Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Sarah M. Stackpoole is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Sarah M. Stackpoole.


Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 2016

Aquatic carbon cycling in the conterminous United States and implications for terrestrial carbon accounting

David Butman; Sarah M. Stackpoole; Edward G. Stets; Cory P. McDonald; David W. Clow; Robert G. Striegl

Significance Inland waters provide habitat for aquatic organisms; are sources of human drinking water; and integrate, transport, and process carbon across continents. Estimates of the accumulation of carbon in terrestrial environments suggest that agricultural and forest ecosystems have annual net gains in carbon storage. These ecosystems are considered sinks of atmospheric carbon dioxide. None of these estimates have considered the loss of carbon to and also through aquatic environments at the national or continental scale. We show that aquatic ecosystems in the conterminous United States export over 100 teragrams of carbon (TgC) per year, highlighting the need to attribute the sources of aquatic carbon more accurately, and assert that inland waters play an important role in carbon accounting. Inland water ecosystems dynamically process, transport, and sequester carbon. However, the transport of carbon through aquatic environments has not been quantitatively integrated in the context of terrestrial ecosystems. Here, we present the first integrated assessment, to our knowledge, of freshwater carbon fluxes for the conterminous United States, where 106 (range: 71–149) teragrams of carbon per year (TgC⋅y−1) is exported downstream or emitted to the atmosphere and sedimentation stores 21 (range: 9–65) TgC⋅y−1 in lakes and reservoirs. We show that there is significant regional variation in aquatic carbon flux, but verify that emission across stream and river surfaces represents the dominant flux at 69 (range: 36–110) TgC⋅y−1 or 65% of the total aquatic carbon flux for the conterminous United States. Comparing our results with the output of a suite of terrestrial biosphere models (TBMs), we suggest that within the current modeling framework, calculations of net ecosystem production (NEP) defined as terrestrial only may be overestimated by as much as 27%. However, the internal production and mineralization of carbon in freshwaters remain to be quantified and would reduce the effect of including aquatic carbon fluxes within calculations of terrestrial NEP. Reconciliation of carbon mass–flux interactions between terrestrial and aquatic carbon sources and sinks will require significant additional research and modeling capacity.


Environmental Science & Technology | 2015

Organic Carbon Burial in Lakes and Reservoirs of the Conterminous United States.

David W. Clow; Sarah M. Stackpoole; Kristine L. Verdin; David Butman; Zhiliang Zhu; David P. Krabbenhoft; Robert G. Striegl

Organic carbon (OC) burial in lacustrine sediments represents an important sink in the global carbon cycle; however, large-scale OC burial rates are poorly constrained, primarily because of the sparseness of available data sets. Here we present an analysis of OC burial rates in water bodies of the conterminous U.S. (CONUS) that takes advantage of recently developed national-scale data sets on reservoir sedimentation rates, sediment OC concentrations, lake OC burial rates, and water body distributions. We relate these data to basin characteristics and land use in a geostatistical analysis to develop an empirical model of OC burial in water bodies of the CONUS. Our results indicate that CONUS water bodies sequester 20.8 (95% CI: 9.4-65.8) Tg C yr(-1), and spatial patterns in OC burial are strongly influenced by water body type, size, and abundance; land use; and soil and vegetation characteristics in surrounding areas. Carbon burial is greatest in the central and southeastern regions of the CONUS, where cultivation and an abundance of small water bodies enhance accumulation of sediment and OC in aquatic environments.


Global Biogeochemical Cycles | 2017

Carbonate buffering and metabolic controls on carbon dioxide in rivers

Edward G. Stets; David Butman; Cory P. McDonald; Sarah M. Stackpoole; Michael D. DeGrandpre; Robert G. Striegl

Multiple processes support the significant efflux of carbon dioxide (CO2) from rivers and streams. Attribution of CO2 oversaturation will lead to better quantification of the freshwater carbon cycle and provide insights into the net cycling of nutrients and pollutants. CO2 production is closely related to O2 consumption because of the metabolic linkage of these gases. However, this relationship can be weakened due to dissolved inorganic carbon inputs from groundwater, carbonate buffering, calcification, and anaerobic metabolism. CO2 and O2 concentrations and other water quality parameters were analyzed in two data sets: a synoptic field study and nationwide water quality monitoring data. CO2 and O2 concentrations were strongly negatively correlated in both data sets (ρ = −0.67 and ρ = −0.63, respectively), although the correlations were weaker in high-alkalinity environments. In nearly all samples, the molar oversaturation of CO2 was a larger magnitude than molar O2 undersaturation. We used a dynamically coupled O2CO2 model to show that lags in CO2 air-water equilibration are a likely cause of this phenomenon. Lags in CO2 equilibration also impart landscape-scale differences in the behavior of CO2 between high- and low-alkalinity watersheds. Although the concept of carbonate buffering and how it creates lags in CO2 equilibration with the atmosphere is well understood, it has not been sufficiently integrated into our understanding of CO2 dynamics in freshwaters. We argue that the consideration of carbonate equilibria and its effects on CO2 dynamics are primary steps in understanding the sources and magnitude of CO2 oversaturation in rivers and streams.


