Literature DB >> 20097406

The strategic significance of wastewater sources to pollutant phosphorus levels in English rivers and to environmental management for rural, agricultural and urban catchments.

Colin Neal1, Helen P Jarvie, Paul J A Withers, Brian A Whitton, Margaret Neal.   

Abstract

The relationship between soluble and particulate phosphorus was examined for 9 major UK rivers including 26 major tributaries and 68 monitoring points, covering wide-ranging rural and agricultural/urban impacted systems with catchment areas varying from 1 to 6000km(2) scales. Phosphorus concentrations in Soluble Reactive (SRP), Total Dissolved (TDP), Total (TP), Dissolved Hydrolysable (DHP) and Particulate (PP) forms correlated with effluent markers (sodium and boron) and SRP was generally dominant signifying the importance of sewage sources. Low flows were particularly enriched in SRP, TDP and TP for average SRP>100microg/l indicating low effluent dilution. At particularly low average concentrations, SRP increased with flow but effluent sources were still implicated as the effluent markers (boron in particular) increased likewise. For rural areas, DHP had proportionately high concentrations and SRP+DHP concentrations could exceed environmental thresholds currently set for SRP. Given DHP has a high bioavailability the environmental implications need further consideration. PP concentrations were generally highest at high flows but PP in the suspended solids was generally at its lowest and in general PP correlated with particulate organic carbon and more so than the suspended sediment in total. Separation of pollutant inputs solely between effluent and diffuse (agriculture) components is misleading, as part of the "diffuse" term comprises effluents flushed from the catchments during high flow. Effluent sources of phosphorus supplied directly or indirectly to the river coupled with within-river interactions between water/sediment/biota largely determine pollutant levels. The study flags the fundamental need of placing direct and indirect effluent sources and contaminated storage with interchange to/from the river at the focus for remediation strategies for UK rivers in relation to eutrophication and the WFD.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20097406     DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.12.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Total Environ        ISSN: 0048-9697            Impact factor:   7.963


  6 in total

1.  Temporal variability in nutrient concentrations and loads in the River Tamar and its catchment (SW England) between 1974 and 2004.

Authors:  Alan D Tappin; Utra Mankasingh; Ian D McKelvie; Paul J Worsfold
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2012-10-11       Impact factor: 2.513

2.  Defining nutrient and biochemical oxygen demand baselines for tropical rivers and streams in São Paulo State (Brazil): a comparison between reference and impacted sites.

Authors:  Davi G F Cunha; Walter K Dodds; Maria do Carmo Calijuri
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2011-08-20       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  The effects of hydraulic works and wetlands function in the Salado-River basin (Buenos Aires, Argentina).

Authors:  M E Bazzuri; N A Gabellone; L C Solari
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2018-01-26       Impact factor: 2.513

4.  Impact of organic contaminants from dumpsite leachates on natural water sources in the Enugu Metropolis, southeastern Nigeria.

Authors:  Ifeoma Lindsey Onyekwelu; Okechukwu Pius Aghamelu
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2019-08-06       Impact factor: 2.513

5.  Validated predictive modelling of the environmental resistome.

Authors:  Gregory C A Amos; Emma Gozzard; Charlotte E Carter; Andrew Mead; Mike J Bowes; Peter M Hawkey; Lihong Zhang; Andrew C Singer; William H Gaze; Elizabeth M H Wellington
Journal:  ISME J       Date:  2015-02-13       Impact factor: 10.302

6.  16S rRNA assessment of the influence of shading on early-successional biofilms in experimental streams.

Authors:  Katja Lehmann; Andrew Singer; Michael J Bowes; Nicola L Ings; Dawn Field; Thomas Bell
Journal:  FEMS Microbiol Ecol       Date:  2015-10-22       Impact factor: 4.194

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.