Grantee Research Project Results
2007 Progress Report: Hydrologic Forecasting for Characterization of Non-linear Response of Freshwater Wetlands to Climatic and Land Use Change in the Susquehanna River Basin
EPA Grant Number: R833013Title: Hydrologic Forecasting for Characterization of Non-linear Response of Freshwater Wetlands to Climatic and Land Use Change in the Susquehanna River Basin
Investigators: Wardrop, Denice Heller , Ready, Richard C , Easterling, William Ewart , Brooks, Robert P. , Shortle, James S. , Duffy, Christopher , Dressler, Kevin , Najjar, Raymond
Current Investigators: Wardrop, Denice Heller , Easterling, William Ewart , Brooks, Robert P. , Shortle, James S. , Dressler, Kevin , Duffy, Christopher , Najjar, Raymond , Ready, Richard C
Institution: Pennsylvania State University
EPA Project Officer: Packard, Benjamin H
Project Period: April 20, 2007 through April 19, 2011
Project Period Covered by this Report: April 20, 2007 through April 19,2008
Project Amount: $899,656
RFA: Nonlinear Responses to Global Change in Linked Aquatic and Terrestrial Ecosystems and Effects of Multiple Factors on Terrestrial Ecosystems: A Joint Research Solicitation- EPA, DOE (2005) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Climate Change , Aquatic Ecosystems
Objective:
To characterize the potential non-linear response of freshwater wetlands and their ecological services to climatic and land use change in the Susquehanna River Basin (SRB). Specifically: (1) develop scenarios of climate and land cover change, operating on a scale of decades, relevant to the SRB; (2) use these scenarios, in conjunction with a coupled surface-ground water model, to develop a number of predictive hydrologic scenarios for a collection of 11-digit HUC watersheds representing a range of human-associated land uses in the SRB; (3) characterize the relationships between hydrologic and land cover parameters and ecosystem characteristics and services in wetlands of various types in the SRB, focusing on those with preliminary evidence of non-linearity and/or thresholds; and (4) utilize the predicted hydrologic scenarios to forecast changes in wetland ecosystems and their services across the entire Susquehanna River Basin, clearly identifying where non-linearities and/or thresholds in response occur.Progress Summary:
Climate scenarios: Daily and monthly averages of 2-m temperature and precipitation simulations of “the climate of the twentieth century” were acquired for 21 global climate models (GCMs) from the model archive used in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) (IPCC 2007). Two historical data sets have been obtained for comparison with GCM output: the first is based on the Global Historical Climatology Network data and will be used for characterizing long-term statistics in monthly means; the second is from the North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR), and will be used for characterizing sub-monthly variability. A list of metrics is being developed to provide a basis for evaluating the 21 GCMs as to their ability to reproduce past climate. Data processing will take place during summer 2008. This evaluation will guide us in selecting future climate scenarios to represent climate forcing in the hydrologic model.
Land cover scenarios: A four-step method was devised for forecasting the conversion of open space (forest, agricultural land, etc.) to developed land. This method combines an empirical model of land cover change with projections of population change, and will yield projections of the probability of development for each spatial unit in the SRB. Methods for estimating the conversion from one type of open space to another (e.g., forest to agriculture and visa versa) are under development.
Hydrologic modeling: Eight primary watersheds in the SRB and four alternates were selected for modeling using a GIS analysis to consider ecoregion boundaries, the location of USGS stream gages, precipitation patterns, and land cover. Most of these were HUC11-sized watersheds, and all were true watersheds (i.e., all flow originates within the basin). Exploratory analyses have been conducted to determine the optimal model spatial resolution in the vicinity of wetlands. Preliminary results from simulation of Shavers Creek watershed indicate that the model, uncalibrated, matched very well with the wetting and drying observed in existing shallow monitoring wells within a modeled wetland, over a 3-year period that experienced a range of moisture conditions. The model also is able to predict the presence of gaining and losing streams. Together, these estimates aid in determining the possible sources and sinks to wetlands and how they evolve.
Ecological responses: Rather than using different wetland types as our assessment unit (as outlined in our proposal), we will evaluate riverine headwater ecosystems along gradients of water source (groundwater to surface water) and adjacent land cover (fully forested to no forest). These units will be assessed for their hydrologic characteristics using data from wells, and for their biological diversity through sampling of aquatic macrointervertebrates. We developed a classification tool (automated GIS application) for delineating hydrogeomorphically complex unconstrained reaches to assist in choosing site locations for rapid and intensive biological assessments. Site selection will be accomplished through random sampling of stream valley segments using EPA’s Reach File Reference, followed by subsequent selection of appropriate hydrogeomorphic reach types using the reach classification tool. We also laid out methods for data collection, including well placement for the dual purpose of calibrating hydrological model and investigating the link between hydrology and ecology.
Future Activities:
Objectives for the next reporting period include: (1) complete the GCM evaluation, and select future climate scenarios for use in the hydrologic model; (2) continue development of land cover scenarios; (3) complete preparation of input data sets and hydrologic model calibration for the eight study watersheds, and conduct preliminary runs of the hydrologic model with climate and land cover scenarios; and (4) select sites for hydrological monitoring and biological sampling; install wells and complete one season of monitoring/ sampling.Journal Articles on this Report : 2 Displayed | Download in RIS Format
| Other project views: | All 5 publications | 4 publications in selected types | All 4 journal articles |
|---|
| Type | Citation | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Kumar M, Bhatt G, Duffy CJ. The role of physical, numerical and data coupling in a mesoscale watershed model, advances in water resources. 2008. |
R833013 (2007) |
not available |
|
|
Kumar M, Bhatt G, Duffy CJ. An efficient domain decomposition framework for accurate representation of geodata in distributed hydrologic models. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 2009;23(12):1569-1596. |
R833013 (2007) R833013 (2009) R833013 (Final) |
Exit Exit Exit |
Supplemental Keywords:
water, watersheds, groundwater, global climate, precipitation, temperature, ecological effects, vulnerability, ecosystem, scaling, aquatic, habitat, ecology, hydrology, climatology, modeling, monitoring, surveys, general circulation models, mid-Atlantic, RFA, Scientific Discipline, Air, Ecosystem Protection/Environmental Exposure & Risk, Hydrology, climate change, Air Pollution Effects, Monitoring/Modeling, Regional/Scaling, Environmental Monitoring, Atmospheric Sciences, Ecological Risk Assessment, Atmosphere, coastal ecosystem, aquatic species vulnerability, biodiversity, environmental measurement, ecosystem assessment, meteorology, global change, climate, anthropogenic, climate models, UV radiation, greenhouse gases, environmental stress, coastal ecosystems, water quality, ecological models, climate model, Global Climate Change, land use, regional anthropogenic stresses, atmospheric chemistry, stressor response modelRelevant Websites:
www.wetlands.psu.edu
Progress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.