Water quality changes in a short-rotation woody crop riparian buffer

Rosa, David J; Clausen, John C.; Kuzovkina, Yulia A.

doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2017.10.020

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This was supported by Ferrarini et al (2017), who found that woody biomass was better for N uptake, whereas herbaceous buffers were better at trapping sediment runoff; also, greater P removal was observed for cumulative annual herbaceous harvests than a single woody material harvest at identical timescales. Rosa et al (2017) observed a 64% reduction in shallow groundwater nitrate at the edge of hybrid willow plots compared with corn ( Zea mays L.) crop plots, but a 35% increase in soluble P. Fortier et al (2015) observed double the supply rates of N and P to ion exchange soil solution samplers in herbaceous versus woody biomass buffers; this may increase the herbaceous biomass nutrient uptake but constitutes a leaching risk at some sites outside of growth periods. The choice between woody versus herbaceous biomass buffers requires consideration and guidance concerning local water quality goals, on‐farm motivations, funding, and management cost benefits.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Production of biomass can provide a financial benefit and incentive for land managers to implement buffers (Rosa et al, 2017), which they often regard as land taken out of production. Fast‐growing tree species can speed up the provision of tree‐associated services in former agricultural land compared with the decades required for natural forests to establish (Fortier et al, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Assessment of the Multifunctionality of Integrated Buffer Zones in Northwestern Europe

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Assessment of the Multifunctionality of Integrated Buffer Zones in Northwestern Europe

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Headwater TSAs have minimal impact on farm productivity and economics (Hewett et al, 2020), as they remain empty for most of the year and require minimal land take compared to other NBS (e.g., tree planting) or large engineered flood prevention approaches (e.g., reservoirs). Furthermore, engineered buffer zones can provide financial incentives to landowners through biomass production (Rosa et al, 2017; Zak et al, 2019). McCarthy et al (2018) showed that the benefits often outweigh the costs associated with NBS implementation.…”

Section: Future Considerations and Concluding Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitigating floods and attenuating surface runoff with temporary storage areas in headwaters

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Temporary storage areas (TSAs) represent a category of soft-engineered naturebased solutions that can provide dispersed, small-scale storage throughout a catchment. TSAs store and attenuate surface runoff, providing new additional storage during flood events. The need for such additional catchment storage will become more urgent as the frequency and magnitude of extreme hydrological events increases due to climate change. Implementation of TSAs in headwater catchments is slowly gaining momentum, but practitioners still require further evidence on how such measures function during flood events. This review focuses on the role of relatively small-scale (<10,000 m 3 ) TSAs in headwater catchments for flood risk management. It also explores the potential wider benefits for implementing these as part of an integrated catchment management approach. TSA flood mitigation effectiveness is primarily determined by the TSA's available storage prior to the event. At the local scale, this can be represented by the relationship between TSA inputs, outputs and total storage. Factors influencing the local functioning and effectiveness of TSAs are discussed, with potential considerations for optimizing future TSA design and management. Hydrological models have suggested that TSAs could be used to effectively attenuate high magnitude events. However, future considerations should involve addressing the lack of empirical evidence showing TSA catchment scale effectiveness and how local TSA functioning might change in time. Small-scale headwater TSAs offer a holistic and sustainable approach to catchment management that can deliver both local benefits to landowners and wider flood risk mitigation for society.

show abstract

“…Willows have been the recent research focus as a renewable feedstock for bioenergy in the northeastern United States [6,7]. Due to their rapid above-ground biomass growth, shallow diffuse root systems, and efficient nutrient use and uptake, willows are a viable source for bioenergy in agricultural systems [8,9]. They are also used as buffers and vegetative filters that remove waste nutrients [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attraction of Bees to Native and Introduced Willows (Salix spp.)

Grandstaff

Kuzovkina

Legrand

2023

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduced willows have mostly been employed as a renewable feedstock for bioenergy in the northeastern USA. The question of whether introduced willows provide the same biodiversity value and attractiveness as native willows has not yet been explored. The objective of this study was to compare the attractiveness of native and introduced willows to different subfamilies of bees. The common garden experiment planted at Storrs, CT, USA, included three native (S. eriocephala, S. sericea, S. lucida) and three introduced (S. ‘SX64’, S. ‘Onondaga’, S. ‘S365’) willows. Various willow taxa flowered at different times through spring, allowing pollinators to be collected over a 6-week period using colored bowl traps. As a result, 2430 bees were collected and identified to the subfamily level. Andreninae was the most prevalent pollinator visiting all taxa of willows, followed by Hylaeinae and Colletinae. There were no significant differences in the number of pollinators collected from either native or introduced taxa during the progressive willow flowering during mid-March–May of 2021 and 2022, suggesting their equal attractiveness to pollinators. Similarly, during the concurrent flowering of the two native and two introduced taxa, there were no significant differences in the number of pollinators associated with either group suggesting that when pollinators had foraging choices, they were similarly attracted to both native and introduced willows. The overall finding of this study suggested that plantings of either native or introduced willows to meet bioenergy goals offer similar benefits of floral resources for pollinators.

show abstract

Water quality changes in a short-rotation woody crop riparian buffer

Cited by 10 publications

References 41 publications

An Assessment of the Multifunctionality of Integrated Buffer Zones in Northwestern Europe

An Assessment of the Multifunctionality of Integrated Buffer Zones in Northwestern Europe

Mitigating floods and attenuating surface runoff with temporary storage areas in headwaters

Attraction of Bees to Native and Introduced Willows (Salix spp.)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About