Faecal contamination of watercourses from farm waste disposal for three sites in the UK with contrasting soil types

Deeks, Lynda K.; McHugh, Marianne; Owens, Philip N.

doi:10.1111/j.1475-2743.2005.tb00127.x

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, the casual collectors and those they supplyshould be as safe from infectious disease as are the exportc ustomers.A pplying fairly unsophisticated sanitary surveys alone, right up to monitoring on aregular basisfor the right indicator in the right milieu -fl esh or water -u sing best available analyticalt echniques, all on ac onsistent basis, should be ac ommon goal. Wyer et al 1994;Wyer et al 1996;Wyer et al 1997;Jagals et al 1995;Cook et al 1996;Aitken et al 2001;D'Arcy and Frost 2001;Shreeram and Mostaghimi 2002;Vinten et al 2002;Vinten et al 2004a;Vinten et al 2004b;Avery et al 2004;Benedict and Neumann 2004;Davies-Colley et al 2004;Deeks et al 2005;. Detailedc onsideration of this aspectw as undertaken at af urther expert consultation in Annapolis, USA which led to the 'AnnapolisP rotocol' ( WHO 1999).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safe Management of Shellfish and Harvest Waters

Rees¹

2013

wio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The World Health Organization wishes to express its appreciation to all those whose efforts madethe production of this monographpossible. An international group of experts met in Kuala Lumpa, Malaysia and from that meeting provided the material for the book and undertook ap rocess of mutual review.W hile authorship of individual chaptersi sn otedb elow, the quality of the volume as aw hole is due in large part to the review and comments provided by many individuals. Intellectual input and review by the following individuals is gratefully acknowledged:

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safe Management of Shellfish and Harvest Waters

Rees¹

2013

wio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Grazing intensity is a poor indicator of waterborne Escherichia coli O157 activity

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation of contrasting buffer features within an agricultural landscape for reducing sediment and sediment‐associated phosphorus delivery to surface waters

Owens

Duzant

Deeks

et al. 2007

Soil Use and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are a variety of buffering features within the landscape that can be used to trap sediment and associated contaminants such as phosphorus (P), thereby helping to reduce sediment and P delivery to watercourses. Astroturf mats (n = 136) were placed within contrasting buffer features at nine sites [mid-field hedges (two sites), edge-of-field grass strips (six sites) and channel wetlands (one site)] within the River Parrett basin in England. Sediment was recorded on the mats at seven of the sites during the 18-month sampling period. At the other two sites either there was insufficient erosion or sediment by-passed the mats. At the seven sites where mats collected sediment, there was a considerable range in sediment deposition over the 18-month sampling period with site-average values (based on all mats at a site) ranging from 0.02 ± 0.06 to 1.15 ± 1.88 g cm )2 ; the average for all 136 mats was 0.41 ± 1.08 g cm )2 , or approximately 0.27 g cm )2 year )1 . Most of the sediment collected on the mats (n = 60) was sand-sized (>63 lm) material. The site-average total-P content of the <63 lm fraction of the deposited sediment ranged between 616 and 1938 mg kg )1 (average 890 mg kg )1 ). About half of all the mats that collected sediment were from the front of the buffers. Comparison of the sediment in the buffer features with topsoil from the contributing upslope fields suggests that the buffers trap coarser sediment with lower P concentrations, than the contributing topsoil. This suggests that the finer fraction, enriched in total-P, may be passing through the buffers towards river channels. Comparison between sites indicates that sediment deposition within buffers is greater at sites with steeper slopes, erodible soils and certain types of land use, such as maize for silage, reflecting the greater soil erosion and sediment transfers in these fields. The location and careful design of buffer features is a key factor in their effectiveness.

show abstract

Faecal contamination of watercourses from farm waste disposal for three sites in the UK with contrasting soil types

Cited by 3 publications

References 10 publications

Safe Management of Shellfish and Harvest Waters

Safe Management of Shellfish and Harvest Waters

Grazing intensity is a poor indicator of waterborne Escherichia coli O157 activity

Evaluation of contrasting buffer features within an agricultural landscape for reducing sediment and sediment‐associated phosphorus delivery to surface waters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About