Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract The interactions between groundwater and nismes des interactions entre les eaux souterraines et les
surface water are complex. To understand these interac- eaux de surface sont largement bauchs, et la significa-
tions in relation to climate, landform, geology, and biotic tion cologique et les impacts humains de telles interac-
factors, a sound hydrogeoecological framework is need- tions sont mises en avant. Les cosystmes des eaux de
ed. All these aspects are synthesized and exemplified in surface et souterraines sont conus comme tant des
this overview. In addition, the mechanisms of interac- composantes lies appartenant un continuum hydrolo-
tions between groundwater and surface water (GWSW) gique conduisant des questions sur le dveloppement
as they affect rechargedischarge processes are compre- durable. Cette revue densemble conclut par une discus-
hensively outlined, and the ecological significance and sion sur les besoins de recherche et des problmes poss
the human impacts of such interactions are emphasized. par ce thme en dveloppement. Les processus biogo-
Surface-water and groundwater ecosystems are viewed chimiques dans les quelques centimtres de sdiments
as linked components of a hydrologic continuum leading immdiatement sous toutes les eaux de surface (la zone
to related sustainability issues. This overview concludes hyporhique) ont un effet essentiel sur le chimisme des
with a discussion of research needs and challenges fac- changes deau, et cest sur ce point que se sont concen-
ing this evolving field. The biogeochemical processes tres la plupart des recherches rcentes. Cependant, pour
within the upper few centimeters of sediments beneath faire progresser la modlisation conceptuelle et les autres
nearly all surface-water bodies (hyporheic zone) have a modlisations des systmes eau souterraineeau de sur-
profound effect on the chemistry of the water inter- face, une perspective plus large de ces interactions lin-
change, and here is where most of the recent research trieur et entre les hydrosystmes de surface est nces-
has been focusing. However, to advance conceptual and saire, en prenant en compte des analyses multidimen-
other modeling of GWSW systems, a broader perspec- sionnelles, la caractrisation hydraulique de linterface et
tive of such interactions across and between surface- la variabilit spatiale, les approches par rgionalisation
water bodies is needed, including multidimensional ana- du site local la rgion, aussi bien que des collabora-
lyses, interface hydraulic characterization and spatial tions transdisciplinaires.
variability, site-to-region regionalization approaches, as
well as cross-disciplinary collaborations. Resumen Las interacciones entre aguas subterrneas y
superficiales son complejas. Para entenderlas en relacin
Rsum Les interactions entre les eaux souterraines et con factores climticos, de relieve del terreno, geolgi-
les eaux de surface sont complexes. Pour comprendre cos y biticos, se necesita un marco hidrogeoecolgico
ces interactions, qui dpendent du climat, des paysages, robusto. Este artculo resume y presenta ejemplos de to-
de la gologie et de facteurs biotiques, il est ncessaire dos estos aspectos. Adems, se describe con profusin
de bien connatre le cadre hydro-go-cologique. Tous los mecanismos de interaccin entre las aguas superficia-
ces aspects sont synthtiss et donns en exemple dans les y subterrneas que afectan a los procesos de recarga y
cette revue densemble. En outre, dans la mesure o ils descarga, haciendo hincapi en la importancia ecolgica
affectent les processus de rechargedcharge, les mca- y en los impactos humanos de tales interacciones. Los
ecosistemas de aguas superficiales y subterrneas son
considerados como elementos unidos de un continuo hi-
Received: 17 December 2000 / Accepted: 30 June 2001 drolgico que llevan a plantear su sustentabilidad. La re-
Published online: 11 January 2002
visin concluye con una discusin de las necesidades de
Springer-Verlag 2002 investigacin y de los retos que afronta este campo tan
dinmico. Los procesos biogeoqumicos que se producen
en los primeros centmetros de los sedimentos en la ma-
M. Sophocleous () yora de los cursos y reservorios de aguas superficiales
Kansas Geological Survey, University of Kansas,
1930 Constant Ave., Lawrence, Kansas 66047, USA (zona hiporreica) tienen un profundo efecto en la qumi-
e-mail: marios@kgs.ukans.edu ca del intercambio de agua, y es aqu donde incide la ma-
Fax: +1-785-864-5317 yora de la investigacin ms reciente. Sin embargo, se
requiere una perspectiva ms amplia de las interacciones replica of the land surface. The resulting groundwater
entre aguas superficiales y subterrneas con el objeto de flow pattern is not only controlled by the configuration
avanzar en la modelacin de estos sistemas, incluyendo of the water table but also by the distribution of hydrau-
anlisis multi-dimensionales, caracterizacin de la hi- lic conductivity in the rocks. In addition to topographic
drulica en la interfaz y de la variabilidad espacial, m- and geologic effects, groundwater flow is affected by
todos de regionalizacin, y colaboraciones interdiscipli- climate (precipitation being the source of recharge).
nares. Groundwater moves along flow paths that are organized
in space and form a flow system. In nature, the available
Keywords Groundwater recharge Hydraulic properties subsurface flow domain of a region with irregular topo-
Hyporheic zone Hydroecology Water sustainability graphy contains multiple flow systems of different or-
ders of magnitude and relative, nested hierarchical order.
Based on their relative position in space, Tth (1963)
Introduction recognizes three distinct types of flow systems local,
intermediate, and regional which could be superim-
Groundwater and surface water are not isolated compo- posed on one another within a groundwater basin. Water
nents of the hydrologic system, but instead interact in a in a local flow system flows to a nearby discharge area,
variety of physiographic and climatic landscapes. Thus, such as a pond or stream. Water in a regional flow system
development or contamination of one commonly affects travels a greater distance than the local flow system, and
the other. Therefore, an understanding of the basic prin- often discharges to major rivers, large lakes, or to
ciples of interactions between groundwater and surface oceans. An intermediate flow system is characterized by
water (GWSW) is needed for effective management of one or more topographic highs and lows located between
water resources. its recharge and discharge areas, but, unlike the regional
In recent years, as Winter (1995) points out, studies of flow system, it does not occupy both the major topo-
GWSW interactions have expanded in scope to include graphic high and the bottom of the basin. Regional flow
studies of headwater streams, lakes, wetlands, and estu- systems are at the top of the hierarchical organization; all
aries. The interaction between groundwater and lakes has other flow systems are nested within them. Detailed as-
been studied since the 1960s because of concerns related pects of complex systems and scaling with the encom-
to eutrophication as well as acid rain. Interest in the rela- passing hierarchy theory and its applications are de-
tionship of groundwater to headwater streams increased scribed in Allen and Starr (1982), Klemes (1983),
greatly in the past two decades because of concerns ONeill et al. (1986), Grimm and Fisher (1991), Wu and
about acid rain. Interest in the relationship of groundwa- Loucks (1995), Stanley et al. (1997), Fisher et al. (1998),
ter to wetlands and to coastal areas has increased in the Marceau (1999), Marceau and Hay (1999), and Wu
past 20 years as these ecosystems are lost to develop- (1999), among others.
ment (Winter 1995). Recently, attention has been fo- Flow systems depend on both the hydrogeologic char-
cused on exchanges between near-channel and in-chan- acteristics of the soil/rock material and landscape posi-
nel water, which are key to evaluating the ecological tion. Zones of high permeability in the subsurface func-
structure of stream systems and are critical to stream-res- tion as drains, which cause enhanced downward gradi-
toration and riparian-management efforts. The teaming ents in the material overlying the upgradient part of the
of geologists and hydrologists with ecologists is result- high-permeability zone (Freeze and Witherspoon 1967).
ing in a more comprehensive conceptualization of Areas of pronounced topographic relief tend to have
GWSW interactions. This work attempts to synthesize dominant local flow systems, and areas of nearly flat re-
this broader, multidisciplinary perspective of GWSW lief tend to have dominant intermediate and regional
interactions, starting with some underlying prerequisites flow systems.
for comprehending environmental systems. In topography-controlled flow regimes, groundwater
moves in systems of predictable patterns, and various
identifiable natural phenomena are regularly associated
Principal Geomorphologic, Hydrogeologic, with different segments of the flow systems. The interac-
and Climatic Controls on Groundwater Flow Systems tions of streams, lakes, and wetlands with groundwater
and GWSW Interactions are governed by the positions of the water bodies with
respect to groundwater flow systems, geologic character-
To understand GWSW interactions, it is necessary to istics of their beds, and their climatic settings (Winter
understand the effects of what Tth (1970) calls the hy- 1999). Therefore, for a thorough understanding of the
drogeologic environment on groundwater flow systems hydrology of surface-water bodies, all three factors
that is, the effects of topography, geology, and climate. should be taken into account. As Tth (1999) points out,
Differences in surface topography are often mirrored by such recognition was not appreciated until the 1960s
differences in potential. As Hubbert (1940) shows, given (Tth 1962, 1963; Freeze and Witherspoon 1967), when
an areally uniform precipitation and infiltration rate over the systems-nature of groundwater flow became under-
an undulating surface, a groundwater flow system will stood. This recognition of the systems-nature of subsur-
develop driven by a water-table surface that is a subdued face water flow has provided a unifying theoretical back-
ground for the study and understanding of a wide range Mechanisms of GWSW Interactions
of natural processes and phenomena and has thus shown
flowing groundwater to be a general geologic agent Basic Concepts
(Tth 1999). For a comprehensive outline of groundwa- Hydrologic interactions between surface and subsurface
ter recharge processes from the systems perspective as waters occur by subsurface lateral flow through the un-
well as estimation methodologies, the reader is referred saturated soil and by infiltration into or exfiltration from
to Scanlon et al. (2002), Sophocleous (2002), and other the saturated zones. Also, in the case of karst or frac-
articles in this theme issue. tured terrain, interactions occur through flow in frac-
