| Literature DB >> 26712772 |
Chen Lin1,2, Ronghua Ma3, Bin He4.
Abstract
Taihu Lake in China is suffering from severe eutrophication partly due to non-point pollution from the watershed. There is an increasing need to identify the regions within the watershed that most contribute to lake water degradation. The selection of appropriate temporal scales and lake indicators is important to identify sensitive watershed regions. This study selected three eutrophic lake areas, including Meiliang Bay (ML), Zhushan Bay (ZS), and the Western Coastal region (WC), as well as multiple buffer zones next to the lake boundary as the study sites. Soil erosion intensity was designated as a watershed indicator, and the lake algae area was designated as a lake quality indicator. The sensitive watershed region was identified based on the relationship between these two indicators among different lake divisions for a temporal sequence from 2000 to 2012. The results show that the relationship between soil erosion modulus and lake quality varied among different lake areas. Soil erosion from the two bay areas was more closely correlated with water quality than soil erosion from the WC region. This was most apparent at distances of 5 km to 10 km from the lake, where the r² was as high as 0.764. Results indicate that soil erosion could be used as an indicator for identifying key watershed protection areas. Different lake areas need to be considered separately due to differences in geographical features, land use, and the corresponding effects on lake water quality.Entities:
Keywords: algal blooms; buffer distance; eutrophication; sensitive watershed region; soil erosion modulus
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26712772 PMCID: PMC4730468 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph13010077
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1The location of the study site and three lake divisions.
The assignment of the conservation support practice factor based on land uses (P) in the study site.
| Land Use | Planted Forest/Grass Land | Original Forest | Water/Building Land | Bare Land | Arable Land (Assigned according to Slope) * | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1–2.0 | 2.0–7.0 | 7.0–12.0 | 12.0–18.0 | 18.0–24.0 | |||||
| P | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0 | 1 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.8 | 0.9 |
* The P assignment in arable land was based on the cropping system and slope. In the study site, the cropping system was unified as contour tillage, and slope could be divided into 5 grades, which are shown in Table 1.
Figure 2Tendency of erosion modulus within each region between 2000 and 2012 (W: winter; SP: spring; S: summer; A: autumn).
Figure 3Tendency variation of algae areas within three lake divisions from 2000 to 2012 (W: winter; SP: spring; S: summer; A: autumn).
Figure 4Spatial distribution of FAI values (A) The average FAI value in 2000; (B) The average FAI value in 2005; (C) The average FAI value in 2007; (D) The average FAI value in 2012).
Statistical data for the correlation coefficients between the erosion modulus and algae within different buffer regions (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01).
| Correlation Coefficient ( | RMSE | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ML | 1 km | −0.190 | 0.04 | 9.19 |
| 5 km | 0.77 | 0.59 | 0.52 | |
| 10 km | 0.88 | 0.77 | 0.184 | |
| 20 km | 0.50 | 0.25 | 0.795 | |
| 30 km | 0.41 | 0.17 | 8.29 | |
| 40 km | 0.18 | 0.03 | 9.68 | |
| ZS | 1 km | 0.63 | 0.40 | 6.94 |
| 5 km | 0.75 | 0.56 | 1.02 | |
| 10 km | 0.83 | 0.69 | 0.48 | |
| 20 km | 0.53 | 0.28 | 3.40 | |
| 30 km | 0.57 | 0.32 | 5.67 | |
| 40 km | 0.49 | 0.24 | 7.55 | |
| WC | 1 km | 0.72 | 0.52 | 6.40 |
| 5 km | 0.69 | 0.48 | 8.99 | |
| 10 km | 0.48 | 0.23 | 4.80 | |
| 20 km | 0.29 | 0.08 | 7.73 | |
| 30 km | −0.10 | 0.01 | 9.03 | |
| 40 km | −0.12 | 0.01 | 12.32 | |
Figure 5The scatter plots of the erosion modulus and algae areas within different regions for three watersheds.
Figure 6Arable land proportion within each buffer region between 2000 and 2010.