Heterogeneous characteristics of streambed saturated hydraulic conductivity of the Touchet River, south eastern Washington, USA

Hydrological Processes

Volumn 23, Issue 8, 2009, Pages 1236-1246

  Leek, Randal ^a,b   Wu, Joan Q ^a   Wang, Li ^a   Hanrahan, Timonthy P ^c   Barber, Michael E ^d   Qiu, Hanxue ^a  

^a WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Otak Inc   (United States)

^c PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^d Washington State University   (United States)

Author keywords

Hyporheic zone; Saturated hydraulic conductivity; Slug test; Streambed heterogeneity

Indexed keywords

CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTIONS; FIELD INVESTIGATIONS; HETEROGENEOUS CHARACTERISTICS; HORIZONTAL COORDINATES; HYDRAULIC GRADIENTS; HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES; HYPORHEIC ZONE; NON-PARAMETRIC STATISTICAL TESTS; NUTRIENT CYCLING; ORGANIC MATTER DECOMPOSITIONS; RICE METHODS; SAMPLING GRIDS; SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY; SLUG TEST; SPATIAL HETEROGENEITIES; SPATIAL PATTERNS; SPATIAL VARIATIONS; STREAMBED HETEROGENEITY; THREE ORDERS OF MAGNITUDES; WASHINGTON , USA; WATER EXCHANGES; WATER FLOWS; WATER INTERACTIONS; WATER STUDIES;

BIOGEOCHEMISTRY; HOLOGRAPHIC GRATINGS; HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY; ORGANIC COMPOUNDS; RIVERS; STREAM FLOW; WATER LEVELS;

STATISTICAL TESTS;

EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; GROUNDWATER-SURFACE WATER INTERACTION; HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY; HYPORHEIC ZONE; SALMONID; SLUG TEST; SPATIAL VARIATION; SPAWNING; STREAM BED; WATER DEPTH; WATER EXCHANGE; WATER FLOW; WATER LEVEL;

NORTH AMERICA; TOUCHET RIVER; UNITED STATES; WASHINGTON [UNITED STATES];