The spatial distribution of flow systems also influenc- ture/solution channels. Water that enters a surface-water
es the intensity of natural groundwater discharge. The body promptly, in response to such individual water in-
main stream of a basin may receive groundwater from put events as rain or snowmelt, is known as event flow,
the area immediately within the nearest topographic high direct flow, storm flow, or quick flow. This water is dis-
and possibly from more distant areas. However, as the tinguished from baseflow, or water that enters a stream
works of Tth (1962, 1963, 1966, 1999), Meyboom et al. from persistent, slowly varying sources and maintains
(1966), Meyboom (1966, 1967), and others have shown, stream flow between water-input events. Although some
groundwater discharge is not only confined along the baseflow is derived from drainage of lakes or wetlands,
stream channel but also extends throughout the discharge or even from the slow drainage of relatively thin soils on
area downgradient from the basin hinge line [i.e., the upland hill slopes, most baseflow is supplied from
imaginary line separating areas of upward (discharge) groundwater flow. Subsurface flow can also enter
from downward (recharge) flow]. Therefore, if baseflow streams quickly enough to contribute to the event re-
calculations are used as indicators of average recharge, sponse. Such flow is called subsurface storm flow or in-
significant error may be introduced, because baseflow terflow. Beven (1989) defines interflow as the near-sur-
would represent only a relatively small part of the total face flow of water within the soil profile resulting in
discharge occurring downgradient from the hinge line. seepage to a stream channel within the time frame of a
Hence, baseflow analysis based on lumped-parameter storm hydrograph. Interflow involves both unsaturated
concepts may give numerical results that are of little and saturated flows, the latter being in zones of limited
practical use unless examined in the light of spatial flow vertical extent caused by soil horizons impeding vertical
characteristics (Domenico 1972). percolation. If interflow encounters a seepage face, the
A geomorphologic perspective is also helpful in char- interflow process may grade into return flow by which
acterizing larger-scale GWSW interactions and in esti- subsurface water can contribute to overland flow (Dunne
mating the extent and location of such interfaces. For ex- and Black 1970). Results from environmental-isotope
ample, Larkin and Sharp (1992) classify streamaquifer studies (Sklash and Farvolden 1979) indicate that inter-
systems (based on the predominant regional groundwater flow may be primarily a displacement process in which
flow component) as (1) underflow-component dominated the storm rainfall induces the displacement of subsur-
(the groundwater flux moves parallel to the river and in face-stored water (pre-event water).
the same direction as the streamflow); (2) baseflow-com- In general, subsurface flow through porous media is
ponent dominated (the groundwater flux moves perpen- sluggish. The mechanisms by which subsurface flow en-
dicular to or from the river depending on whether the ters streams quickly enough to contribute to streamflow re-
river is effluent or influent, respectively; see the next sponses to individual rainstorm and snowmelt inputs
section); or (3) mixed. They conclude that the dominant (storm hydrograph), although still not fully understood, are
groundwater flow component, baseflow or underflow, summarized in various publications (including Ward 1984;
can be inferred from geomorphologic data, such as Beven 1989; Dingman 1994). Beven (1989) identifies four
channel slope, river sinuosity, degree of river incision mechanisms to account for fast subsurface contributions to
through its alluvium, the width-to-depth ratio of the the storm hydrograph: (1) translatory flow, (2) macropore
bankfull river channel, and the character of the fluvial flow, (3) groundwater ridging, and (4) return flows.
depositional system (Larkin and Sharp 1992). The under- Translatory flow (Hewlett and Hibbert 1967), also
flow component is demonstrably predominant in systems known as plug flow or piston flow, is easily observed by
with large channel gradients, small sinuosities, large allowing a soil column to drain to field capacity in the
width-to-depth ratios, and low river penetrations; and, in laboratory and slowly adding a unit of water at the top.
fluvial depositional systems of mixed-load to bed-load Although some water flows from the bottom almost im-
character, in upstream and tributary reaches and valley- mediately, it is not the same water that was added at the
fill depositional environments. Baseflow-dominated top. Rapid subsurface responses to storm inputs may be
systems have characteristics typical of suspended-load the result of fast flow through larger noncapillary soil
streams with the opposite to the aforementioned geomor- pores, or macropores (Beven and Germann 1982). Nor-
phic attributes for systems dominated by the underflow mally, the assumption is made that water does not enter a
component. Mixed-flow systems occur where the longi- large noncapillary pore unless it is at or above atmo-
tudinal valley gradient and channel slope are virtually spheric pressure (Taylor and Ashcroft 1972). Such con-
the same and also where the lateral valley slope is negli- ditions only occur either below the water table or after
gible (Larkin and Sharp 1992). ponding during rainfall at the soil surface.
