4.6 Review

Long-term Trends of Organic Carbon Concentrations in Freshwaters: Strengths and Weaknesses of Existing Evidence

期刊

WATER
卷 6, 期 5, 页码 1360-1418

出版社

MDPI AG
DOI: 10.3390/w6051360

关键词

organic carbon; DOC; dissolved organic carbon; temporal trends; time-series analysis; freshwaters; lakes; rivers

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Many articles published in the last few years start with the assumption that the past decades have seen an increase in dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentrations in the rivers and lakes of the Northern Hemisphere. This study analyses whether the existing evidence supports this claim. With this aim, we have collected published studies where long series of organic carbon concentrations (i.e., longer than 10 years) were analyzed for existing trends and have carefully evaluated the 63 articles found. Information has been collated in a comprehensive and comparable way, allowing readers to easily access it. The two main aspects considered in our analysis have been the analytical methods used and the data treatment methods applied. Both are sensitive issues because, on the one hand, the difficulties associated with correctly determining organic carbon concentrations in surface waters are well known, while, on the other, dealing with real environmental data (i.e., lack of normality, censoring, missing values, etc.) is an extremely intricate matter. Other issues such as data reporting and the geographical location of the systems studied are also discussed. In conclusion, it is clear that organic carbon concentrations have increased in some surface waters in the Northern Hemisphere since the 1990s. However, due to a lack of data in many parts of the world, it is not known whether this phenomenon is general and, more importantly, in the areas for which such data do exist, the reporting and methodological problems in the published studies prevent any conclusion on the existence of a general temporal behavior of organic carbon from being drawn.

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

4.6
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