Nav: Home

Smithsonian study: Sediment prediction tools off the mark

January 29, 2008

A recent study led by Smithsonian ecologist Kathy Boomer suggests it is time for a change in at least one area of watershed management. Boomer has been examining the tools scientists and managers use to predict how much sediment runs into the Chesapeake Bay, and by her account, they are way off the mark. The study, co-authored by SERC ecological modeler Donald Weller and ecologist Thomas Jordan, appears in the January/February issue of the Journal of Environmental Quality.

Sediment running into the bay reduces light, suffocates underwater organisms and is a significant source of phosphorous, a nutrient that essentially fertilizes the water promoting algal blooms and many other problems in the bay.

"Cities and counties are under increasing pressure to meet total maximum daily loads set by state and federal agencies and to understand where sediments come from," she said. "So we tested the tools most widely used now to predict sediment delivery."

Her work has led to a new tactic. "We're moving away from focusing on upland erosion and looking more at what happens near streams and in streams during events with high levels of stream sediments."

The new study compared actual measurement of sediments in more than 100 streams in the Chesapeake watershed with predictions from several of the most up-to-date models. All the models failed completely to identify streams with high sediment levels.

"There was no correlation at all between the model predictions and the measurements," said Boomer. The study is among the first to directly compare predictions of the widely used models with actual observations of sediments in a large number of streams.

The problem, she said, is that the most widely used models all begin with the same tool, the Universal Sediment Loss Equation. The USLE estimates erosion from five factors: topography, soil erodibility, annual average rainfall amount and intensity, land cover, and land management practices. Boomer emphasized that the USLE was developed to help farmers limit topsoil loss from individual fields rather than to predict sediment delivery from complex watersheds to streams.

As often applied, the USLE gives an average annual erosion rate for the whole watershed draining into a stream. But not all of the eroded soil makes it into the water, so the estimates do not translate directly into sediment delivery rates. To account for the discrepancy, different models incorporate a wide variety of adjustments. According to Boomer, the adjusted models still do not work, partly because erosion rate is not the best information to start with.

During the study, Boomer and colleagues Weller and Jordan compared erosion rates and sediment yields estimated from regional application of the USLE, the automated Revised-USLE, and five widely used sediment delivery ratio algorithms to measured annual average sediment delivery in 78 catchments of the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

"We did the same comparisons for an independent set of 23 watersheds monitored by the U.S. Geological Society," Boomer said.

Sediment delivery predictions, which were highly correlated with USLE erosion predictions, exceeded observed sediment yields by more than 100 percent. The RUSLE2 erosion estimates also were highly correlated with the USLE predictions, indicating that the method of implementing the USLE model did not greatly change the results.

"Sediment delivery is largely associated with specific rain events and stream bank erosion," she said. "So, USLE-based models that emphasize long-term annual average erosion from uplands provide limited information to land managers."

With a new focus on what is happening in and near the streams themselves, Boomer and her colleagues hope to develop more reliable tools to predict sediment running into Chesapeake Bay--tools that can be used in other lakes and estuaries as well.
-end-


Smithsonian

Related Predictions Articles:

Accuracy of physician and nurse predictions for survival, functional outcomes after an ICU admission
Physicians were more accurate in predicting the likelihood of death and less accurate in predicting cognitive abilities in six months for critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients; nurses' predictions were similar or less accurate, according to a study published by JAMA.
Penn study pinpoints accuracy of ICU doctors' and nurses' predictions of patient outcomes
A new study shows that ICU physicians are better at predicting whether patients will be alive in six months than they are at predicting patients' cognitive function in six months.
Dopamine neurons factor ambiguity into predictions enabling us to 'win big and win often'
In the struggle of life, evolution rewards animals that master their circumstances, especially when the environment changes.
How does the brain make perceptual predictions over time?
NYU neuroscientist David Heeger offers a new framework to explain how the brain makes predictions.
Scientists improve predictions of how temperature affects the survival of fish embryos
NOAA Fisheries Ecology Division and UC Santa Cruz researchers found the thermal tolerance of Chinook salmon embryos in the Sacramento River is much lower than expected from laboratory studies.
Snow data from satellites improves temperature predictions, UT researchers show
Researchers with The University of Texas at Austin have found that incorporating snow data collected from space into computer climate models can significantly improve seasonal temperature predictions.
Neurons do math to distinguish predictions from reality
Neir Eshel, a neuropsychiatry research pioneer who uncovered novel insights about how dopamine neurons are programmed to help us navigate the consequences of our choices, has been named the 2016 Grand Prize winner of the Science & SciLifeLab Prize for Young Scientists.
Quicker and twice as accurate predictions
With ever-increasing amounts of online information available, modelling and predicting individual preferences for certain products is becoming more and more important.
The Lancet: China's recent two-child policy unlikely to lead to short-term population boom, according to new predictions
China's recently introduced universal two-child policy is predicted to have a relatively small effect on population growth, with a likely peak of 1.45 billion in 2029, compared to 1.4 billion in 2023 if the one-child policy had continued, according to academics writing in The Lancet.
Global climate models do not easily downscale for regional predictions
One size does not always fit all, especially when it comes to global climate models, according to Penn State climate researchers.

