4.5 Article

Recent Changes in Nitrogen Sources and Load Components to Estuaries of the Contiguous United States

期刊

ESTUARIES AND COASTS
卷 42, 期 8, 页码 2096-2113

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12237-019-00614-1

关键词

Nitrogen loading; Estuaries; United States; SPARROW models

资金

  1. Intramural EPA [EPA999999] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Regional Spatially Referenced Regressions on Watershed models were used to update 2002 delivered nitrogen (N) loads to estuaries of the contiguous US for 2011, supplemented by direct estuarine atmospheric deposition from the Community Multiscale Air Quality Model. Median 2011 watershed N yields were greatest for the Puget Trough, Virginian, and Oregon-Washington-Vancouver Coast marine ecoregions (MEs; 13.7, 11.0, and 9.9 kg N/ha watershed/year, respectively); intermediate for the Floridian, Southern California Bight, and Northern California MEs (4.4-6.3 kg N/ha watershed/year); and lowest for the Northern Gulf of Mexico, Carolinian, and Gulf of Maine MEs (2.4-3.2 kg N/ha watershed/year). Dominant sources varied across marine ecoregions, with direct atmospheric deposition as the dominant source only in the far northern Gulf of Maine ME. Delivered N loads from atmospheric deposition have significantly decreased (p < 0.05) for most estuaries on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts for 2002-2012. Estimated point source delivered N loads for 2002-2012 increased for most estuaries with upstream treatment plants, with estimated loads to only seven estuaries decreasing by more than 50%. Urban runoff increased for most estuaries in the Puget Trough and Carolinian MEs and either increased or had no significant trend for the remaining marine ecoregions. The magnitude of change in total N delivered loads is uncertain due to incomplete monitoring for most minor dischargers. In areas with increased population growth and decreases in agricultural land, decreasing agricultural fertilizer inputs have been insufficient to offset increases in urban runoff.

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

4.5
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