4.8 Article

Within-River Phosphorus Retention: Accounting for a Missing Piece in the Watershed Phosphorus Puzzle

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 46, Issue 24, Pages 13284-13292

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es303562y

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Fulbright Scholarship
  2. Fellowship under the OECD Co-operative Research Programme: Biological Resource Management for Sustainable Agricultural Systems
  3. Natural Environment Research Council [ceh010022] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The prevailing puzzle in watershed phosphorus (P) management is how to account for the nonconservative behavior (retention and remobilization) of P along the land-freshwater continuum. This often hinders our attempts to directly link watershed P sources with their water quality impacts. Here, we examine aspects of within-river retention of wastewater effluent P and its remobilization under high flows. Most source apportionment methods attribute P loads mobilized under high flows (including retained and remobilized effluent P) as nonpoint agricultural sources. We present a new simple empirical method which uses chloride as a conservative tracer of wastewater effluent, to quantify within-river retention of effluent P, and its contribution to river P loads, when remobilized under high flows. We demonstrate that within-river P retention can effectively mask the presence of effluent P inputs in the water quality record. Moreover, we highlight that by not accounting for the contributions of retained and remobilized effluent P to river storm-flow P loads, existing source apportionment methods may significantly overestimate nonpoint agricultural sources and underestimate wastewater sources in mixed land-use watersheds. This has important implications for developing effective watershed remediation strategies, where remediation needs to be equitably and accurately apportioned among point and nonpoint P contributors.

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