Sediment and nutrient trapping as a result of a temporary Mississippi River floodplain restoration: The Morganza Spillway during the 2011 Mississippi River Flood

被引:16
|
作者
Kroes, Daniel E. [1 ]
Schenk, Edward R. [2 ,3 ]
Noe, Gregory B. [2 ]
Benthem, Adam J. [2 ]
机构
[1] US Geol Survey, Louisiana Water Sci Ctr, Baton Rouge, LA 70817 USA
[2] US Geol Survey, Natl Res Program, Reston, VA 20164 USA
[3] Natl Pk Serv, Grand Canyon, AZ 86023 USA
关键词
Floodplain restoration; Nutrient deposition; Sediment deposition; 2011; Flood; Atchafalaya River; Mississippi River; DEPOSITION; BASIN; NITROGEN; RETENTION; PATTERNS; WETLANDS; CONNECTIVITY; DYNAMICS; DELTA; FIELD;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecoleng.2015.04.056
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
The 2011 Mississippi River Flood resulted in the opening of the Morganza Spillway for the second time since its construction in 1954 releasing 7.6 km(3) of water through agricultural and forested lands in the Morganza Floodway and into the Atchafalaya River Basin. This volume, released over 54 days, represented 5.5% of the Mississippi River (M.R.) discharge and 14% of the total discharge through the Atchafalaya River Basin (A.R.B.) during the Spillway operation and 1.1% of the M.R. and 3.3% of the A.R.B. 2011 water year discharge. During the release, 1.03 teragrams (Tg) of sediment was deposited on the Morganza Forebay and Floodway and 0.26 Tg was eroded from behind the Spillway structure. The majority of deposition (86 %) occurred in the Forebay (upstream of the structure) and within 4 km downstream of the Spillway structure with minor deposition on the rest of the Floodway. There was a net deposition of 26 x 10(-4) Tg of N and 5.36 x 10(-4) Tg of P, during the diversion, that was equivalent to 0.17% N and 0.33% P of the 2011 annual M.R. load. Median deposited sediment particle size at the start of the Forebay was 13 mm and decreased to 2 mm 15 km downstream of the Spillway structure. Minimal accretion was found greater than 4 km downstream of the structure suggesting the potential for greater sediment and nutrient trapping in the Floodway. However, because of the large areas involved, substantial sediment mass was deposited even at distances greater than 30 km. Sediment and nutrient deposition on the Morganza Floodway was limited because suspended sediment was quickly deposited along the flowpath and not refreshed by incremental water exchanges between the Atchafalaya River (A.R.) and the Floodway. Sediment and nutrient trapping could have been greater and more evenly distributed if additional locations of hydraulic input from and outputs to the A.R. (connectivity) were added. Published by Elsevier B.V.
引用
收藏
页码:91 / 102
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Threshold effects of flood duration on the vegetation and soils of the Upper Mississippi River floodplain, USA
    De Jager, Nathan R.
    Thomsen, Meredith
    Yin, Yao
    FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, 2012, 270 : 135 - 146
  • [22] Hydraulic and flood-loss modeling of levee, floodplain, and river management strategies, Middle Mississippi River, USA
    Remo, Jonathan W. F.
    Carlson, Megan
    Pinter, Nicholas
    NATURAL HAZARDS, 2012, 61 (02) : 551 - 575
  • [23] Understory vegetation as an indicator for floodplain forest restoration in the Mississippi River Alluvial Valley, USA
    De Steven, Diane
    Faulkner, Stephen P.
    Keeland, Bobby D.
    Baldwin, Michael J.
    McCoy, John W.
    Hughes, Steven C.
    RESTORATION ECOLOGY, 2015, 23 (04) : 402 - 412
  • [24] Seasonal bioavailability of sediment-associated heavy metals along the Mississippi river floodplain
    Grabowski, LA
    Houpis, JLJ
    Woods, WI
    Johnson, KA
    CHEMOSPHERE, 2001, 45 (4-5) : 643 - 651
  • [25] Belowground nutrient dynamics following three harvest intensities on the Pearl River floodplain, Mississippi
    Schilling, E.B.
    Lockaby, B.G.
    Rummer, R.
    Soil Science Society of America Journal, 63 (06): : 1856 - 1868
  • [26] Nutrient dynamics in the lower Mississippi River floodplain: Comparing present and historic hydrologic conditions
    Harold L. Schramm
    Michael S. Cox
    Todd E. Tietjen
    Andrew W. Ezell
    Wetlands, 2009, 29 : 476 - 487
  • [27] Belowground nutrient dynamics following three harvest intensities on the Pearl River floodplain, Mississippi
    Schilling, EB
    Lockaby, BG
    Rummer, R
    SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, 1999, 63 (06) : 1856 - 1868
  • [28] The mineral sediment loading of the modern Mississippi River Delta: what is the restoration baseline?
    Turner, R. Eugene
    JOURNAL OF COASTAL CONSERVATION, 2017, 21 (06) : 867 - 872
  • [29] NUTRIENT DYNAMICS IN THE LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER FLOODPLAIN: COMPARING PRESENT AND HISTORIC HYDROLOGIC CONDITIONS
    Schramm, Harold L., Jr.
    Cox, Michael S.
    Tietjen, Todd E.
    Ezell, Andrew W.
    WETLANDS, 2009, 29 (02) : 476 - 487
  • [30] Sediment nutrient flux in a coastal lake impacted by diverted Mississippi River water
    Miao, S. Y.
    Delaune, R. D.
    Jugsujinda, A.
    CHEMISTRY AND ECOLOGY, 2006, 22 (06) : 437 - 449