Related Predictions Reading:

Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction
by Philip E. Tetlock (Author), Dan Gardner (Author)

Prediction Machines: The Simple Economics of Artificial Intelligence
by Ajay Agrawal (Author), Joshua Gans (Author), Avi Goldfarb (Author)

Dire Predictions: The Visual Guide to the Findings of the IPCC
by Michael E. Mann (Author), Lee R. Kump (Author)

The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail--but Some Don't
by Nate Silver (Author)

Predictions for the 21st Century: A Reality Based Analysis of the Current Global Population Collapse
by Dennis Marx (Author)

History's Worst Predictions: And the People Who Made Them
by Eric Chaline (Author)

Grave Predictions: Tales of Mankind’s Post-Apocalyptic, Dystopian and Disastrous Destiny (Dover Doomsday Classics)
by Stephen King (Author), Greg Bear (Author), Ramsey Campbell (Author), Joe R. Lansdale (Author), Carmen Maria Machado (Author), Mark Samuels (Author), Erica L. Satifka (Author), Brian Stableford (Author), Ray Bradbury (Author), Arthur C. Clarke (Author), W.E.B. Du Bois (Author), Kurt Vonnegut Jr. (Author), Drew Ford (Editor), Harlan Ellison (Editor)

People's Almanac Presents Book of Predictions
by Wallechin (Author), David Wallechinsky (Editor), Amy Wallace (Editor), Irving Wallace (Editor)

Prediction, Learning, and Games
by Nicolo Cesa-Bianchi (Author), Gabor Lugosi (Author)

Prediction: Science, Decision Making, and the Future of Nature
by Daniel Sarewitz (Editor), Roger A. Pielke Jr. (Editor), Radford Byerly Jr. (Editor), Stanley A. Changnon (Editor), Rob Ravenscroft (Editor), Orrin H. Pilkey (Editor), Shirley Mattingly (Editor), Denis Walaker (Editor), Jack Fellows (Editor), J. Michael Pendleton (Editor), Ronald Brunner (Editor), Thomas R. Stewart (Editor), Clark Chapman (Editor), Don Gauteir (Editor), Charles Herrick (Editor), William Hooke (Editor), Dale Jamieson (Editor), Dan Metlay (Editor), Robert Moran (Editor), Joanne Nigg (Editor), Naomi Oreskes (Editor), Steve Rayner (Editor), Thomas L. Anderson (Editor)

Best Science Podcasts 2018

We have hand picked the best science podcasts for 2018. Sit back and enjoy new science podcasts updated daily from your favorite science news services and scientists.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Hacking The Law
We have a vision of justice as blind, impartial, and fair — but in reality, the law often fails those who need it most. This hour, TED speakers explore radical ways to change the legal system. Guests include lawyer and social justice advocate Robin Steinberg, animal rights lawyer Steven Wise, political activist Brett Hennig, and lawyer and social entrepreneur Vivek Maru.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#495 Earth Science in Space
Some worlds are made of sand. Some are made of water. Some are even made of salt. In science fiction and fantasy, planet can be made of whatever you want. But what does that mean for how the planets themselves work? When in doubt, throw an asteroid at it. This is a live show recorded at the 2018 Dragon Con in Atlanta Georgia. Featuring Travor Valle, Mika McKinnon, David Moscato, Scott Harris, and moderated by our own Bethany Brookshire. Note: The sound isn't as good as we'd hoped but we love the guests and the conversation and we wanted to...