4.7 Article

Nutrient budgets for the Bohai Sea: Implication for ratio imbalance of nitrogen to phosphorus input under intense human activities

Journal

MARINE POLLUTION BULLETIN
Volume 179, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.113665

Keywords

Nutrient budget; River input; Water exchange; Redfield ratio; Bohai Sea

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Devel-opment Program of China [2018YFC1407602]
  2. Major Scientific and Technological Innovation Project (MSTIP) of Shandong [2021CXGC010705]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Eutrophication is a global issue for coastal ecosystems, and the Bohai Sea in China has been severely affected due to rapid economic and social development. In order to manage nutrients sustainably, a comprehensive budget was conducted to characterize the nitrogen and phosphorus flow in the sea. The study identified the main sources of nutrients and found an imbalance in the nutrient structure and phosphorus limitation in the Bohai Sea.
Eutrophication is a global problem for coastal ecosystems, one that the Bohai Sea (BHS), China, is severely afflicted by due to rapid economic and social development over the last forty years. For sustainable nutrients management in the BHS, comprehensive budgets for Nitrogen (N) and Phosphorus (P) was characterized in 2017, and the relative contributions of river input, submarine fresh groundwater discharge, atmospheric deposition, sediment diffusion, and exchange with the Yellow Sea were quantified. The annual N and P fluxes into the BHS were 362 x 103 t and 10.4 x 103 t, respectively. The terrigenous N inputs occupied the highest proportion, while the largest P input was from sediment diffusion. The ratio of N:P was 77 for total external inputs, while that of the Yellow River was 680; both exceeded the Redfield ratio, indicating an imbalance in the nutrient structure and a P limitation in the BHS.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available