Low transient storage and uptake efficiencies in seven agricultural streams: Implications for nutrient demand
Journal of Environmental Quality, ISSN: 1537-2537, Vol: 43, Issue: 6, Page: 1980-1990
2014
- 31Citations
- 20Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations31
- Citation Indexes27
- 27
- CrossRef18
- Policy Citations4
- Policy Citation4
- Captures20
- Readers20
- 20
Article Description
We used mass load budgets, transient storage modeling, and nutrient spiraling metrics to characterize nitrate (NO), ammonium (NH), and inorganic phosphorus (SRP) demand in seven agricultural streams across the United States and to identify in-stream services that may control these conditions. Retention of one or all nutrients was observed in all but one stream, but demand for all nutrients was low relative to the mass in transport. Transient storage metrics (A/A, F, T, and q) correlated with NO - retention but not NH or SRP retention, suggesting in-stream services associated with transient storage and stream water residence time could influence reach-scale NO - demand. However, because the fraction of median reach-scale travel time due to transient storage (F) was ≤ 1.2% across the sites, only a relatively small demand for NO could be generated by transient storage. In contrast, net uptake of nutrients from the water column calculated from nutrient spiraling metrics were not significant at any site because uptake lengths calculated from background nutrient concentrations were statistically insignificant and therefore much longer than the study reaches. These results suggest that low transient storage coupled with high surface water NO inputs have resulted in uptake efficiencies that are not sufficient to offset groundwater inputs of N. Nutrient retention has been linked to physical and hydrogeologic elements that drive flow through transient storage areas where residence time and biotic contact are maximized; however, our findings indicate that similar mechanisms are unable to generate a significant nutrient demand in these streams relative to the loads.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84911960000&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/jeq2014.01.0034; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25602215; http://doi.wiley.com/10.2134/jeq2014.01.0034; https://dx.doi.org/10.2134/jeq2014.01.0034; https://acsess.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.2134/jeq2014.01.0034
Wiley
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know