Abstract:Merokarst aquifers — relatively thin (<1‐2 m) karstified carbonate units interbedded between mudstone, shale, or sandstone — constitute a significant proportion of carbonate terrain and underlie a large portion of the west‐ and south‐ central USA, yet few advances have been made in our understanding of porosity development and flow‐path generation in these complex systems in decades. Towards this end, we used a multi‐geophysical approach at the well‐studied Konza Prairie Biological Station (KPBS), a part of the larger Flint Hills (25,734 km2), underlain by thin limestone units (1‐2 m thick) interbedded with mudstone/shale units (2‐4 m thick), to elucidate hydrologic connectivity and potential controls on known groundwater flow directions. We combined electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), surface and borehole nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and ground penetrating radar (GPR) measurements across a low order catchment where over 25 boreholes and groundwater wells sampling perched aquifers could be used to constrain interpretation of lithology, potential flow paths, and permeability. Data revealed that groundwater export may be an unappreciated component of lateral‐flow‐dominated models used to represent merokarst in that: 1) potentiometric surfaces from two limestone units showed groundwater flows toward a hydrologic depression, opposite the direction of stream flow, in the upstream portion of the catchment, 2) long term measures of groundwater levels revealed a greater variance and overall water storage in this same upstream area compared to wells near the outlet, and 3) ERT and NMR results indicate pronounced lateral heterogeneity within a given unit, suggestive of a greater degree of vertical hydrological connectivity than usually considered for horizontally‐layered merokarst. Our data suggest vertical connectivity can shunt water to depth in these "sandwiched" merokarst aquifers, yielding atypical groundwater flow directions and unrealized deep export of weathering solutes and carbon.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Reply to Butler Et Al.: A Sound Hydrologic Foundation for Interdisciplinary Studies of the High Plains Aquifer

Reply to Butler et al.: A sound hydrologic foundation for interdisciplinary studies of the High Plains Aquifer.

Interpretation of Water Level Changes in the High Plains Aquifer in Western Kansas

Reply to the Comment on “Tu et al., an Analytical Solution of Groundwater Flow in a Confined Aquifer With a Single‐Well Circulation System, Water Resources Research , First Published: 12 June 2020.”

Reply by the Authors to D. A. Chapin

Sandstone-Body Geometry and Hydrostratigraphy of the Northern High Plain Aquifer System, USA

Tapping Unsustainable Groundwater Stores for Agricultural Production in the High Plains Aquifer of Kansas, Projections to 2110

Reply to 'The merits of plasmonic desalination'

Toward a new conceptual model for groundwater flow in merokarst systems: Insights from multiple geophysical approaches

A geochemical and isotopic assessment of hydraulic connectivity of a stacked aquifer system in the Lisbon Valley, Utah (USA), and critical evaluation of environmental tracers

Application of the Conceptualization Groundwater Data Model to Study the Upper Arkansas River Corridor, Western Kansas

International borders, ground water flow, and hydroschizophrenia

Correspondence: Reply to ‘analytical Flaws in a Continental-Scale Forest Soil Microbial Diversity Study’

Groundwater Economics: an Object‐oriented Foundation for Integrated Studies of Irrigated Agricultural Systems

Those Who Get Hurt Aren’t Always Being Heard: Scientist-Resident Interactions over Community Water

Groundwater Response to Changing Water‐use Practices in Sloping Aquifers Using Convolution of Transient Response Functions

Confounded by forgotten legacies: Effectively managing watersheds in the contemporary age of unknown unknowns

Hydrotectonics of Grand Canyon Groundwater

Hydrologic windows into the crystalline basement and their controls on groundwater flow patterns across the Paradox Basin, western USA

Reply to L. Kutzbach

Analysis of slug tests in formations of high hydraulic conductivity