In this contribution we investigate the hydrodynamic response in Alfacs Bay
(Ebro Delta, NW Mediterranean Sea) to different anthropogenic modifications
in freshwater flows and inner bay–open sea connections. The fresh water
coming from rice field irrigation contains nutrients and pesticides and
therefore affects in multiple ways the productivity and water quality of the
bay. The application of a nested oceanographic circulation modelling suite
within the bay provides objective information to solve water quality problems
that are becoming more acute due to temperature and phytoplankton
concentration peaks during the summer period when seawater may exceed
28 ∘C, leading to high rates of mussel mortality and therefore a
significant impact on the local economy. The effects of different management
“solutions” (like a connection channel between the inner bay and open sea)
are hydrodynamically modelled in order to diminish residence times
(e-flushing time) and water temperatures. The modelling system, based on the
Regional Ocean Modeling System (ROMS), consists of a set of nested domains
using data from CMEMS-IBI for the initial and open boundary conditions
(coarser domain). One full year (2014) of simulation is used to validate the
results, showing low errors with sea surface temperature (SST) and good agreement with surface currents.
Finally, a set of twin numerical experiments during the summer period (when
the water temperature reaches 28 ∘C) is used to analyse the effects of
proposed nature-based interventions. Although these actions modify water
temperature in the water column, the decrease in SST is not enough to
avoid high temperatures during some days and prevent eventual mussel mortality
during summer in the shallowest regions. However, the proposed management
actions reveal their effectiveness in diminishing water residence times along
the entire bay, thus preventing the inner areas from having poor water renewal
and the corresponding ecological problems.
Introduction
Coastal lagoons are highly productive areas, for instance regarding
aquaculture, and are subject to multiple anthropogenic pressures. Due to the
specific characteristics of these environments – e.g. small dimensions, calm
inner waters, constrained exchange with open sea, heavy load of nutrients –
there is usually a wide variety of problems related to water quality that can
strongly limit their use and exploitation (e.g. HABs, anoxia–hypoxia events,
water renovation or high seawater temperatures; Smith, 2003).
This problem is illustrated by the Ebro Delta coastal bays (NW Mediterranean)
in which, for most of the year, there is an interaction between incoming saltwater from the coastal sea and fresh water discharged into the bays through
the irrigation system from the surrounding rice fields. These discharges are
rich in nutrients and pesticides (Köck et al., 2010),
therefore affecting in multiple ways the productivity and water quality of
the bays (Loureiro et al., 2009), in which residence times can be large
depending on the prevailing met-ocean conditions (Artigas et al., 2014).
These bays (Alfacs in the south and Fangar in the north hemidelta) constitute
the most important shellfish aquaculture area on the Spanish Mediterranean
coast. They are considered very productive coastal areas compared to the
oligotrophic western Mediterranean Sea; the primary production per volume
unit is 1 order of magnitude greater than in the adjacent open sea
(Delgado, 1989) and their waters support important fisheries and mussel and
oyster cultures. Moreover, the economy of the area is largely based on
activities that depend on primary production, such as agriculture, fisheries
and aquaculture. The shellfish aquaculture in the region has to face
different types of risks: shellfish pathogens (López-Joven et al., 2015),
extreme warm events in the last years (Fernández-Tejedor et al., 2010),
contamination (Köck et al., 2010), HABs and toxin accumulation (Loureiro
et al., 2009), and the proliferation of invasive alien species, for
example tunicates (Ordóñez et al., 2015). Water mass transport in
marine systems has been demonstrated to be a decisive factor controlling the
behaviour of chemical and biological variables of the ecosystem (Wolanski, 2007). In this sense, the evolution of the ecological status of the
bays is highly related to water renewal and substance dispersion. Wind- or
wave-induced resuspension processes may also affect the ecological status by
inducing the vertical transport of substances from the sea bottom to the
inner water column (Umgiesser et al., 2004).
The application of a nested oceanographic model with enough resolution to
solve the inner dynamics of this kind of environment provides objective
information to address water quality problems. These are becoming more
relevant in the Ebro Delta bays due to increasing peaks of temperature and
nutrient concentrations during the summer when seawater may exceed
28 ∘C, leading to high rates of shellfish mortality and therefore
having a significant impact on the local economy.
In this contribution, focused on Alfacs Bay, we explore the suitability of
land boundary conditions and the controlling effect of different management
actions on the resulting 3-D circulation patterns based on renewal times.
In this context, we also discuss the implications of opening a connection
between the open sea and the inner bay, dredging the sandbar, and how it
affects water temperature and concentrations. This has been a long-standing
proposal by local fishermen to enhance water renovation rates and improve the
water quality within the bay. A set of 3-D numerical model simulations
spanning 1 year (2014), with outer boundary conditions from Copernicus
Marine Environment Monitoring Service (CMEMS) models, is compared to
intensive field campaigns and discussed in terms of water renovation and
temperature. The implications of a hydraulic connection to the outer sea is
analysed as a natural and sustainable type of intervention. From here, a set
of conclusions on the models' performance and on the effectiveness of such
sustainable intervention are presented.
MethodsStudy area
Alfacs Bay is part of the Ebro Delta, which extends about 25 km offshore and
forms two semi-enclosed bays on its lateral margins, Alfacs to the south and
Fangar to the north. Both bays receive direct freshwater input from the
drainage channels of nearby rice fields. In Alfacs Bay, these freshwater
inputs are distributed in two dominant periods: from April to December with
mean flows estimated by Llebot et al. (2011) of around 10 m3 s-1
and from January to March with channels closed and flows around
1 m3 s-1 (hereinafter referred to as wet and dry periods,
respectively) due to rain and groundwater sources. Alfacs Bay is about 16 km
long and 4 km wide, with a 2.5 km wide mouth, an average depth of about
4 m, and a maximum of 6.5 m in the middle of the bay. Figure 1 presents the
location and bathymetry of the bay. The bay is closed in the east by a
sandbar beach called Trabucador bar. This coastal barrier linking the main
lobe of the Ebro Delta with its southern spit has suffered various breaching
events associated with storms, opening an ephemeral connection between the
bay and the open sea (Sánchez-Arcilla and Jiménez, 1994; Gracia et
al., 2013). The bed is mostly muddy (largest percentages in the middle of the
bay) with silty sediments present close to the freshwater outflows
(Palacín et al., 1991).
Location
of Ebro Delta, Alfacs Bay and PdE Tarragona buoy (blue
point, Tb) (a). (b) The nesting scheme with the
coastal (D-A) and bay (D-B) domains and bathymetry. Data from HF-R used to
validate the system are indicated as “HF” (0.91∘ E,
40.31∘ N). (c) Location of the weekly CTDs (T).
The opening area of the Trabucador bar modified in the numerical experiments
is also shown. The dashed line in the bay mouth indicates the separation
between the inner bay and open sea for the salinity box model. The grey
rectangle indicates the mussel farm area. The freshwater drainage channel
locations are indicated with arrows.
The bay has been defined as a salt-wedge estuary with an almost year-round
stable stratification, alternated with well-mixed periods directly related to
strong wind (Camp and Delgado, 1987) or seiche events (Cerralbo et al.,
2015). Solé et al. (2009) found that drainage discharges were the main
factor controlling the observed stratification. Cerralbo et al. (2015) found
that during warm periods the salinity distribution shows strong vertical
gradients, coinciding with isopycnals, with the saltiest water (almost 38)
from the outer sea in the deepest mouth layers and the freshest water
(35–36) at the surface. Stratification is weaker in the inner bay, with
lower salinity values in the water column. Within the bay, fresh water at the
surface layer extends from the northwest to the southeast with a pycnocline
at 3–4 m of depth (Camp, 1994; Llebot et al., 2011). The water temperatures
during summer show a clear diurnal pattern, with a clear stratification. This
pattern occurred until the end of summer, when strong, dry and cold winds
from the NW mix and cool the water column (Cerralbo et al., 2015; Grifoll et
al., 2016). In Llebot et al. (2011), annual cycle (and inter-annual) analyses
of temperature, salinity and some ecological indicators are described.
Moreover, Llebot et al. (2014) use the Wedderburn number to identify wind
events with enough energy to modify stratification, defining the mixed layer
deepening response to wind events. Cerralbo et al. (2014) studied the tidal
characteristics of the bay, noting the importance of the 3 h seiches and
describing the 1 h seiches (corresponding to the first seiching mode). The
subtidal patterns have been related to estuarine circulation (Llebot et al.,
2014) and wind influence through empirical
orthogonal function
(EOF) analysis (Cerralbo et al., 2019). On the other hand, several ecological
studies noted the presence of harmful algal blooms (HABs) in some periods and
their relation to nutrients and waters from the open sea (Loureiro et al.,
2009). Ramón et al. (2007) and Fernández-Tejedor et al. (2010) have
reported mussel mortalities associated with high seawater temperature in the
Ebro Delta bays.
Summary of observations (see Fig.1 for identifications).
Weekly
conductivity–temperature–depth (CTD) profiles were conducted in the
framework of the monitoring programme for toxic phytoplankton in shellfish
growing areas during the years 2013–2014. The location of one sampling
station is shown in Fig. 1 (T). The water temperature in different
locations (and representing different kinds of waterbodies) of the region is
summarized in Fig. 2. The water temperatures inside the bay (T) and in the
drainage channels are very similar (low gradients between them). The lowest
temperatures (∼10∘C) occur during the winter season (December
to March). After this, a gradual rise in water temperature is observed, with
maximum values around 29 ∘C during summer (June to August). Finally,
the water temperature decreases, affected by the influence of NW strong, dry
and cold winds. On the other hand, the water temperature from the river does
show remarkable differences (mainly during summer), with gradients around
2–3 ∘C (similar to the coastal waters measured at the Tarragona
coastal buoy) compared to inner-bay waters. All the observations are
summarized in Table 1.
Water temperatures in Alfacs Bay at point T (year 2014),
drainage channels (rice fields, from climatological observations for
2002–2010 in a nearby coastal lagoon by the staff of the Ebro Delta
Natural Park), Tarragona buoy (Tb) for open seawater conditions
(Puertos del Estado, PdE) and climatological data from the Ebro River
(Confederación Hidrográfica del Ebro).
Numerical model
The three-dimensional hydrodynamic model used in this study is the Regional
Ocean Modeling System (ROMS). Numerical aspects are described in detail in
Shchepetkin and McWilliams (2005), and a complete description of the model,
with documentation and code, is available at the ROMS website:
http://myroms.org (last access: 15 December 2018). Previous
implementation for the model in Alfacs Bay showed a good skill assessment
compared to currents, sea level and water temperature variables (Cerralbo et
al., 2016).
The model applications consist of two nested regular grids with spatial
resolutions of ∼350 and ∼70 m for the coarser (D-A) and finer
domains (D-B), respectively (Fig. 1). The nesting ratio (∼5) between
the two domains is defined to get enough resolution to reproduce the
circulation in the inner bay, allowing for the transfer of large-scale
dynamics into the nested domain. The nesting is offline; a first D-A
simulation is performed and the hourly results are used for the boundary
conditions of D-B. The chosen vertical discretization consists of 20 and
15σ levels for the coastal and bay domains, respectively. Bathymetries
of the coastal system are built by combining bathymetric data from GEBCO
(https://www.gebco.net/, last access: 2 December 2018) and specific
local high-resolution sources. The bottom boundary layer is parameterized
with a logarithmic profile using a characteristic bottom roughness height of
0.002 m. A surface stretching parameter (7.0) and bottom stretching
parameter (0.4) for the Song and Haidvogel (1994) stretching function is
used. This configuration allows for an increase in the resolution in the
upper layer where the surface boundary layer is located due to the wind
action. The transformation function used is described in Shchepetkin and
McWilliams (2005) denoted as an unperturbed coordinate system. In order to
represent the processes at scales smaller than the grid resolution we
selected anisotropic horizontal and vertical turbulent schemes based on a
generic length scale (GLS) formulation (Warner et al., 2005).
