Using particle size distributions to fingerprint suspended sediment sources—Evaluation at laboratory and catchment scales

Applications of sediment source fingerprinting studies are growing globally despite the high costs and workloads associated with the analyses of conventional fingerprint properties on target sediment samples collected using traditional methods. To this end, there is a need to test new fingerprint pr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Hydrological processes 2022-10, Vol.36 (10), p.n/a
Hauptverfasser: Lake, Niels F., Martínez‐Carreras, Núria, Shaw, Peter J., Collins, Adrian L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page n/a
container_issue 10
container_start_page
container_title Hydrological processes
container_volume 36
creator Lake, Niels F.
Martínez‐Carreras, Núria
Shaw, Peter J.
Collins, Adrian L.
description Applications of sediment source fingerprinting studies are growing globally despite the high costs and workloads associated with the analyses of conventional fingerprint properties on target sediment samples collected using traditional methods. To this end, there is a need to test new fingerprint properties that can overcome these challenges. Sediment particle size could potentially contribute here since it is relatively easy to measure but, until now, has rarely been deployed as a fingerprint itself. Instead, particle size has been used to ensure that source and target sediment samples are more directly comparable on the basis of the fingerprints used. Accordingly, this work examined whether particle size distributions (PSDs) could be used as a reliable fingerprint for apportioning sediment sources, in combination with a grain size un‐mixing model. Application of PSDs as a fingerprint was tested at two scales: (i) in a laboratory setting where soil samples with known PSDs were used to generate artificial mixtures to evaluate un‐mixing model results, and (ii) a catchment setting comparing PSDs in a confluence‐based approach to test if downstream target sediment PSDs could be un‐mixed into the contributions of sediment coming from an upstream and a tributary sampling site. Laboratory results showed that the known proportions of the two, three and four soil samples in the artificial mixtures were predicted accurately using the AnalySize grain size un‐mixing model, giving average absolute errors of 9%, 8% and 6%, respectively. Catchment results showed variable performances when comparing un‐mixing results with sediment budget estimations, with the best results obtained at higher discharge values during storm runoff events. Overall, our results suggest the potential of using PSDs for estimating contributions of sediment sources delivering SS with distinct PSDs when sources are located at short distance to the downstream sampling site. Methodological workflow
doi_str_mv 10.1002/hyp.14726
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2730157190</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2730157190</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3556-48c09d58b7eb71a6c2d709c65374f0e6a35d18fb2bfebcb7a68e6f9bd82d65df3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kLtOwzAUhi0EEqUw8AaWmBhSjtPGdkZUcZMqwUAHpsiXE-oqTYLtgAoLD8ET8iSkhJXpSEffdy4_IacMJgwgvVht2wmbiZTvkRGDPE8YyGyfjEDKLOEgxSE5CmENADOQMCIfy-DqZ9oqH52pkAb3jtS6EL3TXXRNHWhsaNkz6Fvv6khDF1qsLVoa0LoN7lpN5w2G78-vq1dVdWrnURVppXTjVWz8lqraUqOiWQ2CURWGY3JQqirgyV8dk-X11eP8Nlnc39zNLxeJmmYZT2bSQG4zqQVqwRQ3qRWQG55NxawE5D1lmSx1qkvURgvFJfIy11amlme2nI7J2TC39c1LhyEW6_7gul9ZpGIKLBMsh546HyjjmxA8lkX_70b5bcGg2GVb9NkWv9n27MXAvrkKt_-Dxe3Tw2D8ACDPgE8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2730157190</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Using particle size distributions to fingerprint suspended sediment sources—Evaluation at laboratory and catchment scales</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Lake, Niels F. ; Martínez‐Carreras, Núria ; Shaw, Peter J. ; Collins, Adrian L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lake, Niels F. ; Martínez‐Carreras, Núria ; Shaw, Peter J. ; Collins, Adrian L.</creatorcontrib><description>Applications of sediment source fingerprinting studies are growing globally despite the high costs and workloads associated with the analyses of conventional fingerprint properties on target sediment samples collected using traditional methods. To this end, there is a need to test new fingerprint properties that can overcome these challenges. Sediment particle size could potentially contribute here since it is relatively easy to measure but, until now, has rarely been deployed as a fingerprint itself. Instead, particle size has been used to ensure that source and target sediment samples are more directly comparable on the basis of the fingerprints used. Accordingly, this work examined whether particle size distributions (PSDs) could be used as a reliable fingerprint for apportioning sediment sources, in combination with a grain size un‐mixing model. Application of PSDs as a fingerprint was tested at two scales: (i) in a laboratory setting where soil samples with known PSDs were used to generate artificial mixtures to evaluate un‐mixing model results, and (ii) a catchment setting comparing PSDs in a confluence‐based approach to test if downstream target sediment PSDs could be un‐mixed into the contributions of sediment coming from an upstream and a tributary sampling site. Laboratory results showed that the known proportions of the two, three and four soil samples in the artificial mixtures were predicted accurately using the AnalySize grain size un‐mixing model, giving average absolute errors of 9%, 8% and 6%, respectively. Catchment results showed variable performances when comparing un‐mixing results with sediment budget estimations, with the best results obtained at higher discharge