4.4 Article

Relationships between land use and nitrogen and phosphorus in New Zealand lakes

Journal

MARINE AND FRESHWATER RESEARCH
Volume 62, Issue 2, Pages 162-175

Publisher

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/MF10180

Keywords

agriculture; catchment connectivity; catchment management; eutrophication; GIS; nutrients; water quality; watershed

Funding

  1. Commonwealth Scholarship
  2. Bay of Plenty Regional Council
  3. New Zealand Foundation of Research, Science and Technology [UOWX0505]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Developing policies to address lake eutrophication requires an understanding of the relative contribution of different nutrient sources and of how lake and catchment characteristics interact to mediate the source-receptor pathway. We analysed total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) data for 101 New Zealand lakes and related these to land use and edaphic sources of phosphorus (P). We then analysed a sub-sample of lakes in agricultural catchments to investigate how lake and catchment variables influence the relationship between land use and in-lake nutrients. Following correction for the effect of co-variation amongst predictor variables, high producing grassland (intensive pasture) was the best predictor of TN and TP, accounting for 38.6% and 41.0% of variation, respectively. Exotic forestry and urban area accounted for a further 18.8% and 3.6% of variation in TP and TN, respectively. Soil P (representing naturally-occurring edaphic P) was negatively correlated with TP, owing to the confounding effect of pastoral land use. Lake and catchment morphology (z(max) and lake : catchment area) and catchment connectivity (lake order) mediated the relationship between intensive pasture and in-lake nutrients. Mitigating eutrophication in New Zealand lakes requires action to reduce nutrient export from intensive pasture and quantifying P export from plantation forestry requires further consideration.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available