Nonpoint Sources

Line, Daniel E.; Osmond, Deanna L.; McLaughlin, Richard A.; Lombardo, Laura A.; Grabow, Garry L.; Wise-Frederick, Dani E.; Spooner, Jean

doi:10.2175/106143001x143781

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 96 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Compared with point sources, diffuse pollution is more difficult to control due to being characterized by numerous and dispersed sources and the difficulties in tracing its pathways (Yang and Wang, 2010). The application of large amounts of mineral and organic fertilizers in intensely cultivated agricultural areas contributes to excessive loads in soil, groundwater, and surface water bodies, which affect negatively biodiversity and human health (Bergström and Brink, 1986;Horrigan et al, 2002;Line et al, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison and Evaluation of Model Structures for the Simulation of Pollution Fluxes in a Tile-Drained River Basin

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Union Water Framework Directive requires an integrated pollution prevention plan at the river basin level. Hydrological river basin modeling tools are therefore promising tools to support the quantification of pollution originating from different sources. A limited number of studies have reported on the use of these models to predict pollution fluxes in tile-drained basins. This study focused on evaluating different modeling tools and modeling concepts to quantify the flow and nitrate fluxes in the Odense River basin using DAISY-MIKE SHE (DMS) and the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT). The results show that SWAT accurately predicted flow for daily and monthly time steps, whereas simulation of nitrate fluxes were more accurate at a monthly time step. In comparison to the DMS model, which takes into account the uncertainty of soil hydraulic and slurry parameters, SWAT results for flow and nitrate fit well within the range of DMS simulated values in high-flow periods but were slightly lower in low-flow periods. Despite the similarities of simulated flow and nitrate fluxes at the basin outlet, the two models predicted very different separations into flow components (overland flow, tile drainage, and groundwater flow) as well as nitrate fluxes from flow components. It was concluded that the assessment on which the model provides a better representation of the reality in terms of flow paths should not only be based on standard statistical metrics for the entire river basin but also needs to consider additional data, field experiments, and opinions of field experts.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison and Evaluation of Model Structures for the Simulation of Pollution Fluxes in a Tile-Drained River Basin

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Early and rapid prediction of leaching potential of a chemical from soil into groundwater becomes an urgent task prior to mass production of the chemical (Line et al, 1998;Fava et al, 2000). Conventional leaching studies are carried out in a lysimeter facility, and the results are highly dependent on the complicated conditions under which the studies were conducted and the soils employed (Byers et al, 1995;Suzuki et al, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of methanol on retention of hydrophobic organic chemicals in soil leaching column chromatography

Liang

Lin

et al. 2002

Chemosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nonpoint Sources

Cited by 2 publications

References 96 publications

Comparison and Evaluation of Model Structures for the Simulation of Pollution Fluxes in a Tile-Drained River Basin

Comparison and Evaluation of Model Structures for the Simulation of Pollution Fluxes in a Tile-Drained River Basin

Influence of methanol on retention of hydrophobic organic chemicals in soil leaching column chromatography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About