Explore the vast range of titles available.

There is a global abundance of non‐perennial rivers and streams, of which are predicted to increase due to environmental change and anthropogenic influences. However, most modeled representations of streamflow have been constructed with perennial systems in mind, leaving a gap in our understanding and representation of non‐perennial systems. To adapt to future challenges, there is a need to determine what modeled representations of low‐ and no‐flow in non‐perennial rivers and streams do well and where uncertainties may lie in the internal representations of hydrologic processes. Here we compare four publicly available process‐based hydrologic models: Variable Infiltration Capacity, Precipitation Runoff Modeling System, and National Water Model versions 2.1 and 3.0, in their ability to represent non‐perennial streamflow regimes across 156 streamgages that experience non‐perennial streamflow behavior in the Pacific Northwest. Our results show that process‐based models are largely unable to capture non‐perennial streamflow behavior, and that simulation skill decreases as a function of increasing aridity of a streamgage location. Most simulations underestimate the number of no‐ and low‐flow days a streamgage experiences and overestimates the magnitude of low‐flows. The ability to accurately model non‐perennial systems is paramount to draw inferences about the connections between hydrologic characteristics of low‐ and no‐flow and the potential ecological, biogeochemical, and societal implications of these important systems. Our findings suggest that improving our predictive understanding of non‐perennial streamflow of rivers and streams within the Pacific Northwest will fill critical gaps and better target the timing and location of future research, management, and conservation efforts as well as improve the usability of these models for a wider audience of practitioners across fields.

Recognizing the continued human domination of landscapes across the globe, social-ecological systems (SES) research has proliferated, necessitating interdisciplinary collaborations. Although interdisciplinary research started gaining traction in academic settings close to 50 years ago, formal frameworks for SES research did not develop until the late 1990s. The first National Science Foundation (NSF) funding mechanism specifically for interdisciplinary SES research began in 2001 and the SES-specific Coupled Natural Human (CNH) Systems program began in 2007. We used data on funded NSF projects from 2000 to 2015 to examine how SES research was funded, where the research is published, and the scholarly impact of SES research. Despite specific programs for funding SES research within the NSF, this type of research also received funding from non-SES mission programs (e.g., Ecosystem Science constituted 19% of grants in our study, and Hydrology constituted 16% of grants). Although NSF funding for SES research originates from across programs, the majority of products are published in journals with a focus on ecological sciences. Grants funded through the Coupled Natural Human Systems programs were more likely to publish at least one paper that was highly interdisciplinary (Biological Sciences [BE-CNH] constituted 70% of grants in program, and Geosciences [GEO-CNH] constituted 48% of grants) than the traditional disciplinary programs (Ecology [ES], 35% and Hydrology, 27%). This result highlights the utility of these cross-cutting programs in producing and widely disseminating SES research. We found that the number of citations was higher in BE-CNH and ES than other programs, pointing to greater scholarly impact of SES research in these NSF programs. Through our research, we identified the need for institutions to recognize research products and deliverables beyond the “standard” peer-reviewed manuscripts, as SES and interdisciplinary research and unconventional research products (e.g., popular press articles, online StoryMaps, workshops, white papers) continue to grow and are important to the broader societal impact of these types of research programs. This project demonstrates that the outcomes and products of grants awarded through the NSF CNH programs are important to furthering SES research and the programs should be valued and expanded in the future.

Relationships between methane (CH4) fluxes and environmental conditions have been extensively explored in saturated soils, while research has been less prevalent in aerated soils because of the relatively small magnitudes of CH4 fluxes that occur in dry soils. Our study builds on previous carbon cycle research at Tenderfoot Creek Experimental Forest, Montana, to identify how environmental conditions reflected by topographic metrics can be leveraged to estimate watershed scale CH4 fluxes from point scale measurements. Here, we measured soil CH4 concentrations and fluxes across a range of landscape positions (7 riparian, 25 upland), utilizing topographic and seasonal (29 May–12 September) gradients to examine the relationships between environmental variables, hydrologic dynamics, and CH4 emission and uptake. Riparian areas emitted small fluxes of CH4 throughout the study (median: 0.186 µg CH4–C m−2 h−1) and uplands increased in sink strength with dry-down of the watershed (median: −22.9 µg CH4–C m−2 h−1). Locations with volumetric water content (VWC) below 38 % were methane sinks, and uptake increased with decreasing VWC. Above 43 % VWC, net CH4 efflux occurred, and at intermediate VWC net fluxes were near zero. Riparian sites had near-neutral cumulative seasonal flux, and cumulative uptake of CH4 in the uplands was significantly related to topographic indices. These relationships were used to model the net seasonal CH4 flux of the upper Stringer Creek watershed (−1.75 kg CH4–C ha−1). This spatially distributed estimate was 111 % larger than that obtained by simply extrapolating the mean CH4 flux to the entire watershed area. Our results highlight the importance of quantifying the space–time variability of net CH4 fluxes as predicted by the frequency distribution of landscape positions when assessing watershed scale greenhouse gas balances.

Communities throughout the United States have come to rely upon agriculture as a pillar of their political integrity, economic security, and health and wellbeing. Climatic conditions in the western portion of the United States necessitate most lands be irrigated to be arable. As a result, a major portion of the economy of the United States, and by extension the world economy, is driven by the continued viability of western United States water law and policy. Furthermore, due to the strong interrelationship between anthropogenic consumptive uses, streamflows, and wetland/riparian area ecology, irrigation demand has a strong effect on stream morphology, quality, and biology for aquatic species. Western water management is a complex mosaic that is controlled by western state, federal, and tribal governments. Each of these systems of law have vulnerabilities to climate change, which is well understood to cause increasing water supply scarcity. This articledemonstrates the risks climate change poses to our management of irrigation water demand, as well as the interrelationship between water supply and demand. Due to the shared nature of the resource, this article addresses both tribal reserved rights and state-based rights using data from Indian reservations that either contain and/or are closely adjacent to non-tribal agricultural communities. Those data are used in a systems–dynamics model to integrate crop–water requirement estimation techniques with climate change estimates and a Monte Carlo analysis to assess how irrigation demand could change because of changing temperature, precipitation, incoming radiation, and wind speed caused by climate change. Results indicate that climate change will cause increases in irrigation requirements at most locations. Further, climate change is expected to significantly increase seasonal variability in many locations. The model provides a useful tool based upon publicly available data that will allow individual water users to make conservation decisions necessary to preserve their water rights as the climate changes.

Streamflow data are critical for monitoring and managing water resources, yet there are significant spatial gaps in our federal monitoring networks with biases toward large perennial rivers. In some cases, streamflow monitoring exists in these spatial gaps, but information about these monitoring locations is challenging to obtain. Here, we present a streamflow catalog for the United States Pacific Northwest that includes current and historical streamflow monitoring location information obtained from 32 organizations (other than the U.S. Geological Survey), which includes 2661 continuous streamflow gaging locations (22% are currently active) and 30,557 discrete streamflow measurements. A stakeholder advisory board with representatives from organizations that operate streamflow monitoring networks identified metadata requirements and provided feedback on the Streamflow Data Catalog user interface. Engagement with the water resources community through this effort highlighted challenges that water professionals face in collecting and managing streamflow data so that data are findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR). Over 60% of the streamflow monitoring locations in the Streamflow Data Catalog are not available online and are thus not findable through web search engines. Providing organizations technical assistance with standard measurement procedures, metadata collection, and web accessibility could substantially increase the availability and utility of streamflow information to water resources communities.

The phrase “hot spots and hot moments” first entered the lexicon in 2003, following the publication of the paper “Biogeochemical hot spots and hot moments at the interface of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems” by McClain and others (Ecosystems 6:301–312, 2003). This paper described the potential for rare places and rare events to exert a disproportionate influence on the movement of elements at the scale of landscapes and ecosystems. Here, we examine how the cleverly named hot spot and hot moment concept (hereafter HSHM) has influenced biogeochemistry and ecosystem science over the last 13 years. We specifically examined the extent to which the HSHM concept has: (1) motivated research aimed at understanding how and why biogeochemical behavior varies across spatiotemporal scales; (2) improved our ability to detect HSHM phenomena; and (3) influenced our approaches to restoration and ecosystem management practices. We found that the HSHM concept has provided a highly fertile framework for a substantial volume of research on the spatial and temporal dynamics of nutrient cycling, and in doing so, has improved our understanding of when and where biogeochemical rates are maximized. Despite the high usage of the term, we found limited examples of rigorous statistical or modeling approaches that would allow ecosystem scientists to not only identify, but scale the aggregate impact of HSHM on ecosystem processes. We propose that the phrase “hot spots and hot moments” includes two implicit assumptions that may actually be limiting progress in applying the concept. First, by differentiating “hot spots” from “hot moments,” the phrase separates the spatial and temporal components of biogeochemical behavior. Instead, we argue that the temporal dynamics of a putative hot spot are a fundamental trait that should be used in their description. Second, the adjective “hot” implicitly suggests that a place or a time must be dichotomously classified as “hot or not.” We suggest instead that each landscape of interest contains a wide range of biogeochemical process rates that respond to critical drivers, and the gradations of this biogeochemical topography are of greater interest than the maximum peaks. For these reasons, we recommend replacing the HSHM terminology with the more nuanced term ecosystem control points. “Ecosystem control” suggests that the rate must be of sufficient magnitude or ubiquity to affect dynamics of the ecosystem, while “points” allows for descriptions that simultaneously incorporate both spatial and temporal dynamics. We further suggest that there are at least four distinct types of ecosystem control points whose influence arises through distinct hydrologic and biogeochemical mechanisms. Our goal is to provide the tools with which researchers can develop testable hypotheses regarding the spatiotemporal dynamics of biogeochemistry that will stimulate advances in more accurately identifying, modeling and scaling biogeochemical heterogeneity to better understand ecosystem processes.