values during storm runoff events. Overall, our results suggest the potential of using PSDs for estimating contributions of sediment sources delivering SS with distinct PSDs when sources are located at short distance to the downstream sampling site. Methodological workflow</description><identifier>ISSN: 0885-6087</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1099-1085</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/hyp.14726</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>AnalySize ; Catchment area ; Catchment scale ; Catchments ; Confluence ; Cost analysis ; Downstream ; end‐member mixing model ; Evaluation ; Fingerprinting ; Fingerprints ; Grain size ; grain size distribution ; Laboratories ; Mixtures ; Particle size ; Particle size distribution ; Sampling ; Sediment ; sediment fingerprinting ; sediment origin ; Sediment samplers ; Sediment samples ; Sediment sources ; Sediments ; Storm runoff ; Storms ; Suspended sediments ; Tributaries</subject><ispartof>Hydrological processes, 2022-10, Vol.36 (10), p.n/a</ispartof><rights>2022 The Authors. published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>2022. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3556-48c09d58b7eb71a6c2d709c65374f0e6a35d18fb2bfebcb7a68e6f9bd82d65df3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a3556-48c09d58b7eb71a6c2d709c65374f0e6a35d18fb2bfebcb7a68e6f9bd82d65df3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5909-2005</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fhyp.14726$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fhyp.14726$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lake, Niels F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martínez‐Carreras, Núria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shaw, Peter J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Collins, Adrian L.</creatorcontrib><title>Using particle size distributions to fingerprint suspended sediment sources—Evaluation at laboratory and catchment scales</title><title>Hydrological processes</title><description>Applications of sediment source fingerprinting studies are growing globally despite the high costs and workloads associated with the analyses of conventional fingerprint properties on target sediment samples collected using traditional methods. To this end, there is a need to test new fingerprint properties that can overcome these challenges. Sediment particle size could potentially contribute here since it is relatively easy to measure but, until now, has rarely been deployed as a fingerprint itself. Instead, particle size has been used to ensure that source and target sediment samples are more directly comparable on the basis of the fingerprints used. Accordingly, this work examined whether particle size distributions (PSDs) could be used as a reliable fingerprint for apportioning sediment sources, in combination with a grain size un‐mixing model. Application of PSDs as a fingerprint was tested at two scales: (i) in a laboratory setting where soil samples with known PSDs were used to generate artificial mixtures to evaluate un‐mixing model results, and (ii) a catchment setting comparing PSDs in a confluence‐based approach to test if downstream target sediment PSDs could be un‐mixed into the contributions of sediment coming from an upstream and a tributary sampling site. Laboratory results showed that the known proportions of the two, three and four soil samples in the artificial mixtures were predicted accurately using the AnalySize grain size un‐mixing model, giving average absolute errors of 9%, 8% and 6%, respectively. Catchment results showed variable performances when comparing un‐mixing results with sediment budget estimations, with the best results obtained at higher discharge values during storm runoff events. Overall, our results suggest the potential of using PSDs for estimating contributions of sediment sources delivering SS with distinct PSDs when sources are located at short distance to the downstream sampling site. Methodological workflow</description><subject>AnalySize</subject><subject>Catchment area</subject><subject>Catchment scale</subject><subject>Catchments</subject><subject>Confluence</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>Downstream</subject><subject>end‐member mixing model</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Fingerprinting</subject><subject>Fingerprints</subject><subject>Grain size</subject><subject>grain size distribution</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Mixtures</subject><subject>Particle size</subject><subject>Particle size distribution</subject><subject>Sampling</subject><subject>Sediment</subject><subject>sediment fingerprinting</subject><subject>sediment origin</subject><subject>Sediment samplers</subject><subject>Sediment samples</subject><subject>Sediment sources</subject><subject>Sediments</subject><subject>Storm runoff</subject><subject>Storms</subject><subject>Suspended sediments</subject><subject>Tributaries</subject><issn>0885-6087</issn><issn>1099-1085</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kLtOwzAUhi0EEqUw8AaWmBhSjtPGdkZUcZMqwUAHpsiXE-oqTYLtgAoLD8ET8iSkhJXpSEffdy4_IacMJgwgvVht2wmbiZTvkRGDPE8YyGyfjEDKLOEgxSE5CmENADOQMCIfy-DqZ9oqH52pkAb3jtS6EL3TXXRNHWhsaNkz6Fvv6khDF1qsLVoa0LoN7lpN5w2G78-vq1dVdWrnURVppXTjVWz8lqraUqOiWQ2CURWGY3JQqirgyV8dk-X11eP8Nlnc39zNLxeJmmYZT2bSQG4zqQVqwRQ3qRWQG55NxawE5D1lmSx1qkvURgvFJfIy11amlme2nI7J2TC39c1LhyEW6_7gul9ZpGIKLBMsh546HyjjmxA8lkX_70b5bcGg2GVb9NkWv9n27MXAvrkKt_-Dxe3Tw2D8ACDPgE8</recordid><startdate>202210</startdate><enddate>202210</enddate><creator>Lake, Niels F.</creator><creator>Martínez‐Carreras, Núria</creator><creator>Shaw, Peter J.</creator><creator>Collins, Adrian L.