EID: 64049102728     PISSN: 08856087     EISSN: 10991085     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hyp.7258     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Alexander GR, Hansen EA. 1986. Sand bed load in a brook trout stream. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 6: 58-62.
2. Anderson JK, Wondzell SM, Gooseff MN, Haggerty R. 2005. Patterns in stream longitudinal profiles and implications for hyporheic exchange flow at the H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest, Oregon, USA. Hydrological Processes 19: 2931-2949.
3. Barker RA, MacNish RD. 1976. Digital model of the gravel aquifer, Walla Walla Basin, Washington and Oregon. Water Supply Bulletin No. 45, Washington State Department of Ecology: Olympia, WA.
4. Bencala KE. 1993. A perspective on stream-catchment connections. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 12: 44-47.
5. Bencala KE. 2000. Hyporheic hydrological processes. Hydrological Processes 14: 2797-2798.
6. Bobba AG, Krishnappan BG, Chambers PA. 2007. The hyporheic zone: understanding the paradigm. Proceedings Water Resources Management, Wilson J (ed). Honolulu, HI.
7. Boulton AJ, Findlay S, Marmonier P, Stanley EH, Valett HM. 1998. The functional significance of the hyporheic zone in streams and rivers. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 29: 59-81.
8. Bouwer H. 1989. The Bouwer and Rice slug test - an update. Ground Water 27: 304-309.
9. Bouwer H, Rice RC. 1976. A slug test for determining hydraulic conductivity of unconfined aquifers with completely or partially penetrating wells. Water Resources Research 12: 423-428.
10. Burger RL, Belitz K. 1997. Measurement of anisotropic hydraulic conductivity in unconsolidated sands: A case study from shoreface deposit, Oyster, Virginia. Water Resources Research 33: 1515-1522.
11. Butler JJ Jr. 1997. The Design, Performance, and Analysis of Slug Tests. CRC Press LLC: Boca Ratan, FL.
12. Butler JJ Jr. 2002. A simple correction for slug tests in small-diameter wells. Ground Water 40: 303-307.
13. Caldwell B, Beecher H, Shedd J. 2002. Walla Walla River fish habitat analysis using the in-stream flow incremental methodology. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication No. 02-11-009.
14. Calver A. 2001. Riverbed permeabilities: information from pooled data. Ground Water 39: 546-553.
15. Cardenas BM, Zlotnik VA. 2003. Three-dimensional model of modern channel bend deposits. Water Resources Research 39: 1141. DOI: 10D1029/2002WR001383.
16. Cardenas BM, Wilson JL, Zlotnik VA. 2004. Impact of heterogeneity, bed form, and stream curvature on subchannel hyporheic exchange. Water Resources Research 40: DOI: 10D1029/2004WR003008.
17. CBFWA (Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority). 2003. http://www.cbfwa.org/ [accessed 15 January, 2005].
18. Chapman DW. 1988. Critical review of variables used to define effects of fines in redds of large salmonids. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 117: 1-21.
19. Chapman DW, McLeod KP. 1987. Development of criteria for fine sediment in the Northern Rockies Ecoregion. EPA 910/9-87-162. USEPA Region X, Seattle, WA.
20. Conant B Jr., Cherry JA, Gillham RW. 2004. A PCE plume discharging to a river: influence of the streambed and near-river zone on contaminant distributions. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 73: 249-279.
21. Cooper AC. 1965. The effect of transported stream sediments on survival of sockeye and pink salmon eggs and alevins. International Pacific Salmon Commission Bulletin 18, New Westminster: British Columbia, Canada.
22. Dahm CN, Grimm NB, Marmonier P, Valett HM, Vervier P. 1998. Nutrient dynamics at the interface between surface water and ground waters. Freshwater Biology 40: 427-451.
23. DeBisschop K. 2004. Spreadsheet Evaluation of Slug Tests. http://hydrotools.sourceforge.net/ [accessed 1 June 2005].
24. Elliott A, Brooks NH. 1997. Transfer of nonsorbing solutes to a streambed with bed forms: theory. Water Resources Research 33: 123-136.
25. Hanrahan TP, Dauble DD, Geist DR. 2004. An estimate of chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) spawning habitat and redd capacity upstream of a migration barrier in the upper Columbia River. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 61: 23-33.
26. Hanrahan TP, Geist DR, Arntzen EV. 2005. Habitat quality of historic Snake River fall chinook salmon spawning locations and implications for incubation survival. Part 1: Substrate quality. River Research and Applications 21: 455-467.
27. Hyder Z, Butler JJ Jr. 1995. Slug tests in unconfined formations: an assessment of the Bouwer and Rice technique. Ground Water 33: 16-22.
28. Instrumentation Northwest, Inc. 2002. PS-9805 Submersible Pressure/ Temp. Transducer Instruction Manual. Doc #9B0004r4 04/2002. P/N 3A342. Kirkland, WA.
29. Kuttel M Jr. 2001. Salmon and steelhead habitat limiting factors: Water Resource Inventory Area 32 Walla Walla Watershed. Washington State Conservation Commission: Lacey, WA.
30. Malcolm IA, Soulsby C, Youngson AF. 2002. Thermal regime in the hyporheic zone of two contrasting salmonid spawning streams: ecological and hydrological implications. Fisheries Management and Ecology 9: 1-10.
31. Malcolm IA, Soulsby C, Youngson AF, Hannah DM, McLaren IS, Thorne A. 2004. Hydrological influences on hyporheic water quality: implications for salmon egg survival. Hydrological Processes 18: 1543-1560.
32. Malcolm IA, Soulsby C, Youngson AF. 2006. High-frequency logging technologies reveal state-dependant hyporheic process dynamics: implications for hydroecological studies. Hydrological Processes 20: 615-622.
33. Marti P. 2005. Assessment of Surface Water and Groundwater Interchange in the Walla Walla River Watershed. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication No. 05-03-020.
34. McElwee CD, Zemansky GM. 1999. Improved definition of hydraulic conductivity structure using multilevel nonlinear slug tests. Kansas Geological Survey Open-File Report 1999-57.
35. Packman AI, Salehin M. 2003. Relative roles of stream flow and sedimentary conditions in controlling hyporheic exchange. Hydrobiologia 494: 291-297.
36. Packman AI, Salehin M, Zaramella M. 2004. Hyporheic exchange with gravel beds: basic hydrodynamic interactions and bedform-induced advective flows. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering - ASCE 130: 647-656.
37. SAS. 2004. SAS/STAT 9D1 User's Guide. SAS Institute Inc.: Cary, NC, USA.
38. Sophocleous M. 2002. Interactions between groundwater and surface water: the state of the science. Hydrogeology Journal 10: 52-67.
39. Stanford JA, Ward JV. 1988. The hyporheic habitat of river ecosystems. Nature 335: 64-66.
40. Stanford JA, Ward JV. 1993. An ecosystem perspective of alluvial rivers: connectivity and the hyporheic corridor. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 12: 48-60.
41. Surridge BWJ, Baird AJ, Heathwaite AL. 2005. Evaluating the quality of hydraulic conductivity estimates from piezometer slug tests in peat. Hydrological Processes 19: 1227-1244.
42. Tonina D, Buffington JM. 2007. Hyporheic exchange in gravel bed rivers with pool-riffle morphology: Laboratory experiments and three-dimensional modeling. Water Resources Research 43: W01421. DOI:10D1029/2005WR004328.
43. Vaux WG. 1968. Intragravel flow and interchange of water in a streambed. USDI, US Fish and Wildlife Service. Fishery Bulletin 66: 479-489.
44. White DS. 1993. Perspectives on defining and delineating hyporheic zones. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 12: 61-69.
45. Wolman MG. 1954. A method of sampling course river-bed material. Transaction of the American Geophysical Union 35: 951-956.
46. WSDOE (Washington State Department of Ecology). 2008. Flow Monitoring Network. Washington State Department of Ecology. (WSDOE Touchet R. County Line Gage Station 32B110). https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/wrx/wrx/ flows/station.asp?sta=32B110. [accessed 25 January, 2008].
47. Wu FC. 2000. Modeling embryo survival affected by sediment deposition into salmonid spawning gravels: application to flushing flow prescriptions. Water Resources Research 36: 1595-1603.
48. Yang SY, Yeh HD. 2004. A simple approach using Bouwer and Rice's method for slug test data analysis. Ground Water 42: 781-784.
49. Zemansky GM, McElwee CD. 2005. High-resolution slug testing. Ground Water 43: 222-230.
50. Zimmermann A, LaPointe M. 2005. Sediment infiltration traps: their use to monitor salmonid spawning habitat in headwater tributaries of the Cascapédia River, Québec. Hydrological Processes 19: 4161-4177.