Denitrification during infiltration for managed aquifer recharge: Infiltration rate controls and microbial response

Gorski, Galen; Dailey, Hannah; Fisher, A. T.; Schrad, Nicole; Saltikov, Chad W.

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138642

Cited by 26 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…swamps, marshes, floodplains, etc.). The ecosystem level is where ecological experimentation and in situ emissions can be recorded (Gorski et al, 2020;Qin et al, 2017;Seitzinger, 1994). Integrating wetlands ecosystems to a landscape or watershed (10 4 m), information regarding input and output fluxes, pollution sources, origin of the organic matter, time of residence and spatial distribution of processes can be understood.…”

Section: Abstract: Denitrification; Denitrification Modelling Denitrification Wetlandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Denitrification in wetlands: A review towards a quantification at global scale

Martínez-Espinosa

Sauvage

Bitar

et al. 2021

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research to understand the nitrogen cycle has been thriving. The production of reactive nitrogen by humans exceeds the removal capacity through denitrification of any natural ecosystem. The surplus of reactive nitrogen is also a significant pollutant that can shift biological diversity and distribution, promotes eutrophication in aquatic ecosystems, and affects human health. Denitrification is the microbial respiration in anoxic conditions and is the main process that removes definitively nitrates from the ecosystem by returning of reactive nitrogen (Nr) to the atmosphere as N 2 and N 2 O emissions. This process occurs in the oceans, aquatic ecosystems and temporary flooded terrestrial ecosystems. Wetlands ecosystems are rich in organic matter and they have regular anoxic soil conditions ideal for denitrification to occur. In the current paper, we provide a meta-analysis that aims at exploring how research around global nitrogen, denitrification and wetlands had evolved in the last fifty years. Back in the time, wetland ecosystems were seen as non-exploitable elements of the landscape, and now they are being integrated as providers of ecosystem services. A significant improvement of molecular biology techniques and genetic extraction have made the denitrification process fully understood allowing constructed wetlands to be more efficient and popular. Yet, large uncertainties remain concerning the dynamic quantification of the global denitrification capacity of natural wetland ecosystems. The contribution of the current investigation is to provide a way forward for reducing these uncertainties by the integration of satellite-based Earth Observation (EO) technology with parsimonious physical based models.

show abstract

Section: Abstract: Denitrification; Denitrification Modelling Denitrification Wetlandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Denitrification in wetlands: A review towards a quantification at global scale

Martínez-Espinosa

Sauvage

Bitar

et al. 2021

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, in situ amendments for infiltration basins have been proposed, including addition of carbon sources (e.g., wood chips) to create a horizontal permeable reactive barrier and promote denitrifying conditions. − These studies focus on nitrate removal from recharge water during infiltration and associated shifts in microbial community structure. While nitrate is a primary contaminant, preventing nitrate from reaching deeper groundwater supplies can also minimize the potential for oxidation of reduced immobile geogenic contaminant phases (e.g., arsenian pyrite, uraninite) limiting mobilization potential along the flow path.…”

Section: Water Quality Considerations For the Future Of Marmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilization of Arsenic and Other Naturally Occurring Contaminants during Managed Aquifer Recharge: A Critical Review

Fakhreddine

Prommer

Scanlon

et al. 2021

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Population growth and climate variability highlight the need to enhance freshwater security and diversify water supplies. Subsurface storage of water in depleted aquifers is increasingly used globally to alleviate disparities in water supply and demand often caused by climate extremes including floods and droughts. Managed aquifer recharge (MAR) stores excess water supplies during wet periods via infiltration into shallow underlying aquifers or direct injection into deep aquifers for recovery during dry seasons. Additionally, MAR can be designed to improve recharge water quality, particularly in the case of soil aquifer treatment and riverbank filtration. While there are many potential benefits to MAR, introduction of recharge water can alter the native geochemical and hydrological conditions in the receiving aquifer, potentially mobilizing toxic, naturally occurring (geogenic) contaminants from sediments into groundwater where they pose a much larger threat to human and ecosystem health. On the basis of the present literature, arsenic poses the most widespread challenge at MAR sites due to its ubiquity in subsurface sediments and toxicity at trace concentrations. Other geogenic contaminants of concern include fluoride, molybdenum, manganese, and iron. Water quality degradation threatens the viability of some MAR projects with several sites abandoning operations due to arsenic or other contaminant mobilization. Here, we provide a critical review of studies that have uncovered the geochemical and hydrological mechanisms controlling mobilization of arsenic and other geogenic contaminants at MAR sites worldwide, including both infiltration and injection sites. These mechanisms were evaluated based on site-specific characteristics, including hydrological setting, native aquifer geochemistry, and operational site parameters (e.g., source of recharge water and recharge/recovery cycling). Observed mechanisms of geogenic contaminant mobilization during MAR via injection include shifting redox conditions and, to a lesser extent, pH-promoted desorption, mineral solubility, and competitive ligand exchange. The relative importance of these mechanisms depends on various site-specific, operational parameters, including pretreatment of injection water and duration of injection, storage, and recovery phases. This critical review synthesizes findings across case studies in various geochemical, hydrological, and operational settings to better understand controls on arsenic and other geogenic contaminant mobilization and inform the planning and design of future MAR projects to protect groundwater quality. This critical review concludes with an evaluation of proposed management strategies for geogenic contaminants and identification of knowledge gaps regarding fate and transport of geogenic contaminants during MAR.

show abstract

Section: Study Objectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Elevated initial nitrate concentrations ($10-15 mg/L) and low soil carbon were commonly associated in the PVDB with areas of intensive agricultural activity, especially where there are sandy, well-drained soils. This suggests that augmenting sandy soils with a bioavailable carbon source could help to reduce both nitrate concentrations and associated loads and exported to underlying aquifers (Beganskas et al, 2018;Gorski et al, 2019Gorski et al, , 2020. Ongoing studies should help to resolve the nature of these emergent relationships and allow testing of carefully managed MAR operations at scale.…”

Section: Modelling Denitrification Across a Hydrologic Basinmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This study leverages the previously published measurements of nitrate removal during infiltration from four sites within the PVDB (Figure 1a). Compiled data were collected using three different experimental methods: (1) laboratory experiments (Gorski et al, 2020), (2) field infiltration studies (Beganskas et al, 2018; Gorski et al, 2019), and (3) observations from an operational MAR facility (Schmidt et al, 2011), all measuring nitrate removal during infiltration. Data from the different sites and collection methods are synthesized to develop a generalized spatial model of potential nitrate removal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The potential for nitrate removal during infiltration: Mapping with machine learning informed by field and laboratory experiments

Gorski

Fisher

Dailey³

et al. 2022

Hydrological Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Managed aquifer recharge (MAR) can increase groundwater supply and, under some conditions, improve groundwater quality simultaneously. However, the conditions under which water quality improvements can be achieved during infiltration for MAR have not been systematically examined in a spatially explicit manner. This work aims to address that gap by synthesizing observations from laboratory tests, field experiments and operational facilities at four MAR sites within the Pajaro Valley, California, USA to develop a predictive model of nitrate removal during infiltration. We compare two machine learning approaches; random forest and boosted regression trees, to multiple linear regression. The preferred model uses boosted regression trees, with four predictor variables (initial nitrate concentration of infiltrating water, residence time in the soil, soil organic carbon content, and soil percent clay). We apply this model to simulate the spatial distribution of potential nitrate removal (NRp) across a heterogeneous and mixed‐use landscape, finding that >87% of the region has the potential to remove nitrate during infiltration. To link potential nitrate removal capacity to available water for MAR, we combine a map of NRp with independently simulated hillslope runoff, and find that potential load reduction is highest in urban areas (median = 18.8 kg‐N/yr) where large runoff volumes are collocated with soils having high nutrient cycling capacity compared to forested and agricultural areas (median = 1.6 and 3.5 kg‐N/yr, respectively). We analyse potential load reduction across dry, normal, and wet precipitation scenarios, which shows that urban areas have the potential to yield large load reductions (median = 11.3 kg‐N/yr) even under relatively dry conditions. However, much of the generation of elevated nitrate in runoff is associated with agricultural activity. These results suggest that the urban–agricultural interface represents a crucial link between hydrologic and biogeochemical cycles where water supply and quality goals may be met simultaneously. The technical approach used in this study is highly flexible and can help guide decisions in resource management and identify promising MAR sites. More broadly, this approach also elucidates heterogeneity in biogeochemical cycling across complex landscapes.

show abstract

Denitrification during infiltration for managed aquifer recharge: Infiltration rate controls and microbial response

Cited by 26 publications

References 49 publications

Denitrification in wetlands: A review towards a quantification at global scale

Denitrification in wetlands: A review towards a quantification at global scale

Mobilization of Arsenic and Other Naturally Occurring Contaminants during Managed Aquifer Recharge: A Critical Review

The potential for nitrate removal during infiltration: Mapping with machine learning informed by field and laboratory experiments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About