DOCSLIB.ORG

Energy Flow in a Floodplain Aquifer Ecosystem

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Energy Flow in a Floodplain Aquifer Ecosystem University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 2007 Energy Flow in a Floodplain Aquifer Ecosystem Brian Reid The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Reid, Brian, "Energy Flow in a Floodplain Aquifer Ecosystem" (2007). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 372. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/372 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ENERGY FLOW IN A FLOODPLAIN AQUIFER ECOSYSTEM By Brian LeGare Reid BS, Cornell University, 1990 Dissertation presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Biology The University of Montana Missoula, MT May 2007 Approved by: Dr. David A. Strobel, Dean Graduate School Dr. F. Richard Hauer, Chair Flathead Lake Biological Station Division of Biological Sciences Dr. Ray Callaway Division of Biological Sciences Dr. James Gannon Division of Biological Sciences Dr. Mark Lorang Flathead Lake Biological Station Division of Biological Sciences Dr. Jack Stanford Flathead Lake Biological Station Division of Biological Sciences Dr. William Woessner Geology Department © COPYRIGHT by Brian LeGare Reid 2007 All Rights Reserved ii Reid, Brian, PhD, May 2007 Biology Energy Flow in a Floodplain Groundwater Ecosystem Chairperson: Dr. F. Richard Hauer ABSTRACT We developed an energy budget to identify energy sources for the invertebrate community of a large 20 km2 floodplain aquifer, based on biomass distributions, organismal respirometry, in situ community respiration, mesocosm and microcosm experiments, stable isotopes and invertebrate gut contents. The invertebrate respiration scaling exponent was 0.474 (+/- 0.068, 95% CI) across six orders in body mass, which is significantly lower than the ¾ power scaling predicted by metabolic theory. Invertebrate production was dominated by copepods (Diacyclops, Acanthocyclops, Bryocamptus), Stygobromus amphipods, and amphibiont stoneflies, and ranged from 26.9 to 4200 mg C/m3 sediment/year. Production and density showed a U-shaped response to dissolved oxygen (high production at both low and high oxygen concentrations). Production declined exponentially with depth for most sites, but at sites with orthograde oxygen profiles there was an exponential increase at the oxycline. Aerobic microbial community production ranged from 1210 to 2020 mg C/m3 sediment/year, also showing a U-shaped response to oxygen. System respiratory quotient (RQ) ranged from ≈ 0 to 9.5, indicating a significant contribution of anaerobic production to system energy flow. We documented multiple lines of evidence for DOC (soil, river) and buried POM carbon sources, however POM was by far the largest carbon reservoir in the aquifer at ≈ 108 (to 1010) mg C/ m3 sediment. Energy from POM breakdown was the only source sufficient to explain microbial and invertebrate production. Carbon stable isotope signatures showed strong levels of depletion for invertebrates (δ13C -25‰ to -70‰). These results suggest a significant anaerobic subsidy of aerobic food webs in the subsurface, and a potential methane subsidy of 10% to 99% of invertebrate energy flow. Oxygen showed high, non- random, spatial and temporal variation across the aquifer, with a large scale decline in oxygen along the axis of the floodplain, and distinct hotspots of low oxygen. Low oxygen hotspots corresponded with migration of stonefly nymphs 100’s of meters into the aquifer. The U-shaped responses and biogeochemical trends suggest a major threshold at bulk oxygen concentrations of 3-5 mg/l. Collectively, these findings indicate the role of dissolved oxygen as a key variable in groundwater ecosystems. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Jack Stanford for providing the opportunity to work on one of the most interesting and least explored ecosystems in the world. I thank my advisor Dr. F. Richard Hauer, and my committee, Drs. Ray Callaway, Mark Lorang, Matthias Rillig, Jack Stanford and William Woessner. Dr. James Gannon offered abundant advice, and thanks also to Dr. William Holben and Dr. Emily Bernhardt. Dr. Charlie Hall provided a simple insight that set everything in motion. I would particularly like to thank the Dalimata family, especially John, Ruth, Chris and Steve, for pulling my truck out of the mud, ideas, friendship, the most amazing field site in the world, the new amphipod Stygobromus presleyii, the smartest dog I’ve ever had, and pulling my truck out of the mud again. Every graduate student would benefit from having a farmer on their committee. Access to field sites was also provided by the Wheeler and Pouliat families. Vincent and Neil Dalimata (who coined the term “hyperactive weaselcosm”), helped with some of the most abusive field work I could come up with, all for a few lousy sandwiches. Curtis and Dave from Rocky Boys (supported by project TRAIN) made possible the well oxygen sampling that ended up tying the whole story together. Jason and Mark from Salish Kootenai College helped drive wells and dig several enormous holes that kept filling back in, which is a great metaphor too. Big thanks to fellow field slave, lab mate, statistics coach and best friend Michelle Anderson. Scott Relyea: we should have died in that canoe. Kristin Olsen: beware the sound of breaking glassware. Mark Potter and Eric Anderson for all the help in the shop. All the staff at FLBS. Sherrie at DBS for supporting the “sleeping bags for science” campaign. And the list of people who helped in the field: Sandra Adams, Jake Chaffin, Cain Diehl, Nathan Gordon, Adam Johnson, Mike Machura, Bonnie McGill, Phil Mattson, Mike Morris, Chris Platt, Phillip Ramsey, Jessica Schultz, Audrey Thompson. Thanks, List! Thanks in advance to taxonomic gurus Euyalem Abebe (nematodes), Bob Newell (insects), Janet Reid (copepods), Rhithron Associates (chironomids) and Howard Taylor (rotifers). And finally to my friend Jessica Schultz and my grandmother Sunny, who encouraged me to hang in there. And my dad Walter Reid, the engineering brains. This project was supported in part by a two-year fellowship from the Inland Northwest Research Alliance (INRA) Subsurface Science Research Initiative (SSRI). Additional research support was from NSF Biocomplexity in the Environment grant # 0120523, and material support by an NSF Dissertation Improvement Grant and INRA. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ……………………………………………………………………………...….iii Acknowledgments ……………………………………………………………………....iv Table of Contents …………………………………………………....…………………..v List of Figures ……………………………………………………………..…………….ix List of Tables ………………………………………………………..………………….xii Introduction…………………………………………..…………………………………..1 Chapter 1: Oxygen Dynamics and Community Respiration in a Montane Floodplain Aquifer Abstract …………………………………………………………………….…………7 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………8 Methods Study site …………………………………………………………….…………..12 Well Grid Installation and Design……………………………………………….13 Well and Surface Water Sampling……………………………………………….15 Oxygen Contouring ……………………………………………………………...16 Flowpath Oxygen and Community Respiration…………………………………17 Community Respiration………………………………………………..………...17 Respiration Model………………………………………………………………..21 Results Seasonal and Spatial Patterns in Dissolved Oxygen……………………………..22 Flowpath Oxygen and Cumulative Respiration Patterns………………………...24 Mesocosm Community Respiration……………………………………………...30 Respiration Model ……………………………………………………………….35 Discussion Sources of Energy: Rivers, Soils, or Buried Organic Matter?…………………...36 Limitations, Assumptions and Future Directions………………………………..41 Ecosystem Resistance?..........................................................................................46 Flowpaths to Progress? ………………………………………………………….47 Conclusions…………………………………………………………………………..47 References……………………………………………………………………………49 Chapter 2: Distribution and Isotopic Composition of Buried Organic Matter in Sediments of a Floodplain Aquifer Abstract………………………………………………………………………………54 Introduction ………………………………………………………………….………55 Methods Sediment Collection……………………………………………………………...58 Particulate (Detrital) Organic Matter Processing………………………………...58 Strongly Associated Particulate Organic Matter Processing.……………………60 v Results and Discussion SAPOM: Sonication Trials and Mass Balance of Carbon Fractions.