ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2017
Synoptic sampling and principal components analysis to identify sources of water and metals to an acid mine drainage stream.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Salty chemical cocktails as water quality signatures: Longitudinal trends and breakpoints along different U.S. streams.The Science of the total environment · 2024Article
- Hyporheic Reaction Potential: A Framework for Predicting Reach Scale Solute Fate and Transport.Environmental science & technology letters · 2024Article
- Longitudinal stream synoptic (LSS) monitoring to evaluate water quality in restored streams.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2024Article
- Distribution and migration of antimony and other trace elements in a Karstic river system, Southwest China.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Combining the synoptic mass balance approach with principal components analysis (PCA) can be an effective method for discretising the chemistry of inflows and source areas in watersheds where contamination is diffuse in nature and/or complicated by groundwater interactions. This paper presents a field-scale study in which synoptic sampling and PCA are employed in a mineralized watershed (Lion Creek, Colorado, USA) under low flow conditions to (i) quantify the impacts of mining activity on stream water quality; (ii) quantify the spatial pattern of constituent loading; and (iii) identify inflow sources most responsible for observed changes in stream chemistry and constituent loading. Several of the constituents investigated (Al, Cd, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn) fail to meet chronic aquatic life standards along most of the study reach. The spatial pattern of constituent loading suggests four primary sources of contamination under low flow conditions. Three of these sources are associated with acidic (pH <3.1) seeps that enter along the left bank of Lion Creek. Investigation of inflow water (trace metal and major ion) chemistry using PCA suggests a hydraulic connection between many of the left bank inflows and mine water in the Minnesota Mine shaft located to the north-east of the river channel. In addition, water chemistry data during a rainfall-runoff event suggests the spatial pattern of constituent loading may be modified during rainfall due to dissolution of efflorescent salts or erosion of streamside tailings. These data point to the complexity of contaminant mobilisation processes and constituent loading in mining-affected watersheds but the combined synoptic sampling and PCA approach enables a conceptual model of contaminant dynamics to be developed to inform remediation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.