Journal of Geophysical Research | 2014

The impact of climate and reservoirs on longitudinal riverine carbon fluxes from two major watersheds in the Central and Intermontane West

Sarah M. Stackpoole; Edward G. Stets; Robert G. Striegl

A nested sampling network on the Colorado (CR) and Missouri Rivers (MR) provided data to assess impacts of large-scale reservoir systems and climate on carbon export. The Load Estimator (LOADEST) model was used to estimate both dissolved inorganic and organic carbon (DIC and DOC) fluxes for a total of 22 sites along the main stems of the CR and MR. Both the upper CR and MR DIC and DOC fluxes increased longitudinally, but the lower CR fluxes decreased while the lower MRs continued to increase. We examined multiple factors through space and time that help explain these flux patterns. Seasonal variability in precipitation and temperature, along with site-level concentration versus discharge relationships proved to be significant factors explaining much of the difference among sites located below reservoirs as compared to sites located in more free-flowing segments of the river. The characterization of variability in carbon exports over space and time provides a basis for understanding carbon cycling and transport within river basins affected by large reservoir systems, particular in arid-to semi-arid ecosystems.


Environmental Science & Technology | 2015

Correction to Organic Carbon Burial in Lakes and Reservoirs of the Conterminous United States.

David W. Clow; Sarah M. Stackpoole; Kristine L. Verdin; David Butman; Zhiliang Zhu; David P. Krabbenhoft; Robert G. Striegl

Equations provided in the Supporting Information for predicting lacustrine sediment organic carbon concentrations, volumetric reservoir sedimentation rates, and for organic carbon burial in lakes/ponds listed incorrect units for land cover variables. Instead of percent (%), they should have been %/100 (as shown below). The correct units were used in all calculations, and the original figures, results, discussions, and conclusions in the paper were not affected by the error. The GLM equation for lacustrine sediment OC concentrations was:


Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences | 2015

The river as a chemostat: fresh perspectives on dissolved organic matter flowing down the river continuum

Irena F. Creed; Diane M. McKnight; Brian A. Pellerin; Mark B. Green; Brian A. Bergamaschi; George R. Aiken; Douglas A. Burns; Jamie Shanley; Rob Striegl; Brent T. Aulenbach; David W. Clow; Hjalmar Laudon; Brian L. McGlynn; Kevin J. McGuire; Richard A. Smith; Sarah M. Stackpoole


Scientific Investigations Report | 2010

A method for assessing carbon stocks, carbon sequestration, and greenhouse-gas fluxes in ecosystems of the United States under present conditions and future scenarios

Brian A. Bergamaschi; Richard Bernknopf; David W. Clow; Dennis Dye; Stephen P. Faulkner; William M. Forney; Robert A. Gleason; Todd J. Hawbaker; Jinxun Liu; Shuguang Liu; Stephen Prisley; Bradley C. Reed; Matthew Reeves; Matthew Rollins; Benjamin M. Sleeter; Terry L. Sohl; Sarah M. Stackpoole; Stephen V. Stehman; Robert G. Striegl; Anne Wein; Zhiliang Zhu


Professional Paper | 2011

Baseline and projected future carbon storage and greenhouse-gas fluxes in the Great Plains region of the United States

Michelle A. Bouchard; David Butman; Todd J. Hawbaker; Zhengpeng Li; Jinxun Liu; Shuguang Liu; Cory P. McDonald; Ryan R. Reker; Kristi L. Sayler; Benjamin M. Sleeter; Terry L. Sohl; Sarah M. Stackpoole; Anne Wein; Zhiliang Zhu


Ecological Applications | 2017

Inland waters and their role in the carbon cycle of Alaska

Sarah M. Stackpoole; David Butman; David W. Clow; Kristine L. Verdin; Benjamin V. Gaglioti; Hélène Genet; Robert G. Striegl


Hydrological Processes | 2017

Spatial and temporal patterns of dissolved organic matter quantity and quality in the Mississippi River Basin, 1997–2013

Sarah M. Stackpoole; Edward G. Stets; David W. Clow; Douglas A. Burns; George R. Aiken; Brent T. Aulenbach; Irena F. Creed; Robert M. Hirsch; Hjalmar Laudon; Brian A. Pellerin; Robert G. Striegl

Collaboration


Dive into the Sarah M. Stackpoole's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Robert G. Striegl

United States Geological Survey

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David W. Clow

United States Geological Survey

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David Butman

University of Washington

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Edward G. Stets

United States Geological Survey

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Zhiliang Zhu

Center for Earth Resources Observation and Science

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Anne Wein

United States Geological Survey

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Benjamin M. Sleeter

United States Geological Survey

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Brian A. Bergamaschi

United States Geological Survey

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jinxun Liu

United States Geological Survey

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge