Water, Air, and Soil Pollution

, Volume 85, Issue 3, pp 1599–1604 | Cite as

Covered catchment experiment at Gårdsjön: changes in runoff chemistry after four years of experimentally reduced acid deposition

  • Filip Moldan
  • Hans Hultberg
  • Ingvar Andersson
Part VI Ecosystem Experiments — Case Studies

Abstract

Atmospheric deposition was almost entirely excluded from the forested headwater catchment G1 ROOF, by means of a 7000 m2 plastic roof that prevents rain and throughfall from reaching the ground. Under the roof an irrigation system was installed to simulate a natural precipitation regime. The intercepted throughfall was substituted by the same amount of clean “pre-industrial throughfall”. The experiment started in April 1991. During the four years of the treatment, 2960 mm (18 600 m3) of sprinkled solution was applied under the roof, which is about 15 times the mean water storage of the catchment. After four years of treatment major changes in runoff chemistry were observed. The exclusion of all non-marine sulphate (SO42−) input to the catchment (i.e. ca 75 % of total SO42− input excluded) resulted in significant decline of sulphate in runoff through all four years of treatment. During the fourth year, annual volume weighted SO42− concentration was 46 % lower than the two years prior to the treatment. Concentrations of inorganic aluminium Al3+ declined 52 % and Mg2+ declined 54 %. No change of H+ concentration was detected. As the treatment proceeds there seems to be a trend towards less negative acid neutralising capacity in runoff.

Key words

catchment manipulation deposition exclusion roof spruce SW Sweden Gårdsjön 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersson, F. and Olsson, B. (eds.): 1985, Ecological Bulletins, 37.Google Scholar
  2. Bishop K. H. and Hultberg, H.: 1995, Ambio, 24, 85–91.Google Scholar
  3. Bredemeier, M, Blanck, K., Lamersdorf, N., et al.: 1995, Forest Ecol. Manag. 71, 31–44.Google Scholar
  4. Boxman, A. W., van Dam, D., va Dijk, H. F. G., et al.: 1995, Forest Ecol. Manag. 71, 7–29.Google Scholar
  5. Driscoll, C. T.: 1984, Int. J. Environ. Anal. Chem. 16, 267–284.Google Scholar
  6. Carpenter, S. R., Frost, T. M., Heisey, D., et al.: 1989, Ecology 70, 1142–1152.Google Scholar
  7. Hanssen, K., Beier, C., Gundersen, P., et al.:1995, Plant and Soil 168–169, 623–632.Google Scholar
  8. Hultberg, H.: 1985, Ecological Bulletins, 37, 133–157.Google Scholar
  9. Hultberg, H. and Grennfelt, P.: 1992, Env. Pol., 75, 215–222.Google Scholar
  10. Mörth, C.M. and Torssander, P.: 1995, Wat. Air Soil Pollut. 79, 261–278.Google Scholar
  11. Reuss, J. O. and Johnson, D. W.: 1986, Ecological Studies 59, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1–119.Google Scholar
  12. Skeffington, R. A. and Brown, D. J. A.: 1992, Env. Pollut. 77, 227–234.Google Scholar
  13. Wright, R. F., Lotse, E. and Semb, A.: 1988, Nature 334, 670–675.Google Scholar
  14. Wright, R. F., Lotse, E. and Semb, A.: 1993, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 50, 258–268.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Filip Moldan
    • 1
  • Hans Hultberg
    • 1
  • Ingvar Andersson
    • 1
  1. 1.Swedish Environmental Research Institute (IVL)GothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations