Sensitivity of precipitation isotope meteoric water lines and seasonal signals to sampling frequency and location

Allison R. Reynolds, areyno13@kent.edu, and Anne J. Jefferson Department of Geology, Kent State University, Kent, OH 44242

Local Meteoric Water Lines (LMWLs)

LMWLs for each site were similar (Figure 1). Comparing the LMWLs generated from the event samples and the monthly data (Figure 2), the monthly data had a slightly lower slope and d-excess. Transforming from event to monthly samples also reduced the range of variability in isotopic signatures in Kent (Figure 2, Table 1).

Research Question
How do local meteoric water lines and seasonal signals in precipitation isotopes change regionally and between event and monthly sampling intervals?
We collected data in Kent, OH and compared it to the records in the GNIP database. The sites Coshocton and Simcoe were the closest sites. Coshocton collected samples from 1966-1975 and Simcoe collected samples monthly from 1975-1982.

Methods
Precipitation samples were collected in Kent, Ohio in a residential yard. Rain was collected in a 10.16 cm diameter rain gage, and snow was collected in a 15 by 30 cm box. Samples were collected daily at 8 am local time, and some events were also sampled at 8 pm. Samples were filtered and analyzed by a Picarro L-2130i at Kent State University and the data was processed following the protocols in van Geldern and Barth (2012). The closest GNIP sites are Coshocton, Ohio, USA and Simcoe, Ontario, Canada. Monthly data were downloaded from the IAEA WISER database (http://www-naweb.iaea.org/napc/ih/IHS_resources_isohis.html).

Figure 1. LMWL for Kent, Coshocton, and Simcoe, based on monthly data

Table 1. Comparison of the range of isotopic values for event samples versus monthly composites for Kent.
Kent Event -26.0 Monthly -17.8 -1.3

Instrument Performance Repeat analyses show a standard error of 0.01 for 18O and 0.04 for 2H. Approximately 27% of samples had multiple analyses, and for these we report average values. Kent, OH sampling site is indicated by the red dot.

Minimum 18O

Figure 2. LMWLs calculated from event and monthly samples at Kent, Ohio.

Maximum 18O -0.1

Seasonal Signals
The best-fit seasonal signal (Figure 3, Table 2) for Kent, OH is more similar isotopically to Simcoe (206 km north from Kent) than Coshocton (106 km south). For the Kent dataset (Figure 4), the event-based data produced a sine wave with greater amplitude of 6.1, than that fit to the monthly data.
0 -2 -4
18O ()

Conclusions and Implications

LMWLs and seasonal signals derived from monthly samples were broadly similar along a 300 km north-south transect in the US eastern Great Lakes Region. Mean isotopic values are more depleted at the northern end of the transect. Composite samples on monthly basis under-represent event scale variability in precipitation isotopes, based on samples from Kent, Ohio. Monthly sampling reduces the apparent d-excess. The d-excess values have a bigger difference between Kent event sampling and Kent monthly sampling than is observed between monthly samples across sites.

Future plans
Continued event sampling to assess inter-annual variability Sub-event sampling to assess variability within events Correlating isotopes with air masses trajectories and histories Comparison with other existing precipitation isotope datasets in the region Establish Kent as a GNIP station with better sample collection location and monthly sampling

Kent Simcoe Coshocton

-6 -8 -10 -12 -14 -16 10 12 14 16 Months 18 20 22 24

Figure 4. Time series of event (blue squares) and monthly samples (red diamonds) for Kent, OH showing fitted sine waves. Table 2. Best-fit sine waves. The amplitude of the seasonal signal is represented by the first term, and average 18O is the last term. Location Coshocton Simcoe Kent (monthly) Kent (event) Equation for 18O 6.2*sin(0.52*t-1.33)-7.672, where t = months 4.3*sin(0.55*t-4.18)-10.07, where t = months 4.9*sin(0.56*t-3.23)-9.56, where t = months 6.14*sin(0.017*t-291)-11.69, where t = days

There is substantial diversity in precipitation isotopes in winter months. Isotopically depleted events are frequent but do not produce large amounts of precipitation. This may reflect different air mass sources and trajectories. Understanding the amount and source of variability in precipitation isotopes in space and time is important for correctly using them in watershed hydrology applications.

Figure 3. Kent, Coshocton, and Simcoe sinewaves compared

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. DUE-1140980. For more information about this project, please visit https://sites.google.com/a/kent.edu/d-edgeo/