……………62 POM: Distribution and Relationship to SAPOM………………………………..66 Stable Isotopes of POM and SAPOM ……………………………...……………69 Variation in Organic Matter Properties with Depth…………………...…………71 Contribution to Aquifer Organic Matter Budget ……………………….……….72 Organic Matter in Aquifer Food Webs…………………………………………..74 References…………………………………………………………….……………...75 Chapter 3: Large Scale Invertebrate Dynamics in Response to Oxygen Gradients in a Floodplain Aquifer Abstract ………………………………………………………………………….…..79 Introduction …………………………………………………………………….........80 Methods Study Site ………………………………………………………………………..84 Well Grid Design and Installation…………………………………………….....85 Well and Surface Water Sampling ………………………………………………87 Sampling Efficiency……………………………………………………………..89 Invertebrate Sample Processing……………………………………………….....90
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Infiltration Trench
    APPENDIX F Alternative Stormwater Treatment Control Measure Fact Sheets Appendix F – Alternative Stormwater Treatment Control Measure Fact Sheets Table of Contents LID-1: Infiltration Basin ................................................................................................. F-1 LID-2: Infiltration Trench ............................................................................................. F-10 LID-3: Dry Well ........................................................................................................... F-18 T-1: Stormwater Planter ............................................................................................. F-26 T-2: Tree-Well Filter ................................................................................................... F-36 T-3: Sand Filter .......................................................................................................... F-45 T-4: Vegetated Swales ............................................................................................... F-55 T-5: Proprietary Stormwater Treatment Control Measures ......................................... F-67 HM-1: Extended Detention Basin ............................................................................... F-72 HM-2: Wet Pond ........................................................................................................ F-86 June 2015 F-i LID-1: Infiltration Basin Description An infiltration basin is a shallow earthen basin constructed in naturally permeable soil designed for retaining and
    [Show full text]
  • IN EUROPE with Special Reference to Underground Resources
    Bull. Org. mond. Sante' 1957, 16, 707-725 Bull. Wld Hlth Org. SANITARY ENGINEERING AND WATER ECONOMY IN EUROPE With Special Reference to Underground Resources W. F. J. M. KRUL Professor, Technische Hogeschool, Delft; Director, Rijksinstituut voor Drinkwatervoorziening, The Hague, Netherlands SYNOPSIS The author deals with a wide variety of aspects of water economy and the development of water resources, relating them to the sanitary engineering problems they give rise to. Among those aspects are the balance between available resources and water needs for various purposes; accumulation and storage of surface and ground water, and methods of replenishing ground water supplies; pollution and purification; and organizational measures to deal with the urgent problems raised by the heavy demands on the world's water supply as a result of both increased population and the increased need for agricultural and industrial development. The author considers that at the national level over-all plans for developing the water economy of countries might well be drawn up by national water boards and that the economy of inter-State river basins should receive international study. In such work the United Nations and its specialized agencies might be of assistance. The Fourth European Seminar for Sanitary Engineers, held at Opatija, Yugoslavia, in 1954, dealt with surface water pollution, as seen from the angle of public health. It was pointed out that, especially in heavily indus- trialized countries, there is a great task to be fulfilled by sanitary engineers in the purification of waste waters of different kinds, in the sanitation of streams and in the adaptation of more or less polluted surface water to the needs of different kinds of consumers.
