An integrated modeling framework for performing environmental assessments: Application to ecosystem services in the Albemarle-Pamlico basins (NC and VA, USA)

Johnston, John M.; McGarvey, Daniel J.; Barber, M. Craig; Laniak, Gerry; Babendreier, J.; Parmar, Rajbir; Wolfe, Kurt; Kraemer, Stephen R.; Cyterski, Mike; Knightes, Chris; Rashleigh, Brenda; Suárez, Luis; Ambrose, Robert B.

doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.03.036

Cited by 55 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The phosphorus cycle, another notorious nutrient responsible for pollution in freshwater bodies, was associated with water quality related ecosystem services [39,40,42,43]. Dissolved oxygen [40], suspended matter [43], and ammonia and methylmercury [44] were also studied and modelled. All of these pollutants were investigated to assess the assimilation capacity and response of freshwater ecosystems.…”

Section: In the Aquatic Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The problems of nutrient pollution in rivers due to diffuse agricultural sources were also studied in order to determine the capacity of the landscape to mitigate the transmission of diffuse source pollution toward the water bodies, including for nitrates [30,44,50,51] and for phosphates [30,44,50]. Erol and Randhir [30] also considered some point sources of pollution such as septic tanks.…”

Section: In the Terrestrial Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Included in these hydrological ecosystem services, erosion and the problems of sedimentation in rivers were studied to consider the hydrological ecosystem service of preventing soil erosion [27,30,42,44,49]. The problems of nutrient pollution in rivers due to diffuse agricultural sources were also studied in order to determine the capacity of the landscape to mitigate the transmission of diffuse source pollution toward the water bodies, including for nitrates [30,44,50,51] and for phosphates [30,44,50].…”

Section: In the Terrestrial Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the literature on freshwater ecosystem services mentioned above, the studies focusing on water quality rarely modelled the pollution pathway through the terrestrial ecosystems; rather they used measurements, standards, or published data of the pollution loading inputs. Johnston, et al [44] was a valuable exception, and they proposed an integrated approach to modelling the water quality in terrestrial ecosystems and its impacts on the associated aquatic habitat.…”

Section: In the Terrestrial Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Erol and Randhir [30] also considered some point sources of pollution such as septic tanks. Other pollutants were considered: for example, Johnston, et al [44] considered methylmercury to determine if the concentrations exceed the sanitary thresholds. Both mechanistic and conceptual models were considered for these hydrological ecosystem services.…”

Section: In the Terrestrial Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Challenges in Using Hydrology and Water Quality Models for Assessing Freshwater Ecosystem Services: A Review

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Freshwater ecosystems contribute to many ecosystem services, many of which are being threatened by human activities such as land use change, river morphological changes, and climate change. Many disciplines have studied the processes underlying freshwater ecosystem functions, ranging from hydrology to ecology, including water quality, and a panoply of models are available to simulate their behaviour. This understanding is useful for the prediction of ecosystem services, but the model outputs must go beyond the production of time-series of biophysical variables, and must facilitate the beneficial use of the information it contains about the ecosystem services it describes. This article analyses the literature of ad hoc approaches that aim at quantifying one or more freshwater ecosystem services. It identifies the strategies adopted to use disciplinary-specific models for the prediction of the services. This review identifies that hydrological, water quality, and ecological models form a valuable knowledge base to predict changes in ecosystem conditions, but challenges remain to make proper and fruitful use of these models. In particular, considerations of temporal and spatial scales could be given more attention in order to provide better justifications for the choice of a particular model over another, including the uncertainty in their predictions.

show abstract

Section: In the Aquatic Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: In the Terrestrial Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: In the Terrestrial Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: In the Terrestrial Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: In the Terrestrial Ecosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Challenges in Using Hydrology and Water Quality Models for Assessing Freshwater Ecosystem Services: A Review

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Green infrastructure stormwater management at the watershed scale: urban variable source area and watershed capacitance

Miles

Band

2015

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison of radar and gauge precipitation data in watershed models across varying spatial and temporal scales

Price

Purucker

Kraemer

et al. 2013

Hydrological Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Precipitation is a key control on watershed hydrologic modelling output, with errors in rainfall propagating through subsequent stages of water quantity and quality analysis. Most watershed models incorporate precipitation data from rain gauges; higherresolution data sources are available, but they are associated with greater computational requirements and expertise. Here, we investigate whether the Multisensor Precipitation Estimator (MPE or Stage IV Next-Generation Radar) data improve the accuracy of streamflow simulations using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), compared with rain gauge data. Simulated flows from 2002 to 2010 at five timesteps were compared with observed flows for four nested subwatersheds of the Neuse River basin in North Carolina (21-, 203-, 2979-, and 10 100-km 2 watershed area), using a multi-objective function, informal likelihood-weighted calibration approach. Across watersheds and timesteps, total gauge precipitation was greater than radar precipitation, but radar data showed a conditional bias of higher rainfall estimates during large events (>25-50 mm/day). Model parameterization differed between calibrations with the two datasets, despite the fact that all watershed characteristics were the same across simulation scenarios. This underscores the importance of linking calibration parameters to realistic processes. SWAT simulations with both datasets underestimated median and low flows, whereas radar-based simulations were more accurate than gauge-based simulations for high flows. At coarser timesteps, differences were less pronounced. Our results suggest that modelling efforts in watersheds with poor rain gauge coverage can be improved with MPE radar data, especially at short timesteps. Published 2013. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

show abstract

An integrated modeling framework for performing environmental assessments: Application to ecosystem services in the Albemarle-Pamlico basins (NC and VA, USA)

Cited by 55 publications

References 21 publications

Challenges in Using Hydrology and Water Quality Models for Assessing Freshwater Ecosystem Services: A Review

Challenges in Using Hydrology and Water Quality Models for Assessing Freshwater Ecosystem Services: A Review

Green infrastructure stormwater management at the watershed scale: urban variable source area and watershed capacitance

Comparison of radar and gauge precipitation data in watershed models across varying spatial and temporal scales

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About