Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Upriver transport of dissolved substances in an estuary and sub-estuary system of the lower James River, Chesapeake Bay

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Frontiers of Earth Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The water exchange between the James River and the Elizabeth River, an estuary and sub-estuary system in the lower Chesapeake Bay, was investigated using a 3D numerical model. The conservative passive tracers were used to represent the dissolved substances (DS) discharged from the Elizabeth River. The approach enabled us to diagnose the underlying physical processes that control the expansion of the DS, which is representative of potential transport of harmful algae blooms, pollutants from the Elizabeth River to the James River without explicitly simulating biological processes. Model simulations with realistic forcings in 2005, together with a series of processoriented numerical experiments, were conducted to explore the correlations of the transport process and external forcing. Model results show that the upriver transport depends highly on the freshwater discharge on a seasonal scale and maximum upriver transport occurs in summer with a mean transport time ranging from 15–30 days. The southerly/easterly wind, low river discharge, and neap tidal condition all act to strengthen the upriver transport. On the other hand, the northerly/westerly wind, river pulse, water level pulse, and spring tidal condition act to inhibit the upriver transport. Tidal flushing plays an important role in transporting the DS during spring tide, which shortens the travel time in the lower James River. The multivariable regression analysis of volume mean subtidal DS concentration in the mesohaline portion of the James River indicates that DS concentration in the upriver area can be explained and well predicted by the physical forcings (r = 0.858, p = 0.00001).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Basdurak N B, Valle-Levinson A (2013). Tidal variability of lateral advection in a coastalplain estuary. Cont Shelf Res, 61–62: 85–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brubaker J M, Simpson J H (1999). Flow convergence and stability at a tidal estuarinefront: acoustic Doppler current observations. J Geophys Res, 104(C8): 18257–18268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen S N, Sanford L P (2009). Axial wind effects on stratification and longitudinalsalt transport in an idealized partially mixed estuary. J Phys Oceanogr, 39(8): 1905–1920

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deleersnijder E, Campin J M, Delhez E J M (2001). The concept of age in marine modeling. I. Theory and preliminary model results. J Mar Syst, 28: 229–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Galperin B, Kantha L H, Hassid S, Rosati A (1988). A quasi-equilibrium turbulent energy model for geophysicalflows. J Atmos Sci, 45(1): 55–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gong W P, Shen J, Hong B (2009). The influence of wind on the water age in the tidal Rappahannock River. Mar Environ Res, 68(4): 203–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamrick J M (1992). A Three-Dimensional Environmental Fluid Dynamics Computer Code: Theoretical and Computational Aspects. Special Report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering. No. 317. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College ofWilliam and Mary, Gloucester Point, Virginia

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamrick J M, Wu T S (1997). Computational design and optimization of the EFDC/HEM3D surface waterhydrodynamic and eutrophication models. In: Delich G, Wheeler M F, eds. Next Generation Environmental Modelsand Computational Methods. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Pennsylvania, 143–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong B, Gong W, Peng S, Xie Q, Wang D, Li H, Xu H (2016). Characteristics of vertical exchange process in the Pearl River Estuary (PRE). Aquat Ecosyst Health Manage, 19(3): 286–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong B, Panday N, Shen J, Wang H V, Gong W, Soehl A (2010). Modeling water exchange between Baltimore Harbor and Chesapeake Bay using artificial tracers: seasonal variations. Mar Environ Res, 70(1): 102–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong B, Shen J (2012). Responses of estuarine salinity and transport processes to potential future sea-level rise in the Chesapeake Bay. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci, 104–105: 33–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong B, Shen J (2013). Linking dynamics of transport timescale and variations of hypoxia in the Chesapeake Bay. J Geophys Res, 118: 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuo A Y, Byrne R J, Brubaker J M, Posenau J H (1988). Vertical transport across an estuary front. In: Dronkers J, van Leussen W, eds. Physical Processes in Estuaries. New York: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 93–109

  • Kuo A Y, Byrne R J, Hyer P V, Ruzecki E P, Brubaker J M (1990). Practicalapplication of theory for tidal-intrusion fronts. JWaterw Port Coast Ocean Eng, 116(3): 341–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee S B, Birch G, Lemckert C J (2011). Fieldand modeling investigations of fresh-water plume behavior in response to infrequent high-precipitation events, Sydney Estuary, Australia. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci, 92(3): 389–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li C, Armstrong S, Williams D (2006). Residual eddies in a tidal channel. Estuaries Coasts, 29(1): 147–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mellor G L, Yamada T (1982). Development of a turbulence closure model for geophysical fluid problems. Rev Geophys Space Phys, 20 (4): 851–875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morse R E, Shen J, Blanco-Garcia J L, HunleyWS, Fentress S,Wiggins M, Mulholland M R (2011). Environmental and physical controlson the formation and transport of blooms of the dinoflagellate cochlodinium polykrikoides margalef in lower Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. Estuaries Coasts, 34(5): 1006–1025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narváez D A, Valle-Levinson A (2008). Transverse structure of winddriven flow at the entranceto an estuary: Nansemond River. J GeophysRes, 113(C9): C09004

    Google Scholar 

  • Park K, Jung H S, Kim H S, Ahn S (2005). Three-dimensional hydrodynamic and eutrophication model (HEM-3D): application to Kwang-Yang Bay, Korea. Mar Environ Res, 60(2): 171–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park K, Kuo A Y, Shen J, Hamrick J M (1995). A three-dimensional hydrodynamic eutrophication model (HEM-3D): description of water quality and sediment process submodels. Special Report in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering. No. 327. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point, VA 23062

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice K C, Hong B, Shen J (2012). Assessment of salinityintrusion in the James and Chickahominy Rivers as a result of simulated sea-level rise in Chesapeake Bay, East Coast, USA. J Environ Manage, 111: 61–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen J, Boon J D, Kuo AY (1999). A modeling study of a tidal intrusion front and its impact on larval dispersion in the James River estuary, Virginia. Estuaries Coasts, 22(3): 681–692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen J, GongW(2009). Influence of model domain size, wind directions and Ekman transporton storm surge development inside the Chesapeake Bay: a case study of extra-tropical cyclone Ernesto, 2006. J Mar Syst, 75(1–2): 198–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen J, Haas L (2004). Calculating age and residence time in the tidal York River using three-dimensional model experiments. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci, 61(3): 449–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen J, Lin J (2006). Modeling study of the influences of tide and stratification on age of water in the tidal James River. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci, 68(1–2): 101–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valle-Levinson A, Wong K C, Lwiza K M(2000). Fortnightly variability in the transverse dynamics of a coastal plain estuary. J Geophys Res, 105(C2): 3413–3424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang D P, Elliott A J (1978). Nontidal variability in the Chesapeake Bay and the Potomac River, evidence for nonlocal forcing. J Phys Oceanogr, 8(2): 225–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warner J C, Geyer W R, Lerczak J A (2005). Numerical modeling of an estuary: a comprehensive skill assessment. J Geophys Res, 110(C5): C05001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg R H, Sturges W (1976). Velocity observations in the west passage of Narragansett Bay: a partially mixed estuary. J Phys Oceanogr, 6(3): 345–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong K C (2002). On the wind-induced exchange between Indian River Bay, Delaware and the adjacent continental shelf. Cont Shelf Res, 22 (11–13): 1651–1668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong K C, Garvine RW (1984). Observations of wind-induced subtidal variability inthe Delaware estuary. J Geophys Res, 89(C6): 10589–10597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong K C, Valle-Levinson A (2002). On the relative importance of the remote and local wind effects on the subtidal exchange at the entrance to the Chesapeake Bay. J Mar Res, 60(3): 477–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilmott C J (1981). On the validation of models. Physical Geography, 2: 184–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Xia M, Xie L, Pietrafesa L J (2007). Modeling of the Cape Fear River estuary plume. Estuariesand Coasts, 30(4): 698–709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu H, Lin J, Wang D (2008). Numerical study onsalinity stratification in the Pamlico River Estuary. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci, 80(1): 74–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 41406005 and 41666001), Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences, CAS (No. QYZDJ-SSW-DQC022), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of SCUT under Grant No. 2017ZD101. Parts of this study were supported by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (contracts # 15050 and 14835). The development of the model was supported by USGS Project of Model Study of Change in Salinity under Different Sea-level Rise Scenarios in the York River and James River.We appreciate two anonymous reviewers’ comments and constructive suggestions, which improve the manuscript. We thank Mac Sisson for his comments on the early version and help on editing the manuscript. This is the contribution number #3704 of Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Civil and Transportation Engineering, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510641, China

    Bo Hong

  2. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William & Mary, Williamsburg, VA, 23062, USA

    Jian Shen

  3. Institute of Deep-sea Science and Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Sanya, 572000, China

    Hongzhou Xu

Authors
  1. Bo Hong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jian Shen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hongzhou Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bo Hong.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hong, B., Shen, J. & Xu, H. Upriver transport of dissolved substances in an estuary and sub-estuary system of the lower James River, Chesapeake Bay. Front. Earth Sci. 12, 583–599 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-017-0684-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11707-017-0684-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation