Literature DB >> 15156350

A watershed-scale model for predicting nonpoint pollution risk in North Carolina.

Kevin M Potter1, Frederick W Cubbage, Gary B Blank, Rex H Schaberg.   

Abstract

The Southeastern United States is a global center of freshwater biotic diversity, but much of the region's aquatic biodiversity is at risk from stream degradation. Nonpoint pollution sources are responsible for 70% of that degradation, and controlling nonpoint pollution from agriculture, urbanization, and silviculture is considered critical to maintaining water quality and aquatic biodiversity in the Southeast. We used an ecological risk assessment framework to develop vulnerability models that can help policymakers and natural resource managers understand the impact of land cover changes on water quality in North Carolina. Additionally, we determined which landscape characteristics are most closely associated with macroinvertebrate community tolerance of stream degradation, and therefore with lower-quality water. The results will allow managers and policymakers to weigh the risks of management and policy decisions to a given watershed or set of watersheds, including whether streamside buffer protection zones are ecologically effective in achieving water quality standards. Regression analyses revealed that landscape variables explained up to 56.3% of the variability in benthic macroinvertebrate index scores. The resulting vulnerability models indicate that North Carolina watersheds with less forest cover are at most risk for degraded water quality and steam habitat conditions. The importance of forest cover, at both the watershed and riparian zone scale, in predicting macrobenthic invertebrate community assemblage varies by geographic region of the state.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15156350     DOI: 10.1007/s00267-004-0117-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Manage        ISSN: 0364-152X            Impact factor:   3.266


  7 in total

1.  Identifying sources of stress to native aquatic fauna using a watershed ecological risk assessment framework.

Authors:  J M Diamond; V B Serveiss
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2001-12-15       Impact factor: 9.028

2.  Effects of land use and municipal wastewater treatment changes on stream water quality.

Authors:  S R Ha; M S Bae
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 2.513

3.  Impervious surface area as a predictor of the effects of urbanization on stream insect communities in Maine, USA.

Authors:  Chandler C Morse; Alexander D Huryn; Christopher Cronan
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 2.513

4.  Using environmental stressor information to predict the ecological status of Maryland non-tidal streams as measured by biological indicators.

Authors:  J H Vølstad; N E Roth; G Mercurio; M T Southerland; D E Strebel
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.513

5.  Stream biodiversity: the ghost of land use past.

Authors:  J S Harding; E F Benfield; P V Bolstad; G S Helfman; E B Jones
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1998-12-08       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Ecological Risk Assessment at The Regional Scale: Ecological Archives A005-001.

Authors:  R L Graham; C T Hunsaker; R V O'Neill; B L Jackson
Journal:  Ecol Appl       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 4.657

7.  Relationships Between Landscape Characteristics and Nonpoint Source Pollution Inputs to Coastal Estuaries.

Authors: 
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 3.266

  7 in total
  9 in total

1.  Load estimation and source apportionment of nonpoint source nitrogen and phosphorus based on integrated application of SLURP model, ECM, and RUSLE: a case study in the Jinjiang River, China.

Authors:  Haiyang Chen; Yanguo Teng; Jinsheng Wang
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 2.513

2.  Land use, spatial scale, and stream systems: lessons from an agricultural region.

Authors:  Bruce Vondracek; Kristen L Blann; Carson B Cox; Julia Frost Nerbonne; Karen G Mumford; Brian A Nerbonne; Laurie A Sovell; Julie K H Zimmerman
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Temporal and spatial relationships between watershed land use and salt marsh disturbance in a pacific estuary.

Authors:  Kristin B Byrd; N Maggi Kelly; Adina M Merenlender
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2006-11-14       Impact factor: 3.266

4.  A method for comparative analysis of recovery potential in impaired waters restoration planning.

Authors:  Douglas J Norton; James D Wickham; Timothy G Wade; Kelly Kunert; John V Thomas; Paul Zeph
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 3.266

5.  Predicting the biological condition of streams: use of geospatial indicators of natural and anthropogenic characteristics of watersheds.

Authors:  Daren M Carlisle; James Falcone; Michael R Meador
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 2.513

6.  Beyond Impervious: Urban Land-Cover Pattern Variation and Implications for Watershed Management.

Authors:  Scott M Beck; Melissa R McHale; George R Hess
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2016-04-19       Impact factor: 3.266

7.  Comparison of general water quality of rivers in Indonesia and Japan.

Authors:  Machiko Kido; M Suhaemi Syawal; Toshiyuki Hosokawa; Shunitz Tanaka; Takeshi Saito; Toshio Iwakuma; Masaaki Kurasaki
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2008-08-30       Impact factor: 2.513

8.  Towards to understanding the preliminary loss and absorption of nitrogen and phosphorus under different treatments in cotton drip- irrigation in northwest Xinjiang.

Authors:  Honghong Ma; Shenghai Pu; Pan Li; Xinxiang Niu; Xianglin Wu; Zhiying Yang; Jingrong Zhu; Tao Yang; Zhenan Hou; Xingwang Ma
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  A phased approach for assessing combined effects from multiple stressors.

Authors:  Charles A Menzie; Margaret M MacDonell; Moiz Mumtaz
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2007-01-24       Impact factor: 9.031

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.