Advertisement

Water, Air, and Soil Pollution

, Volume 85, Issue 2, pp 707–712 | Cite as

Effects of future N deposition scenarios on the Galloway region of SW Scotland using a coupled sulphur & nitrogen model (MAGIC-WAND)

  • R. C. Fermer
  • A. Jenkins
  • B. J. Cosby
  • R. C. Helliwell
  • R. F. Wright
  • A. J. Bulger
Part III Long Term Trends in Acidification

Abstract

The Galloway region of Southwest Scotland has been subject to decades of acidic deposition which has resulted in damage to soils, surface waters and aquatic biota. A survey of lochs was conducted in 1979, 1988, and 1993, over which time there have been dramatic changes in total sulphur and nitrogen deposition. The MAGIC model successfully reproduced the major chemical changes in water chemistry from 1979 to 1988 during which time there was a rapid decline in sulphur deposition. A new coupled sulphur and nitrogen model (MAGIC-WAND) has been used to evaluate the regional hydrochemical response to changing patterns of N & S deposition from the period 1988 to 1993. Details of the model structure and parameterisation are discussed. The model under-predicts the response of non-marine sulphate in the region suggesting that there has been a slight increase in deposition over this period. Future hydrochemical responses to different nitrogen deposition scenarios are presented, indicating that the potential increase of nitrogen in surface waters is closely linked to the age and extent of different mosaics of commercial afforestation within the individual catchments.

Key words

Acidification modelling nitrogen land-use MAGIC-WAND 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Cosby, B.J., Hornberger, G.M., Galloway, J.N., Wright, R.F.: 1985a, Water. Resour. Res. 21, 51–63.Google Scholar
  2. Cosby, B.J., Wright, R.F., Hornberger, G.M., Galloway, J.N.: 1985b, Water. Resour. Res. 21, 1591–1601.Google Scholar
  3. Cosby, B.J., Jenkins, A., Ferrier, R.C., Miller, J.D., Walker, T.A.B.: 1990, J Hydrol., 120, 143–162.Google Scholar
  4. Dise, N.B., Wright, R.F.: 1995, For. Ecol. Manag., 71, 153–162.Google Scholar
  5. Emmett, B.A., Reynolds, B., Stevens, P.A., Norris, D.D., Hughes, S., Gorres, J., Lubrecht, I.: 1993, Ambio 22, 386–394.Google Scholar
  6. Emmett, B.A., Brittain, A., Hughes, S., Kennedy, V.: 1995, For. Ecol. Manag., 71, 61–74.Google Scholar
  7. Flower, R.J., Battarbee, R.W.: 1983, Nature, 305, 130–133.Google Scholar
  8. Gosz, J.R.:1981, In: Clark,F.E., Rosswall, T. (Eds.) Terrestrial Nitrogen Cycles, Ecol. Bull., 33, 405–426.Google Scholar
  9. Harriman, R., Morrison, B.R.S., Caines, L.A., Collen, P., Watt, A.W.: 1987, Water Air Soil Pollut., 32, 89–112.Google Scholar
  10. Jenkins, A., Cosby, B.J., Ferrier, R.C., Walker, T.A.B., Miller, J.D.: 1990, J. Hydrol, 120, 163–181.Google Scholar
  11. Wright, R.F., Cosby, B.J., Ferrier, R.C., Jenkins, A., Harriman, R.: 1994, J. Hydrol, 161, 257–285.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. C. Fermer
    • 1
  • A. Jenkins
    • 2
  • B. J. Cosby
    • 3
  • R. C. Helliwell
    • 1
  • R. F. Wright
    • 4
  • A. J. Bulger
    • 3
  1. 1.Macaulay Land Use Research InstituteCraigiebucklerAberdeenUK
  2. 2.Institute of HydrologyCrowmarsh GiffordWallingfordUK
  3. 3.Dept. of Environmental SciencesUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA
  4. 4.Norwegian Institute of Water ResearchOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations