Advertisement

Consolidated sediment resuspension in model vegetated canopies

  • Jordi Colomer
  • Aleix Contreras
  • Andrew Folkard
  • Teresa SerraEmail author
Original Article
  • 80 Downloads

Abstract

Aquatic plants, turbulence and sediment fluxes interact with each other in a complex, non-linear fashion. While most studies have considered turbulence as being generated primarily by mean flow, it can, however, also be generated by the action of the wind or by the night cooling convection at the surface of the water column. Here, we study turbulent interaction with vegetation and the effects it has on sediment suspension, in the absence of mean flow. In a water tank containing a base layer of sediment, turbulence was generated by oscillating a grid with the main objective being to determine the differences in sediment resuspension in sediment beds over a wide range of consolidation times (1 h–3 days), for a set of model canopies with different structural characteristics: density and flexibility, and for three types of sediment beds. The greater the consolidation time was, the lower the sediment resuspension. For bed consolidation times below 6 h, the concentration of resuspended sediment was approximately constant and had no dependence on turbulence intensity. However, for higher bed consolidation times, between 6 and 3 days, the resuspension of the sediment beds increased with turbulence intensity (defined in terms of turbulent kinetic energy; TKE hereafter). The TKE within the sparse flexible canopies was higher than that in the sparse rigid canopies, while within the dense flexible canopies it was below that of the rigid canopies. Therefore, the sediment resuspension in the sparse flexible canopies was greater than that of the sparse rigid canopies. In contrast, the sediment resuspension in the dense flexible canopies was lower than that of the dense rigid canopies. Using different sediment types, the results of the study indicate that sediments with greater concentrations of small particles (muddy beds) have higher concentrations of resuspended sediment than sediment beds that are composed of larger particle sizes (sandy beds).

Keywords

Oscillating grid Isotropic turbulence Sediment re-suspension Turbulent kinetic energy Submerged vegetation 

List of symbols

A

Total area studied (cm2)

ADV

Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter

b

Plant width (mm)

C

Suspended sediment concentration (μg L−1)

Ct

Suspended sediment concentration with time (μg L−1)

C0

Initial suspended sediment concentration, at t = 0 s (μg L−1)

CSS

Relative suspended sediment concentration in the steady state (μg L−1)

D

Diameter of the plant model (mm)

E

Modulus of elasticity (Pa)

F

Grid oscillation frequency (s−1)

hw

Mean water depth (m)

hS

Length of the rigid canopy model (m)

k

Turbulent kinetic energy

k0

Turbulent kinetic energy profile at the boundary

l

Integral length scale (mm)

M

Spacing between bars in oscillating grid (m)

n

Number of plants per square meter

OGT

Oscillating Grid Turbulence

PVC

Polyvinyl chloride

R2

Correlation

s

Stroke (m)

SFV

Submerged Flexible Vegetation

SPF

Solid Plant Fraction (%)

SRV

Submerged Rigid Vegetation

t

Time (s)

TKE

Turbulent Kinetic Energy (m2 s−2)

TSS

Total Suspended Sediment (g L−1)

u, v, w

Components of the Eulerian velocity

U

Time averaged velocity (m s−1)

u′

Turbulent component of velocity (m s−1)

WP

Without plants

z

Vertical direction

z0

Distance from the grid to the water surface (m)

λ1

Lambda parameter 1

λ2

Lambda parameter 2

ρω

Water density (kg m−3)

ρv

Plant density (kg m−3)

ν

Kinematic viscosity (m2 s−1)

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the University of Girona, through the Grant MPCUdG2016-006 and by the Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad of the Spanish Government through the Grant CGL2017-86515-P.

