Landscape Ecology

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 193–206 | Cite as

Upstream-to-downstream changes in nutrient export risk

  • James D. Wickham
  • Timothy G. Wade
  • Kurt H. Riitters
  • R.V. O'Neill
  • Jonathan H. Smith
  • Elizabeth R. Smith
  • K.B. Jones
  • A.C. Neale


Nutrient export coefficients are estimates of the mass of nitrogen (N) or phosphorus (P) normalized by area and time (e.g., kg/ha/yr). They have been estimated most often for watersheds ranging in size from 102 to 104 hectares, and have been recommended as measurements to inform management decisions. At this scale, watersheds are often nested upstream and downstream components of larger drainage basins, suggesting nutrient export coefficients will change from one subwatershed to the next. Nutrient export can be modeled as risk where lack of monitoring data prevents empirical estimation. We modeled N and P export risk for subwatersheds of larger drainage basins, and examined spatial changes in risk from upstream to downstream watersheds. Spatial (subwatershed) changes in N and P risk were a function of in-stream decay, subwatershed land-cover composition, and subwatershed streamlength. Risk tended to increase in a downstream direction under low rates of in-stream decay, whereas high rates of in-stream decay often reduced risk to zero (0) toward downstream subwatersheds. On average, increases in the modeled rate of in-stream decay reduced risk by 0.44 for N and 0.39 for P. Interactions between in-stream decay, land-cover composition and streamlength produced dramatic changes in risk across subwatersheds in some cases. Comparison of the null cases of no in-stream decay and homogeneously forested subwatersheds with extant conditions indicated that complete forest cover produced greater reductions in nutrient export risk than a high in-stream decay rate, especially for P. High rates of in-stream decay and complete forest cover produced approximately equivalent reductions in N export risk for downstream subwatersheds.

Chesapeake Bay In-stream nutrient decay Modeling Nitrogen Phosphorus Pollution Watersheds 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alexander R.B., Smith R.A. and Schwarz G.E. 2001. The regional transport of nitrogen in surface waters: the effects of streams and reservoirs. Spring Meeting, May 29–June 2, 2001. Amer-ican Geophysical Union, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.Google Scholar
  2. Alexander R.B., Smith R.A. and Schwarz G.E. 2000. Effect of stream channel size on the delivery of nitrogen to the Gulf of Mexico. Nature 403: 758–761.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnold C.L. and Gibbons C.J. 1996. Impervious surface: the emergence of a key environmental indicator. Journal of the American Planning Association 62: 244–252.Google Scholar
  4. Bartell S.M., Gardner R.H. and O'Neill R.V. 1992. Ecological Risk Estimation. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, Michigan, USA.Google Scholar
  5. Beaulac M.N. and Reckhow K.H. 1982. An examination of land use–nutrient export relationships. Water Resources Bulletin 18: 1013–1024.Google Scholar
  6. Burns D.A. 1998. Retention of NO 3 in an upland stream environment: a mass balance approach. Biogeochemistry 40: 73–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clesceri N.L., Curran S.J. and Sedlak R.I. 1986. Nutrient loads in Wisconsin Lakes: part I. Nitrogen and phosphorous export co-efficients. Water Resources Bulletin 22: 983–989.Google Scholar
  8. DeWald T., Horn R., Greenspun R., Manning L., Taylor P. and Montalbano A. 1985. STORET Reach Retrieval Documentation. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  9. Dickerhoff Delwiche L.L. and Haith D.A. 1983. Loading functions for predicting nutrient losses from complex watersheds. Water Resources Bulletin 19: 951–959.Google Scholar
  10. Dillon P.J. and Kirchner W.B. 1975. The effects of geology and land use on the export of phosphorous from watersheds. Water Research 9: 135–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Donigian A.S., Bicknell B.R., Patwardan A.S., Linker L.C., Chang C. and Reynolds R. 1994. Chesapeake Bay Program Watershed Model Application to Calculate Bay Nutrient Loadings–Final Findings and Recommendations. Chesapeake Bay Program. CBP/TRS 157/96, EPA 903-R–94–042. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Annapolis, Maryland, USA.Google Scholar
  12. Fisher T.R., Lee K.Y., Berndt H., Benitez J.A. and Norton M.M. 1998. Hydrology and chemistry of the Choptank river basin. Water Air and Soil Pollution 105: 387–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Frink C.R. 1991. Estimating nutrient exports to estuaries. Journal of Environmental Quality 20: 717–724.Google Scholar
  14. Gardner R.H., Milne B.T., Turner M.G. and O'Neill R.V. 1987. Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape patterns. Landscape Ecology 1: 19–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gardner R.H. and Urban D.L. Model validation and testing: Past lessons, present concerns, future prospects. In: Canham C.D., Cole J.D. and Lauenroth W.K. (eds), The Role of Models in Ecosystem Science. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA (in press).Google Scholar
  16. Graham R.L., Hunsaker C.T., O'Neill R.V. and Jackson B.L. 1991. Ecological risk assessment at the regional scale. Ecological Applications 1: 196–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hartigan J.P., Quasenbarth T.F. and Southerland E. 1983. Calibration of NPS model loading factors. Journal of Environmental Engineering 109: 1259–1272.Google Scholar
  18. Hession W.C., Storm D.E., Haan C.T., Burks S.L. and Matlock M.D. 1996. A watershed-level ecological risk assessment methodology. Water Resources Bulletin 32: 1039–1054.Google Scholar
  19. Hill A.R. 1979. Denitrification in the nitrogen budget of a river ecosystem. Nature 281: 291–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hill A.R. 1981. Nitrate-nitrogen flux and utilization in a stream ecosystem during low summer flows. Canadian Geographer 35: 225–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jones K.B., Neale, A.C., Nash M.S., Van Remortel R.D., Wickham J.D., Riitters K.H. and O'Neill R.V. 2001. Predicting nutrient and sediment loadings to streams from landscape metrics: a multiple watershed study from the United States mid-Atlantic region. Landscape Ecology 16: 301–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jordan T.E., Correll D.L. and Weller D.E. 1997. Effects of agricul-ture on discharges of nutrients from coastal plain watersheds of the Chesapeake Bay. Journal of Environmental Quality 26: 836–848.Google Scholar
  23. Leopold L.B. and Maddock T. Jr 1953. The Hydraulic Geometry of Stream Channels and Some Physiographic Implications. US Geological Survey Professional Paper 252. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  24. Linker L.C., Stigall G.C., Chang C.H. and Donigian A.S. 1996. Aquatic accounting: Chesapeake Bay watershed model quantifies nutrient loads. Water Environment and Technology 8: 48–52.Google Scholar
  25. Loveland T.R. and Shaw D.M. 1996. Multi-resolution land characterization–building collaborative partnerships. In: Scott J.M., Tear T.H. and Davis F.W. (eds), GAP Analysis–A Landscape Approach to Biodiversity Planning. American Society of Pho-togrammetry and Remote Sensing, Bethesda, Maryland, USA, pp. 75–85.Google Scholar