K-ε parameters are chosen for GLS formulation. Also, the Kantha
and Clayson stability function formulation is used (Kantha and Clayson,
1994). For the advection scheme a third-order upstream horizontal flux is
selected. For heat and mass tracers, a biharmonic mixing scheme along
geopotential surfaces is used.
A 1-year-long base simulation (hereafter referred to as BS, from 1 January
to 31 December 2014) has been performed in order to validate the
model and obtain the initial and boundary conditions for the 3-month
simulations in the analysis period (summer 2014) in the smaller domain. The
BS is done using the first 24 h of the CMEMS-IBI (Sotillo et al., 2015)
daily forecasts for the initial and open boundary conditions. Hourly
depth-averaged water currents and sea level are provided by CMEMS-IBI and
consistently accommodated to the open boundaries (OBC) with Chapman and
Flather algorithms (Carter and Merrifield, 2007). The variability of currents
along the water column (3-D component), temperature and salinity are imposed
from CMEMS-IBI daily average values with clamped conditions.
At the sea surface, the models are driven by high-frequency (hourly) wind
components (with 0.05∘ resolution), atmospheric pressure, humidity,
precipitation and solar radiation derived from the Spanish Meteorological
Agency (AEMET) forecast (model HARMONIE). The wind stress and sensible and
latent heat are computed internally by the model using aerodynamic bulk
formulas. To avoid land contamination of the atmospheric forcing on coastal
areas (e.g. heat fluxes and winds), a prior land mask is applied to the
forcing data, and then variables over the sea are interpolated on the land.
The freshwater flows are 1 m3 s-1 during January–March (dry
season) and 10 m3 s-1 during April–December (wet season)
distributed in the three channels (see Fig. 1c). Salinity is set to 18, and
water temperature is defined from climatological water temperature in the
Ebro River (Fig. 2).
For the sake of understanding the influence of land discharges and layout
modifications on the water dynamics, a set of 3-month-long numerical
experiments is done (1 June–30 September). In all of them, a passive tracer
with a 1 kg m-3 concentration is initially released at all the
computational nodes inside the bay. The BS simulation is restarted on 1 June
with the passive tracers and is used as a control simulation (called C) to
compare all the numerical tests. A second set of three tests has been
prepared to understand the effects of establishing an artificial connection
with the open sea through the Trabucador bar (see Fig. 1). This is an
engineering action proposed in the last years by the local authorities to
consolidate the ephemeral connection between the bay and the open sea that
occurs occasionally due to storm-related bar breaching. The purpose of a
permanent open sea connection is to solve the problems of the bay linked to
long residence times and overheating, and similar solutions have been studied
in other coastal lagoons with water quality issues (Netto et al., 2012; Lill
et al., 2012). These simulations consist of opening the bar using different
widths, from 200 to 800 m, and studying the effects on water renewal and sea
surface temperature. Finally, two more numerical tests are performed in which
the freshwater input flows were modified. Considering that the gravitational
circulation in the bay has been previously related to the hydrodynamics of
the bay (Cerralbo et al., 2019), it is expected to find variability in the
water renewal times when the freshwater flows are modified. These numerical
tests are designed to understand their effects on current patterns. In test
R1 the usual flow (10 m3 s-1 in C) is doubled, keeping the
proportion in the three channels. In test R2, the total discharged flow is
doubled, but the flow increment is only applied to the innermost channel,
while the outflow through the drainage channels closest to the bay mouth is
kept the same as in C. Thus, the R1 test doubles the freshwater input along
the three channels, and R2 only modifies the innermost channel. All the
numerical tests are summarized in Table 2.
* The order inside the brackets indicates the location of
a drainage channel from west to east (see Fig. 1).
Validation
Data from CMEMS-IBI, atmospheric models and field observations (high-frequency radar (HF-R) from Puertos
del Estado, PdE), as well as sea surface salinity (SSS) and sea surface temperature (SST) data from the
Institute of Agriculture and Food Research and Technology (IRTA), were
available for the year 2014. The modelled and observed SSTs are shown in
Fig. 3. A qualitative and quantitative comparison shows good agreement
between the two variables (correlation of 0.99), with a small overheating in the
modelled results (see statistics in Fig. 3). The errors in modelled SSS
are mainly related to the uncertainty associated with the flows and the exact
location of the discharge points. However, the results of the coastal model
(D-A), which considers the inner-bay freshwater flows, show a closer
agreement with the observed values than the CMEMS-IBI results, which do not
account for the inner discharges. The variability of SSS in the CMEMS-IBI
fields is related to the Ebro River plume, not to the influence of inner-bay
freshwater inflows. Water surface currents are validated for the coastal
model (D-A) considering the information from HF-R in the area (Lorente et
al., 2016). The HF-R (CODAR SeaSonde standard range) was deployed at the Ebro
Delta in 2013 within the framework of the RIADE (Redes de Indicadores
Ambientales del Delta del Ebro) project. The network consists of three remote
shore-based sites providing hourly radial measurements with a cut-off filter
of 100 cm s-1 and representative of current velocities in the upper
first metre of the water column (Lorente et al., 2015). The total current
vectors are hourly averaged on a predefined Cartesian regular grid with 3×3 km horizontal resolution. The parent model (CMEMS-IBI) has been
validated in the region using HF-R in Sotillo et al. (2015). Their results shows
zonal and meridional root mean square error (correlation) values in the range of
6–10 cm s-1 (0.4–0.8) over central areas of the HF-R radar domain, with
higher errors detected at the far edges of the radar spatial coverage (Sotillo et
al., 2015). For D-A domain both eastward and northward components of the
surface currents are shown in Fig. 3a and b (at point HF, location shown
in Fig. 1). Validation is performed for all of 2014 in one point close to
the bay and with optimal temporal coverage (more than 85 % of 2014 with
data). The gaps in the HF-R data are not considered. The agreement and
correlation between modelled and observed currents are very high (∼0.7),
both in intensity and phase and in both components. The daily oscillations
correspond to the inertial period in the region (∼19 h) and are well
reproduced by the model. Some currents intensifications, probably related to
energetic wind events, are also well described by the model (for instance on
10 February and 16 March).
Eastward (a) and northward (b) water surface
currents for the D-A model and HF-R at HF (Fig. 1) are shown. SST (c)
and SSS (d) validation of the local model D-B (red), CMEMS-IBI
(yellow) and observations (blue) at T (Fig. 1).
Water residence times
There are a multitude of different methods and concepts to calculate water
renovation in the literature. For any given domain, the simplest way to
assess water renovation is to obtain the water exchange time through the
ratio between its total volume (V) and the daily flux (Q) entering or
leaving through its open boundaries. It represents the time required for the
entire mass of water to be replaced by input water (Takeoka, 1984; Jouon et
al., 2006). On the other hand, the e-flushing time (Thomann and Mueller,
1987) assumes that a passive tracer is injected into a homogenous water mass
at time t with an initial concentration C0. The e-flushing time is the time
required for the tracer mass initially contained within the whole domain to
decrease by a 1/e factor. A fair adaptation to this parameter, the local
e-flushing time, is presented in Jouon et al. (2006) by considering the
spatial variability of the e-flushing time and taking into account the
evolution of the tracer in each cell of the computational mesh.
The integral water exchange time in Alfacs Bay can be grossly estimated using
simple approaches. A first approximation can be done by considering the
residual circulation presented in Cerralbo et al. (2018); through an
analysis of the mean circulation the authors obtain residual velocities at
the bay mouth. Using the mean residual currents and the bay's volume and
typical cross section at the mouth leads to water exchange times (θ)
of around 20 and 70 days for the wet and the dry season, respectively.
Similar results can be also obtained using a box model approximation
(Officer, 1980) based on the salinity variations between the bay water and
the open sea with four layers: seaside surface and bottom (salinity of 36.35
and 37.82, respectively) and inner-bay surface and bottom layers (with
salinities of 35.7 and 36.94). The box model is described by Eqs. (1–4).
S2⋅Q21+E12=S1⋅Q13+E12S0⋅Q02+S1⋅E12=S1⋅Q21+E12Q+Q21=Q13Q02=Q21Q is the total freshwater input, Si is the salinity in layer i, and
Qij and Eij are the advective and
turbulent fluxes between layers i and j. In this model, Q is set to
10 m3 s-1, and the salinities are given by the mean values
obtained in the field campaigns described in Sect. 2.2. Solving the system
with these values yields residence times of ∼13 and ∼40 days for
the wet and the dry season, respectively. However, these methods are not
useful when large variations in hydrodynamics occur (Jouon et al., 2006). In
this sense, previous studies on the Alfacs Bay hydrodynamics have highlighted
the relevance of hydrodynamic spatial variability associated with seiches
(Cerralbo et al., 2014), winds (Llebot et al., 2014; Cerralbo et al., 2016)
and gravitational circulation (Artigas et al., 2014).
An approximation to the spatial variability of the residence times is
addressed for the first time in this work by analysing the space distribution
of the local flushing time (LFT) for the entire waterbody. The methodology
applied is based on the numerical deployment of an Eulerian conservative
tracer, within the inner domain of the bay, to compute the time required for
its concentration in each grid cell to decrease by a factor e-1 from the
initial value. This definition represents the sum of the flushing lag and
local e-flushing time in Jouon et al. (2006). Thus, an Eulerian passive and
conservative tracer with a concentration equal to Co=1 kg m-3 was
deployed in the different sigma layers of the inner bay. Considering that the
pycnocline is around 3–4 m of depth (Camp, 1994) and mussel farms are
mostly above this depth, the analysis focuses on the surface layers. The
freshwater inflows are considered clean of the tracer. An example of the time
evolution of the surface tracer concentration at two points is shown in
Fig. 4a. The LFT is defined at each grid cell based on the concentration
decrease between Co and Co*e-1 using the best-correlated
exponential regression (Jouon et al., 2006).
(a) Time evolution of the dye concentration at two points
– at the bay mouth and inside the bay – and the corresponding exponential
fitting (with the squared correlation shown in the legend) used to obtain the
LFT for the C case. (b) The local e-flushing time for the C
case (colour). The black contour shows the squared correlation obtained at
each of the grid points.
Results
The results for LFT in the C simulation reveal a high spatial variability
(Fig. 4b), with short values between 5 and 20 days in the region close to the
bay mouth and near the freshwater discharges. These are similar to those
presented in Camp (1994) and Llebot et al. (2011). On the other hand, longer
times are found in the inner regions (30–47 days). When the total flushing
time (TFT) is considered (TFT being equal to the period necessary for the
average concentration of the entire bay to go from Co to Co*e-1), values of about 28 days for
C are found.
TFT values for the surface e-flushing time in the Alfacs Bay.
NumericalTFT (totalDifference intestflushing time)relation to CDaysDaysC28.2–B122.7-5.5B217.6-10.6B314.6-13.6R120.3-7.9R217.6-10.6
As mentioned before, the hydrodynamics of Alfacs Bay are particularly
affected by freshwater inputs. Both R1 and R2 reveal (not shown) maximum
LFT values of 34 and 29 days, respectively (shorter than C, with 47 days).
