JEQ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Published online 8 August 2008
Published in J Environ Qual 37:1894-1908 (2008)
DOI: 10.2134/jeq2007.0590
© 2008 American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Richards, R. P.
Right arrow Articles by Merryfield, B. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Richards, R. P.
Right arrow Articles by Merryfield, B. J.
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Richards, R. P.
Right arrow Articles by Merryfield, B. J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Water Quality
Right arrow Soil Erosion
Right arrow Best Management Practices
Right arrow Water Pollution

Thirty-Year Trends in Suspended Sediment in Seven Lake Erie Tributaries

R. Peter Richards*, David B. Baker, John P. Crumrine, Jack W. Kramer, D. Ellen Ewing and Barbara J. Merryfield

National Center for Water Quality Research, Heidelberg College, 310 E. Market Street, Tiffin, OH 44883


Figure 1
View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 1. Map of the study area showing the locations of the seven sampling locations. The two smaller dots show the positions of the Rock Creek (upper) and Honey Creek (lower) stations.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 2. Trends for the River Raisin, Michigan. Left, top to bottom: flow, sediment concentration, and daily load. Right, top to bottom: flow-adjusted concentration, seasonally adjusted concentration (dark is summer, light is winter), and change in sediment concentration per decade in six flow classes.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 3. Trends for the Maumee River, Ohio. Left, top to bottom: flow, sediment concentration, and daily load. Right, top to bottom: flow-adjusted concentration, seasonally adjusted concentration (dark is summer, light is winter), and change in sediment concentration per decade in six flow classes.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 4. Trends for the Sandusky River, Ohio. Left, top to bottom: flow, sediment concentration, and daily load. Right, top to bottom: flow-adjusted concentration, seasonally adjusted concentration (dark is summer, light is winter), and change in sediment concentration per decade in six flow classes.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 5. Trends for Honey Creek, Ohio. Left, top to bottom: flow, sediment concentration, and daily load. Right, top to bottom: flow-adjusted concentration, seasonally adjusted concentration (dark is summer, light is winter), and change in sediment concentration per decade in six flow classes.

 

Figure 6
View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 6. Trends for Rock Creek, Ohio. Left, top to bottom: flow, sediment concentration, and daily load. Right, top to bottom: flow-adjusted concentration, seasonally adjusted concentration (dark is summer, light is winter), and change in sediment concentration per decade in six flow classes.

 

Figure 7
View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 7. Trends for the Cuyahoga River, Ohio. Left, top to bottom: flow, sediment concentration, and daily load. Right, top to bottom: flow-adjusted concentration, seasonally adjusted concentration (dark is summer, light is winter), and change in sediment concentration per decade in six flow classes.

 

Figure 8
View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 8. Trends for the Grand River, Ohio. Left, top to bottom: flow, sediment concentration, and daily load. Right, top to bottom: flow-adjusted concentration, seasonally adjusted concentration (dark is summer, light is winter), and change in sediment concentration per decade in six flow classes.

 

Figure 9
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 9. Trend in the yearly intercept returned from an ANCOVA of the natural log of total suspended sediment concentration as a function of natural log of flow and YEAR, where YEAR was treated as a categorical variable. The downward trend in this figure documents a change in the sediment rating curve over time, leading to lower suspended sediment concentrations for a given flow.

 




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education		 Vadose Zone Journal
Soil Science Society of America Journal Journal of Plant Registrations The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2008 by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.