4.7 Article

Source area effects on herbicide losses to surface waters -: A case study in the Swiss Plateau

期刊

AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEMS & ENVIRONMENT
卷 128, 期 3, 页码 177-184

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.agee.2008.06.014

关键词

diffuse pollution; surface water; atrazine; sulcotrione; dimethenamide; metolachlor; critical source areas; land management

资金

  1. Eawag and the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN, Switzerland)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reducing herbicide applications on hydrologically contributing areas has been suggested as an effective approach to mitigate diffuse herbicide pollution. We report on controlled herbicide applications in two small neighboring catchments in the Swiss Plateau investigating the persistence of contributing areas in time and the influence of herbicide properties on the spatial loss patterns and on the extent of herbicides loads. A mixture of atrazine, dimethenamide, metolachlor, and sulcotrione was applied to four corn fields on the same day. Simazine was used as an additional tracer to the wettest part of one field. Irrespective of rainfall timing and for all compounds, spatial differences in the herbicide losses relative to the amounts applied were large (factors 15-18). The water table fluctuations in the fields suggest that soil hydrology differentiated between high and low loss fields. The spatial patterns were consistent with results obtained under very different weather conditions in an earlier study indicating that contributing areas prevail in time. Simazine losses from a wet hot spot were exceptionally large exceeding 24% of the applied mass. Avoiding atrazine applications on this small area corresponding to 1% of the field size would have resulted in a 30% decrease of the overall losses. Hence, land use strategies should not only account for soil (hydrological) differences between fields but should pay sufficient attention to small-scale heterogeneity within fields. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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