The anomaly – in days – of these patterns in relation to the distributions
obtained for C is shown in Fig. 5a and b. R1 shows shorter residence times
than the C test in the innermost part of the bay. The clearest effects of
the freshwater increment are observed in the area closest to the drainage points
(with LFT under 10 days). However, the inner areas still present residence
times longer than 30 days. The R2 results also show remarkable differences
compared to the control case, with shorter times in the area close to the
inner channel and values around 20 days in the innermost region. In both
tests, the area of mussel farms shows similar differences, with LFT values
almost 10 days shorter in the results obtained with modified freshwater
flows. In Table 3 the TFT for the entire bay is summarized for all the cases.
It is interesting to note that the TFT for test C is around 28 days, similar
to the values obtained through the simple relation between the mean residual
circulation and the volume of the bay. Tests R1 and R2 show a noticeable
decrease in the average e-flushing time, with reductions of ∼8 and
∼11 days, respectively.
Differences (in days) for the water e-flushing times between each
test case and the control simulation (C). Negative (positive) indicates shorter
(longer) local e-flushing times for the corresponding test compared with C.
Regarding SST (Fig. 6), the differences are evident, but not significant.
In general, there is a cooling of the surface water over the entire bay of
about 0.5 ∘C, being more evident in the vicinities of the drainage
points. However, in the region near the Trabucador bar, the surface waters
show an increase in temperature. This area is very shallow and probably the
effects of higher stratification (induced by the highest freshwater inputs)
and longer residence times in this region contribute to increasing the SST.
Considering the integrated SST values for the entire bay, the R1 and R2 tests
show a decrease of 0.07 and 0.08 ∘C in relation to the control test.
Differences for the SST between each test case and the control
simulation (C). Blue indicates a lower SST for the corresponding test
compared with C (red indicates a lower SST for the control simulation).
To evaluate the effect of bar breaching, a set of three numerical tests (B1,
B2 and B3) with different widths of sandbar breaching (200, 500 and 800 m,
respectively) has been implemented. In all the cases, the depth of the
channel is equal to the minimum depth considered in the model (1 m).
Figure 1 shows the region of the sandbar modified for these simulations.
The results are summarized in Figs. 5 and 6. Test B1 (200 m) shows shorter
LFT mostly in the region close to the sandbar. However, no remarkable
differences are observed in the mussel farm region (differences of about
5 days with respect to C). Tests B2 and B3 (500 and 800 m) reveal a higher variation
in the residence times than B1, but with similar spatial variability
patterns. In general, a wider connection with the open sea implies a larger
area with lower LFT in the vicinities of the sandbar and inner region.
Moreover, the effects are also observed in the region of the mussel farms,
with a decrease in the residence time to less than 10 days. The TFT for the
entire bay and the differences relative to the C test are summarized in
Table 3. There is clearly a direct relationship between the width of the
channel and the residence times, with those for B3 (widest channel) being
almost 14 days shorter than those for the control case C.
The analysis of SST differences shows no relevant discrepancies with the
C case in most of the bay. Only the region closest to the open
channel in the bar shows a decrease in the inner-bay SST (due to mixing with
the cooler open seawater, as observed in Fig. 2) and also an increase in SST
in the open seaside of the bar. The integrated values over the bay do not
show significant variations between the tests and the control case, with
differences smaller than 0.07 ∘C.
Discussion
Previous studies had applied numerical models in Alfacs Bay (Llebot et al.,
2014; Artigas et al., 2014; Cerralbo et al., 2014, 2015, 2016), trying to
characterize the main hydrodynamic features of the bay: wind, sea level,
seiches, mixing and gravitational circulation. However, none of them
addresses one of the most relevant problems inside the bay related to low
water renovation and warm water temperatures during summer periods. For this,
a high-resolution numerical model able to simulate interventions and impacts
has been implemented for the first time in the bay using the available data
from CMEMS numerical models (as initial and boundary conditions) and
following the nesting scheme designed in the SAMOA initiative (Sotillo et
al., 2019). The validation of such an implementation with the available data
in the coarser domain has been done through comparison with HF-R water
surface currents, revealing very good performance and agreement. The
validation of the higher-resolution domain – local – has been performed
using SST and SSS from in situ field campaigns, revealing a good agreement
between observed and modelled data for the SST. Errors in salinity could be
related to the lack of accurate data for freshwater flows (total volume,
spatial and temporal distribution) and the salinity of these waters (fresh
water from rice fields mixed with brackish waters from the coastal lagoon).
The model presented in this paper could be also considered as the first
attempt towards the implementation of an operational system in the bay as a
local downscaling of CMEMS products, which could be used by local authorities
to improve the management of the bay. However, this study has revealed the
scarcity of information about the bay, which may influence the robustness of
modelling results. Lacking data include, for instance, accurate information
on bathymetry, which is expected to improve with new products derived from
Sentinel-2, and the correct characterization of the freshwater flows (i.e.
number and spatial distribution of sources, water flows, and temperature).
As stated by several authors (i.e. Braunschweig et al., 2003; Jouon et al.,
2006; Dabrowski et al., 2012; Grifoll et al., 2013) there are various ways to
obtain the residence time of a given waterbody. In this contribution, we have
followed different approximations, from a simplistic scheme using the
observed residual velocities or the application of a box model that uses the
salinities and freshwater flows to obtain the gravitational circulation, to
the most complete scheme using the depletion of Eulerian conservative tracers
in a numerical model (LFT and TFT). The analysis has focused on surface
layers (above the pycnocline at 3–4 m) where the water column is entirely
mixed. The water exchange times reveal values of 13 and 40 days for wet and
dry periods, respectively, using the box model, similar to those obtained
using residual currents (20 and 70 days). These results are in agreement with
previous studies (Camp and Delgado, 1987; Llebot et al., 2011) presenting
residence times for the Alfacs Bay between 10 (wet period) and 25 days (dry
period). The differences between these results and previous studies may be
due to the arbitrary selection of the bay mouth section, sensitivity to
salinity and freshwater flows used in the box model, and the location of the
current meters. In this sense, the variability of the flow through the mouth section
has been demonstrated to be high in Cerralbo et al. (2016). However,
simple methods consider all water particles to have the same transit time
through the entire control volume (Takeoka, 1984). In Alfacs Bay, several
authors (Llebot et al., 2011; Cerralbo et al., 2014, 2015, 2016) have
observed remarkable variability in the spatial distribution of the
hydrodynamics fields. Thus, the application of LFT allows for an understanding of the
spatial variability of the residence time inside the bay and offers a proper
information tool for the local authorities. The results of the LFT method
reveal differences in renewal times among different areas (for instance,
where the mussel farms are located) with residence times (LFT) around
15–20 days and regions inside the bay with much larger residence times
(∼40–45 days). According to these data, the location of the mussel
farms could be considered optimal when the residence time is considered.