  26. Lowrance R.R., Leaonard R.A. and Asmussen L.E. 1985. Nutrient budgets for agricultural watersheds in the southeastern coastal plain. Ecology 66: 287–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lucey K.J. and Goolsby D.A. 1993. Effects of climatic variations over 11 years on nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in the Racoon River, Iowa. Journal of Environmental Quality 22: 38–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Omernik J.M. 1977. Nonpoint Source–Stream Nutrient Relation-ships: A Nationwide Study. EPA/600/3–77–105. Environmental Research Laboratory, US Environmental Protection Agency, Corvallis, Oregon, USA.Google Scholar
  29. O'Neill R.V., Gardner R.H., Barnthouse L.W., Suter G.W., Hilde-brand S.G. and Gehrs C.W. 1982. Ecosystem risk analysis: a new methodology. Ecotoxicology and Chemistry 1: 167–177.Google Scholar
  30. Peterson B.J., Wollheim W.M., Mulholland P.J., Webster J.R., Meyer J.L., Tank J.L. et al. 2001. Control of nitrogen export from watersheds by headwater streams. Science 292: 80–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Preston E.M. and Bedford B.L. 1988. Evaluating cumulative effects on wetland functions: a conceptual overview and generic framework. Environmental Management 12: 656–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Preston S.D. and Brakebill J.W. 1999. Application of spatially referenced regression modeling for evaluation of total nitrogen loading in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. USGS Water-Resources Investigation Report 99–4054. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia, USA.Google Scholar
  33. Rast W. and Lee G.F. 1983. Nutrient loading estimates for lakes. Journal of Environmental Engineering 109: 503–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reckhow K.H., Beaulac M.N. and Simpson J.T. 1980. Modeling phosphorus loading and lake response under uncertainty: A manual and compilation of export coefficients. EPA/440/5–80/ 011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  35. Renard K.G., Foster G.R., Weesies G.A., McCool D.K. and Yoder D.C. 1997. A guide to conservation planning with the revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE). Agricultural Handbook No. 703. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  36. Reynolds J.F. and Wu J. 1999. Do landscape Structural and Functional Units Exist? In: Tenhunen J.D. and Kabat P. (eds), Integrating Hydrology, Ecosystem Dynamics, and Biogeochemistry in Complex Landscape. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, USA, pp. 273–296.Google Scholar
  37. Richards C. and Johnson L.B. 1998. Landscape perspectives on ecological risk assessment. In: Newman M.C. and Strojan C.L. (eds), Risk Assessment: Logic and Measurement. Ann Arbor Press, Chelsea, Michigan, USA, pp. 255–274.Google Scholar
  38. Risser P.G., Karr J.R. and Forman R.T.T. 1984. Landscape Ecology: Directions and Approaches. Special Publication Number 2. Illinois History Survey, Champaign, Illinois, USA.Google Scholar
  39. Seaber P.R., Kapinos F.P. and Knapp G.L. 1987. Hydrologic unit maps. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia, USA.Google Scholar
  40. Sjodin A.L., Lewis W.M. and Saunders J.F. 1997. Denitrification as a component of the nitrogen budget for a large plains river. Biogeochemistry 39: 327–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Smith R.A., Schwarz G.E. and Alexander R.B. 1997. Regional interpretation of water-quality monitoring data. Water Resources Research 33: 2781–2798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Suter G.W. 1993. Ecological Risk Assessment. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, Michigan, USA.Google Scholar
  43. U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA), National Resource Con-servation Service (NRCS) 2001. Federal standards for delinea-tion of hydrologic unit boundaries–06/12/01., Scholar
  44. Vogelmann J.E., Howard S.M., Yang L., Larson C.R., Wylie B.K. and Van Driel N. 2001. Completion of the 1990s National Land Cover Data Set for the Conterminous United States from Land-sat Thematic Mapper data and ancillary data sources. Photo grammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 67: 650–662.Google Scholar
  45. Wickham J.D., Jones K.B., Riitters K.H., Wade T.G. and O'Neill R.V. 1999. Transitions in forest fragmentation: implications for restoration opportunities at regional scales. Landscape Ecology 14: 137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wickham J.D., O'Neill, Riitters K.H., Smith E.R., Wade T.G. and Jones K.B. 2002. Geographic targeting of increases in nutrient export due to future urbanization. Ecological Applications 12: 93–106.Google Scholar
  47. Wickham J.D., Riitters K.H., O'Neill R.V., Reckhow K.H., Wade T.G. and Jones K.B. 2000. Land cover as a framework for as-sessing risk of water pollution. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 36: 1417–1422.Google Scholar
  48. Wickham J.D. and Wade T.G. 2002. Watershed level risk assess-ment of nitrogen and phosphorus export. Computers and Elec-tronics in Agriculture 37: 15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • James D. Wickham
    • 1
  • Timothy G. Wade
    • 1
  • Kurt H. Riitters
    • 2
  • R.V. O'Neill
    • 3
  • Jonathan H. Smith
    • 1
  • Elizabeth R. Smith
    • 1
  • K.B. Jones
    • 4
  • A.C. Neale
    • 4
  1. 1.National Exposure Research LaboratoryResearch Triangle ParkUSA
  2. 2.US Forest Service, Forestry Sciences LaboratoryResearch Triangle ParkUSA
  3. 3.O'Neill Inc.Oak RidgeUSA
  4. 4.National Exposure Research Laboratory, US EPALas VegasUSA

Personalised recommendations