, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 458–472 | Cite as

Characterizing hydrology and the importance of ground-water discharge in natural and constructed wetlands

  • Randall J. Hunt
  • John F. Walker
  • David P. Krabbenhoft


Although considered the most important component for the establishment and persistence of wetlands, hydrology has been hard to characterize and linkages between hydrology and other environmental conditions are often poorly understood. In this work, methods for characterizing a wetland’s hydrology from hydrographs were developed, and the importance of ground water to the physical and geochemical conditions in the root zone was investigated. Detailed sampling of nearly continuous hydrographs showed that sites with greater ground-water discharge had higher water tables and more stable hydrographs. Subsampling of the continuous hydrograph failed to characterize the sites correctly, even though the wetland complex is located in a strong regional ground-water-discharge area. By comparing soil-moisture-potential measurements to the water-table hydrograph at one site, we noted that the amount of root-zone saturation was not necessarily driven by the water-table hydrograph but can be a result of other soil parameters (i.e., soil texture and associated capillary fringe). Ground-water discharge was not a significant determinant of maximum or average temperatures in the root zone. High ground-water discharge was associated with earliest date of thaw and shortest period of time that the root zone was frozen, however. Finally, the direction and magnitude of shallow ground-water flow was found to affect the migration and importance of a geochemical species. Areas of higher ground-water discharge had less downward penetration of CO2 generated in the root zone. In contrast, biotically derived CO2 was able to penetrate the deeper ground-water system in areas of ground-water recharge. Although ground-water flows are difficult to characterize, understanding these components is critical to the success of wetland restoration and creation efforts.

