12,000

We have over 12,000 students, from over 100 countries, within one of the safest campuses in the UK

93%

93% of Lancaster students go into work or further study within six months of graduating

Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Phosphorus loss from an agricultural watershed ...
View graph of relations

« Back

Phosphorus loss from an agricultural watershed as a function of storm size.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published

  • Andrew N. Sharpley
  • Peter J. A. Kleinman
  • A. Louise Heathwaite
  • William J. Gburek
  • Gordon J. Folmar
  • John P. Schmidt
Journal publication date03/2008
JournalJournal of Environmental Quality
Journal number2
Volume37
Number of pages7
Pages362-368
Original languageEnglish

Abstract

Phosphorus (P) loss from agricultural watersheds is generally greater in storm rather than base flow. Although fundamental to P-based risk assessment tools, few studies have quantified the effect of storm size on P loss. Thus, the loss of P as a function of flow type (base and storm flow) and size was quantified for a mixed-land use watershed (FD-36; 39.5 ha) from 1997 to 2006. Storm size was ranked by return period (<1, 1–3, 3–5, 5–10, and >10 yr), where increasing return period represents storms with greater peak and total flow. From 1997 to 2006, storm flow accounted for 32% of watershed discharge yet contributed 65% of dissolved reactive P (DP) (107 g ha–1 yr–1) and 80% of total P (TP) exported (515 g ha–1 yr–1). Of 248 storm flows during this period, 93% had a return period of <1 yr, contributing most of the 10-yr flow (6507 m3 ha–1; 63%) and export of DP (574 g ha–1; 54%) and TP (2423 g ha–1; 47%). Two 10-yr storms contributed 23% of P exported between 1997 and 2006. A significant increase in storm flow DP concentration with storm size (0.09–0.16 mg L–1) suggests that P release from soil and/or area of the watershed producing runoff increase with storm size. Thus, implementation of P-based Best Management Practice needs to consider what level of risk management is acceptable.