Subarctic lakes are drying up at a rate not seen in 200 years

Nov 27, 2013
Desiccated lakes in Wapusk National Park near Churchill, Manitoba (Canada) are shown. Desiccation of shallow lakes has occurred recently in response to lower-than-average snowmelt runoff. This phenomenon appears unprecedented over the last 200 years. Credit: Hilary White

The decrease in snowfall observed in recent years in Canada's subarctic regions has led to worrisome desiccation of the regions' lakes. This is the conclusion arrived at by researchers from Université Laval, Wilfrid Laurier University, Brock University and the University of Waterloo in a study published this week on the website of the scientific journal Geophysical Research Letters.

Researchers came to this conclusion after studying 70 lakes near Old Crow, Yukon, and Churchill, Manitoba. Most of the lakes studied are less than one metre deep. According to the analysis, more than half of those located on relatively flat terrain and surrounded by scrubby vegetation show signs of desiccation. The problem stems chiefly from a decline in meltwater; for instance, from 2010 to 2012 average winter precipitation in Churchill decreased by 76 mm compared to the averages recorded from 1971 to 2000.

The drying of some lakes, which first became visible to the in 2010, was even more pronounced in summer 2013. "With this type of , precipitation in the form of snow represents 30% to 50% of the annual water supply," explained the study's lead author, Frédéric Bouchard, a postdoctoral fellow at Université Laval's Department of Geography and the Centre for Northern Studies.

The kind of desiccation seen by the researchers is without precedent in 200 years. Isotopic analyses conducted on the remains of phytoplankton accumulated in lakebed sediment show that the lakes have maintained water balance for 200 years. This stability was abruptly disrupted a few years ago.

If the trend of dry summers and less snowy winters continues, as climate models forecast, many of the subarctic's shallowest lakes could dry out completely. "It's difficult to predict all the repercussions of this habitat loss," admits Bouchard, "but it's certain that the ecological consequences will be significant."

Explore further: NASA helps melt secrets of Great Lakes ice

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

How many lakes are there, and how big are they?

Feb 11, 2013

Because of the important role lakes play in regional and local biogeochemical cycling, including carbon storage and emissions, scientists need to know how many lakes of various sizes exist. However, determining the size distribution ...

Alpine lakes reflect climate change

Jun 06, 2013

Increases in temperature as a result of climate change are mirrored in lake waters where temperatures are also on the rise. A new study, by Dr. Martin Dokulil, retired researcher from the Institute for Limnology at the University ...

NASA helps melt secrets of Great Lakes ice

Nov 14, 2013

(Phys.org) —Two scientists from NASA and NOAA have developed a new space-based technique for monitoring the ice cover of the Great Lakes that is so accurate it can identify a narrow channel of open water ...

Recommended for you

EU leaders seek last-minute climate deal

1 hour ago

European Union leaders came under pressure Thursday to strike a deal aimed at bolstering Brussels as a trailblazer in fighting global climate change as negotiations went down to the wire.

Research team studies 'regime shifts' in ecosystems

4 hours ago

The prehistory of major ecological shifts spanning multiple millennia can be read in the fine print of microscopic algae, according to a new study led by researchers at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

SamB
1 / 5 (2) Nov 29, 2013
So, if this same cycle happened 200 years ago, why are we shocked it happened again?
Anyone???
thermodynamics
3.8 / 5 (4) Nov 29, 2013
SamB: That is a good question based on the way the article was written. However, if you check the paper and other related papers, it will show that this is just because the record they have, based on isotopic analysis from the area, only goes back 200 years. This does not mean it happened 200 years ago, only that they have no way of comparing back more than 200 years and it has never been this drastic in that record. I agree the way this is written it is easy to think there was an occurrence like this 200 years ago. There was not.