Key Words

hydrology ground water hydrogeology Monte Carlo temperature geochemistry 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. American Public Health Association. 1995. Standard Methods for the Examination Of Water and Wastewater, 19th edition. American Public Health Association, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, M. P. and C. J. Bowser. 1986. The role of ground-water in delaying lake acidification. Water Resources Research 22:1101–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashworth, S. A. 1997. Comparison between restored and reference sedge meadow wetlands in south-central Wisconsin. Wetlands 17:518–527.Google Scholar
  4. Bedford, B. L. 1996. The need to define hydrologic equivalence at the landscape scale for freshwater wetland mitigation. Ecological Applications 6:57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brinson, M. M. 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, MS, USA. Wetlands Research Program Technical Report WRP-DE-4.Google Scholar
  6. Brown, G. H. 1996. Three-dimensional ground-water model of natural and constructed wetlands near Wilton, Wisconsin. M.S. Thesis. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA.Google Scholar
  7. Campbell Scientific. 1990. Model 227 Delmhorst cylindrical soil moisture block instruction manual. Campbell Scientific Inc. Logan, UT, USA.Google Scholar
  8. Cole, C. A., R. P. Brooks, and D. H. Wardrop. 1997. Wetland hydrology as a function of hydrogeomorphic (HGM) subclass. Wetlands 17:456–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carter, V. 1986. An overview of the hydrologic concerns related to wetlands in the United States. Canadian Journal of Botany 64:364–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carter, V. 1996. Environmental gradients, boundaries and buffers: an overview. p. 9–18.In G. Mulamoottil, B. G. Warner, and E. A. McBean (eds) Wetlands: Environmental Gradients, Boundaries and Buffers. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL, USA.Google Scholar
  11. Erwin, K. L. 1989. Wetland Evaluation for Restoration and Creation. p. 239–254In J. A. Kusler and M. E. Kentula (eds.) Wetland Creation and Restoration: The Status of the Science, Volume 1—The Status of the Science. USEPA EPA 600/3-89/038b.Google Scholar
  12. Farouki, O. T. 1981. Thermal Properties of Soil. Monograph 81-1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH, USA.Google Scholar
  13. Freeze, R. A. and J. A. Cherry. 1979. Ground-water. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA.Google Scholar
  14. Gerritsen, J. and H. S. Greening. 1989. Marsh seed banks of the Okefenokee Swamp: effects of hydrologic regime and nutrients. Ecology 70:750–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Good, R. E., D. F. Whigham, and R. L. Simpson. 1978. Freshwater Wetlands. Academic Press, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  16. Greeson, P. E., J. R. Clark and J. E. Clark. 1979. Wetland Functions and Values: the State of our Understanding. American Water Resources Association, Minneapolis, MN, USA.Google Scholar
  17. Harvey, J. W. and W. K. Nuttle 1995. Fluxes of water and solutes in a coastal wetland sediment. Journal of Hydrology 164:109–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hite, C. D. and S. Cheng. 1996. Spatial characterization of hydrogeochemistry within a constructed fen, Greene County, Ohio. Ground Water 34:415–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hughes, P. E., J. S. Hannuksela and W. J. Danchuk. 1981. Flood of July 15, 1978 on the Kickapoo River, Southwestern Wisconsin. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA 653.Google Scholar
  20. Hunt, R. J. 1992. Simulation of drainage ditch and adjacent wetland creation effects on a wetland system using analytic elements. p. 552.In Wetlands: Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference of the Society of Wetland Scientists, New Orleans, LA. Society of Wetland Scientists, Lawrence, KS, USA.Google Scholar
  21. Hunt, R. J., D. P. Krabbenhoft, and M. P. Anderson. 1996. Ground-water inflow measurements in wetland systems. Water Resources Research 32:495–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hunt, R. J., D. P. Krabbenhoft, and M. P. Anderson. 1997. Assessing hydrogeochemical heterogeneity in natural and constructed wetlands. Biogeochemistry 34:271–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hunt, R. J., T. D. Bullen, D. P. Krabbenhoft, and C. Kendall. 1998. Using stable isotopes of water and strontium to investigate a natural and a constructed wetland. Ground Water 36:434–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hurley, J. P., D. E. Armstrong, G. J. Kenoyer, and C. J. Bowser. 1985. Ground-water as a silica source for diatom production in a precipitation-dominated lake. Science 227:1576–1578.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ivanov, K. E. 1981. Water Movement in Mirelands. Academic Press, Inc., New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  26. LaBaugh, J. W. 1986. Wetland ecosystem studies from a hydrologic perspective. Water Resources Bulletin 22:1–10.Google Scholar
  27. Lapham, W. W. 1989. Use of temperature profiles beneath streams to determine rates of vertical ground-water flow and vertical hydraulic conductivity. U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2337.Google Scholar
  28. Lee, D. R. and J. A. Cherry. 1978. A field exercise on ground-water flow using seepage meters and mini-piezometers. Journal of Geological Education 27:6–10.Google Scholar
  29. Long, K. S. and J. M. Nestler. 1996. Hydroperiod changes as clues to impacts on Cache River riparian wetlands. Wetlands 16:379–396.Google Scholar
  30. Lott, R. B. 1997. Estimating Evapotranspiration in Natural and Constructed Ground-water Dominated Wetlands: Traditional and Geochemical Approaches. M.S. Thesis. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.Google Scholar
  31. Mitsch, W. J. and J. G. Gosselink. 1993. Wetlands. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  32. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands. Characteristics and Boundaries. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  33. Novitzki, R. P. 1982. Hydrology of Wisconsin Wetlands. Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, Madison, WI, USA. Information Circular 40.Google Scholar
  34. Nuttle, W. K. 1997. Measurement of wetland hydroperiod using harmonic analysis. Wetlands 17:82–89.Google Scholar
  35. Peters, R. H. 1983. The Ecological Implications of Body Size. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  36. Price, J. 1997. Soil moisture, water tension, and water table relationships in a managed cutover bog. Journal of Hydrology 202:21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rey Benayas, J. M., F. G. Bernáldez, C. Levassor, and B. Peco. 1990. Vegetation of ground water discharge sites in the Douro basin, central Spain. Journal of Vegetation Science 1:461–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Siegel, D. I., J. P. Chanton, L. Stalder, P. H. Glaser, and J. Rivers. 1998. Enrichment in deuterium in water: evidence for methanogenesis by carbonate reduction in the Glacial Lake Agassiz Peatlands, northern Minnesota. EOS 79:S144.Google Scholar
  39. Winter, T. C. 1981. Uncertainties in estimating the water balance of lakes. Water Resources Bulletin 17:82–115.Google Scholar
  40. Zedler, J. B. 1996. Ecological issues in wetland mitigation: an introduction to the forum. Ecological Applications 6:33–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zimmerman, J. H. 1987. A multi-purpose wetland characterization procedure, featuring the hydroperiod. p. 31–48.In J. A. Kusler and G. Brooks (eds.) Wetland Hydrology. Proceedings of the national wetland symposium, Association of State Wetland Managers Technical Report 6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Wetland Scientists 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Randall J. Hunt
    • 1
  • John F. Walker
    • 1
  • David P. Krabbenhoft
    • 1
  1. 1.US Geological Survey-Water Resources DivisionMiddletonUSA

Personalised recommendations