Article | Published:

Distinct air–water gas exchange regimes in low- and high-energy streams

Nature Geosciencevolume 12pages259263 (2019) | Download Citation

Abstract

Gas exchange across the air–water interface drives the flux of climate-relevant gases and is critical for biogeochemical processes in aquatic ecosystems. Despite the presence of mountain streams worldwide, we lack basic understanding of gas exchange through their turbulent surfaces, making global estimates of outgassing from streams and rivers difficult to constrain. Here we combine new estimates of gas transfer velocities from tracer gas additions in mountain streams with published data to cover streams differing in geomorphology and hydraulics. We find two different scaling relationships between the turbulence-induced energy dissipation rate and gas transfer velocity for low- and high-channel slope streams, indicating that gas exchange in streams exists in two states. We suggest that turbulent diffusion drives gas transfer velocity in low-energy streams; whereas turbulence entrains air bubbles in high-energy streams, and the resulting bubble-mediated gas exchange accelerates with energy dissipation rate. Gas transfer velocities in the high-energy streams are among the highest reported. Our findings offer a framework to include mountain streams in future estimates of gas fluxes from streams and rivers at the global scale.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Data availability

The compiled data on k600, channel slope, velocity, depth, width and stream discharge, along with additional data and information on hydraulic scaling, a summary of data and statistics, and the code used to generate the results and figures presented here, can be found in the Supplementary Information.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  1. 1.

    Zappa, C. J. et al. Environmental turbulent mixing controls on air-water gas exchange in marine and aquatic systems. Geophys. Res. Lett. 34, L10601 (2007).

  2. 2.

    Wanninkhof, R., Asher, W. E., Ho, D. T., Sweeny, C. & McGillis, W. R. Advances in quantifying air-sea gas exchange and environmental forcing. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 1, 213–244 (2009).

  3. 3.

    Jähne, B. & Haußecker, H. Air-water gas exchange. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 30, 443–468 (1998).

  4. 4.

    Cole, J. J. et al. Plumbing the global carbon cycle: integrating inland waters into the terrestrial carbon budget. Ecosystems 10, 172–185 (2007).

  5. 5.

    Battin, T. J. et al. The boundless carbon cycle. Nat. Geosci. 2, 598–600 (2009).

  6. 6.

    Raymond, P. A. et al. Global carbon dioxide emissions from inland waters. Nature 503, 355–359 (2013).

  7. 7.

    Raymond, P. A. et al. Scaling the gas transfer velocity and hydraulic geometry in streams and small rivers. Limnol. Oceanogr. Fluid. Environ. 2, 41–53 (2012).

  8. 8.

    Hall, R. O. & Madinger, H. L. Use of argon to measure gas exchange in turbulent mountain streams. Biogeosciences 15, 3085–3092 (2018).

  9. 9.

    Liss, P. S. Processes of gas exchange across an air-water interface. Deep Sea Res. 20, 221–238 (1973).

  10. 10.

    Pereira, R., Ashton, I., Sabbaghzadeh, B., Shutler, J. D. & Upstill-Goddard, R. C. Reduced air–sea CO2 exchange in the Atlantic Ocean due to biological surfactants. Nat. Geosci. 11, 492–496 (2018).

  11. 11.

    Wanninkhof, R., Mulholland, P. J. & Elwood, J. W. Gas exchange rates for a first-order stream determined with deliberate and natural tracers. Water Resour. Res. 26, 1621–1630 (1990).

  12. 12.

    McNeil, C. & D’Asaro, E. Parameterization of air–sea gas fluxes at extreme wind speeds. J. Mar. Syst. 66, 110–121 (2007).

  13. 13.

    Vachon, D., Prairie, Y. T. & Cole, J. J. The relationship between near-surface turbulence and gas transfer velocity in freshwater systems and its implications for floating chamber measurements of gas exchange. Limnol. Oceanogr. 55, 1723–1732 (2010).

  14. 14.

    Chanson, H., Toombes, L., Moog, D. B. & Jirka, G. H. Discussion of stream reaeration in nonuniform flow: macroroughness enhancement. J. Hydraul. Eng. 126, 222–224 (2000).

  15. 15.

    Chanson, H. & Toombes, L. Strong interactions between free-surface aeration and turbulence in an open channel flow. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 27, 525–535 (2003).

  16. 16.

    Hall, R. O., Kennedy, T. A. & Rosi-Marshall, E. J. Air–water oxygen exchange in a large whitewater river. Limnol. Oceanogr. Fluid. Environ. https://doi.org/10.1215/21573689-1572535 (2012).

  17. 17.

    Marzolf, E. R., Mulholland, P. J. & Steinman, A. D. Improvements to the diurnal upstream-downstream dissolved-oxygen change technique for determining whole-stream metabolism in small streams. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 51, 1591–1599 (1994).

  18. 18.

    Cole, J. J. & Caraco, N. F. Atmospheric exchange of carbon dioxide in a low wind oligotrophic lake measured by the addition of SF6. Limnol. Oceanogr. 43, 647–656 (2008).

  19. 19.

    O'Connor, D. J. & Dobbins, W. E. Mechanism of reaeration in natural streams.Trans. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng. 123, 641–666 (1956).

  20. 20.

    Holtgrieve, G. W., Schindler, D. E., Branch, T. A. & A’mar, Z. T. Simultaneous quantification of aquatic ecosystem metabolism and reaeration using a Bayesian statistical model of oxygen dynamics. Limnol. Oceanogr. 55, 1047–1062 (2010).

  21. 21.

    Appling, A. P., Hall, R. O., Yackulic, C. B. & Arroita, M. Overcoming equifinality: leveraging long time series for stream metabolism estimation. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 123, 624–645 (2018).

  22. 22.

    Butman, D. & Raymond, P. A. Significant efflux of carbon dioxide from streams and rivers in the United States. Nat. Geosci. 4, 839–842 (2011).

  23. 23.

    Larsen, I. J., Montgomery, D. R. & Greenberg, H. M. The contribution of mountains to global denudation. Geology 42, 527–530 (2014).

  24. 24.

    Viviroli, D., Dürr, H. H., Messerli, B., Meybeck, M. & Weingartner, R. Mountains of the world, water towers for humanity: typology, mapping, and global significance. Water Resour. Res. 43, W07447 (2007).

  25. 25.

    Qu, B. et al. Greenhouse gases emissions in rivers of the Tibetan Plateau. Sci. Rep. 7, 16573 (2017).

  26. 26.

    Kuhn, C. et al. Patterns in stream greenhouse gas dynamics from mountains to plains in northcentral Wyoming. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 122, 2173–2190 (2017).

  27. 27.

    Peter, H. et al. Scales and drivers of temporal pCO2 dynamics in an Alpine stream. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 119, 1078–1091 (2014).

  28. 28.

    Schelker, J., Singer, G. A., Ulseth, A. J., Hengsberger, S. & Battin, T. J. CO2 evasion from a steep, high gradient stream network: importance of seasonal and diurnal variation in aquatic pCO2 and gas transfer. Limnol. Oceanogr. 61, 1826–1838 (2016).

  29. 29.

    Maurice, L., Rawlins, B. G., Farr, G., Bell, R. & Gooddy, D. C. The influence of flow and bed slope on gas transfer in steep streams and their implications for evasion of CO2. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 122, 2862–2875 (2017).

  30. 30.

    McDowell, M. J. & Johnson, M. S. Gas transfer velocities evaluated using carbon dioxide as a tracer show high streamflow to be a major driver of total CO2 evasion flux for a headwater stream. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 123, 2183–2197 (2018).

  31. 31.

    Holgerson, M. A. & Raymond, P. A. Large contribution to inland water CO2 and CH4 emissions from very small ponds. Nat. Geosci. 9, 222–226 (2016).

  32. 32.

    Melching, C. S. & Flores, H. E. Reaeration equations derived from US Geological Survey database. J. Environ. Eng. 125, 407–414 (1999).

  33. 33.

    Tsivoglou, E. C. & Neal, L. A. Tracer measurement of reaeration: III. Predicting the reaeration capacity of inland streams. J. Water Pollut. Control Fed. 48, 2669–2689 (1976).

  34. 34.

    Muggeo, V. M. Estimating regression models with unknown break-points. Stat. Med. 22, 3055–3071 (2003).

  35. 35.

    Muggeo, V. segmented: an R package to fit regression models with broken-line relationships. R News 8, 20–25 (2008).

  36. 36.

    Montgomery, D. R. & Buffington, J. M. Channel-reach morphology in mountain drainage basins. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 109, 596–611 (1997).

  37. 37.

    Schneider, J. M., Rickenmann, D., Turowski, J. M. & Kirchner, J. W. Self-adjustment of stream bed roughness and flow velocity in a steep mountain channel. Water Resour. Res. 51, 7838–7859 (2015).

  38. 38.

    Knighton, D. Fluvial Forms and Processes: A New Perspective (Hodder Education, London, 1998).

  39. 39.

    Moog, D. B. & Jirka, G. H. Stream reaeration in nonuniform flow: macroroughness enhancement. J. Hydraul. Eng. 125, 11–16 (1999).

  40. 40.

    Wüest, A., Brooks, N. H. & Imboden, D. M. Bubble plume modeling for lake restoration. Water Resour. Res. 28, 3235–3250 (1992).

  41. 41.

    D’Asaro, E. & McNeil, C. Air–sea gas exchange at extreme wind speeds measured by autonomous oceanographic floats. J. Mar. Syst. 66, 92–109 (2007).

  42. 42.

    Asher, W. & Wanninkhof, R. Transient tracers and air-sea gas transfer. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 103, 15939–15958 (1998).

  43. 43.

    Asher, W. E. & Wanninkhof, R. The effect of bubble-mediated gas transfer on purposeful dual-gaseous tracer experiments. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 103, 10555–10560 (1998).

  44. 44.

    Woolf, D. K. et al. Modelling of bubble-mediated gas transfer: fundamental principles and a laboratory test. J. Mar. Syst. 66, 71–91 (2007).

  45. 45.

    Woolf, D. K. Bubbles and the air-sea transfer velocity of gases. Atmos. Ocean 31, 517–540 (1993).

  46. 46.

    Stream Solute Workshop. Concepts and methods for assessing solute dynamics in stream ecosystems. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 9, 95–119 (1990).

  47. 47.

    Kana, T. M., Darkangelo, C., Hunt, M. D. & Oldham, J. B. Membrane inlet mass spectrometer for rapid high-precision determination of N2, O2, and Ar in environmental water samples. Anal. Chem. 66, 4166–4170 (1994).

  48. 48.

    Stan Development Team. Stan Modeling Language: User’s Guide and Reference Manual Version 2.17 (Stan, 2017).

  49. 49.

    R Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2018).

  50. 50.

    Wanninkhof, R. Relationship between wind-speed and gas-exchange over the ocean. J. Geophys. Res. 97, 7373–7382 (1992).

  51. 51.

    Jähne, B., Heinz, G. & Dietrich, W. Measurement of the diffusion coefficients of sparingly soluble gases in water. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans 92, 10767–10776 (1987).

  52. 52.

    Fonstad, M. A., Dietrich, J. T., Courville, B. C., Jensen, J. L. & Carbonneau, P. E. Topographic structure from motion: a new development in photogrammetric measurement. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 38, 421–430 (2013).

  53. 53.

    Dietrich, J. T. Bathymetric structure-from-motion: extracting shallow stream bathymetry from multi-view stereo photogrammetry. Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 42, 355–364 (2016).

  54. 54.

    Moog, D. B. & Jirka, G. H. Air-water gas transfer in uniform channel flow. J. Hydraul. Eng. 125, 3–10 (1999).

  55. 55.

    Xiao, X., White, E. P., Hooten, M. B. & Durham, S. L. On the use of log-transformation vs. nonlinear regression for analyzing biological power laws. Ecology 92, 1887–1894 (2011).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank F. Hammer, R. Romanens, L. Freund, F. Cuttat and V. Sahli for fieldwork conducting the argon gas tracer releases as well as measuring channel slopes for the Swiss study streams; S. Lane for helping with photogrammetry and the semivariance analysis; P. Raymond and co-authors for providing data from ref. 7; and D. McGinnis for discussions on bubble-mediated gas exchange. Financial support came from the Swiss Science Foundation (200021-163015) to T.J.B.

Author information

Author notes

    • Amber J. Ulseth

    Present address: Department of Biological Sciences, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX, USA

    • Hilary L. Madinger

    Present address: Department of Life & Earth Sciences, Concordia University Wisconsin, Mequon, WI, USA

Affiliations

  1. Stream Biofilm and Ecosystem Research Laboratory, School of Architecture, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    • Amber J. Ulseth
    • , Marta Boix Canadell
    • , Amin Niayifar
    •  & Tom J. Battin
  2. Flathead Lake Biological Station, University of Montana, Polson, MT, USA

    • Robert O. Hall Jr
  3. Program in Ecology and Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY, USA

    • Hilary L. Madinger

Authors

  1. Search for Amber J. Ulseth in:

  2. Search for Robert O. Hall Jr in:

  3. Search for Marta Boix Canadell in:

  4. Search for Hilary L. Madinger in:

  5. Search for Amin Niayifar in:

  6. Search for Tom J. Battin in:

Contributions

A.J.U., R.O.H. Jr and T.J.B. conceived the idea of scaling. M.B.C. calculated streambed roughness. H.L.M. produced code to analyse Ar data. A.J.U. analysed the results. A.J.U., R.O.H., T.J.B. and A.N. wrote the manuscript. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amber J. Ulseth.

Supplementary information

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

Issue Date

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-019-0324-8