TY - JOUR

T1 - Dentrification potential of different landuse types in an agricultural watershed, lower Mississippi valley.

AU - Ullah, Sami

AU - Faulkner, Stephen

N1 - The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Ecological Engineering, 28 (2), 2006, © ELSEVIER.

PY - 2006/11/30

Y1 - 2006/11/30

N2 - Expansion of agricultural land and excessive nitrogen (N) fertilizer use in the Mississippi River watershed has resulted in a three-fold increase in the nitrate load of the river since the early 1950s. One way to reduce this nitrate load is to restore wetlands at suitable locations between croplands and receiving waters to remove run-off nitrate through previous termdenitrification.next term This research investigated previous termdenitrificationnext term potential (DP) of different land uses and its controlling factors in an agricultural watershed in the lower Mississippi valley (previous termLMV)next term to help identify sites with high DP for reducing run-off nitrate. Soil samples collected from seven land-use types of an agricultural watershed during spring, summer, fall and winter were incubated in the laboratory for DP determination. Low-elevation clay soils in wetlands exhibited 6.3 and 2.5 times greater DP compared to high-elevation silt loam and low-elevation clay soils in croplands, respectively. DP of vegetated-ditches was 1.3 and 4.2 times that of un-vegetated ditches and cultivated soils, respectively. Soil carbon and nitrogen availability, bulk density, and soil moisture significantly affected DP. These factors were significantly influenced in turn by landscape position and land-use type of the watershed. It is evident from these results that low-elevation, fine-textured soils under natural wetlands are the best locations for mediating nitrate loss from agricultural watersheds in the previous termLMV.next term Landscape position and land-use types can be used as indices for the assessment/modeling of previous termdenitrificationnext term potential and identification of sites for restoration for nitrate removal in agricultural watersheds.

AB - Expansion of agricultural land and excessive nitrogen (N) fertilizer use in the Mississippi River watershed has resulted in a three-fold increase in the nitrate load of the river since the early 1950s. One way to reduce this nitrate load is to restore wetlands at suitable locations between croplands and receiving waters to remove run-off nitrate through previous termdenitrification.next term This research investigated previous termdenitrificationnext term potential (DP) of different land uses and its controlling factors in an agricultural watershed in the lower Mississippi valley (previous termLMV)next term to help identify sites with high DP for reducing run-off nitrate. Soil samples collected from seven land-use types of an agricultural watershed during spring, summer, fall and winter were incubated in the laboratory for DP determination. Low-elevation clay soils in wetlands exhibited 6.3 and 2.5 times greater DP compared to high-elevation silt loam and low-elevation clay soils in croplands, respectively. DP of vegetated-ditches was 1.3 and 4.2 times that of un-vegetated ditches and cultivated soils, respectively. Soil carbon and nitrogen availability, bulk density, and soil moisture significantly affected DP. These factors were significantly influenced in turn by landscape position and land-use type of the watershed. It is evident from these results that low-elevation, fine-textured soils under natural wetlands are the best locations for mediating nitrate loss from agricultural watersheds in the previous termLMV.next term Landscape position and land-use types can be used as indices for the assessment/modeling of previous termdenitrificationnext term potential and identification of sites for restoration for nitrate removal in agricultural watersheds.

KW - Bottomland hardwoods

KW - Denitrification

KW - Forested wetlands

KW - NO3 pollution control

KW - Wetlands restoration

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2006.05.007

DO - 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2006.05.007

M3 - Journal article

VL - 28

SP - 131

EP - 140

JO - Ecological Engineering

JF - Ecological Engineering

SN - 0925-8574

IS - 2

ER -