baseflow, which is determined by the groundwater level. Fig. 3 Illustrations of the various mechanisms describing flow be-
In perennial streams, baseflow is more-or-less continu- tween the river and aquifer (q) as a function of the difference be-
ous, whereby these streams are primarily effluent and tween the river and aquifer heads (h). ad represent various flow
flow continuously throughout the year (Gordon et al. conditions; see text for additional explanations. (Adapted from
Rushton and Tomlinson 1979)
1992). Intermittent streams receive water only at certain
times of the year and are either influent (losing) or efflu-
ent (gaining), depending on the season. In ephemeral
streams the groundwater level is always beneath the tum in one dimension (Rushton and Tomlinson 1979).
channel, so they are exclusively influent when they are This mechanism, based on Darcys law, where flow is a
flowing (Gordon et al. 1992). direct function of the hydraulic conductivity and head
When the stream channel is generally oriented paral- difference, can be expressed as
lel to the alluvial plain, gaining, losing, and parallel-flow
channels are most likely to occur. Parallel-flow channels q=kh, (1)
occur when the channel stage and groundwater head are
equal. Flow-through reaches, which occur where the where h=hahr, (ha is aquifer head, and hr is river
channel stage is less than the groundwater head on one head); q is flow between the river and the aquifer (posi-
bank and is greater than the groundwater head at the op- tive for baseflow for gaining streams; and negative for
posite bank, most often exist where a channel cuts per- river recharge for losing streams); and k is a constant
pendicular to the fluvial-plain groundwater flow field representing the streambed leakage coefficient (hydrau-
(Hoehn 1998; Huggenberger et al. 1998; Wroblicky et al. lic conductivity of the semi-impervious streambed stra-
1998; Woessner 2000). tum divided by its thickness).
As Woessner (2000) points out, the construction of al- The simple mechanism described by Eq. (1) can be
luvial-plain and stream cross sections to show ground- used to represent both baseflow and river recharge, de-
water flow and quality along a flowpath to the stream re- pending on the sign of h. Figure 3a implies that the
quires careful consideration (e.g., Harvey and Bencala mechanisms for flow from the aquifer to the river (base-
1993; Wondzell and Swanson 1996). Figure 2 (Woessner flow) and from the river to the aquifer (river recharge)
2000) illustrates the proper location of wells (cross sec- are the same, although, in practice, the mechanisms rep-
tion CD) to accomplish these purposes for a section of resenting the two processes can be different. Figure 3b
gaining stream. Cross section AB may be used to illus- illustrates the situation where the rate of flow from the
trate the geology; however, within the alluvial plain flow river to the aquifer is slower than the rate of flow from
system, it is not parallel to a flow line. Proper conceptu- the aquifer to the river, and Fig. 3c illustrates the situa-
alization and measurement of the flow field in the near- tion where no flow can occur from the river to the aqui-
channel area results in appropriate locations of hydro- fer.
geologic cross sections (Woessner 2000). The assumption of a linear relationship between q and
h is often too simplistic. Several publications, including
Rushton and Tomlinson (1979), note that total leakage
Quantitative Analysis (baseflow) during streamflow recession is largely inde-
For hydraulically connected streamaquifer systems, the pendent of the leakage coefficient, k. Also, at times of
resulting exchange flow is a function of the difference very high recharge, the leakage calculated from Eq. (1)
between the river stage and aquifer head. A simple ap- is much greater than would occur in practice and takes
proach to estimate flow is to consider the flow between no account of the increased resistance to the passage
the river and the aquifer to be controlled by the same of water as its volume increases. Thus Rushton and
mechanism as leakage through a semi-impervious stra- Tomlinson (1979) propose that a nonlinear relationship
tures of the riffle gravel during the summer months. capture some of the ambient groundwater flow that
A thermally induced, density-dependent mechanism that would have, without pumping, discharged as baseflow to
causes convection of surface water into the interstices is the surface water. At sufficiently large pumping rates,
proposed by Whitman and Clark (1982). Cooler stream these declines induce flow out of the body of surface wa-
water tends to displace warmer interstitial water season- ter into the aquifer, a process known as induced infiltra-
ally during winter and diurnally during the night in sum- tion, or induced recharge. The sum of these two effects
mer and autumn. In spring and summer, warming of the leads to streamflow depletion. Quantifying the amount of
surface water during the day inhibits this mixing process induced infiltration, which is a function of many factors,
(Brunke and Gonser 1997). is an important consideration in conjunctive water use as
Because of their high hydraulic conductivity and water demand increases and the reliability of surface
short residence times, preferential subsurface flow paths, supplies is threatened by streamflow depletion. As dis-
such as paleo-channels, transport water with physico- cussed in the previous section, streamaquifer interac-
chemical properties similar to the surface water into tions are also important in situations of groundwater
deeper alluvial layers beneath the flood plain. These sub- contamination by polluted surface water, and in situa-
surface flows extend direct connections between rivers tions of degradation of surface water by discharge of sa-
and groundwater into the subterranean landscape and line or other low-quality groundwater. Because of the
may sustain a high interstitial biodiversity and biomass potential for pollution of both groundwater and surface
by delivering resources. Ward et al. (1994) propose that water from varied sources and by varied pollutant spe-
paleochannels in the alluvium of the Flathead River cies, quantifying the amount of induced infiltration is
in Montana, USA, are a significant factor influencing the also an important factor in evaluating the reliability of
spatial distribution of crustaceans. Sophocleous (1991) well-water quality.