Observations of the presence or absence of surface water in streams are useful for characterizing streamflow permanence, which includes the frequency, duration, and spatial extent of surface flow in streams and rivers. Such data are particularly valuable for headwater streams, which comprise the vast majority of channel length in stream networks, are often non-perennial, and are frequently the most data deficient. Datasets of surface water presence exist across multiple data collection groups in the United States but are not well aligned for easy integration. Given the value of these data, a unified approach for organizing information on surface water presence and absence collected by diverse surveys would facilitate more effective and broad application of these data and address the gap in streamflow data in headwaters. In this paper, we highlight the numerous existing datasets on surface water presence in headwater streams, including recently developed crowdsourcing approaches. We identify the challenges of integrating multiple surface water presence/absence datasets that include differences in the definitions and categories of streamflow status, data collection method, spatial and temporal resolution, and accuracy of geographic location. Finally, we provide a list of critical and useful components that could be used to integrate different streamflow permanence datasets.

Non-perennial streams are widespread, critical to ecosystems and society, and the subject of ongoing policy debate. Prior large-scale research on stream intermittency has been based on long-term averages, generally using annually aggregated data to characterize a highly variable process. As a result, it is not well understood if, how, or why the hydrology of non-perennial streams is changing. Here, we investigate trends and drivers of three intermittency signatures that describe the duration, timing, and dry-down period of stream intermittency across the continental United States (CONUS). Half of gages exhibited a significant trend through time in at least one of the three intermittency signatures, and changes in no-flow duration were most pervasive (41% of gages). Changes in intermittency were substantial for many streams, and 7% of gages exhibited changes in annual no-flow duration exceeding 100 days during the study period. Distinct regional patterns of change were evident, with widespread drying in southern CONUS and wetting in northern CONUS. These patterns are correlated with changes in aridity, though drivers of spatiotemporal variability were diverse across the three intermittency signatures. While the no-flow timing and duration were strongly related to climate, dry-down period was most strongly related to watershed land use and physiography. Our results indicate that non-perennial conditions are increasing in prevalence over much of CONUS and binary classifications of ‘perennial’ and ‘non-perennial’ are not an accurate reflection of this change. Water management and policy should reflect the changing nature and diverse drivers of changing intermittency both today and in the future.

Ecosystems in the Anthropocene face pressures from multiple, interacting forms of environmental change. These pressures, resulting from land use change, altered hydrologic regimes, and climate change, will likely change the synchrony of ecosystem processes as distinct components of ecosystems are impacted in different ways. However, discipline-specific definitions and ad hoc methods for identifying synchrony and asynchrony have limited broader synthesis of this concept among studies and across disciplines. Drawing on concepts from ecology, hydrology, geomorphology, and biogeochemistry, we offer a unifying definition of synchrony for ecosystem science and propose a classification framework for synchrony and asynchrony of ecosystem processes. This framework classifies the relationships among ecosystem processes according to five key aspects: (1) the focal variables or relationships representative of the ecosystem processes of interest, (2) the spatial and temporal domain of interest, (3) the structural attributes of drivers and focal processes, (4) consistency in the relationships over time, and (5) the degree of causality among focal processes. Using this classification framework, we identify and differentiate types of synchrony and asynchrony, thereby providing the basis for comparing among studies and across disciplines. We apply this classification framework to existing studies in the ecological, hydrologic, geomorphic, and biogeochemical literature and discuss potential analytical tools that can be used to quantify synchronous and asynchronous processes. Furthermore, we seek to promote understanding of how different types of synchrony or asynchrony may shift in response to ongoing environmental change by providing a universal definition and explicit types and drivers with this framework.

International audience