Only locations closer to the bay mouth show higher ratios of renovation.
These results agree with an approximation by Artigas et al. (2014).
Once the numerical model is implemented, calibrated and validated, it can be
used to test different interventions directed to improve the water quality of
the bay. Considering that some of the main problems of the bay
are related to the long residence times (i.e. anoxia as observed by Camp et
al., 1992) and the high values of water temperatures during summer, several
management options have been tested to find the best option to mitigate these
negative effects. Two actions are proposed and analysed here: the
modification of freshwater flows (both volume and spatial distribution) and
the artificial connection with open sea through the El Trabucador bar. Both
actions show a remarkable reduction in the LFT (and corresponding TFT),
mostly concentrated in the inner area of the bay, with LFT in B3 and
R2 almost half of that observed in C case, as noted in similar studies by Netto et
al. (2012) and Lill et al. (2012). Previous studies have pointed out the
presence of a region in the northeast of the bay with low residence times
(Cerralbo et al., 2019), also described as a nutrient accumulation area
(Artigas et al., 2014). The LFT shows noticeable spatial variability, with
highest diminution in the region close to the artificial channel (in B1, B2
and B3) and the freshwater discharge points (R1 and R2). The region where the
mussel farms are located also shows lower LFT than in the control case
(reductions ranging from 20 % in B1 and R1 to 30 % in B3 and R2),
but the differences are not as high as those observed in the inner bay. The
effects of opening a ∼1 km wide channel (B3) are negligible in
comparison to modifying the freshwater flows in R2 (increase in fresh water
mainly concentrated in the inner channel). In that sense, the modification of
the freshwater flows seems more feasible both economically and technically
compared to artificially opening and maintaining a new connection with the open
sea. Moreover, the opening of the sandbar would imply high economic
(dredging, jetties) and environmental costs (breaking of alongshore
circulation and transport of sediments and nutrients) that must be evaluated
cautiously.
The water temperature from the drainage canals used in the simulations
corresponds to the climatological values observed in the Ebro River, not to
the observations in the drainage channels, which is similar to the
temperature of the water inside the bay (see Fig. 2). This is because the
channel freshwater input would not decrease the temperature of the bay water,
but there is the possibility of doing this by conducting cooler water from
the river directly to the bay using an irrigation system. However, none of
the analysed scenarios show significant differences in the evolution of
water temperature, and only the tests R1 and R2 show decreases of ∼0.5∘C in the regions closest to the freshwater input points. The
shallowness of the bay implies that the effects of solar heating, which is
significant during the summer in these regions, influence the entire water
column and counterbalance the analysed solutions. An example of this is the
temperature of the open seawater, which is originally colder but heats up
rapidly upon entering the bay.
A comprehensive analysis of the complete set of simulations reveals the
complexity of the area under study and suggests that effort must be
invested for the regulation of freshwater flows. For instance, by
modifying the flows, the residence times and water temperatures are affected,
and also by regulating the nutrient (and contaminants, suspended matter) load
of the freshwater flows the productivity of the bay may be controlled.
However, the effects of increasing the freshwater sources could lead to some
disturbances over the bay: e.g. stress over the marine biota and nutrient
enrichment (increasing the risk of HABs under some conditions). For that
reason, future works should consider the application of biogeochemical models
(e.g. Nash et al., 2011) in the bay characterizing the ecological behaviour of
the bay and performing numerical simulations in order to understand the
effects of such modifications. All these actions should also be considered to
avoid some of the climate change effects expected in the region: sea level
rise (promoting marine intrusion in the rice fields and blocking the
freshwater discharges) and an increase in water temperature (increasing the
probability of mussel mortalities).
Conclusions
The management actions proposed for Alfacs Bay (i.e. bar breaching and
modification of freshwater flows) revealed the effectiveness of increasing
water renovation within the entire bay, thus preventing the innermost
areas of the bay from having long residence times and the corresponding
ecological problems (i.e. anoxia events). Both proposed actions show similar
results. However, only the modification of freshwater flows could be useful
due to its lower impact on the environment and associated economic costs. On
the other hand, none of the proposed solutions solve one of the main problems
of the bay related to occasional extremely high temperatures in summer
(>28∘C). In this sense, the shallow depths of the
bay and the warm water temperature from the rice fields restrict the ability to address
the issue of higher mussel mortality. The application of a set of validated
numerical models in a preoperational mode, nested into a CMEMS regional
model, has allowed us for the first time to provide objective high-resolution
predictions for stakeholders and end users of the bay (fisheries and
tourism) and to investigate the effects of the proposed actions on
the ecological problems of the bay. Future works should include an analysis
of wave effects on water circulation, the application of
biogeochemical models, and the consideration of different initial
conditions and met-ocean conditions on the determination of water renewal in
Alfacs Bay.
Data availability
Model outputs are available upon request to the first
author.
Author contributions
PC led the research and the writing process.
All authors contributed equally to this work.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
Special issue statement
This article is part of the special issue “Coastal modelling
and uncertainties based on CMEMS products”. It is not associated with a
conference.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful for the collaboration with IRTA staff for
participation in the field campaigns carried out within the framework of the
monitoring programme on water quality at the shellfish growing areas in
Catalonia. Thanks for the data provided by Puertos del Estado and AEMET. This
work received funding from the EU H2020 programme under grant agreement no.
730030 (CEASELESS project). The authors also acknowledge the
funding and support received from the “Direcció General de Pesca I
Afers Marítims” in the framework of the project “Anàlisi
ambiental de les Badies del Delta de l'Ebre i el seu entorn. Cap al
desenvolupament d'una eina per a la seva gestió integrada” and the project
ECOSISTEMA (CTM2017-84275-R). We also want to thank the Secretaria
d'Universitats i Recerca del Dpt. d'Economia i Coneixement de la Generalitat
de Catalunya (ref. 2014SGR1253), who supported our research group.
Edited by: Joanna Staneva
Reviewed by: three anonymous referees
References
Artigas, M. L., Llebot, C., Ross, O. N., Neszi, N. Z., Rodellas, V.,
Garcia-Orellana, J., and Berdalet, E.: Understanding the spatio-temporal
variability of phytoplankton biomass distribution in a microtidal
Mediterranean estuary, Deep-Sea Res. Pt. II, 101, 180–192, 2014.
Braunschweig, F., Martins, F., Chambel, P., and Neves, R.: A methodology to
estimate renewal time scales in estuaries: the Tagus Estuary case, Ocean
Dynam., 53, 137–145l, 2003.
Camp, J.: Aproximaciones a la dinámica ecológica de una bahía
estuárica mediterránea, PhD thesis, Universitat de Barcelona,
Barcelona, p. 245,
1994.
Camp, J. and Delgado, M.: Hidrografía de las bahías del delta del
Ebro, Inv. Pesq, 51, 351–369, 1987.
Camp, J., Romero, J., Pérez, M., Vidal, M., Delgado, M., and
Martínez, A.: Production-consumption budget in an estuarine bay: how
anoxia is prevented in a forced system, Homage to Ramon Margalef, Or, Why
There is Such Pleasure in Studying Nature, 8, 145–156, 1992.
Carter, G. S. and Merrifield, M. A.: Open boundary conditions for regional
tidal simulations, Ocean Model., 18, 194–209, 2007.
Cerralbo, P., Grifoll, M., Valle-Levinson, A., and Espino, M.: Tidal
transformation and resonance in a short, microtidal Mediterranean estuary
(Alfacs Bay in Ebro delta), Estuar. Coast. Shelf S., 145,
57–68, 2014.
Cerralbo, P., Grifoll, M., and Espino, M.: Hydrodynamic response in a
microtidal and shallow bay under energetic wind and seiche episodes, J.
Marine Syst., 149, 1–13, 2015.
Cerralbo, P., Espino, M., and Grifoll, M.: Modeling circulation patterns
induced by spatial cross-shore wind variability in a small-size coastal
embayment, Ocean Model., 104, 84–98, 2016.Cerralbo, P., Grifoll, M., Valle-Levinson, A., and Espino, M.: Subtidal
circulation in a microtidal Mediterranean Bay, Sci. Mar., 82, 231–243,
10.3989/scimar.04801.16A, 2019.
Dabrowski, T., Hartnett, M., and Olbert, A. I.: Determination of flushing
characteristics of the Irish Sea: A spatial approach, Comput. Geosci., 45,
250–260, 2012.
Delgado, M.: Abundance and distribution of
microphyto- benthos in the Bays of the Ebro Delta (Spain), Estuar. Coast.
Shelf S., 29, 183–194, 1989.
Fernández-Tejedor, M., Delgado, M., Garcés, E., Camp, J., and
Diogène, J.: Toxic phytoplankton response to warming in two
Mediterranean bays of the Ebro Delta, Phytoplankton Response to
Mediterranean Environmental Changes, edited by: Briand, F., CIESM Publisher,
Monaco, 83–86, 2010.
Gracia, V., García, M., Grifoll, M., and Sánchez-Arcilla, A:
Breaching of a barrier under extreme events. The role of morphodynamic
simulations, J. Coastal Res., 951–956, 2013.
Grifoll, M., Del Campo, A., Espino, M., Mader, J., González, M., and
Borja, Á.: Water renewal and risk assessment of water pollution in
semi-enclosed domains: Application to Bilbao Harbour (Bay of Biscay),
J. Marine Syst., 109, S241–S251, 2013.Grifoll, M., Navarro, J., Pallares, E., Ràfols, L., Espino, M., and
Palomares, A.: Ocean-atmosphere-wave characterisation of a wind jet (Ebro
shelf, NW Mediterranean Sea), Nonlin. Processes Geophys., 23, 143–158,
10.5194/npg-23-143-2016, 2016.
Kantha, L. H. and Clayson, C. A.: An improved mixed layer model for
geophysical applications, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 99, 25235–25266, 1994.
Jouon, A., Douillet, P., Ouillon, S., and Fraunié, P.: Calculations of
hydrodynamic time parameters in a semi-opened coastal zone using a 3D
hydrodynamic model, Cont. Shelf Res., 26, 1395–1415, 2006.
Köck, M., Farré, M., Martínez, E., Gajda-Schrantz, K.,
GinEbroda, A., Navarro, A., and Barceló, D.: Integrated ecotoxicological
and chemical approach for the assessment of pesticide pollution in the Ebro
River delta (Spain), J. Hydrol., 383, 73–82, 2010.
Lill, A. W., Closs, G. P., Schallenberg, M., and Savage, C.: Impact of berm
breaching on hyperbenthic macroinvertebrate communities in intermittently
closed estuaries, Estuar. Coast., 35, 155–168, 2012.
Llebot, C., Solé, J., Delgado, M., Fernández-Tejedor, M., Camp, J.,
and Estrada, M.: Hydrographical forcing and phytoplankton variability in two
semi-enclosed estuarine bays, J. Marine Syst., 86, 69–86, 2011.
Llebot, C., Rueda, F. J., Solé, J., Artigas, M. L., and Estrada, M.:
Hydrodynamic states in a wind-driven microtidal estuary (Alfacs Bay), J. Sea
Res., 85, 263–276, 2014.López-Joven, C., de Blas, I., Furones, M. D., and Roque, A.:. Prevalences
of pathogenic and non-pathogenic Vibrio parahaemolyticus in mollusks from the
Spanish Mediterranean Coast, Front. Microbiol., 6, 736,
10.3389/fmicb.2015.00736, 2015.Lorente, P., Piedracoba, S., Soto-Navarro, J., and Alvarez-Fanjul, E.:
Evaluating the surface circulation in the Ebro delta (northeastern Spain)
with quality-controlled high-frequency radar measurements, Ocean Sci., 11,
921–935, 10.5194/os-11-921-2015, 2015.
Lorente, P., Piedracoba, S., Sotillo, M. G., Aznar, R., Amo-Balandron, A.,
Pascual, A., and Álvarez-Fanjul, E.: Characterizing the surface
circulation in Ebro Delta (NW Mediterranean) with HF radar and modeled
current data, J. Marine Syst., 163, 61–79, 2016.
Loureiro, S., Garcés, E., Fernández-Tejedor, M., Vaqué, D., and
Camp, J.: Pseudo-nitzschia spp.(Bacillariophyceae) and dissolved organic
matter (DOM) dynamics in the Ebro Delta (Alfacs Bay, NW Mediterranean Sea),
Estuar. Coast. Shelf S., 83, 539–549, 2009.
Nash, S., Hartnett, M., and Dabrowski, T. Modelling phytoplankton dynamics in
a complex estuarine system, P. I. Civil Eng.-Wat. M., 164, 34–54, 2011.
Netto, S. A., Domingos, A. M., and Kurtz, M. N.: Effects of artificial
breaching of a temporarily open/closed estuary on benthic macroinvertebrates
(Camacho Lagoon, Southern Brazil), Estuar. Coast., 35, 1069–1081, 2012.
Officer, C. B.: Box Models Revisited, in:
Estuarine and Wetland Processes, edited by: Hamilton, P. and Macdonald, K. B., Marine Science, vol. 11. Springer, Boston,
MA, 1980.
Ordóñez, V., Pascual, M., Fernández-Tejedor, M., Pineda, M. C.,
Tagliapietra, D., and Turon, X.: Ongoing expansion of the worldwide invader
Didemnum vexillum (Ascidiacea) in the Mediterranean Sea: high plasticity of
its biological cycle promotes establishment in warm waters, Biol. Invasions,
17, 2075–2085, 2015.
Palacín, C., Martin, D., and Gili, J. M.: Features of spatial
distribution of benthic infauna in a Mediterranean shallow-water bay, Mar.
Biol., 110, 315–321, 1991.
Ramón, M., Fernández, M., and Galimany, E.: Development of mussel
(Mytilus galloprovincialis) seed from two different origins in a
semi-enclosed Mediterranean Bay (NE Spain), Aquaculture, 264, 148–159, 2007.
Sánchez-Arcilla, A., and Jiménez, J. A.: Breaching in a
wave-dominated barrier spit: The trabucador bar (north-eastern spanish
coast), Earth Surf. Proc Land., 19, 483–498, 1994.
Shchepetkin, A. F. and McWilliams, J. C.: The regional oceanic modeling
system (ROMS): a split-explicit, free-surface,
topography-following-coordinate oceanic model, Ocean Model., 9, 347–404,
2005.Smith, V. H.: Eutrophication of freshwater and coastal marine ecosystems a
global problem, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 10, 126–139,
10.1065/espr2002.12.142, 2003.
Solé, J., Turiel, A., Estrada, M., Llebot, C., Blasco, D., Camp, J., and
Diogène, J.: Climatic forcing on hydrography of a Mediterranean bay
(Alfacs Bay), Cont. Shelf Res., 29, 1786–1800, 2009.
Song, Y. and Haidvogel, D. B.: A semi-implicit ocean circulation model using
a generalized topography-following coordinate system, J. Comput. Phys., 115,
228–244, 1994.
Sotillo, M. G., Cailleau, S., Lorente, P., Levier, B., Aznar, R., Reffray,
G., and Alvarez-Fanjul, E. The MyOcean IBI Ocean Forecast and Reanalysis
Systems: operational products and roadmap to the future Copernicus Service,
J. Oper. Oceanogr., 8, 63–79, 2015.
Sotillo, M. G., Cerralbo, P., Lorente, P., Grifoll, M., Espino, M.,
Sánchez-Arcilla, A., and Álvarez-Fanjul, E.: Coastal Ocean
Forecasting in Spanish Ports: The SAMOA Operational Service, in press, 2019.Takeoka, H.: Exchange and transport time scales in the Seto Inland Sea, Cont.
Shelf Res., 3, 327–341, 1984.
Thomann, R. V. and Mueller, J. A.: Principles of surface water quality
modeling and control, Harper & Row, 1987.Umgiesser, G., Sclavo, M., Carniel, S., and Bergamasco, A.: Exploring the
bottom stress variability in the Venice Lagoon, J. Marine Syst., 51,
161–178, 10.1016/j.jmarsys.2004.05.023, 2004.Warner, J. C., Geyer, W. R., and Lerczak, J. A.: Numerical modeling of an
estuary: A comprehensive skill assessment, J. Geophys. Res.-Oceans, 110,
C05001, 10.1029/2004JC002691, 2005.
Wolanski, E.: Estuarine Ecohydrology, Elsevier, 157 pp.,
ISBN 978-0-444-53066-0, 2007.