Role of the geomorphic setting in controlling groundwater–surface water exchanges in riverine wetlands: A case study from two southern Québec rivers (Canada)

Figures & data

Figure 1. (a) Québec Province map with location of the two study sites, (b) close-up map of the Matane River site (star), and (c) close-up view of the two wetlands (wetland A-WA and wetland B-WB) of the De la Roche River. The black square in (b) and (c) indicates the closest gauging station, and the darker grey area represents the watershed area.

Table 1. Site hydrogeomorphological conditions on the De la Roche River for wetland A (DLR-WA) and wetland B (DLR-WB), and on the Matane River wetland.

	DLR-WA	DLR-WB	Matane River wetland
Kmin (m/s)	5.3 × 10^−7	0	2.1 × 10^−5
Kmax (m/s)	5.4 × 10^−6	4.4 × 10^−7	8.5 × 10^−4
Material	Sandy silt	Clayey silt	Coarse sand/gravel
Regional aquifer	Fractured bedrock	Fractured bedrock	Sand and gravel
Wetland type	Swamp	Swamp	Wet meadow and shrub swamp
Reach morphology	Abandoned meander	Stable (80 years)	River floodplain (abandoned meander)
Min–max discharge (m^3/s)	0.01–34.3	0.01–34.3	7.4–153.2
River width at transects (m)	20	16	55
Hydraulic setting at transect	Gaining	Gaining	Gaining

Figure 2. Field site instrumentation: (a) wetland A of the De la Roche River (flow is from right to left), (b) wetland B of the De la Roche River (flow is from top to bottom) also showing the presence of a cold spot (localized groundwater contribution), and (c) wetland on the Matane River (flow is from bottom right to top left). Note the former meander loops which are visible in the LiDAR DEM in (c). The freedom space limits (defined in Biron et al. 2014) are indicated in each case with a solid black line.

Figure 3. Piezometer transects showing water table elevation [meters above sea level (masl)], (a) for the De la Roche River with wetland A (DLR-WA), (b) for the De la Roche River with wetland B (DLR-WB) and (c) for the Matane River. The water levels are average values from the study periods on the two rivers.

Figure 4. Water level variations (a) for the De la Roche River with wetland A (WA), (b) for the De la Roche River with wetland B (WB) and (c) for the Matane River (modified from Cloutier et al. 2014). Water levels in the Matane River are higher than piezometer levels because the gauging station is located upstream from the piezometers. The arrows indicate the rain events illustrated in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Changes in river and piezometer water levels [meters above sea level (masl)] for both wetlands in the De la Roche River (DLR) following rain events occurring on (a) 23 July 2012 (59 mm), and (b) 5 September 2012 (61 mm); changes in river and piezometer water levels in the Matane River following rain events occurring on (c) 5–7 July 2011 (34 mm), and (d) 4–5 September 2011 (58 mm).

Figure 6. Cross-correlation functions [r_xy(k)] of river water levels as input and piezometer water levels as output (a) for the De la Roche River, and (b) for the Matane River.

Figure 7. Water temperature (a) for the De la Roche River near wetlands A and B along with the temperatures in the piezometers of wetland A (wetland B piezometers show the same pattern), and (b) for the Matane River and the piezometers.

Figure 8. Cross-correlation functions of river water levels as input and piezometer water temperature as output (a) for the De la Roche River, and (b) for the Matane River.

Figure 9. Autocorrelation functions of river and piezometer water levels (a) for the De la Roche River, and (b) for the Matane River.

Table 2. Storage capacity on the De la Roche River for wetland A (DLR-WA), and on the Matane River wetland. The calculation is for the September rain events (2012 on the De la Roche River, and 2011 on the Matane River).

	DRL-WA			Matane River wetland
	A1	A2	A3	D21	D55	D81	D127	D175	D227	D257
Δhtot (m)	1.52	1.39	1.38	1.11	0.95	0.84	0.79	0.73	0.70	0.66
Δhrain (m)	0.61	0.61	0.61	0.23	0.23	0.23	0.23	0.23	0.23	0.23
Δhriv (m)	0.91	0.78	0.77	0.88	0.72	0.61	0.56	0.50	0.47	0.43
Riv (m)	0.09	0.08	0.08	0.22	0.18	0.15	0.14	0.12	0.12	0.11
Sriv (mm/mm rain)	1.49	1.28	1.26	3.78	3.10	2.62	2.41	2.15	2.02	1.84

Figure 10. Typical river–wetland–aquifer connections with (a) bank storage, (b) overland storage and (c) flood wave attenuation (adapted from Ramsar 2005).

Biron, P. M., T. Buffin-Bélanger, M. Larocque, G. Choné, C. A. Cloutier, M. A. Ouellet, S. Demers, T. Olsen, C. Desjarlais, and J. Eyquem. 2014. Freedom space for rivers: A sustainable management approach to enhance river resilience. Environmental Management. doi:10.1007/s00267-014-0366-z.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Cloutier, C. A., T. Buffin-Belanger, and M. Larocque. 2014. Controls of groundwater floodwave propagation in a gravelly floodplain. Journal of Hydrology 511: 423–431.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ramsar. 2005. Guidelines for the management of groundwater to maintain wetland ecological character. 9th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971), Kampala, Uganda, 8–15 November 2005. Web page accessed in 2014 http://www.ramsar.org/cda/en/ramsar-documents-guidelines-guidelines-for-the-20845/main/ramsar/1-31-105%5E20845_4000_0__

 Google Scholar