↓ Skip to main content

Large Shift in Source of Fine Sediment in the Upper Mississippi River

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Science & Technology, September 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
176 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
197 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Large Shift in Source of Fine Sediment in the Upper Mississippi River
Published in
Environmental Science & Technology, September 2011
DOI 10.1021/es2019109
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patrick Belmont, Karen B. Gran, Shawn P. Schottler, Peter R. Wilcock, Stephanie S. Day, Carrie Jennings, J. Wesley Lauer, Enrica Viparelli, Jane K. Willenbring, Daniel R. Engstrom, Gary Parker

Abstract

Although sediment is a natural constituent of rivers, excess loading to rivers and streams is a leading cause of impairment and biodiversity loss. Remedial actions require identification of the sources and mechanisms of sediment supply. This task is complicated by the scale and complexity of large watersheds as well as changes in climate and land use that alter the drivers of sediment supply. Previous studies in Lake Pepin, a natural lake on the Mississippi River, indicate that sediment supply to the lake has increased 10-fold over the past 150 years. Herein we combine geochemical fingerprinting and a suite of geomorphic change detection techniques with a sediment mass balance for a tributary watershed to demonstrate that, although the sediment loading remains very large, the dominant source of sediment has shifted from agricultural soil erosion to accelerated erosion of stream banks and bluffs, driven by increased river discharge. Such hydrologic amplification of natural erosion processes calls for a new approach to watershed sediment modeling that explicitly accounts for channel and floodplain dynamics that amplify or dampen landscape processes. Further, this finding illustrates a new challenge in remediating nonpoint sediment pollution and indicates that management efforts must expand from soil erosion to factors contributing to increased water runoff.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 197 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
France 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 188 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 45 23%
Student > Master 37 19%
Researcher 29 15%
Student > Bachelor 17 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 7%
Other 26 13%
Unknown 29 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Earth and Planetary Sciences 61 31%
Environmental Science 53 27%
Engineering 19 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 5%
Psychology 2 1%
Other 11 6%
Unknown 41 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 October 2011.
All research outputs
#14,474,744
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science & Technology
#14,815
of 20,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,005
of 137,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science & Technology
#116
of 166 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,675 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 137,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 166 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.