    [Show full text]
  • 3.1 Infiltration Basin
    3.1 INFILTRATION BASIN Type of BMP LID ‐ Infiltration Treatment Mechanisms Infiltration, Evapotranspiration (when vegetated), Evaporation, and Sedimentation Maximum Treatment Area 50 acres Other Names Bioinfiltration Basin Description An Infiltration Basin is a flat earthen basin designed to capture the design capture volume, VBMP. The stormwater infiltrates through the bottom of the basin into the underlying soil over a 72 hour drawdown period. Flows exceeding VBMP must discharge to a downstream conveyance system. Trash and sediment accumulate within the forebay as stormwater passes into the basin. Infiltration basins are highly effective in removing all targeted Figure 1 – Infiltration Basin pollutants from stormwater runoff. See Appendix A, and Appendix C, Section 1 of Basin Guidelines, for additional requirements. Siting Considerations The use of infiltration basins may be restricted by concerns over ground water contamination, soil permeability, and clogging at the site. See the applicable WQMP for any specific feasibility considerations for using infiltration BMPs. Where this BMP is being used, the soil beneath the basin must be thoroughly evaluated in a geotechnical report since the underlying soils are critical to the basin’s long term performance. To protect the basin from erosion, the sides and bottom of the basin must be vegetated, preferably with native or low water use plant species. In addition, these basins may not be appropriate for the following site conditions: Industrial sites or locations where spills of toxic materials may occur Sites with very low soil infiltration rates Sites with high groundwater tables or excessively high soil infiltration rates, where pollutants can affect ground water quality Sites with unstabilized soil or construction activity upstream On steeply sloping terrain Infiltration basins located in a fill condition should refer to Appendix A of this Handbook for details on special requirements/restrictions Riverside County - Low Impact Development BMP Design Handbook rev.
    [Show full text]
  • Examples of Stormwater Control Devices
    Stormwater Control Devices Filtration Basin A SHALLOW BASIN WITH ENGINEERED OR AMENDED SOIL AND AN UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM Filtration basins function by detaining stormwater in the basin. As stormwater infiltrates through the amended soil, sand, or engineered media, pollutants are filtered and adsorbed onto soil particles. Treated stormwater is directed to the receiving stream via the underdrain system. Filtration basins may be shaped like ponds or channels. To improve pollutant removal, the basin may be covered with grass, wetland species, or landscaped vegetation (see Bioretention Basin). Sand filters are considered filtration basins. Filtration basins may have outlet control structures and emergency spillways. However, all filtration basins have underdrain systems. Bioretention Basin A TYPE OF FILTRATION BASIN WITH ENGINEERED MEDIA , AN UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM , AND LANDSCAPED VEGETATION Bioretention basins use a landscaped mix of water- tolerant plants to improve pollutant removal. The vegetation is selected for its ability to physically filter and uptake stormwater pollutants. As with all filtration basins, stormwater is infiltrated through amended soil or an engineered media before it enters the underdrain system. Selected vegetation simulates various ecosystems such as forests, meadows, and hedgerows Bioretention basins are suited to drainage areas less than 1 acre. Bioretention basins may include outlet control structures and emergency spillways, but they will always have underdrain systems. Dry Detention Basin A SHALLOW , DRY BASIN WITH AN OUTLET PIPE OR ORIFICE AT THE INVERT OF THE BASIN Dry detention basins attenuate peak discharges and temporarily detain runoff to promote sedimentation of solids and infiltration. Runoff is slowly released from an outlet control structure at a steady flow rate to increase detention time.
    [Show full text]
  • Storm Water Permitting Requirements for Construction Activities
    Storm Water Permitting Requirements for Construction Activities John Mathews Storm Water Program Manager Division of Surface Water Why Permit Storm Water? Impacts During Construction • Not an issue until we add rainfall… Impacts During Construction Impacts During Construction • Large amounts of sediment are transported downstream and embed streams. Impacts During Construction • A healthy versus an embedded stream bottom. Post-Construction Impacts • Efficient runoff and pollution delivery Post-Construction Impacts • Stream Erosion (erosion and downcutting) Post-Construction Impacts • Stream Erosion (erosion and downcutting) History of the Construction General Permit (CGP) Increased Sediment Storage; Required Basic Erosion and Skimmers on Sediment Control, Sediment Basins; Very General Post- Allowed Offsite Major Update of Post- Construction, ≥5 Mitigation of Post- Construction acres of disturbance Construction Requirements 1992 2003 2008 2013 2018 ≥ 1 acre; Added Minor Changes Specific Post- construction, Large ≥ 5 and Small (1-5 ac) Sites Authorizes Storm Water Discharge From • Construction activities - clearing, grading, excavating, grubbing and/or filling – that disturb ≥ 1 acres – or will disturb < 1 acre of land but are part of a larger common plan of development or sale that will ultimately disturb ≥ 1 acres • Associated support activities (on-site or contiguous batch plants, borrow pits, & material storage areas) A Statewide Permit • But two watersheds have special conditions (the Big Darby and portions of the Olentangy) • Submittal
    [Show full text]
  • Doryphoribius Quadrituberculatus (Tardigrada: Hypsibiidae)
    Genus Vol. 15 (3): 447-453 Wroc³aw, 10 X 2004 First record of the genus Doryphoribius PILATO, 1969 from Costa Rica (Central America) and description of a new species Doryphoribius quadrituberculatus (Tardigrada: Hypsibiidae) £UKASZ KACZMAREK1 and £UKASZ MICHALCZYK 2* 1 Department of Animal Taxonomy & Ecology, Institute of Environmental Biology, A. Mickiewicz University, Szamarzewskiego 91 a, 60-569 Poznañ, Poland; e-mail:[email protected] 2 Institute of Environmental Sciences, Jagiellonian University, Gronostajowa 7, 30-387 Kraków, Poland; e-mail: [email protected] *Present address: Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Conservation, School of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK ABSTRACT. A new eutardigrade, Doryphoribius quadrituberculatus is described from a moss sample collected in Costa Rica. The new species is similar to D. flavus (IHAROS, 1966) and D. maranguensis BINDA & PILATO, 1995 but differs from the former by the presence of 4 gibbosities on caudal end of the body and the presence of oral cavity armature, and from the latter by a more complicated oral cavity armature, and the presence of a distinct reticular design on dorsal and lateral sides of the body instead of irregular tubercles Key words: taxonomy, Tardigrada, Doryphoribius, new species, Costa Rica, Central America INTRODUCTION The genus Doryphoribius PILATO, 1969 encloses 18 species known from whole world. Characteristics for this genus are: 1) the presence of Isohypsibius type claws, 2) Doryphoribius type buccal apparatus and 3) lack of microplacoids or septulum in pharynx. In this paper a new species, Doryphoribius quadri- tuberculatus n. sp., from Costa Rica is described and figured.
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Management Dry Wells and Infiltration Basins
    WENTWORTH WATERSHED RESTORATION AND PROTECTION STRATEGIES 1 Stormwater Management Dry Wells and Infiltration Basins DRY WELL A dry well is essentially small subsurface leaching basins. It consists of a small pit filled with stone, or a small structure surrounded by stone, used to temporarily store and infiltrate runoff from a very limited contributing area. Dry wells are well-suited to receive roof runoff via building gutter and downspout systems. Runoff enters the structure through an inflow pipe, inlet grate, or through surface infiltration. The runoff is stored in the structure and/or void spaces in the stone fill. Properly sited and designed dry wells provide treatment of runoff as pollutants become bound to the soils under and adjacent to the well, as the water percolates into the ground. The infiltrated stormwater contributes to recharge of the groundwater table. A commercially manufactured drywell being installed to capture water from roof downspout. Stormwater Runoff Dry Wells and Infiltration Basins (continued) 2 INFILTRATION BASINS Infiltration basins are structures designed to temporarily store runoff, allowing all or a portion of the water to infiltrate into the ground. The structure is designed to completely drain between storm events. In a properly sited and designed infiltration basin, water quality treatment is provided by runoff pollutants binding to soil particles beneath the basin as water percolates into the subsurface. Biological and chemical processes occurring in the soil also contribute to the breakdown of pollutants. Infiltrated water is recharged to the underlying groundwater. Subsurface infiltration basins may comprise a subsurface manifold system with associated crushed stone storage bed, or specially-designed chambers (with or without perforations) bedded in or above crushed stone.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6 - Infiltration Bmps
