Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T06:30:18.377Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ecohydrology of Scottish peatlands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2011

H. A. P. Ingram
H. A. P. Ingram
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Sciences, The University, Dundee DD1 4HN, U.K.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mires are terrestrial ecosystems which conserve organic production in the form of peat because their soils are waterlogged. Scotland's damp climate makes it rich in mires, with fens, raised mires and blanket mires occurring widely. Intact examples are mostly treeless due to wind exposure. They have two functional layers of soil: a shallow acrotelm overlying the catotelm or peat deposit proper. The acrotelm is the main region of diagenesis and contains the water table, which lies close to the surface for most of the time. Evapotranspiration depends on water table depth and surface vegetation. In the catotelm, water transmission is described by Darcy's law with sufficient exactness to allow prediction of the water table profile. An analysis of seepage using Dupuit–Forchheimer theory predicts a hemi-elliptical profile whose curvature is governed by the water balance in dry years and which, in its turn, closely controls the overall shape of the mire. Water flow is more rapid in the acrotelm, where it creates a regular series of different soil physical regimes which are linked with distinct combinations of surface topography and vegetation arranged sequentially from the centre of a mire to its edge. Such regular arrangements are most clearly seen in the Flowe Country of E Sutherland and Caithness. Acrotelm structure also permits variation in flow rate with depth, so that the amplitude of water table oscillations is narrowly confined and the mire thus protected against both desiccation and sheet flow.

Keywords

acrotelmaquifer dischargebogcatotelmDarcy's lawevapotranspirationfenground-water moundlysimetermicrotopewater balancewater table.
Type
Surface and subsurface hydrology
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 78 , Issue 4: Hydrology in Scotland , 1987 , pp. 287 - 296
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anon. 1986. Nature Conservation and Afforestation in Britain. Peterborough: Nature Conservancy Council.Google Scholar
Birse, E. & Robertson, L. 1970. Assessment of Climatic Conditions in Scotland 2: Based on Exposure and Accumulated Frost. Aberdeen: Macaulay Institute.Google Scholar
Bragg, O. M. 1982. The Acrotelm of Dun Moss: Plants, Water and their relationships. Ph.D. Thesis., University of Dundee.Google Scholar
Bragg, O. M. & Ingram, H. A. P. 1984. Ecological Observations on some Mires in Caithness, 1983. Dundee: University of Dundee, Unpublished Report to the Nature Conservancy Council.Google Scholar
Childs, E. C. 1969. An Introduction to the Physical Basis of Soil Water Phenomena. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Clymo, R. S. 1983. Peat. In Gore, A. J. P. (ed.) Mires: Swamp, Bog, Fen and Moor, General Studies, 159–224. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Coupar, A. M. 1983. Studies on Vegetation and Blanket Mire Hydrology at Rannoch Moor. Ph.D. Thesis., University of Dundee.Google Scholar
Dry, F. T. & Robertson, J. S. 1982. Soil and Land Capability for Agriculture: Orkney and Shetland. Aberdeen: Macaulay Institute.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, E. A. 1964. The Soils of Scotland. In Burnett, J. H. (ed.) The Vegetation of Scotland, 36–63. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Futty, D. W. & Towers, W. 1982. Soil and Land Capability for Agriculture: Northern Scotland. Aberdeen: Macaulay Institute.Google Scholar
Hudson, G., Towers, W., Bibby, J. S. & Henderson, D. J. 1982. Soil and Land Capability for Agriculture: The Outer Hebrides. Aberdeen: Macaulay Institute.Google Scholar
Huggett, R. J. 1985. Earth Surface Systems. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingram, H. A. P. 1978. Soil layers in mires: function and terminology. J SOIL SCI 29, 224–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingram, H. A. P. 1982. Size and shape in raised mire ecosystems: a geophysical model. NATURE, LOND 297, 300–03.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingram, H. A. P. 1983. Hydrology. In Gore, A. J. P. (ed.) Mires: Swamp, Bog, Fen and Moor, General Studies, 67–158. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Ingram, H. A. P. & Bragg, O. M. 1984. The diplotelmic mire: some hydrological consequences reviewed. PROC 7TH INT PEAT CONGR, DUBLIN 1, 220–34.Google Scholar
Ivanov, K. E. 1953. Gidrologiya bolot. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat.Google Scholar
Ivanov, K. E. 1957. Osnovy gidrologii bolot lesnoĭ zony i raschety vodnogo rezhima bolotnykh massivov. Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat.Google Scholar
Ivanov, K. E. 1981. Water Movement in Mirelands. Thomson, A. & Ingram, H. A. P. (transl.). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lähde, E. 1972. Seasonal variation in the depth of the aerobic limit and the ground water table in virgin and in drained myrtillus spruce swamp. PROC 4TH INT PEAT CONGR, OTANIEMI, 355–69.Google Scholar
Linacre, E. 1976. Swamps. In Monteith, J. L. (ed.) Vegetation and the Atmosphere 2, 329–47. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lopatin, V. D. 1949. O gidrologicheskom znachenii verkhovykh bolot. VEST LENINGRAD GOS UNIV 2, 37–49.Google Scholar
Malmer, N. & Holm, E. 1984. Variation in the C/N quotient of peat in relation to decomposition rate and age determination with 210Pb. OIKOS 43, 171–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marino, M. A. 1974. Growth and decay of groundwater mounds induced by percolation. J HYDROL, AMST 22, 295–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nilsson, M. & Berg, B. 1986. Microbiology. In Basic Studies of Waterbinding in Peat, 47–54. Umeå: Institute of Surface Chemistry, University of Umeå.Google Scholar
Penman, H. L. 1948. Natural evaporation from open water, bare soil and grass. PROC R SOC LONDON A193, 120–45.Google Scholar
Penman, H. L. 1963. Vegetation and Hydrology. Farnham Royal: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raats, P. A. C. 1967. Non-Darcy flow in soils. PROC INT SOIL WATER SYMP, PRAGUE 1, 1–8.Google Scholar
Swartzendruber, D. 1962. Non-Darcy flow behavior in liquidsaturated porous media. J GEOPHYS RES 67, 5205–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J. A. 1983. The peatlands of Great Britain and Ireland. In Gore, A. J. P., (ed.) Mires: Swamp. Bog, Fen and Moor, Regional Studies, 1–46. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Waine, J., Brown, J. M. B. & Ingram, H. A. P. 1985. Non-Darcyan transmission of water in certain humified peats. J HYDROL, AMST 82, 327–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar