2021
DOI: 10.1111/fwb.13833
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of nitrogen removal from wastewater on phytoplankton in eutrophic prairie streams

Abstract: Biological nutrient removal (BNR) may be an effective strategy to reduce eutrophication; however, concerns remain about effects on receiving waters of removing both nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P), rather than P alone. Phytoplankton abundance (as µg chlorophyll a/L) and community composition (as nmol biomarker pigment/L) were quantified over 6 years in two connected eutrophic streams to determine how algae and cyanobacteria varied in response to a shift from tertiary (P removal) to BNR (N and P removal) waste… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 80 publications
(170 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…DOC and DIC were analyzed using standard analytic procedures on a Shimadzu model 5000 A total carbon analyzer (Finlay et al, 2009;Webb et al, 2019b). Dissolved nitrogen (TDN, NO x , NH 3 ) and dissolved phosphorus (TDP, SRP) were measured using standard procedures on a Lachat QuikChem 8,500 (APHA-AWWA/WEF 1998; Bergbusch et al, 2021). Chl-a concentration was standard trichromatic spectrophotometric methods (Jeffrey and Humphrey 1975;Finlay et al, 2009).…”
Section: Laboratory Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…DOC and DIC were analyzed using standard analytic procedures on a Shimadzu model 5000 A total carbon analyzer (Finlay et al, 2009;Webb et al, 2019b). Dissolved nitrogen (TDN, NO x , NH 3 ) and dissolved phosphorus (TDP, SRP) were measured using standard procedures on a Lachat QuikChem 8,500 (APHA-AWWA/WEF 1998; Bergbusch et al, 2021). Chl-a concentration was standard trichromatic spectrophotometric methods (Jeffrey and Humphrey 1975;Finlay et al, 2009).…”
Section: Laboratory Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Water quality in effluent-dependent streams can be quite different from that in natural streams ( Brooks, Riley & Taylor, 2006 ; Hamdhani, Eppehimer & Bogan, 2020 ; Nikel et al, 2021 ). Differences noted in effluent-dominated and effluent-dependent streams include elevated values for water temperatures ( Boyle & Fraleigh, 2003 ; Canobbio et al, 2009 ) and nutrient levels, such as nitrate ( Hur et al, 2007 ; Chen et al, 2009 ), ammonium/ammonia ( Gafny, Goren & Gasith, 2000 ; Bergbusch et al, 2021 ), and phosphate ( Birge et al, 1989 ; Chen et al, 2009 ). Additionally, lower dissolved oxygen levels are frequently observed in stream reaches closest to effluent outfalls ( Birge et al, 1989 ; Matamoros & Rodríguez, 2017 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The global degradation of fresh waters through eutrophication and the proliferation of toxic cyanobacterial blooms is often attributable to excessive nutrient loading (Glibert, 2020; Paerl et al., 2016; Taranu et al., 2015). As a result, eutrophication‐ and bloom‐mitigation strategies have attempted to reduce nutrient inputs to lakes, succeeding primarily when improved water‐treatment infrastructure has regulated discrete nutrient inputs (Bergbusch et al., 2021; Hamilton et al., 2016; Schindler et al., 2016). By contrast, diffuse nutrient sources are more difficult to regulate, in part owing to the large spatial scales of some biogeochemical disturbances (e.g., agriculture), and potential effects of intervening waterbodies on transmission of nutrients to downstream lakes (Bunting et al., 2016; Donald et al., 2015; Maheaux et al., 2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%