indicates that some buried channels, when in contact
with active surface channels, are avenues of fast trans-
mission of pressure pulses resulting from surface-chan- Human Impacts
nel flooding, causing water-level fluctuations in distant The ecological integrity of groundwater and fluvial sys-
wells screened in these buried channels. tems is often threatened by human activities, which can
In conclusion, as Brunke and Gonser (1997) point reduce connectivity, alter exchange processes, and lead
out, ecological studies concerning the faunal composi- to toxic or organic contamination. Brunke and Gonser
tion, distribution, and abundance of the GWSW inter- (1997) reviewed human impacts on alluvial hydrosys-
face reveal an extraordinary patchiness and variability, tems, and Fig. 8 summarizes human-induced disruptions
owing to the inherent heterogeneity of the physical pa- of hydrologic-exchange processes and their ecological
rameters. The main determinants of the interstitial habi- consequences. The following draws on their review.
tat of rivers are the usable pore space, dissolved-oxygen Organic and toxic contamination in surface water can
concentrations, temperatures, organic matter, and nutri- be transferred to the groundwater in influent reaches.
ent contents, all of which are influenced on a higher hier- The quality of the downwelling surface water is normal-
archical scale by the sediment facies, the hydrology, and ly altered during its passage through the first few meters
climate (Brunke and Gonser 1997). A large body of liter- of the infiltrated sediments. However, this may not be
ature exists on biochemical and water-quality impacts on the case for persistent organic compounds, such as chlo-
GWSW interactions (for example, Schwarzenbach et al. roform and inorganic pollutants, which may contaminate
1983; Von Gunten et al. 1991; Bourg and Bertin 1993; extensive areas of groundwater (Schwarzenbach et al.
Brunke et al. 1998; Dahm et al. 1998; Hedin et al. 1998; 1983; Santschi et al. 1987; Whittemore et al. 2000).
and references therein), but due to space limitations Increased sewage loading often leads to clogging by
these aspects are not covered here. promoting the development of dense algal mats, or by
causing sedimentation of an organic layer on the river
bed. The extent of these processes is related directly to
Human Impacts and Water-Resource Depletion land-use practices that increase suspended particulate
and Sustainability matter (seston) and sediment loading (Karr and Schlosser
1978). In many streams, gradual clogging (colmation)
Despite its general abundance, water does not always occurs naturally through the siltation of fine material
occur in the place, at the time, or in the form desired. during low discharge, alternating with a reopening of the
People strive to grow crops and other water-consuming interstices during flooding or exfiltration (decolmation).
products in semiarid regions, and they attempt to use Although increased current velocity usually flushes fine
water simultaneously as a pure source and, deliberately material out of the upper layers, only bed-load move-
or inadvertently, as a dump for waste. Consequently, so- ment opens deeper interstices. A balanced relationship
ciety faces increasingly serious water-management prob- between clogging and streambed scouring can be dis-
lems (National Research Council 1981; Sophocleous turbed by increased organic and fine sediment inputs,
1997, 1998, 2000a, 2000b). hydroengineering, and increased river-bank filtration for
The decline of groundwater levels around pumping the supply of drinking, industrial, and irrigation waters.
wells near a surface-water body creates gradients that Each of these factors is capable of causing permanent
clogging. As Brunke and Gonser (1997) point out, clog- tent, and hence fluvial geomorphology (Keller and
ging exerts severe impacts on the renewal of groundwa- Kondolf 1990).
ter through river-bank filtration and the development and Human impacts on terrestrial and aquatic systems
colonization of invertebrates and fish. Furthermore, al- may lead to reductions in exchange processes that con-
terations of the fluvial temperature regime are possible, nect running waters to their surroundings, and thus di-
with wide-ranging implications for the biota. The same minish the ecological integrity of subsurface and sur-
authors also refer to a case study where the mechanical face-water ecosystems. By preventing communication
opening of a clogged section of the stream bed of the between these systems, cascading effects in ecosystem
Rhine River, Germany, near a drinking-water bank-filtra- structure and function occur (Fig. 8; Brunke and Gonser
tion site induced a 1-m rise in the water table near the 1997), with consequences on water-resource depletion
river, but after a few weeks, the opened section had be- and water sustainability.
come sealed again. Conversely, a clogged bed may act as
an intrusion barrier that prevents the contamination of
groundwater by polluted surface water (Younger et al. Water-Resource Depletion and Sustainability
1993). The topics of water-resource depletion, GWSW interac-
As Brunke and Gonser (1997) also indicate, river-bed tions, and water-resource sustainability were recently re-
incision results from bed-load deficits due to sediment examined by Sophocleous (1997, 1998, 2000a, 2000b).
