Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byMyles Davis Modified over 9 years ago
1
Spring-neap Variation in Fecal Pellet Properties within Surficial Sediment of the York River Estuary Emily Wei VIMS REU Prospectus Presentation Mentor: Carl Friedrichs and Lindsey Kraatz June 29, 2011
2
Why study fecal pellets? Fecal pellets and flocs Biological influences Presence of fecal pellets and flocs changes seabed surface Studying erosional processes in the York River estuary navigation, engineering, ecology, contaminant spread Clay Bank: deep physical mixing of seabed Spring/neap tidal currents Stronger currents at spring stratification York River estuary Dickhudt (2009)
3
Fecal pellets and flocs coexist in the Clay Bank region Pellets are compact, consolidated sediments processed by benthic organisms Range in size from ~40 um to several mm Pellets are denser than flocs As turbulence increases, more/heavier resilient pellets resuspended Pellets can “armor” seabed, decrease erodibility Flocs are loosely aggregated sediment van der Waals mixing of seawater, particle-clay interactions Glued by extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) Secreted by diatoms and other microorganisms Flocs are not as dense as pellets Flocs have more water content With onset of turbulence, flocs suspended, broken apart Cartwright et. al, (2010); Drake et. al, (2002) Kraeuter and Haven (1970) Fecal Pellets
4
Erodibility of cohesive sediment based on: Water content, grain size, recent disturbance, biological activity Lower water column: Suspended sediment concentrations based on: tidal currents, availability of easily suspended sediment Changes in sediment transport driven by changes in freshwater influx, stratification, and strong spring vs. weak neap tides Freshwater influx More sediment transport/ bed disturbance at Clay Bank Similar to spring tide conditions Less consolidation and higher erodibility Low river flow Less sediment transport/ bed disturbance at Clay bank Similar to neap tide conditions More consolidation and lower erodibility Dickhudt et. al, 2009 Erosion processes River flow
5
There will be a higher fecal pellet concentration at neap tide rather than at spring tide Expected: More fecal pellets will be resuspended at spring tide The percentage of smaller-sized pellets (45 um) will be higher at neap tide Expected: Smaller pellets are resuspended first, so smaller pellets will be in resuspension during stronger spring tidal currents Mud at neap tide will have a higher water content Expected: There will be more flocs at neap tide than at spring tide. Flocs have more water content. Mud at neap tide will have lower erodibility Expected: There will be less bed disturbance and more time for consolidation at neap tide, so consolidation will increase Hypotheses/ Expected Results
6
Methods Sampling cruises coincide with spring/neap Gomex box corer X-ray analysis Core logger Gust microcosm Sliced at 1 cm intervals Water content, sieving Pellet presence/ concentration Sieve aggregated particles disaggregated particles 3 Methodologies compared Cartwright Kraatz Cartwright
7
Sources Cited Cartwright, G.M., C.T. Friedrichs and L.P. Sanford, 2010. In situ characterization of estuarine suspended sediment in the presence of muddy flocs and pellets. (submitted for Publication) Dickhudt, P.J., C.T. Friedrichs, L.C. Schaffner and L.P. Sanford, 2009. Spatial and temporal variation in cohesive sediment erodibility in the York River estuary, eastern USA: A biologically influenced equilibrium modified by seasonal deposition. Marine Geology, 267, 128-140. Friedrichs, C.T., 2009. York River physical oceanography and sediment transport. In: K.A. Moore and W.G. Reay (eds.), A Site Profile of the Chesapeake Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, Virginia. Journal of Coastal Research, SI 57, 17-22. Haas, L.W., 1977. The effect of the spring-neap tidal cycle on the vertical salinity structure of the James, York, and Rappahannock Rivers, Virginia, U.S.A. Estuarine and Coastal Marine Science, 5, 485-496. Kraeuter, J. and D.S. Haven, 1970. Fecal Pellets of Common Invertebrates of Lower York River and Lower Chesapeake Bay, Virginia. Chesapeake Science, 11, 159-173. Rhoads, D.C. and D.K. Young, 1970. The Influence of Deposit-feeding Organisms on Sediment Stability and Community Trophic Structure. Journal of Marine Research 28, 150-177. Rodriguez-Calderon, C., 2010. Spatial and temporal patterns in erosional and depositional processes: physical and biological controls in the York River, Chesapeake Bay, Virginia. M.S. thesis, Virginia Institute of Marine Science/School of Marine Science, The College of William and Mary, Virginia.
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.