4.8 Article

Contribution of wetlands to nitrate removal at the watershed scale

期刊

NATURE GEOSCIENCE
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 127-+

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41561-017-0056-6

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation (NSF) through NSF Science, Engineering and Education for Sustainability (SEES) [EAR-1415206]
  2. National Science Foundation (NSF) through Water Sustainability and Climate Program (WSC): REACH (Resilience under Accelerated Change) [EAR-1209402]
  3. Mortenson Family Foundation
  4. ICER
  5. Directorate For Geosciences [1415206] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Intensively managed row crop agriculture has fundamentally changed Earth surface processes within the Mississippi River basin through large-scale alterations of land cover, hydrology and reactive nitrogen availability. These changes have created leaky landscapes where excess agriculturally derived nitrate degrades riverine water quality at local, regional and continental scales. Individually, wetlands are known to remove nitrate but the conditions under which multiple wetlands meaningfully reduce riverine nitrate concentration have not been established. Only one region of the Mississippi River basin-the 44,000 km(2) Minnesota River basin-still contains enough wetland cover within its intensively agriculturally managed watersheds to empirically address this question. Here we combine high-resolution land cover data for the Minnesota River basin with spatially extensive repeat water sampling data. By clearly isolating the effect of wetlands from crop cover, we show that, under moderate-high streamflow, wetlands are five times more efficient per unit area at reducing riverine nitrate concentration than the most effective land-based nitrogen mitigation strategies, which include cover crops and land retirement. Our results suggest that wetland restorations that account for the effects of spatial position in stream networks could provide a much greater benefit to water quality then previously assumed.

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

4.8
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