The strengths and weaknesses of using hydrological connectivity to interpret stream biogeochemistry
The strengths and weaknesses of using hydrological connectivity to interpret stream biogeochemistry
Previously Published Material: Some of the results used in this review presentation were presented at the CGU annual general meeting in 2013.
Abstract ID#: 33512
English Abstract:
The concept of hydrological connectivity emerged with the broad acceptance that the non-linear streamflow response to precipitation or snowmelt inputs is partially due to heterogeneous landscape storage capacities, thresholds, and runoff pathways across a range of scales. Because hydrological connectivity is defined as the ability of water to transfer across the landscape, its nature could have implications for biogeochemical regimes. This presentation will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using hydrological connectivity in the interpretation of biogeochemical connectivity with two examples from Canadian watersheds. It will be shown that peak hydrological connectivity is not necessarily synonymous with peak biogeochemical connectivity. Secondly, connectivity can be simultaneous, but not common to all constituents. These examples demonstrate that 1) the definition of metrics of both the connection presence and strength are crucial for integrated analysis of biogeochemical and hydrological connectivity; 2) the interplay of sources, sinks and pathways of water and constituents influences observed patterns; and 3) biogeochemical cycles are at least as important as hydrological connectivity to defining stream biogeochemical responses and regimes.