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>SOI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5909-2005</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202210</creationdate><title>Using particle size distributions to fingerprint suspended sediment sources—Evaluation at laboratory and catchment scales</title><author>Lake, Niels F. ; Martínez‐Carreras, Núria ; Shaw, Peter J. ; Collins, Adrian L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a3556-48c09d58b7eb71a6c2d709c65374f0e6a35d18fb2bfebcb7a68e6f9bd82d65df3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>AnalySize</topic><topic>Catchment area</topic><topic>Catchment scale</topic><topic>Catchments</topic><topic>Confluence</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>Downstream</topic><topic>end‐member mixing model</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Fingerprinting</topic><topic>Fingerprints</topic><topic>Grain size</topic><topic>grain size distribution</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Mixtures</topic><topic>Particle size</topic><topic>Particle size distribution</topic><topic>Sampling</topic><topic>Sediment</topic><topic>sediment fingerprinting</topic><topic>sediment origin</topic><topic>Sediment samplers</topic><topic>Sediment samples</topic><topic>Sediment sources</topic><topic>Sediments</topic><topic>Storm runoff</topic><topic>Storms</topic><topic>Suspended sediments</topic><topic>Tributaries</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lake, Niels F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martínez‐Carreras, Núria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shaw, Peter J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Collins, Adrian L.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Hydrological processes</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lake, Niels F.</au><au>Martínez‐Carreras, Núria</au><au>Shaw, Peter J.</au><au>Collins, Adrian L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Using particle size distributions to fingerprint suspended sediment sources—Evaluation at laboratory and catchment scales</atitle><jtitle>Hydrological processes</jtitle><date>2022-10</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>10</issue><epage>n/a</epage><issn>0885-6087</issn><eissn>1099-1085</eissn><abstract>Applications of sediment source fingerprinting studies are growing globally despite the high costs and workloads associated with the analyses of conventional fingerprint properties on target sediment samples collected using traditional methods. To this end, there is a need to test new fingerprint properties that can overcome these challenges. Sediment particle size could potentially contribute here since it is relatively easy to measure but, until now, has rarely been deployed as a fingerprint itself. Instead, particle size has been used to ensure that source and target sediment samples are more directly comparable on the basis of the fingerprints used. Accordingly, this work examined whether particle size distributions (PSDs) could be used as a reliable fingerprint for apportioning sediment sources, in combination with a grain size un‐mixing model. Application of PSDs as a fingerprint was tested at two scales: (i) in a laboratory setting where soil samples with known PSDs were used to generate artificial mixtures to evaluate un‐mixing model results, and (ii) a catchment setting comparing PSDs in a confluence‐based approach to test if downstream target sediment PSDs could be un‐mixed into the contributions of sediment coming from an upstream and a tributary sampling site. Laboratory results showed that the known proportions of the two, three and four soil samples in the artificial mixtures were predicted accurately using the AnalySize grain size un‐mixing model, giving average absolute errors of 9%, 8% and 6%, respectively. Catchment results showed variable performances when comparing un‐mixing results with sediment budget estimations, with the best results obtained at higher discharge values during storm runoff events. Overall, our results suggest the potential of using PSDs for estimating contributions of sediment sources delivering SS with distinct PSDs when sources are located at short distance to the downstream sampling site. Methodological workflow</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/hyp.14726</doi><tpages>17</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5909-2005</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0885-6087
ispartof Hydrological processes, 2022-10, Vol.36 (10), p.n/a
issn 0885-6087
1099-1085
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2730157190
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects AnalySize
Catchment area
Catchment scale
Catchments
Confluence
Cost analysis
Downstream
end‐member mixing model
Evaluation
Fingerprinting
Fingerprints
Grain size
grain size distribution
Laboratories
Mixtures
Particle size
Particle size distribution
Sampling
Sediment
sediment fingerprinting
sediment origin
Sediment samplers
Sediment samples
Sediment sources
Sediments
Storm runoff
Storms
Suspended sediments
Tributaries
title Using particle size distributions to fingerprint suspended sediment sources—Evaluation at laboratory and catchment scales
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T03%3A52%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Using%20particle%20size%20distributions%20to%20fingerprint%20suspended%20sediment%20sources%E2%80%94Evaluation%20at%20laboratory%20and%20catchment%20scales&rft.jtitle=Hydrological%20processes&rft.au=Lake,%20Niels%20F.&rft.date=2022-10&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=10&rft.epage=n/a&rft.issn=0885-6087&rft.eissn=1099-1085&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/hyp.14726&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2730157190%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2730157190&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true