    Chapter 6 - Infiltration BMPs Infiltration measures control stormwater quantity and quality by retaining runoff on-site and discharging it into the ground through absorption, straining, microbial decomposition and trapping of particulate matter. Infiltration systems should not be used if the intercepted runoff is anticipated to contain pollutants that can affect groundwater quality, such as hydrocarbons, nitrate, and chloride. When the subsoils are appropriate, an infiltration basin can be suitable for treating and controlling the runoff from very small to very large drainage areas. However, some commercial or industrial sites may have contaminants that may not be treatable by soil filtration and should be avoided. Figure 6-1 shows a typical infiltration basin. IMPORTANT: This chapter describes three common Infiltration BMPs: infiltration basins, dry wells, and infiltration trenches. In addition to these infiltration techniques, there are several Low Impact Design (LID) techniques that rely on infiltration in small systems dispersed throughout a site, rather than an end- of-pipe technique such as the infiltration basin. Sizing: Infiltration systems must be designed to retain a runoff volume equal to 1.0 inch times the subcatchment's impervious area plus 0.4 inch times the subcatchment's landscaped developed area and infiltrate this volume into the ground. The infiltration system must drain completely within 24 to 48 hours following the runoff event. Complete drainage is necessary to maintain aerobic conditions in the underlying soil to favor bacteria that aid in pollutant attenuation and to allow the system to recover its storage capacity before the next storm event. Site Suitability: The following are some recommendations on the suitability of a site: Soil Permeability: The permeability of the soil at the depth of the base of the proposed infiltration system should be no less than 0.50 inches per hour and no greater than 2.41 inches per hour.
    [Show full text]
  • Los Angeles River Watershed
    UCLA Recent Work Title LA Sustainable Water Project: Los Angeles River Watershed Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/42m433ps Authors Mika, Katie Gallo, Elizabeth Read, Laura et al. Publication Date 2017-09-19 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ 4.0 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California LA SUSTAINABLE WATER PROJECT: LOS ANGELES RIVER WATERSHED This report is a product of the UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, UCLA Sus- tainable LA Grand Challenge, and Colorado School of Mines. AUTHORS Katie Mika, Elizabeth Gallo, Laura Read, Ryan September 2017 Edgley, Kim Truong, Terri Hogue, Stephanie Pincetl, Mark Gold ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS UCLA Grand Challenges, Sustainable LA This research was supported by the City of Los 2248 Murphy Hall Angeles Bureau of Sanitation (LASAN). Many Los Angeles, CA 90005-1405 thanks to LASAN for providing ideas and direc- tion, facilitating meetings and data requests, as well as sharing the many previous and current re- UCLA Institute of the Environment and search efforts that provided us with invaluable in- Sustainability formation on which to build. Further, LASAN La Kretz Hall, Suite 300 and LADWP provided data and edits that helped Box 951496 to deepen and improve this report. Any findings, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1496 opinions, or conclusions are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of LASAN. Colorado School of Mines 1500 Illinois Street Golden, CO 80401 We would like to acknowledge the many organiza- tions which facilitated this research through providing data, conversations, reviews, and in- sights into the integrated water management world in the Los Angeles region: LADWP, LAC- DPW, LARWQCB, LACFCD, WRD, WBMWD, MWD, SCCWRP, the Mayor’s Office of Sustaina- bility, and many others.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Infrastructure To
    1 2 3 USING GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE TO 4 MANAGE URBAN STORMWATER QUALITY: 5 A Review of Selected Practices and State Programs 6 7 8 A DRAFT REPORT TO 9 THE ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 10 11 by: 12 13 Martin Jaffe, Moira Zellner, Emily Minor, 14 Miquel Gonzalez-Meler, Lisa Cotner, and Dean Massey, 15 University of Illinois at Chicago 16 17 Hala Ahmed and Megan Elberts, 18 Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning 19 20 Hal Sprague and Steve Wise 21 Center for Neighborhood Technology 22 23 Brian Miller 24 Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant College Program 25 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 26 27 June 24, 2010 28 29 30 31 32 This research report was funded by the 33 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 34 35 36 1 1 2 2 1 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 3 4 ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………..…………..5 5 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………….….....…..7 7 8 CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION…..…..………………….………………….…......21 9 10 CHAPTER II: THE EFFECTIVENESS OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE…..27 11 Indicators of Effectiveness…………………………………………….………..28 12 Sources of Data for Assessing Green Infrastructure Effectiveness…….……….29 13 Green Infrastructure Performance…………….……………………………........31 14 The International Stormwater BMP Database………………………………......34 15 Sources of Variation……………………………………………………….…….36 16 Maintenance and Effectiveness………………………………………….….…...38 17 Conclusions……………………………………………………………….……...39 18 19 CHAPTER III: FUNDING GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE…………...…………..41 20 The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act………………………….……...41 21 The Cost-Effectiveness
    [Show full text]
  • PC-28 INFILTRATION BASIN Definition and Purpose An
    Best Management Practices Manual PC-28 Infiltration Basin PC-28 INFILTRATION BASIN Reference: Maryland Stormwater Design Manual. BMP Objectives Perimeter Control Slope Protection Borrow and Stockpiles Drainage Areas Sediment Trapping Stream Protection Temporary Stabilizing Permanent Stabilizing Definition and Purpose An infiltration basin is used to capture and treat a volume of stormwater runoff. This BMP consists of an excavated basin (sometimes rock-filled) in which runoff is collected and percolated to the surrounding soils. Grass channels, filter strips, or forebays can be used to reduce sediments entering the basin. The basin has a flat floor with an underdrain system and an outfall to drain higher volumes of flow. Appropriate Applications Can be used to enhance stormwater quality, reduce peak discharges, and recharge groundwater. Should not be used on or adjacent to steep slopes and should not be used within fill soils. Can be used to pre-treat portions of the water quality volume if used as an upstream stilling basin. Typically used for drainage areas less than 5 acres. Should only be used with well-drained soils of Hydrologic Soil Groups A or B. Should not be installed in highly permeable sand or gravel seams that are directly connected to aquifers. Can be directly connected to parking lot drains, roof downspouts, or other inlet structures. Design Parameters The bottom of the basin should be 4 feet higher than the seasonal high water table or bedrock. Generally, basins are designed to infiltrate retained runoff within a 48-hour period. 08/11 Chapter 5 Post-Construction Best Management Practices Manual PC-28 Infiltration Basin A dense vegetative cover needs to be established over all contributing pervious areas before runoff can be conveyed to the basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Contribution to the Knowledge on Distribution of Tardigrada in Turkey
    diversity Article Contribution to the Knowledge on Distribution of Tardigrada in Turkey Duygu Berdi * and Ahmet Altında˘g Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Ankara University, 06100 Ankara, Turkey; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 28 December 2019; Accepted: 4 March 2020; Published: 6 March 2020 Abstract: Tardigrades have been occasionally studied in Turkey since 1973. However, species number and distribution remain poorly known. In this study, distribution of Tardigrades in the province of Karabük, which is located in northern coast (West Black Sea Region) of Turkey, was carried out. Two moss samples were collected from the entrance of the Bulak (Mencilis) Cave. A total of 30 specimens and 14 eggs were extracted. Among the specimens; Echiniscus granulatus (Doyère, 1840) and Diaforobiotus islandicus islandicus (Richters, 1904) are new records for Karabük. Furthermore, this study also provides a current checklist of tardigrade species reported from Turkey, indicating their localities, geographic distribution and taxonomical comments. Keywords: cave; Diaforobiotus islandicus islandicus; Echiniscus granulatus; Karabük; Tardigrades; Turkey 1. Introduction Caves are not only one of the most important forms of karst, but also one of the most unique forms of karst topography in terms of both size and formation characteristics, which are formed by mechanical melting and partly chemical erosion of water [1]. Most of the caves in Turkey were developed within the Cretaceous and Tertiary limestone, metamorphic limestone [2], and up to now ca. 40 000 karst caves have been recorded in Turkey. Although, most of these caves are found in the karstic plateaus zone in the Toros System, important caves, such as Kızılelma, Sofular, Gökgöl and Mencilis, have also formed in the Western Black Sea [3].
    [Show full text]