retention by impoundments and from increased transport To understand this depletion, a thorough knowledge of
capacity following channel straightening. Such incision the hydrologic principles, concisely stated by Theis
determines the dominant subsurface flow direction and (1940), is required. Under natural conditions, prior to
lowers the adjacent groundwater level (Galay 1983; Golz development by wells, aquifers approach a state of dy-
1994). Desiccation of the floodplain endangers aquatic namic equilibrium: over hundreds of years, wet years,
and riparian vegetation, reduces the connectivity and when recharge exceeds discharge, are offset by dry
spatio-temporal heterogeneity of former channels, and years, when discharge exceeds recharge. Discharge from
ultimately alters biodiversity patterns (Dister et al. 1990; wells upsets this equilibrium by producing a loss from
Allan and Flecker 1993; Bornette and Heiler 1994). The aquifer storage; a new state of dynamic equilibrium is
vegetation contributes to the resisting forces by stabiliz- approached when there is no further loss or minimal loss
ing the bank material with roots and decreasing the ve- from storage. This state is accomplished either by an in-
locity of floodwaters. Thus, riparian vegetation that has crease in recharge, a decrease in natural discharge, or a
been impacted by a lowered water table enhances the combination of the two.
danger of stream-bank erosion during flooding (Keller Consider a streamaquifer system such as an alluvial
and Kondolf 1990). Changes from perennial to intermit- aquifer discharging into a stream, where the term
tent flow may alter bank vegetation and moisture con- stream is used in the broadest sense of the word to in-
is still a major challenge, plagued by heterogeneity and al nature of the problem is needed for a better under-
scale problems. standing of the streamaquifer process (Sophocleous et
The HZ is both complex hydrologically and relatively al. 1988, 1995). Despite the current emphasis on near-
inaccessible and difficult to manipulate. Palmer (1993) stream and in-stream processes, most models today [e.g.,
outlines major obstacles that must be overcome in order the widely used MODFLOW model (McDonald and
to make significant progress in experimentation in the HZ Harbaugh 1988) and later upgrades] are not well
and suggests corollary experiments or technical develop- equipped to deal with local phenomena related to flow
ments that should lead to major breakthroughs in the un- near domain boundaries. To properly handle the physics
derstanding of HZ processes. The choice of proper tem- of streamaquifer interaction, close attention must be de-
poral and spatial scales for conducting such experiments voted to the mechanisms operating at the GWSW inter-
is critical, because the particular site and time of year in face. This would involve, among other things, addressing
which experiments are performed are likely to dramati- the dynamics of seepage-face boundary conditions in de-
cally influence results. Different geomorphologies of tail. Because streamaquifer seepage flows are driven by
sites selected for study could lead to evaluation of differ- the head differential at the interface of the two systems,
ent processes, particularly because groundwater inputs inaccuracies in the determination of aquifer heads on the
and subsurface flows often vary dramatically within and seepage face would affect seepage fluxes; this would in
between stream reaches. turn impact channel flow rates and stream stages and
Understanding GWSW interactions presents unique thus again affect the head differential. Thus, it is impor-
challenges. The biogeochemical processes within the tant to compute rapidly changing stream stages accurate-
upper few centimeters of sediments beneath nearly all ly. This effort involves modeling of wave diffusion and
surface-water bodies have a profound effect on the bank storage on a physical basis that is, by taking into
chemistry of groundwater entering surface water, as well account streamflow kinematics. In evaluating GWSW
as on the chemistry of surface water entering groundwa- interactions, both analytical and numerical methods need
ter. Knowledge of biogeochemical processes occurring to be continually improved by more realistically simulat-
within the sediments depends on understanding GWSW ing observed field conditions.
hydrologic interactions and on gaining a better under- Longitudinal flow paths along a riffle-pool sequence
standing of subsurface microbial processes. Jones and and lateral flow paths into the stream bank create three-
Holmes (1996) conclude that whereas surfacehyporheic dimensional physicochemical patterns that are thus con-
exchanges and water residence times are known to be trolled by the flow patterns (Brunke and Gonser 1997).
important regulators of subsurface biochemical transfor- Hydrologic exchange between the stream surface and un-
mations, the manner in which these parameters vary derlying sediments is characterized by using models and
across streams is not yet known. They emphasize that by direct measurement of hydrologic parameters of sub-
this broader perspective is important not only for gener- surface flow velocities. As Jones and Holmes (1996) point
alizations about subsurface processes but more funda- out, a key step for advancing understanding is the integra-
mentally for advancing conceptual models of streams. tion of hydrologic models with biochemical transforma-
Thus, studies of the interaction of groundwater and tions, and in general linking ecology and hydrology.
