Skip to main content
Log in

Eutrophication

Nitrate flux in the Mississippi River

  • Brief Communication
  • Published:

From Nature

View current issue Submit your manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 13 December 2001

Abstract

Increased delivery of biologically available nitrogen to estuaries and coastal oceans in recent decades has been linked to eutrophication and seasonal hypoxia in the northern Gulf of Mexico1,2 and elsewhere3,4. We have developed a model that accounts for 95% of annual variation in delivery of nitrate to the Gulf of Mexico by the Mississippi River in 1960–98. Retrospective analysis indicates that this nitrate flux could have been reduced by 33% if the use of nitrogen-containing fertilizer in the Mississippi River basin had been cut by 12%.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1: Observed nitrate flux in the lower Mississippi River, including the Old River outflow, in 1955–98 (diamonds) and nitrate flux estimated using our equation (see text; black line).

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Turner, R. E. & Rabalais, N. N. Nature 368, 619–621 (1994).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Rabalais, N. N., Turner, R. E., Justic, D., Dortch, Q. & Wiseman, W. J. NOAA Coastal Ocean Prog. Decision Anal. Ser. 15 (Silver Spring, Maryland, 1999).

  3. National Research Council` Clean Coastal Waters: Understanding and Reducing the Effects of Nutrient Pollution (Natl Acad. Press, Washington DC, 2000).

  4. Diaz, R. J. J. Environ. Qual. 30, 275–281 (2001).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Howarth, R. W. et al. Biogeochemistry 35, 75–139 (1996).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Jordan, T. E. & Weller, D. W. BioScience 46, 655–664 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Goolsby, D. A. & Battaglin, W. A. Hydrol. Proc. 15, 1209–1226 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Caraco, N. F. & Cole, J. J. Ambio 28, 167–170 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cerrato, M. E. & Blackmer, D. G. Agron. J. 82, 138–143 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bullock, D. G. & Bullock, D. S. Agron. J. 86, 191–195 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Legg, T. D., Fletcher, J. J. & Easter, K. W. J. Prod. Agric. 2, 110–116 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  12. US Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistic Service. Agricultural Chemical Usage (PCU-BB) http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/nassr/other/pcu-bb

  13. Taylor, H. H. Stat. Bull. 893 (Econ. Res. Service, US Dept Agric., Washington DC, 1994).

  14. Doering, O. C. et al. NOAA Coastal Ocean Prog. Decision Anal. Ser. 20 (Silver Spring, Maryland, 1999).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gregory F. McIsaac.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McIsaac, G., David, M., Gertner, G. et al. Nitrate flux in the Mississippi River. Nature 414, 166–167 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1038/35102672

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/35102672

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Navigation