Sediment concentrations, loads, and particle-size distributions in the Red River of the North and selected tributaries near Fargo, North Dakota, during the 2010 spring high-flow event
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Geology topics
Publications and source records attributed to Dennis A. Evans.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
In February 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Memphis District, investigated the presence of inorganic elements and organic compounds in bed sediments of the lower Mississippi River. Selected sites were located in the navigation channel near river miles 737, 773, and 790 near Memphis, Tennessee. Bed-sediment samples were collected using a Shipek grab sampler mounted to a boom crane with a motorized winch. Samples then were processed and shipped to the U.S. Geological Survey Sediment Laboratory in Rolla, Missouri, the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory in Denver, Colorado, and to TestAmerica Laboratory, Inc. in West Sacramento, California. Samples were analyzed for grain size, inorganic elements (including mercury), and organic compounds. Chemical results were tabulated and listed with sediment-quality guidelines and presented with the physical property results. All of the bed material samples collected during this investigation yielded concentrations that were less than the Consensus-Based Probable Effect Concentration guidelines. The physical properties were tabulated and listed using a standard U.S. Geological Survey scale of sizes by class for sediment analysis. All of the samples collected during this investigation indicated a percent composition mostly comprised of sand, ranging from less than 0.125 millimeters to less than 2 millimeters.
Suspended-sediment concentration and total suspended solids data collected with automatic pumping samplers at the L'Anguille River near Colt and the L'Anguille River at Palestine, Arkansas, August 2001 to October 2003 were compared using ordinary least squares regression analyses to determine the relation between the two datasets for each of the two sites. The purpose of this report is to describe the suspended-sediment concentration and total suspended-solids data and examine the comparability of the two datasets for each site. Suspended-sediment concentration and total suspended solids data for the L'Anguille River varied spatially and temporally from August 2001 to October 2003. The site at the L'Anguille River at Palestine represents a larger portion of the L'Anguille River Basin than the site near Colt, and generally had higher median suspended-sediment concentration and total suspended solids and greater ranges in values. The differences between suspended-sediment concentration and total suspended solids data for the L'Anguille River near Colt appeared inversely related to streamflow and not related to time. The relation between suspended-sediment concentration and total suspended solids at the L'Anguille River at Palestine was more variable than at Colt and did not appear to have a relation with flow or time. The relation between suspended-sediment concentration and total suspended solids for the L'Anguille River near Colt shows that total suspended solids increased proportionally as suspended-sediment concentration increased. However, the relation between suspended-sediment concentration and total suspended solids for the L'Anguille River at Palestine showed total suspended solids increased less proportionally as suspended-sediment concentration increased compared to the L'Anguille River near Colt. Differences between the two analytical methods may partially explain differences between the suspended-sediment concentration and total suspended solids data at the two sites. Total suspended solids are analyzed by removing an aliquot of the original sample for further analysis, and suspended-sediment concentrations are analyzed using all sediment and the total mass of the sample. At the L'Anguille River at Palestine another source of variability in the two data sets could have been the location of the automatic pumping sampler intake. The intake was located at a point in the stream cross-section that was subject to sedimentation, which may have resulted in positive sample bias.