surface water should emphasize broader perspectives Understanding the hydrologic and biologic processes
through cross-disciplinary collaborations. Also, as in that define the relationships between surface and subsur-
most sciences, methods are needed for extrapolating re- face waters, the landscape connectivity of riverine or
sults from small instrumented stream reaches to stream- aquatic habitats, and human-induced changes and associ-
network or basin scales. ated responses of floodplains is essential if one is to un-
The hydraulic properties of stream and lake beds con- derstand the ecological effects of water-resources man-
trol the interactions between these surface-water and agement decisions in a basin. Despite the fact that hierar-
groundwater systems, but these properties are normally chy theory (for overviews, see Marceau and Hay 1999;
difficult to measure directly. The primary limitation to and Wu 1999) offers a useful conceptual framework for
date has been the difficulty of spatially defining the hy- linking processes at multiple scales, the development of
draulic properties and spatial heterogeneities of a stream operational hierarchies and upscaling from reaches to
or lake bed. In a streamaquifer study, Sophocleous et al. watersheds remains a major research challenge today.
(1995) rank stream-bed clogging, stream partial penetra- The present inability to characterize subsurface heteroge-
tion, and aquifer heterogeneity as the three most signifi- neity exacerbates the upscaling problem and leads to
cant factors in streamaquifer problems. All these fac- great uncertainties in data interpretation. In the face of
tors relate directly to the multidimensional nature of the such uncertainties, multiple techniques for quantifying
streamaquifer process. Yet most analytical treatments of GWSW exchanges need to be pursued, utilizing both
GWSW interactions ignore these factors. in-situ and remote-sensing observations coupled with
Because streams and aquifers exchange water hori- GIS technological advances, numerical models, and sta-
zontally and vertically, flow dynamics are inherently tistical analyses to study these processes in a multidisci-
three-dimensional. However, most hydrologic modeling plinary and multiscale approach.
studies have used one-dimensional or two-dimensional
models. Analysis and simulation of the three-dimension-
References Fisher SG, Grimm NB, Marti E, Gomez R (1998) Hierarchy, spa-
tial configuration, and nutrient cycling in a desert stream. Aust
Allan JD, Flecker AS (1993) Biodiversity conservation in running J Ecol 23:4152
waters. BioScience 43:3243 Freeze RA, Witherspoon PA (1967) Theoretical analysis of re-
Allen TFH, Starr TB (1982) Hierarchy perspective for ecological gional groundwater flow, II: effect of water table configuration
complexity. University of Chicago Press, Chicago and subsurface permeability variations. Water Resour Res
Balleau WP (1988) Water approximation and transfer in a general 3(2):623634
hydrogeologic system. Nat Resour J 29(2):269291 Galay VJ (1983) Causes of river bed degradation. Water Resour
Beven KJ (1986) Runoff production and flood frequency in catch- Res 19:10571090
ments of order : an alternative approach. In: Gupta VK, Garrels RM, Mackenzie FT (1967) Origin of the chemical compo-
Rodriquez-Iturbe I, Wood EF (eds) Scale problems in hydrolo- sitions of some springs and lakes. In: Stumm W (Chairman)
gy. Reidel, Hingham, pp 107131 Proc Symp Equilibrium Concepts in Natural Water Systems,
Beven KJ (1989) Interflow. In: Morel-Seytoux HJ (ed) Unsaturat- Advances in Chem Ser 67, American Chemical Society,
ed flow in hydrologic modeling: theory and practice. Kluwer, Washington, DC, pp 222242
Dordrecht, pp 191219 Gillham RW (1984) The capillary fringe and its effect on water ta-
Beven KJ, Germann PF (1982) Macropores and water flow in ble response. J Hydrol 67:307324
soils. Water Resour Res 18:13111325 Glover RE (1974) Transient ground water hydraulics. Department
Bonell M, Gilmour DA, Sinclair DF (1981) Soil hydraulic proper- of Civil Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins.
ties and their effect on surface and subsurface water transfer in Reprinted in 1985 by Water Resources Publications, High-
a tropical rain forest catchment. Hydrol Sci Bull 26:118 lands Ranch
Bornette G, Heiler G (1994) Environmental and biological re- Golz E (1994) Bed degradation nature, causes, countermeasures.
