended time
periods
Are loads calculated from high frequency monitoring superior to those from intermittent sampling?
Study Area: Little Bear River
• Paradise: less impacted by human activity.
• Mendon: influenced by reservoir releases, agricultural return flows, wastewater treatment plant, and greater agricultural activity.
#S
Utah
Montana
California
Arizona
Idaho
Nevada
Oregon
Colorado
Wyoming
New Mexico
Washington
Study Area: Sampling Sites
Paradise• Higher peaks, flashier flow
regime• Coarse sediments• Phosphorus content:
60% particulate 40% dissolved
Mendon• Higher baseflow• Fine, lacustrine
sediments• Phosphorus content:
40% particulate 60% dissolved
Study Area: Sampling Sites
Paradise
Mendon
Methods
• Surrogate relationships with turbidity used to generate high frequency estimates of TP and TSS concentration.
• Concentration paired with discharge to estimate annual loads- reference loads.
Methods
• Half hourly concentration and discharge were subsampled to represent various sampling frequencies:
-Hourly-Daily randomized-Weekly randomized-Monthly randomized-Daily by hour-Weekly by day
• Annual loads were compared to the reference loads.
Results
Paradise (upper) Mendon (lower)
Results
Results: Hour of Day
Results: Hour of Day
Results: Day of Week
Conclusions
• Using high frequency data to calculate loads provides increased resolution and accuracy.
• Bias from the reference loads varied between sites.
• Daily sampling may approximate reference loads, but is usually infeasible.
• Weekly and monthly sampling were inadequate.
• The hour of the day and the day of the week of sampling can impact load estimation.
Why We Care• Water quality monitoring -higher resolution data -improved concentration and load estimation (regulations) -compare between sites or time periods -additional settings (WWTP, beaches, etc)• Water quality models -better ability to estimate and calibrate parameters -testing underlying assumptions of models• Environmental observatories -logistically and economically feasible -extended time periods -at many locations
Acknowledgments
• Field and Lab SupportSandra GuerreroEmily SaadEric PetersonMichael StevensSu AndersonUSU Aquatic Biogeochemistry LabUSU Analytical Lab• Landowners on the Little
Bear River• National Science Foundation
(CBET 0610075)• US Department of
Agriculture (UTAW-2004-05671)
Questions?
top related