Aquatic Geochemistry

, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp 337–355 | Cite as

Estimation of Pore Water Concentrations from DGT Profiles: A Modelling Approach


The technique of Diffusional Gradients in Thin-films (DGT) can be used in situ to obtain high resolution profiles of trace-metals in sediment pore waters. Substances sampled by DGT continuously diffuse through a ‘diffusion layer’ comprising a hydrogel prior to being immobilized by binding to a resin layer. DGT therefore measures a time averaged flux from the pore water to the resin. Interpretation of this flux as pore water concentration is problematic for two reasons. Firstly, the pore water concentration adjacent to the sampler may become depleted by the DGT induced flux. Secondly, if there are steep vertical chemical gradients in the pore waters, they may relax by diffusion along the gradient within the gel layer. The extent of relaxation depends on the diffusion coefficient, gradient steepness, and diffusion layer thickness. Two dimensional (2D) numerical models of DGT deployments in horizontally uniform sediments were used to investigate to what extent DGT measured profiles accurately reproduced (a) the shape of pore water concentration profiles, and (b) the magnitude of pore water concentrations. A method is developed which translates high resolution DGT measured flux profiles into reliable estimates of pore water concentrations. Linear relationships are given which estimate the minimum DGT measured peak width (as a function of diffusion layer thickness) that ensures accurate reproduction of the shape and the magnitude of peaks in pore water concentrations. Peaks in DGT profiles obtained from assemblies with diffusion layer thicknesses of 0.3 mm (0.5 mm) should be at least 1.2 mm (1.8 mm) wide for their shape to reflect accurately their true shape in the pore water, and at least 1.7 mm (2.7 mm) wide to ensure the peak concentration is accurately estimated.

concentration-depth profiles DGT modelling pore water sediments 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Berner, R. A. (1980) Early Diagenesis. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bielders, C. L., Debacker, L. W., and Delvaux, B. (1990) Particle density of volcanic soils as measured with a gas pycnometer. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 54(3), 822-826.Google Scholar
  3. Boudreau, B. P. (1996) The diffusive tortuosity of fine grained sediments. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 60(16), 3139-3142.Google Scholar
  4. Boudreau, B. P. (1997) Diagenetic Models and Their Implementation. Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Davison, W., Fones, G., and Grime, G. W. (1997) Dissolved metals in surface sediments and a microbial mat at 100 µm resolution. Nature 387, 885-888.Google Scholar
  6. Davison, W. and Zhang, H. (1994a) High-resolution trace-metal gradients at the sediment-water interface. Abstracts of Papers of the American Chemical Society 207(Pt1), 100-GEOC.Google Scholar
  7. Davison, W. and Zhang, H. (1994b) In-situ speciation measurements of trace components in natural waters using thin-film gels. Nature 367(6463), 546-548.Google Scholar
  8. Davison, W., Zhang, H., and Grime, G.W. (1994) Performance-characteristics of gel probes used for measuring the chemistry of pore waters. Environ. Sci. Technol. 28(9), 1623-1632.Google Scholar
  9. Harper, M. P., Davison, W., and Tych, W. (1997) Temporal, spatial and resolution constraints for porewater sampling devices using diffusional equilibration: dialysis and DET. Environ. Sci. Technol. 31(11), 3110-3119.Google Scholar
  10. Harper, M. P., Davison, W., Tych, W., and Zhang, H. (1998) Kinetics of metal exchange between solids and solutions in sediments and soils interpreted from DGT measured fluxes. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 62, 2757-2770.Google Scholar
  11. Harper, M. P., Davison, W., and Tych, W. (1999) One dimensional views of three dimensional sediments. Environ. Sci. Technol. in press.Google Scholar
  12. Honeyman, B. D. and Santschi, P. H. (1988) Metals in aquatic systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 22(8), 863-871.Google Scholar
  13. Nyffeler, U. P., Li, Y. H., and Santschi, P. (1984) A kinetic approach to describe trace element distribution between particles and solution in natural aquatic systems. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 48, 1513-1522.Google Scholar
  14. Nyffeler, U. P., Santschi, P.H., and Li, Y. H. (1986) The relevance of scavenging kinetics to modelling of sediment-water interactions in natural waters. Limnol. Oceanogr. 31(2), 277-292.Google Scholar
  15. Santschi, P., Hohener, P., Benoit, G., and Buchholtz-ten-Brink, M. (1990) Chemical processes at the sediment water interface. Marine Chem. 30(1–3), 269-315.Google Scholar
  16. Stumm, W. and Morgan, J. J. (1996) Aquatic Chemistry. Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
  17. Zhang, H. and Davison, W. (1995) Performance-characteristics of diffusion gradients in thin-films for the in-situ measurement of trace-metals in aqueous-solution. Anal. Chem. 67(19), 3391-3400.Google Scholar
  18. Zhang, H., Davison, W., Miller, S., and Tych, W. (1995) In-situ high-resolution measurements of fluxes of Ni, Cu, Fe, and Mn and concentrations of Zn and Cd in porewaters by DGT. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 59(20), 4181-4192.Google Scholar
  19. Zhang, H., Davison, W., Knight, B., and McGrath, S. (1998) In situ measurement of solution concentrations and fluxes of trace metals in soils using DGT. Environ. Sci. Technol. 32(5), 704-710.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael P. Harper
    • 1
  • William Davison
    • 1
  • Wlodek Tych
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Environmental Science, Institute of Environmental and Natural SciencesLancaster UniversityLancasterUK

Personalised recommendations