umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A comparison of MAGIC and paleolimnological predictions of preindustrial pH for 55 Swedish lakes.
Umeå University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Ecology and Environmental Science.
Show others and affiliations
2008 (English)In: Environmental Science & Technology, ISSN 0013-936X, Vol. 42, no 1, 43-8 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Two fundamentally different approaches to define reference conditions for acidification assessments are hydrogeochemical modeling and paleolimnological reconstructions. Both methods have been applied to calculate the preindustrial chemistry for 55 Swedish lakes in two independent studies. This paper investigates whether these methods give similar reconstructions of the preindustrial pH for these lakes. Special focus has been attached to the importance of total organic carbon concentrations and CO2 partial pressure (pCO(2)) in the conversion from ANC to pH in the hydrogeochemical modeling. With a uniform pCO(2) value for all the lakes of 0.63 matm, the mean absolute difference between pH from the hydrogeochernical model and the paleolimnological pH was +0.23 units (mean absolute difference 0.36 units). If instead a lake specific preindustrial pCO(2) is assumed, equal to contemporary pCO(2), the mean difference in the predicted preindustrial pH between the two methods was reduced to +0.03 units (mean absolute difference 0.22 units). Statistical analyses indicated that with a lake specific pCO(2), the difference between the reconstructions is smaller than 0.13 pH-units at a 95% level of significance. The results of this study build confidence in the reliability of both methods, providing that lake-specific estimates of pCO(2) are used.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2008. Vol. 42, no 1, 43-8 p.
Keyword [en]
Carbon/analysis, Carbon Dioxide/analysis, Diatoms, Fresh Water/*chemistry, Geologic Sediments/analysis, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Industry, Models; Theoretical, Sweden
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-11475DOI: doi:10.1021/es070432aPubMedID: 18350873OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-11475DiVA: diva2:151146
Available from: 2009-01-09 Created: 2009-01-09 Last updated: 2011-01-10Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=18350873&dopt=Citation

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Korsman, Tom
By organisation
Ecology and Environmental Science

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 95 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf