Advances in Monitoring to Understand Flow Paths in Karst: Comparison of Historic and Recent Data from the Valley and Ridge of Pennsylvania
- 332 Downloads
We revisited seven karst springs studied in 1971 to examine how advances in monitoring techniques influence our understanding of spring flow paths and recharge. These springs in the Valley and Ridge of Pennsylvania offer a variety of spring discharge volumes and physical appearance (visible conduits at the discharge site versus fracture networks). We focused on temperature for a comparison between historic and recent trends because it is the least likely to differ in value due to updated measurement techniques. High-resolution temperature data showed variations in storm responses (not observed with historic data) which distinguish among springs. We also used automatic samplers to track geochemical changes during storm events. Variations in CO2 concentrations and Mg/Ca ratios provided indicators of fast and slow recharge and changes in flow paths over time. Some springs showed similar response from storm to storm and some varied. Rare earth elements (REEs) were analyzed in baseflow samples to evaluate their potential for distinguishing spring source rock along flow pathways. The REE grouped springs differently than their temperature and storm response geochemistry. This study showed that classification of karst springs varied depending on the parameter monitored. This variation further points out the complexity of karst flow paths and recharge. Multiple methods and long-term monitoring are needed to interpret karst spring discharge and provide sampling schemes for source water protection.
KeywordsKarst REE Stormwater sampling Temperature
Funding from this project was provided by the National Science Foundation’s Hydrologic Sciences Program under award number 1417477. Several undergraduate research assistants contributed to data collection and analysis: Josh Barna, Madison Fink, and Arnetia Carroll. Special thanks to the landowners of the springs and sinkhole who allowed us to access these features and to Will White and Evan Shuster who found and monitored the initial set of springs, inspiring many follow-on studies.
- 18.Toran L, Roman E (2006) Outgassing in a combined fracture and conduit karst aquifer near Lititz Spring, Pennsylvania. Geol Soc Am Spec Pap 404(23):275–282Google Scholar
- 27.Toran L, Reisch CE (2013) Using stormwater hysteresis to characterize karst spring discharge. Ground Water 51(4):575–587Google Scholar
- 28.Banner JL, Hanson GN, Meyers WJ (1988) Rare earth element and Nd isotopic variation in regionally extensive dolomites from the Burlington Keokuk Formation (Mississippian); implications for REE mobility during carbonate diagenesis. J Sediment Petrol 58(3):415–432Google Scholar
- 30.Tang J, Johannesson KH (2005) Rare earth element concentrations, speciation, and fractionation along groundwater flow paths: the Carrizo Sand (Texas) and Upper Floridan aquifers. In: Johannesson KH (ed) Rare earth elements in groundwater flow systems. Springer, Netherlands, pp 223–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Tarbert JA, Vesper DJ (2010) A preliminary evaluation of rare earth elements in karst spring water and their potential as indicators of water source. Presented at the Geological Society of America Northeastern and Southeastern section joint meeting, 13–16 March, 2010, Abstracts with Programs 42(1):192Google Scholar
- 34.Barna JM (2017) Mg/Ca and PCO2 storm hysteresis as an indicator of flowpaths and recharge sources at two karst springs in Central Pennsylvania. Senior Honors Thesis, Bucknell UniversityGoogle Scholar
- 35.Parkhurst DL, Appelo CAJ (1999) User’s guide to PHREEQC (version 2): a computer program for speciation, batch-reaction, one-dimensional transport, and inverse geochemical calculations. US Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation, Reston, pp 99–4259Google Scholar
- 37.National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2017) https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/temp-and-precip/state-temps/. Accessed Sept 2017
- 42.Henderson P (1984) Rare earth element geochemistry (developments in geochemistry 2). Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar