Grantee Research Project Results
2009 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, 2009 through April 19,2010
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: During the past year, we extended our comparison of global climate model (GCM) output to include humidity, solar radiation, and wind speed - in addition to temperature and precipitation - because these variables are also important inputs for our hydrologic model. All five variables were available for 12 of the original 21 GCMs examined. For each GCM, we computed an error index as described in the Year 2 report, and used the index to rank the models based on (1) temperature and precipitation and (2) wind, solar radiation, and humidity. Only one model was ranked in the top six for both groups of variables: the Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research (Norway) model. Thus, this model is our tentative choice for use in developing 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. The model was calibrated by computing land use change between 1992 and 2001 using the NLCD data for those time periods. During Year 3, we applied the model to project the probability of development for each square km in each of 17 subwatersheds in the SRB under consideration for hydrologic modeling. The projections for 2050 show losses of open space in our selected watersheds that range from a low of 0.6% in the Young Woman’s Creek watershed, to a high of 16.9% in the Little Conestoga watershed.
Hydrologic modeling: Multiple steps were used to develop an approach towards integrated water budgets (e.g., evapotranspiration, soil water, ground water, precipitation) within the wetland and at the wetland interface. When comparing the model results to data from monitoring wells in the wetland, we determined that a nested approach would better capture the variability around the wetland’s contributing area. The nested approach then focused on increasing resolution both within the wetland and in the surrounding contributing area to the wetland. We also explored the best approach to initializing the model through conducting a “relaxation” experiment. Finally, we began to address the hydrologic classification of wetland cells with respect to the frequency of time groundwater level is within the top 30 cm of soil through the simulation period. This scheme will be used to estimate the probability of persistence of a wetland. Model set-up and exploratory runs have been completed for a subset of the study watersheds.
Ecological responses: We are evaluating riverine headwater ecosystems along gradients of water source and adjacent land cover. We are assessing their hydrologic characteristics using data from wells, and their biological diversity through sampling of aquatic macrointervertebrates. We completed development of a GIS-based classification tool for delineating hydrogeomorphically complex unconstrained reaches to assist in choosing site locations for rapid and intensive biological assessments. Additional activities this year included: Completed installation of shallow groundwater monitoring wells at 10 intensive data collection sites; completed development of a rapid assessment protocol and applied it at sites selected using the reach classification tool (about 50% complete); collected elevation measurements along one or more super-site transects; collected plant community data; and collected and processed additional macroinvertebrate samples for fall season.
Future Activities:
Using climate scenarios and land cover scenarios developed as described above, the following hydrologic model runs will be completed for each study basin: (1) 2004-2010 (present); (2) 1978-1997 (observed climate, without land use change); (3) 1978-1997 (modeled climate, without landuse change); (4) 2046-2066 (future climate, without land use change); (5) 2046-2066 (future climate, with land use change). The resulting hydrologic scenarios will be used to forecast changes in (a) the area of wetland ecosystems and (b) their ecological services (macroinvertebrate and plant biodiversity) in the selected study basins. A probability surface will be developed to identify where non-linearities and/or thresholds in wetland response occur.Journal Articles on this Report : 1 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. 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![exit EPA](https://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/epafiles_misc_exitepadisc.gif)
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.