sponses of former channel to river incision a diachronic Water Sci Technol 29:325333
study on the upper Rhone River. Regulated Rivers 9:7992 Gordon NB, McMahon TA, Finlayson BL (1992) Stream hydrolo-
Boulton AJ, Findlay S, Marmonier P, Stanley EH, Valett HM gy: an introduction for ecologists, Wiley, Chichester
(1998) The functional significance of the hyporheic zone in Grimm NB, Fisher SG (1984) Exchange between surface and in-
streams and rivers. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 29:5981 terstitial water: implications for stream metabolism and nutri-
Bourg ACM, Bertin C (1993) Biogeochemical processes during ent cycling. Hydrobiologia 111:219228
the infiltration of river water into an alluvial aquifer. Environ Grimm NB, Fisher SG (1991) Responses of arid-land streams to
Sci Technol 27:661666 changing climate. In: Firth P, Fisher SG (eds) Global climate
Bouwer H, Maddock T III (1997) Making sense of the interaction change and freshwater ecosystems. Springer, Berlin Heidel-
between groundwater and streamflow: lessons for watermas- berg New York, pp 211233
ters and adjudicators. Rivers 6(1):1931 Harvey JW, Bencala KE (1993) The effect of stream bed topogra-
Bredehoeft JD, Papadopulos SS, Cooper HH Jr (1982) Groundwa- phy on surfacesubsurface water exchange in mountain catch-
ter: the water budget myth. In: National Research Council ments. Water Resour Res 29:8998
(US) Geophysics Committee Scientific basis of water resource Hedin LO, von Fischer JC, Ostrom NE, Kennedy BP, Brown MG,
management. Studies in geophysics. National Academy Press, Robertson GP (1998) Thermodynamic constraints on nitrogen
Washington, DC, pp 5157 transformations and other biogeochemical processes at
Brunke M, Gonser T (1997) The ecological significance of soilstream interfaces. Ecology 79:684703
exchange processes between rivers and ground-water. Fresh- Hewlett JD, Hibbert AR (1967) Factors affecting the response of
water Biol 37:133 small watersheds to precipitation in humid areas. In: Sopper
Brunke M, Gonser T, Grieder E (1998) Influence of surface and WE, Lull HW (eds) Proc Int Symp on Forest Hydrology,
subsurface flow on distributions of particulate organic matter Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 275290
and inorganic fine particles in perialpine stream sediments. In: Hoehn E (1998) Solute exchange between river water and ground-
Proc Headwater 98 Conf Hydrology, Water Resources and water in headwater environments. In: Proc Headwater 98
Ecology in Headwaters, Meran/Merano, Italy, April, IAHS Conf Hydrology, Water Resources and Ecology in Headwa-
Publ 248, IAHS Press, Wallingford, pp 371378 ters, Meran/Merano, Italy, April, IAHS Publ 248, IAHS Press,
Creuz des Chtelliers M, Reygrobellet JL (1990) Interactions be- Wallingford, pp 165171
tween geomorphological processes, benthic and hyporheic Hubbert MK (1940) The theory of groundwater motion. J Geol
communities: first results on a bypassed canal of the French 48:785944
upper Rhone River. Regulated Rivers 5:139158 Huggenberger P, Hoehn E, Beschta R, Woessner W (1998) Abiotic
Dahm CN, Grimm NB, Marmonier P, Valett MH, Vervier P (1998) aspects of channels and floodplains in riparian ecology. Fresh-
Nutrient dynamics at the interface between surface waters and water Biol 40:407425
groundwaters. Freshwater Biol 40:427451 Jones JB Jr, Holmes RM (1996) Surfacesubsurface interactions
Dingman SL (1994) Physical hydrology. Macmillan, New York in stream ecosystems. Trends Ecol Evol 16:239242
Dister E, Gomer D, Obrdlik P, Petermann P, Schneider E (1990) Karr JR, Schlosser IJ (1978) Water resources and land water inter-
Water management and ecological perspectives of the Upper face. Science 201:229234
Rhines floodplains. Regulated Rivers 5:115 Keller EA, Kondolf GM (1990) Groundwater and fluvial process-
Domenico PA (1972) Concepts and models in groundwater hy- es: selected observations. In: Higgins CG, Coates DR (eds)
drology. McGraw Hill, New York Groundwater geomorphology: the role of subsurface water in
Duff JH, Triska FJ (1990) Denitrification in sediments from the earth surface processes and landforms. Geol Soc Am Spec Pap
hyporheic zone adjacent to a small forested stream. Can J Fish 252:319340
Aquat Sci 47:11401147 Klemes V (1983) Conceptualization and scale in hydrology.
DuMars CT, Brown FL, Cummings RG, Lansford R, Rodgers AB, J Hydrol 65:123
Utton AE (1986) State appropriation of unappropriated ground Larkin RG, Sharp JM Jr (1992) On the relationship between river-
water: a strategy for insuring New Mexico a water future. basin geomorphology, aquifer hydraulics, and ground-water flow
WRRI Rep 200, New Mexico Water Resources Research Insti- direction in alluvial aquifers. Geol Soc Am Bull 104:16081620
tute and University of New Mexico Law School, Socorro Livingstone DA (1963) Chemical composition of rivers and lakes.
Dunne T, Black R (1970) An experimental investigation of runoff US Geol Surv Prof Pap 440-G
production in permeable soils. Water Resour Res 6:478490 Maddock IP, Petts GE, Evans EC, Greenwood MT (1995) Assess-
Findlay S (1995) Importance of surfacesubsurface exchange in ing riveraquifer interactions within the hyporheic zone. In:
stream ecosystems: the hyporheic zone. Limnol Oceanogr Brown AG (ed) Groundwater and geomorphology. Wiley,
40:159164 Chichester, pp 5374