Laserfiche WebLink
<br />74 <br /> <br />(GARCIA-HERNANDEZ ET AL. <br /> <br /> <br />~~- -------- <br /> <br />----F--r------ ... <br /> <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />. > 2.5 uglg Se cone, in 8M <br />e < 2,5 uglg Se cone. in 8M <br />I"V Streams <br />. Wetland area <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />20 Kilometers <br /> <br />Figure 2. Distribution of Se concentrations in bottom material (BM) cores ( < 63 Ilm) from 41 <br />sampling sites in the Colorado River delta. <br /> <br />For comparisons, we grouped the sites according to their principal so~rce of water, <br />which was: (1) Agricultural runoff: Cienega de Santa Clara, E1 IndlO, Zacatecas <br />drain, Campo Rafael, Ayala drain, El Mayor, Hardy River and Cucapa north; (2) <br />Colorado River water: Colorado River, Bocana and Cucapa south; and (3) other: EI <br />Doctor and geothermal lagoons. .' . <br />EI Doctor and geothermal lagoons group had small~r concentraoons o~ selemum m <br />bottom material compared to sites influenced by nver waters (one-sIded p-value <br />< 0.001 from one-sample z-test, z = 4.8, df. = 20) or agricultural drains (one-sided <br />p-value < 0.001 from one-sample z-t~st, ~ = 5.6, df. = 23).. Concentrati?n of selenium <br />in bottom material was greater at sItes mfluenced by agncultural dramage (n = 20, <br />geom. mean = 1.811g g-I) than at sites influenced by river water (n = 19, geom. mean <br />= 1.3 I1g g-I) (Fig. 3) (one-sided p-value = 0.03 from two-sample I-test, t = 2,1, <br />df. = 37). <br /> <br />Dynamics of selenium in Ihe colorado river delta wellands <br /> <br />Redox potential (Eh in mV) was higher (positive) in bottom material from river water <br />sources (n = 19, mean = 45 mV) than from bottom material derived from agricultural <br />runoff (n = 20, mean = - 118 mV) (one-sid~d p-value < 0.?0~1 from tw~-sample <br />I-test, I = 5.2, df. = 37). Concentration of Se In bott?m ~atenal In~~eased WIth lower <br />(negative) values of redox potential, and decreased WIth higher (pOSI~ve) redo~ poten- <br />tials (Fig. 4) four outliers (not shown in Fig. 4) from the C:olorad? River are d!scussed <br />below (If = 0.53, FI.34 = 39.5; p-value < 0.0001 from a SImple linear regressIon), <br /> <br /> <br />SELENIUM, SELECTED INORGANIC ELEMENTS FROM COLORADO RIVER DELTA 75 <br /> <br />1.5 <br /> <br />I <br />t <br />~ <br />i <br />I <br />Vi <br />t <br />I <br />I <br />! <br />I <br />! <br />t <br />~ <br />1 <br />I <br />I <br />t <br />! <br /> <br />C:.' <br />c.'l <br />W <br /> <br /> <br />.. 1,0 <br />'C <br />III <br />ii <br />E <br />E <br />o <br />::: 0'5 <br />.8 <br />.5 <br />.., <br />CI) <br />:5 <br />0.0 <br /> <br />E.'.~') <br /> <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />I. -', <br />GO <br /> <br />Percentiles: <br /> <br />_ 90th <br />: 75th <br /> <br /> <br />B~ <br /> <br /> <br />--'- 10th <br /> <br />-0'5 <br /> <br />Agriculture influenced sites River influenced sites <br /> <br />~igure 3. Comparison between the concentration of selenium in bottom material from sites <br />mfluenced by agricultural runoff to sites influenced by Colorado River water. <br /> <br />Water pH was high~r (~ore basic) at si~es influenced by agricultural drains (n = 20, <br />mean = 8.4) than at sItes mfluenced by nver waters (n = 19, mean = 8,1) (one-sided <br />p-value < 0.002 from two-sample I-test, t = 3.3, elf. = 37). Concentration of selenium <br />in bottom material increased with water pH, excluding two outliers from the Colorado <br />River with high pH and low selenium concentration (FI 36 = 8.3; p-value = 0.006 from <br />a simple linear regression). . <br />Other explanatory variables were the clay, silt and sand content of the bottom <br />material. Selenium concentration increased with the clay (F138 = 5.6; p-value = 0.02 <br />from a simple linear regression) and silt content of the sample (F1,38 = 4.4; <br />p-value = 0.04 from a simple linear regression). Selenium decreased with the sand <br />content of the sample (F1,38 = 6.1; p-value = 0.02 from a simple linear regression). The <br />am?unt of c1a~ was greater in bottom material collected from sites influenced by <br />agncultura1 drains (n = 20, mean = 26%) compared with sites influenced by river water <br />; (n = 19, mean = 10%) (one-sided p-value = 0.001 from two-sample t-test, t = 3.6 <br />I df. = 37). This was also true for silt, which was greater in agricultural runoff site~ <br />'I (n = 20, mean = 40:-) compared to sites influenced by river waters (n = 19, <br />mean = 13%) (one-sIded p-value < 0.0001 from two-sample I-test, 1= 5.0, df. = 37). <br />I The opposite occurred with sand. Sites influenced with river water had more <br />! sand percentage (n = 19, mean = 77%) than sites influenced by agricultural drains <br />I ~~. =: ;o'h~ean = 34%) (one-sided p-value < 0.0001 from two-sample t-test, t = 5.0, <br /> <br />! Percent organic carbon in bottom material was also related with selenium concentra- <br />tion. Higher selenium concentrations were detected in samples with a high organic <br />i carbon content (FI.38 = 6.5; p-value = 0.01 from a simple linear regression). More <br />I... organic carbon was detected in bottom material from agriculture runoff sites <br />(n = 20, mean = 1,3%) than from bottom material from river sites (n = 19, <br />mean = 0.5%) (one-sided p-value = 0.0002 from two-sample I-test, I"" 4.2, elf. = 37). <br /> <br />I <br />