WSP07478

• File Number: 8272.600.60
• Description: Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program - Basin Member State Info - Utah
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 3/1/1982
• Title: Salt Uptake in Natural Channels Traversing Mancos Shales in the Price River Basin - Utah
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

Table 4.4, Results of t-tests for significant differences among soil extract electrical con-
N ductJ.vities of samples taken from Coal Creek and Coal Creek tributaries,
0
...,J t Level of
0) Comparison Statistic df Significance
Depth Compariaons
Coal Creek:
Channel 0-10 va. Channel 10-20 0,280 16 NS
Channel 0-10 VB. Channel 20-30 0.093 16 NS
Channel 10-20 VB. Channel 20-30 -0.158 16 NS
Bank 0-10 VB. Bank 10-20 0.873 40 NS
Bank 0-10 VB. Bank 20- 30 0.480 40 NS
Bank 10-20 VB. Bank 20- 30 -0.360 40 NS
Coal Creek Tributaries:
Channel 0-10 VB. Channel 10-20 0.396 18 NS
Channel 0-10 VB. Channel 20- 30 1. 329 18 NS
Channel 10-20 VB. Channel 20- 30 0.737 18 NS
Bank 0-10 VB. Bank 10-20 0.730 38 NS
Bank 0-10 VB. Bank 20-30 0.473 38 NS
Bank 10-20 VB. Bank 20-30 -0.377 38 NS
Main Ste~TributarY Channel Comparisons
Coal Creek 0-10 VB. Trib. 0-10 -1.972 17 NS
Coal Creek 0-10 VB. Trib. 10-20 -1. 348 17 NS
Coal Creek 0-10 VB. Trlb. 20- 30 -1. 851 17 NS
Coal Creek 10-20 VB. Trib. 0-10 -2,032 17 NS
Coal Creek 10-20 VB. Trib. 10-20 -1.412 17 NS
Coal Creek 10-20 VB. Trib. 20- 30 -1. 924 17 NS
Coal Creek 20-30 va. Trib. 0-10 -1. 9 73 17 NS
Coal Creek 20-30 VB. Trib. 10-20 -1. 358 17 NS
Coal Creek 20-30 VB. Trib. 20-30 -1. 752 17 NS
Main Stem-Tributary Bank Comparisons
Coal Creek 0-10 VS. Trib. Bank 0-10 -2.013 39 NS
Coal Creek 0-10 VS. Trib. Bank 10-20 -1. 766 39 NS
Coal Creek 0-10 VB. Trib. Bank 20- 30 -1.924 39 NS
Coal Creek 10-20 vs. Trib. Bank 0-10 -2.540 39 . ,
Coal Creek 10-20 vs. Trib. Bank 10-20 -2.585 39 . i
Coal Creek 10-20 vs. Trib. Bank 20- 30 -2.650 39 .
Coal Creek 20-30 VB. Trib. Bank 0-10 -2.293 39 .
Coal Creek 20-30 vs. Trib. Bank 10-20 -2.179 39 .
Coal Creek 20-30 VS. Trib. BanK 20-30 -2.295 39 .

Null Hypothesis Ho: ~A = ~B

NS - No significant difference between sample means at 0.95 level.
* - Significantly different at 0.95 level.

Three samples from each site were
leached in an equal weight of distilled
water for about 45 days. Tben the solution
was replaced witb fresh distilled water, and
the leaching continued for another 40 days.
The conductivities measured are recorded
in Appendix 0, Table 0.1. In the table, the
actual conductivity measurements at the
recorded temperature are converted to a 250C
base.

The other three samples from each site
were leached for 7 days; they were then
rinsed, dried at I03'C, and placed again in
sn equal weight of distilled water for 42
more days. Finally, they were rinsed and
dried again and placed in a third solution
for 37 days. These measured conductivities
are recorded in Appendix 0, Table 0.2,

As one would expect, dissolution rates
were rapid at first, declined with time, and
eventually approacbed zero (accumulated
conductivi ty ceased to increase). About 80
percent of the total dissolution occurrad
during the first 3 days. Also, as one
can see from Table 0.1, the dissolution rate
in the second batch of distilled water was
only one third to one half that in the first.
Samples tbat were rinsed and dried between
leachings bad faster, dissolution rates than
did samples that were merely placed back into
fresh distilled water.

Several tests were made for the statis-
tical significance of differences in dis-
solution rates. The first was to determine
whether tbe differences in total accumulated
conductivity over approximately the first

34