4.4 Article

Water Quality, Sediment, and Soil Characteristics near Fargo-Moorhead Urban Areas as Affected by Major Flooding of the Red River of the North

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
卷 41, 期 2, 页码 554-563

出版社

AMER SOC AGRONOMY
DOI: 10.2134/jeq2011.0358

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [0936065]
  2. North Dakota Water Resource Research Institute
  3. Division Of Earth Sciences
  4. Directorate For Geosciences [0936065] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spring flooding of the Red River of the North (RR) is common, but little information exits on how these flood events affect water and overbank sediment quality within an urban area. With the threat of the spring 2009 flood in the RR predicted to be the largest in recorded history and the concerns about the flooding of farmsteads, outbuildings, garages, and basements, the objectives of this study, which focused on Fargo, ND, and Moorhead, MN, were to assess floodwater quality and to determine the quantity and quality of overbank sediment deposited after floodwaters recede and the quality of soil underlying sediment deposits. 17 beta-Estradiol was detected in 9 of 24 water samples, with an average concentration of 0.61 ng L-1. Diesel-range organics were detected in 8 of 24 samples, with an average concentration of 80.0 mu g L-1. The deposition of sediment across locations and transects ranged from 2 to 10 kg m(-2), and the greatest mass deposition of chemicals was closest to the river channel. No gasoline-range organics were detected, but diesel-range organics were detected in 26 of the 27 overbank sediment samples (maximum concentration, 49.2 mg kg(-1)). All trace elements detected in the overbank sediments were within ranges for noncontaminated sites. Although flooding has economic, social, and environmental impacts, based on the results of this study, it does not appear that flooding in the RR in F-M led to decreased quality of water, sediment, or soil compared with normal river flows or resident soil.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据