| Literature DB >> 23180248 |
Elodie Passeport1, Philippe Vidon, Kenneth J Forshay, Lora Harris, Sujay S Kaushal, Dorothy Q Kellogg, Julia Lazar, Paul Mayer, Emilie K Stander.
Abstract
Excess nitrogen (N) in freshwater systems, estuaries, and coastal areas has well-documented deleterious effects on ecosystems. Ecological engineering practices (EEPs) may be effective at decreasing nonpoint source N leaching to surface and groundwater. However, few studies have synthesized current knowledge about the functioning principles, performance, and cost of common EEPs used to mitigate N pollution at the watershed scale. Our review describes seven EEPs known to decrease N to help watershed managers select the most effective techniques from among the following approaches: advanced-treatment septic systems, low-impact development (LID) structures, permeable reactive barriers, treatment wetlands, riparian buffers, artificial lakes and reservoirs, and stream restoration. Our results show a broad range of N-removal effectiveness but suggest that all techniques could be optimized for N removal by promoting and sustaining conditions conducive to biological transformations (e.g., denitrification). Generally, N-removal efficiency is particularly affected by hydraulic residence time, organic carbon availability, and establishment of anaerobic conditions. There remains a critical need for systematic empirical studies documenting N-removal efficiency among EEPs and potential environmental and economic tradeoffs associated with the widespread use of these techniques. Under current trajectories of N inputs, land use, and climate change, ecological engineering alone may be insufficient to manage N in many watersheds, suggesting that N-pollution source prevention remains a critical need. Improved understanding of N-removal effectiveness and modeling efforts will be critical in building decision support tools to help guide the selection and application of best EEPs for N management.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23180248 DOI: 10.1007/s00267-012-9970-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Manage ISSN: 0364-152X Impact factor: 3.266