Effects of riparian buffers on nitrate concentrations in watershed discharges: new models and management implications

dc.contributor.authorWeller, Donald E.
dc.contributor.authorBaker, Matthew
dc.contributor.authorJordan, Thomas E.
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-08T15:08:43Z
dc.date.available2025-01-08T15:08:43Z
dc.date.issued2011-07-01
dc.description.abstractWatershed analyses of nutrient removal in riparian buffers have been limited by the geographic methods used to map buffers and by the statistical models used to test and quantify buffer effects on stream nutrient levels. We combined geographic methods that account for buffer prevalence along flow paths connecting croplands to streams with improved statistical models to test for buffer effects on stream nitrate concentrations from 321 tributary watersheds to the Chesapeake Bay, USA. We developed statistical models that predict stream nitrate concentration from watershed land cover and physiographic province. We used information theoretic methods (AICc) to compare models with and without buffer terms, and we demonstrate that models accounting for riparian buffers better explain stream nitrate concentrations than models using only land cover proportions. We analyzed the buffer model parameters to quantify differences within and among physiographic provinces in the potentials for nitrate loss from croplands and nitrate removal in buffers. On average, buffers in Coastal Plain study watersheds had a higher relative nitrate removal potential (95% of the inputs from cropland) than Piedmont buffers (35% of inputs). Buffers in Appalachian Mountain study watersheds were intermediate (retaining 39% of cropland inputs), but that percentage was uncertain. The absolute potential to reduce nitrate concentration was highest in the Piedmont study watersheds because of higher nitrate inputs from cropland. Model predictions for the study watersheds provided estimates of nitrate removals achieved with the existing cropland and buffer distributions. Compared to expected nitrate concentrations if buffers were removed, current buffers reduced average nitrate concentrations by 0.73 mg N/L (50% of their inputs from cropland) in the Coastal Plain study watersheds, 0.40 mg N/L (11%) in the Piedmont, and 0.08 mg N/L (5%) in the Appalachian Mountains. Restoration to close all buffer gaps downhill from croplands would further reduce nitrate concentrations by 0.66 mg N/L, 0.83 mg N/L, and 0.51 mg N/L, respectively, in the Coastal Plain, Piedmont, and Appalachian Mountain study watersheds. Aggregate nitrate removal by riparian buffers was less than suggested by many studies of field-to-stream transects, but buffer nitrate removal is significant, and restoration could achieve substantial additional removal.
dc.description.sponsorshipSupport for this research was provided in part by grantsfrom the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Science toAchieve Results (STAR) Estuarine and Great Lakes (EaGLes)Program to the Atlantic Slope Consortium (USEPA Agreement#R-82868401) and the Watershed Classi?cation Program(USEPA Agreement #R-831369). Although the researchdescribed in this article has been funded by the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, it has not been subjectedto the Agency’s required peer and policy review and thereforedoes not necessarily re?ect the views of the Agency, and noof?cial endorsement should be inferred. Further support wasprovided by CICEET, the Cooperative Institute for Coastaland Estuarine Environmental Technology. The stream datawere collected with support from NSF (BSR-89-05219, DEB-92-06811, and DEB-93-17968), NOAA (NA66RG0129), theGovernor’s Research Council of Maryland, the government ofCharles County Maryland, and the Smithsonian InstitutionEnvironmental Sciences Program. David L. Correll led thestream sampling program. We thank Alison Baker, KathyBoomer, Molly Van Appledorn, and Micah Ryder for detailedfeedback on early versions of the manuscript. Doug Call, JamesGraves, Sal Orochena, Nancy Lee, Jennifer Bruggink, CarolynLieberman, Kieren Tinning, and Michelle Coffee assembled spatial data used in some of the analyses. D. E Weller and M. E.Baker are joint ?rst authors.
dc.description.urihttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1890/10-0789.1
dc.format.extent17 pages
dc.genrejournal articles
dc.identifierdoi:10.13016/m2irxa-ubrc
dc.identifier.citationWeller, Donald E., Matthew E. Baker, and Thomas E. Jordan. “Effects of Riparian Buffers on Nitrate Concentrations in Watershed Discharges: New Models and Management Implications.” Ecological Applications 21, no. 5 (2011): 1679–95. https://doi.org/10.1890/10-0789.1.
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1890/10-0789.1
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11603/37175
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherWiley
dc.relation.isAvailableAtThe University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC)
dc.relation.ispartofUMBC Center for Urban Environmental Research and Education (CUERE)
dc.relation.ispartofUMBC Faculty Collection
dc.relation.ispartofUMBC Geography and Environmental Systems Department
dc.rightsThis work was written as part of one of the author's official duties as an Employee of the United States Government and is therefore a work of the United States Government. In accordance with 17 U.S.C. 105, no copyright protection is available for such works under U.S. Law.
dc.rightsPublic Domain
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/
dc.subjectflow path analysis
dc.subjectwatershed analysis
dc.subjectnitrogen
dc.subjectnutrient discharges
dc.subjectnitrate
dc.subjectChesapeake Bay watershed
dc.subjectwatershed management
dc.subjectland cover
dc.subjectcollinearity
dc.subjectriparian buffer
dc.titleEffects of riparian buffers on nitrate concentrations in watershed discharges: new models and management implications
dc.typeText
dcterms.creatorhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-5069-0204

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
EcologicalApplications2011WellerEffectsofriparianbuffersonnitrateconcentrationsinwatersheddischarges.pdf
Size:
616.43 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format