Fingerprinting the contribution of quarrying to fine‐grained bed sediment in a mountainous catchment, Iran. (12th February 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Nosrati, Kazem; Collins, Adrian L.
• Is Part Of: River research and applications. Volume 35:Number 3(2019)
• Page Start: 290
• Page End: 300
• Publication Date: 2019-02-12
• Subjects: bed sediment -- fingerprinting -- mountainous catchment -- multiple statistical techniques -- quarrying; Rivers -- Regulation -- Periodicals; Rivers -- Periodicals; 551.483
• DOI: 10.1002/rra.3408
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1535-1459

Abstract

Abstract: The contribution of quarrying in the context of multiple catchment sources of fine‐grained sediment has rarely been investigated. This study assessed the relative importance of quarrying as a sediment source alongside rangeland surface soils and channel banks in a mountainous catchment in northern Tehran, Iran, using fingerprinting. Eight geochemical tracers were measured on 24 potential sediment source samples and four fine‐grained sediment samples. Statistical analysis to select three different composite fingerprints for discriminating the potential sediment sources comprised: (a) the Kruskal–Wallis H test (KW‐H), (b) a combination of KW‐H and discriminant function analysis (DFA), and (c) a combination of KW‐H and principal components and classification analysis (PCCA). A Bayesian unmixing model was used to apportion sediment source contributions using the three composite fingerprints. Using the KW‐H composite signature, the respective relative contributions (with uncertainty ranges) from channel banks, rangeland surface soils, and quarrying were estimated as 28.4% (10.9–46.8), 15.1% (6.6–22.7), and 56.6% (38.3–74.2), compared with 35.4% (11.9–60.1), 13.4% (4.1–22.2), and 51.3% (26.5–74.3) using a composite signature selected using a combination of KW‐H and DFA, or 20.7% (3.9–41.7), 17.2% (4.4–29.9), and 61.4% (44–78.8) using a fingerprint selected using KW‐H and PCCA. The different composite signatures therefore all consistently suggested that quarrying is the dominant source of the fine‐grained sediment samples. Potential mitigation measures targeting this land use include closure to permit revegetation to reduce exposure of bare surfaces to sediment mobilization. Limitations and uncertainties associated with this preliminary investigation are briefly discussed.