References

  1. 1.
    Vermaat J, Santamaria L, Roos P (2000) Water flow across and sediment trapping in submerged macrophyte beds of contrasting growth form. Arch fur Hydrobiol 148:549–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Madsen JD, Chambers PA, James WF et al (2001) The interaction between water movement, sediment dynamics and submersed macrophytes. Hydrobiologia 444:71–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pujol D, Colomer J, Serra T, Casamitjana X (2010) Effect of submerged aquatic vegetation on turbulence induced by an oscillating grid. Cont Shelf Res 30:1019–1029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ward L, Kemp W, Boynton W (1984) The influence of waves and seagrass communities on suspended particulates in an estuarine embayment. Mar Geol 59:85–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Koch EW (2001) Beyond light: physical, geological, and geochemical parameters as possible submersed aquatic vegetation habitat requirements. Estuaries 24:1.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1352808 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Boer WF (2007) Seagrass-sediment interactions, positive feeedbacks and cretical thresholds for occurrence: a review. Hydrobiologia 591:5–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carr J, D’Odorico P, McGlathery K, Wiberg P (2010) Stability and bistability of seagrass ecosystems in shallow coastal lagoons: role of feedbacks with sediment resuspension and light attenuation. J Geophys Res Biogeosci 115:1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JG001103 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Van Der Heide T, Van Nes EH, Geerling GW et al (2007) Positive feedbacks in seagrass ecosystems: implications for success in conservation and restoration. Ecosystems 10:1311–1322.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-007-9099-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhu M, Zhu G, Nurminen L et al (2015) The influence of macrophytes on sediment resuspension and the effect of associated nutrients in a shallow and Large Lake (Lake Taihu, China). PLoS ONE 10:1–20.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127915 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wu T, Timo H, Qin B et al (2016) In-situ erosion of cohesive sediment in a large shallow lake experiencing long-term decline in wind speed. J Hydrol 539:254–264.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.05.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gacia E, Duarte CM (2001) Sediment retention by a Mediterranean Posidonia oceanica meadow: the balance between deposition and resuspension. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 52:505–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Granata TC, Serra T, Colomer J et al (2001) Flow and particle distributions in a nearshore seagrass meadow before and after a storm. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 218:95–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pujol D, Serra T, Colomer J, Casamitjana X (2013) Flow structure in canopy models dominated by progressive waves. J Hydrol 486:281–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pujol D, Casamitjana X, Serra T, Colomer J (2013) Canopy-scale turbulence under oscillatory flow. Cont Shelf Res 66:9–18.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2013.06.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ros À, Colomer J, Serra T et al (2014) Experimental observations on sediment resuspension within submerged model canopies under oscillatory flow. Cont Shelf Res 91:220–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ondiviela B, Losada IJ, Lara JL et al (2014) The role of seagrasses in coastal protection in a changing climate. Coast Eng 87:158–168.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2013.11.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Black KS, Tolhurst TJ, Paterson DM, Hagerthey SE (2002) Working with natural cohesive sediments. J Hydraul Eng 128:2–8.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tinoco RO, Coco G (2016) A laboratory study on sediment resuspension within arrays of rigid cylinders. Adv Water Resour 92:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2016.04.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yang Y, Wang YP, Gao S et al (2016) Sediment resuspension in tidally dominated coastal environments: new insights into the threshold for initial movement. Ocean Dyn 66:401–417.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10236-016-0930-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Horppila J, Kaitaranta J, Joensuu L, Nurminen L (2013) Influence of emergent macrophyte (Phragmites australis) density on water turbulence and erosion of organic-rich sediment. J Hydrodyn Ser B 25:288–293.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-6058(13)60365-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bouma T, Friedrichs M, Klaassen P et al (2009) Effects of shoot stiffness, shoot size and current velocity on scouring sediment from around seedlings and propagules. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 388:293–297.  https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08130 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lawson S, Wiberg P, McGlathery K, Fugate D (2007) Wind-driven sediment suspension controls light availability in a shallow coastal lagoon. Estuaries Coasts 30:102.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02782971 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hansen JCR, Reidenbach MA (2013) Seasonal growth and senescence of a Zostera marina seagrass meadow alters wave-dominated flow and sediment suspension within a coastal bay. Estuaries Coasts 36:1099–1114.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12237-013-9620-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mendez F, Losada I, Losada M (1999) Hydrodynamics induced by wind waves in a vegetation field. J Geophys Res Ocean 104:18383–18396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nepf HM (1999) Drag, turbulence, and diffusion in flow through emergent vegetation. Water Resour Res 35:479–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nepf HM, Vivoni E (2000) Flow structure in depth-limited, vegetated flow. J Geophys Res 105:28547–28557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Poggi D, Porporato A, Ridolfi L et al (2003) The effect of vegetation density on canopy sub-layer turbulence. Bound Layer Meteorol 111:565–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Neumeier U (2007) Velocity and turbulence variations at the edge of saltmarshes. Cont Shelf Res 27:1046–1059.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2005.07.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Coates MJ, Folkard AM (2009) The effects of littoral zone vegetation on turbulent mixing in lakes. Ecol Modell 220:2726Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    De Silva IP, Fernando HJS (1994) Oscillating grids as a source of nearly isotropic turbulence. Phys Fluids 6:2455–2464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Colomer J, Peters F, Marrasé C (2005) Experimental analysis of coagulation of particles under low-shear flow. Water Res 39:2994–3000.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2005.04.076 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Serra T, Colomer J, Logan BE (2008) Efficiency of different shear devices on flocculation. Water Res 42:1113–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nokes R (1988) On the entrainmnent rate across a density interface. J Fluid Mech 188:185–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Holzner M, Liberzon A, Guala M et al (2006) Generalized detection of a turbulent front generated by an oscillating grid. Exp Fluids 41:711–719.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-006-0193-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Orlins JJ, Gulliver JS (2003) Turbulence quantification and sediment resuspension in an oscillating grid chamber. Exp Fluids 34:662–677.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-003-0595-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tsai C-H, Lick W (1986) A portable device for measuring sediment resuspension. J Great Lakes Res 12:314–321.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0380-1330(86)71731-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Huppert HE, Turner JS, Hallworth MA (1995) Sedimentation and entrainment in dense layers of suspended particles stirred by an oscillating grid. J Fluid Mech 289:263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    El Allaoui N, Serra T, Soler M et al (2015) Modified hydrodynamics in canopies with longitudinal gaps exposed to oscillatory flows. J Hydrol 531:840–849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Redondo JM, De Madron XD, Medina P et al (2001) Comparison of sediment resuspension measurements in sheared and zero-mean turbulent flows. Cont Shelf Res 21:2095–2103.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-4343(01)00044-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ghisalberti M, Nepf HM (2002) Mixing layers and coherent structures in vegetated aquatic flows. J Geophys Res Oceans 107:C2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Folkard AM (2005) Hydrodynamics of model Posidonia oceanica patches in shallow water. Limnol Oceanogr 50:1592–1600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    El Allaoui N, Serra T, Colomer J et al (2016) Interactions between fragmented seagrass canopies and the local hydrodynamics. PLoS ONE 11:1–19.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156264 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Guillén JE, Sánchez JL, Jiménez S et al (2013) Evolution of Posidonia oceanica seagrass meadows and its implications for management. J Sea Res 83:65–71.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seares.2013.04.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Rupprecht F, Möller I, Paul M et al (2017) Vegetation-wave interactions in salt marshes under storm surge conditions. Ecol Eng 100:301–315.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2016.12.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pedlow CL, Dibble ED, Getsinger KD (2006) Littoral habitat heterogeneity and shifts in plant composition relative to a fall whole-lake fluridone application in Perch lake, Michigan. J Aquat Plant Manag 44:26–31Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Serra T, Fernando HJS, Rodríguez RV (2004) Effects of emergent vegetation on lateral diffusion in wetlands. Water Res 38:139–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Neumeier U, Amos CL (2006) Turbulence reduction by the canopy of coastal Spartina salt-marshes. J Coast Res 39:433–439Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Serra T, Granata T, Colomer J et al (2003) The role of advection and turbulent mixing in the vertical distribution of phytoplankton. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 56:53–62.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7714(02)00120-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Serra T, Soler M, Julia R et al (2005) Behaviour and dynamics of a hydrothermal plume in Lake Banyoles, Catalonia, NE Spain. Sedimentology 52:795–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Van Rijn LC (2007) Unified view of sediment transport by currents and waves. I: initiation of motion, bed roughness, and bed-load transport. J Hydraul Eng 133:649–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Blott SJ, Pye K (2012) Particle size scales and classification of sediment types based on particle size distributions: review and recommended procedures. Sedimentology 59:2071–2096.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3091.2012.01335.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Goring DG, Nikora VI (2002) Despiking acoustic doppler velocimeter data. J Hydraul Eng 128:117–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Hopfinger E, Toly J (1976) Spatially decaying turbulence and its relation to mixing across density interfaces. J Fluid Mech 78:155–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Matsunaga N, Sugihara Y, Komatsu T, Masuda A (1999) Quantitative properties of oscillating-grid turbulence in a homogeneous fluid. Fluid Dyn Res 25:147–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Wan Mohtar WHM (2016) Oscillating-grid turbulence at large strokes: revising the equation of Hopfinger and Toly. J Hydrodyn 28:473–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Rotach MW (1993) Turbulence close to a rough urban surface. Part I: Reynolds stress. Bound Layer Meteorol 65:1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Neumeier U, Ciavola P (2004) Flow resistance and associated sedimentary processes in a Spartina maritima salt-marsh. J Coast Res 20:435–447Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Oguz E, Elginoz N, Koroglu A, Kabdasli MS (2013) The effect of reed beds on wave attenuation and suspended sediment concentration. J Coast Res 65:356–361.  https://doi.org/10.2112/SI65-061.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Green MO, Coco G (2013) Review of wave-driven sediment resuspension and transport in estuaries. Rev Geophys 52:77–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    G.-Tóth L L, Parpala L, Balogh C et al (2011) Zooplankton community response to enhanced turbulence generated by water-level decrease in Lake Balaton, the largest shallow lake in Central Europe. Limnol Oceanogr 56:2211–2222.  https://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2011.56.6.2211 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Zhou J, Qin B, Han X (2017) The synergetic effects of turbulence and turbidity on the zooplankton community structure in large, shallow Lake Taihu. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:1168–1175.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-0262-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Zikhali V, Tirok K, Stretch D (2015) Sediment resuspension in a shallow lake with muddy substrates: st Lucia, South Africa. Cont Shelf Res 108:112–120.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2015.08.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Wu D, Hua Z (2014) The effect of vegetation on sediment resuspension and phosphorus release under hydrodynamic disturbance in shallow lakes. Ecol Eng 69:55–62.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.03.059 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Hendriks IE, Sintes T, Bouma TJ, Duarte CM (2008) Experimental assessment and modeling evaluation of the effects of the seagrass Posidonia oceanica on flow and particle trapping. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 356:163–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Chen T, Xu Y, Zhu S, Cui F (2015) Combining physico-chemical analysis with a Daphnia magna bioassay to evaluate a recycling technology for drinking water treatment plant waste residuals. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 122:368–376.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2015.08.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Li EH, Li W, Liu GH, Yuan LY (2008) The effect of different submerged macrophyte species and biomass on sediment resuspension in a shallow freshwater lake. Aquat Bot 88:121–126.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquabot.2007.09.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Lo EL, Bentley SJ, Xu K (2014) Experimental study of cohesive sediment consolidation and resuspension identifies approaches for coastal restoration: lake Lery, Louisiana. Geo Mar Lett 34:499–509.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00367-014-0381-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    James CS, Birkhead AL, Jordanova AA, O’Sullivan JJ (2004) Flow resistance of emergent vegetation. J Hydraul Eng 42:390–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jordi Colomer
    • 1
  • Aleix Contreras
    • 1
  • Andrew Folkard
    • 2
  • Teresa Serra
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of PhysicsEscola Politècnica Superior II, University of GironaGironaSpain
  2. 2.Lancaster Environment CentreLancasterUK

Personalised recommendations