Zero or not? Causes and consequences of zero-flow stream gage readings.
Margaret A Zimmer, Kendra E Kaiser, Joanna R Blaszczak, Samuel C Zipper, John C Hammond, Ken M Fritz, Katie H Costigan, Jacob Hosen, Sarah E Godsey, George H Allen, Stephanie Kampf, Ryan M Burrows, Corey A Krabbenhoft, Walter Dodds, Rebecca Hale, Julian D Olden, Margaret Shanafield, Amanda G DelVecchia, Adam S Ward, Meryl C Mims, Thibault Datry, Michael T Bogan, Kate S Boersma, Michelle H Busch, C Nathan Jones, Amy J Burgin, Daniel C Allen
Author Information
Margaret A Zimmer: Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of California, Santa Cruz, California.
Kendra E Kaiser: Department of Geosciences, Boise State University, Boise, Idaho.
Joanna R Blaszczak: Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Science, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada.
Samuel C Zipper: Kansas Geological Survey, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas.
John C Hammond: U.S. Geological Survey, MD-DE-DC Water Science Center, Baltimore, Maryland.
Ken M Fritz: Office of Research and Development, U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Katie H Costigan: School of Geosciences, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, Louisiana.
Jacob Hosen: Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana.
Sarah E Godsey: Department of Geosciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho.
George H Allen: Department of Geography, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.
Stephanie Kampf: Department of Ecosystem Science and Sustainability, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Ryan M Burrows: Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Corey A Krabbenhoft: College of Arts and Sciences and Research and Education in Energy, Environment and Water (RENEW) Institute, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.
Walter Dodds: Division of Biology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas.
Rebecca Hale: Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, Idaho.
Julian D Olden: School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Margaret Shanafield: College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Amanda G DelVecchia: Flathead Lake Biological Station, University of Montana, Polson, Montana.
Adam S Ward: O'Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
Meryl C Mims: Department of Biological Sciences, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia.
Thibault Datry: INRAE, UR Riverly, Centre de Lyon-Villeurbanne, Villeurbanne, Cedex, France.
Michael T Bogan: School of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.
Kate S Boersma: Department of Biology, University of San Diego, San Diego, California.
Michelle H Busch: Department of Biology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma.
C Nathan Jones: Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama.
Amy J Burgin: University of Kansas and Kansas Biological Survey, Lawrence, Kansas.
Daniel C Allen: Department of Biology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma.
Streamflow observations can be used to understand, predict, and contextualize hydrologic, ecological, and biogeochemical processes and conditions in streams. Stream gages are point measurements along rivers where streamflow is measured, and are often used to infer upstream watershed-scale processes. When stream gages read zero, this may indicate that the stream has fully dried; however, zero-flow readings can also be caused by a wide range of other factors. Our ability to identify whether or not a zero-flow gage reading indicates a dry fluvial system has far reaching environmental implications. Incorrect identification and interpretation by the data user can lead to hydrologic, ecological, and/or biogeochemical predictions from models and analyses. Here, we describe several causes of zero-flow gage readings: frozen surface water, flow reversals, instrument error, and natural or human-driven upstream source losses or bypass flow. For these examples, we discuss the implications of zero-flow interpretations. We also highlight additional methodss for determining flow presence, including direct observations, statistical methods, and hydrologic models, which can be applied to interpret causes of zero-flow gage readings and implications for reach- and watershed-scale dynamics. Such efforts are necessary to improve our ability to understand and predict surface flow activation, cessation, and connectivity across river networks. Developing this integrated understanding of the wide range of possible meanings of zero-flows will only attain greater importance in a more variable and changing hydrologic climate.
