4.8 Article

The Role of Denitrification in Stormwater Detention Basin Treatment of Nitrogen

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 51, Issue 14, Pages 7928-7935

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b01813

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation (NSF) [1069193]
  2. Atkinson Center for a Sustainable Future
  3. Direct For Education and Human Resources
  4. Division Of Graduate Education [1069193] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  5. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie
  6. Division Of Behavioral and Cognitive Sci [1444755] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The nitrogen (N) cycling dynamics of four stormwater basins, two often saturated sites (Wet Basins) and two quick draining sites (Dry Basins), were monitored over a similar to 1-year period. This study paired stormwater and greenhouse gas monitoring with microbial analyses to elucidate the mechanisms controlling N treatment. Annual dissolved inorganic N (DIN) mass reductions (inflow minus outflow) were greater in the Dry Basin than in the Wet Basin, 2.16 vs 0.75 g N m(-2) yr(-1), respectively. The Dry Basin infiltrated a much larger volume of water and thus had greater DIN mass reductions, even though incoming and outgoing DIN concentrations were statistically the same for both sites. Wet Basins had higher proportions of denitrification genes and potential denitrification rates. The Wet Basin was capable of denitrifying 58% of incoming DIN, whereas the Dry Basin only denitrified 1%. These emphasize the need for more mechanistic attention to basin design because the reductions calculated by comparing inflow and outflow loads may not be relevant at watershed scales. Denitrification is the only way to fully remove DIN from the terrestrial environment and receiving waterbodies. Consequently, at the watershed scale the Wet Basin may have better overall DIN treatment.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available