Cargando…

Radionuclide Transport and Uptake in Coastal Aquatic Ecosystems: A Comparison of a 3D Dynamic Model and a Compartment Model

In safety assessments of underground radioactive waste repositories, understanding radionuclide fate in ecosystems is necessary to determine the impacts of potential releases. Here, the reliability of two mechanistic models (the compartmental K-model and the 3D dynamic D-model) in describing the fat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Erichsen, Anders Christian, Konovalenko, Lena, Møhlenberg, Flemming, Closter, Rikke Margrethe, Bradshaw, Clare, Aquilonius, Karin, Kautsky, Ulrik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3636370/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23619804
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13280-013-0398-2
_version_ 1782267322366427136
author Erichsen, Anders Christian
Konovalenko, Lena
Møhlenberg, Flemming
Closter, Rikke Margrethe
Bradshaw, Clare
Aquilonius, Karin
Kautsky, Ulrik
author_facet Erichsen, Anders Christian
Konovalenko, Lena
Møhlenberg, Flemming
Closter, Rikke Margrethe
Bradshaw, Clare
Aquilonius, Karin
Kautsky, Ulrik
author_sort Erichsen, Anders Christian
collection PubMed
description In safety assessments of underground radioactive waste repositories, understanding radionuclide fate in ecosystems is necessary to determine the impacts of potential releases. Here, the reliability of two mechanistic models (the compartmental K-model and the 3D dynamic D-model) in describing the fate of radionuclides released into a Baltic Sea bay is tested. Both are based on ecosystem models that simulate the cycling of organic matter (carbon). Radionuclide transfer is linked to adsorption and flows of carbon in food chains. Accumulation of Th-230, Cs-135, and Ni-59 in biological compartments was comparable between the models and site measurements despite differences in temporal resolution, biological state variables, and partition coefficients. Both models provided confidence limits for their modeled concentration ratios, an improvement over models that only estimate means. The D-model enables estimates at high spatio-temporal resolution. The K-model, being coarser but faster, allows estimates centuries ahead. Future developments could integrate the two models to take advantage of their respective strengths. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13280-013-0398-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3636370
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36363702013-04-29 Radionuclide Transport and Uptake in Coastal Aquatic Ecosystems: A Comparison of a 3D Dynamic Model and a Compartment Model Erichsen, Anders Christian Konovalenko, Lena Møhlenberg, Flemming Closter, Rikke Margrethe Bradshaw, Clare Aquilonius, Karin Kautsky, Ulrik Ambio Article In safety assessments of underground radioactive waste repositories, understanding radionuclide fate in ecosystems is necessary to determine the impacts of potential releases. Here, the reliability of two mechanistic models (the compartmental K-model and the 3D dynamic D-model) in describing the fate of radionuclides released into a Baltic Sea bay is tested. Both are based on ecosystem models that simulate the cycling of organic matter (carbon). Radionuclide transfer is linked to adsorption and flows of carbon in food chains. Accumulation of Th-230, Cs-135, and Ni-59 in biological compartments was comparable between the models and site measurements despite differences in temporal resolution, biological state variables, and partition coefficients. Both models provided confidence limits for their modeled concentration ratios, an improvement over models that only estimate means. The D-model enables estimates at high spatio-temporal resolution. The K-model, being coarser but faster, allows estimates centuries ahead. Future developments could integrate the two models to take advantage of their respective strengths. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13280-013-0398-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Netherlands 2013-04-26 2013-05 /pmc/articles/PMC3636370/ /pubmed/23619804 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13280-013-0398-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2013 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
spellingShingle Article
Erichsen, Anders Christian
Konovalenko, Lena
Møhlenberg, Flemming
Closter, Rikke Margrethe
Bradshaw, Clare
Aquilonius, Karin
Kautsky, Ulrik
Radionuclide Transport and Uptake in Coastal Aquatic Ecosystems: A Comparison of a 3D Dynamic Model and a Compartment Model
title Radionuclide Transport and Uptake in Coastal Aquatic Ecosystems: A Comparison of a 3D Dynamic Model and a Compartment Model
title_full Radionuclide Transport and Uptake in Coastal Aquatic Ecosystems: A Comparison of a 3D Dynamic Model and a Compartment Model
title_fullStr Radionuclide Transport and Uptake in Coastal Aquatic Ecosystems: A Comparison of a 3D Dynamic Model and a Compartment Model
title_full_unstemmed Radionuclide Transport and Uptake in Coastal Aquatic Ecosystems: A Comparison of a 3D Dynamic Model and a Compartment Model
title_short Radionuclide Transport and Uptake in Coastal Aquatic Ecosystems: A Comparison of a 3D Dynamic Model and a Compartment Model
title_sort radionuclide transport and uptake in coastal aquatic ecosystems: a comparison of a 3d dynamic model and a compartment model
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3636370/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23619804
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13280-013-0398-2
work_keys_str_mv AT erichsenanderschristian radionuclidetransportanduptakeincoastalaquaticecosystemsacomparisonofa3ddynamicmodelandacompartmentmodel
AT konovalenkolena radionuclidetransportanduptakeincoastalaquaticecosystemsacomparisonofa3ddynamicmodelandacompartmentmodel
AT møhlenbergflemming radionuclidetransportanduptakeincoastalaquaticecosystemsacomparisonofa3ddynamicmodelandacompartmentmodel
AT closterrikkemargrethe radionuclidetransportanduptakeincoastalaquaticecosystemsacomparisonofa3ddynamicmodelandacompartmentmodel
AT bradshawclare radionuclidetransportanduptakeincoastalaquaticecosystemsacomparisonofa3ddynamicmodelandacompartmentmodel
AT aquiloniuskarin radionuclidetransportanduptakeincoastalaquaticecosystemsacomparisonofa3ddynamicmodelandacompartmentmodel
AT kautskyulrik radionuclidetransportanduptakeincoastalaquaticecosystemsacomparisonofa3ddynamicmodelandacompartmentmodel