Water Treatment Residuals and Biosolids Coapplications Affect Semiarid Rangeland Phosphorus Cycling

Bayley, Robin; Ippolito, James A.; Stromberger, Mary E.; Barbarick, K. A.; Paschke, Mark W.

doi:10.2136/sssaj2007.0109

Cited by 18 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most studies that evaluated the impacts of P‐source and WTR additions on soil soluble P concentrations have focused on laboratory incubations (Dayton et al, 2003; Novak and Watts, 2004; Agyin‐Birikorang and O'Connor, 2007), column leaching studies (Elliott et al, 2002b; O'Connor et al, 2002), or indoor rainfall simulation studies with packed boxes (Agyin‐Birikorang et al, 2007). Some studies have evaluated WTR effectiveness in controlling excess soil soluble P under field conditions (Dayton and Basta, 2005a; Novak and Watts, 2005; Agyin‐Birikorang et al, 2007; Bayley et al, 2008). However, these studies examined the extent of soluble P reductions in soils, and no attempt was made to directly assess P concentrations of ground water due to WTR land application.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Drinking‐Water Treatment Residual in Controlling Off‐Site Phosphorus Losses: A Field Study in Florida

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Land application of drinking-water treatment residuals (WTR) has been shown to control excess soil soluble P and can reduce off-site P losses to surface and ground water. To our knowledge, no field study has directly evaluated the impacts of land application of WTRs on ground water quality. We monitored the effects of three organic sources of P (poultry manure, Boca Raton biosolids, Pompano biosolids) or triple superphosphate co-applied with an aluminum-based WTR (Al-WTR) on soil and ground water P and Al concentrations under natural field conditions for 20 mo in a soil with limited P sorption capacity. The P sources were applied at two rates (based on P or nitrogen [N] requirement of bahiagrass) with or without Al-WTR amendment and replicated three times. Without WTR application, applied P sources increased surface soil soluble P concentrations regardless of the P source or application rate. Co-applying the P sources with Al-WTR prevented increases in surface soil soluble P concentrations and reduced P losses to shallow ground water. Total dissolved P and orthophosphate concentrations of shallow well ground water of the N-based treatments were greater (>0.9 and 0.3 mg L(-1), respectively) in the absence than in the presence ( approximately 0.6 and 0.2 mg L(-1), respectively) of Al-WTR. The P-based application rate did not increase ground water P concentrations relative to background concentrations. Notwithstanding, Al-WTR amendment decreased ground water P concentrations from soil receiving treatments with P-based application rates. Ground water total dissolved Al concentrations were unaffected by soil Al-WTR application. We conclude that, at least for the study period, Al-WTR can be safely used to reduce P leaching into ground water without increasing the Al concentration of ground water.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Drinking‐Water Treatment Residual in Controlling Off‐Site Phosphorus Losses: A Field Study in Florida

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This amorphous alum results in very high specific surface area, enhancing binding kinetics (Lucas and Greenway, 2011a). This media amendment has proven effective in reducing interstitial phosphate (PO 4 ) concentrations in P‐enriched soils (Bayley et al, 2008). It is expected that as the freshness fades, the P binding capability of the amorphous alum will degrade significantly.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Isotherm experiments were conducted to estimate the equilibrium amount of P adsorbed onto the media surface as a function of its concentration in aqueous phase at a constant temperature. Although mesocosm experiments can simulate P removal under different conditions, determining the idealized maximum P adsorption capacity by media is best estimated by using an adsorption isotherm (Atkins, 1978), such as those described by Freundlich or Langmuir models (Goldberg, 2005). These empirical isotherms can be used to estimate the relative P removal by bioretention blends because P equilibrium concentration levels are relatively low in urban runoff (Harter and Baker, 1977).…”

Section: Isotherm Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Selected Bioretention Blends for Nutrient Retention Using Mesocosm Experiments

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study compares the performance of three bioretention media blends for N and P removal from simulated urban runoff in experimental mesocosms. TerraSolve, Biofilter, and "VT Mix" (Virginia Tech) were compared with and without vegetation at varying hydraulic residence times (HRTs). Adsorption isotherm experiments were also conducted. TerraSolve and VT Mix included water treatment residuals (WTRs), Biofilter and VT Mix included yard-waste compost (YWC), and TerraSolve included a mix of coir and peat. TerraSolve removed the highest amount of total P (>95%), which is attributed to the high quantity of WTRs. Results were similar for VT Mix, likely due to WTR content. Adsorption isotherms indicate a substantial difference due to this factor. Vegetative mesocosms were found to be less effective at P removal at an HRT of 6 to 12 h but not at an HRT of 24 h. VT Mix had the highest removal of total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), significantly different than the other blends. Interactive effects with vegetation were observed, generally improving TKN removal at all HRTs, with the highest at 24 h. Substantial export of nutrients when using compost was not observed. The addition of YWC appeared to increase N removal, possibly by denitrification. It is recommended that bioretention media contain <10% fines, a source of amorphous Al for P adsorption, at least 3 to 5% total organic C in the form of a low P, relatively stable compost, and a minimum concentration of plant-available nutrients for establishment of vegetation. For systems that use HRT, optimum residence time is influenced by media composition.

show abstract

“…Greater P content in the occluded phase represents greater P within retaining components or minerals (Evans and Syers 1971). Bayley et al (2008) studied short-and long-term Al-WTR applications to a shortgrass steppe rangeland soil, showing that Al-WTR contributed to increased P content in the occluded phase as well as the soluble + Al + Fe-bound phase. The authors suggested that these fractions were relatively stable over the long term (e.g., decadal) and thus possibly would be stable in the current system studied.…”

Section: Inorganic P Fractionationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aluminum-Based Water Treatment Residual Use in a Constructed Wetland for Capturing Urban Runoff Phosphorus: Column Study

Ippolito

2015

Water Air Soil Pollut

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aluminum-based water treatment residuals (Al-WTRs) have a strong affinity to sorb P. In a proofof-concept greenhouse column study, Al-WTR was surface-applied at rates equivalent to 0, 62, 124, and 248 Mg ha −1 to 15 cm of soil on top of 46 cm of sand;Al-WTR rates were estimated to capture 0, 10, 20, and 40 years of P from an urban watershed entering an engineered wetland in Boise, ID, USA. Creeping red fescue (Festuca rubra) was established in all columns; one set of columns received no Al-WTR or plants. After plant establishment, once per week over a 12-week period, ∼1.0 pore volumes of ∼0.20 mg P L −1 were added to each column. Infiltration rates were measured, leachate was collected and analyzed for soluble P, and fescue yield, P concentration, and uptake were determined. After plant harvest, the sand, soil, and the Al-WTR layer were collected and analyzed for Olsen P; amorphous Al, Fe, and P; P storage capacity (PSC); and soluble + Al + Fe-bound, occluded, and Ca-bound P phases. Infiltration rate increased only due to the presence of plants. Leached P decreased (50 %) with plants present; Al-WTR further reduced soluble P leaching losses (60 %). Fescue yield, P concentration, and uptake increased with increasing Al-WTR rate, due to Al-WTR sorbing and potentially making P more plant available; Olsen-extractable P increased with increasing Al-WTR rate, supporting this contention. The PSC was reduced with the 62 Mg ha −1 Al-WTR rate but maintained with greater Al-WTR rates. The 124 and 248 Mg ha −1 Al-WTR rates also contained greater P associated with the soluble + Al + Fe and occluded phases which should be stable over the long term (e.g., decadal). It was recommended to apply Al-WTR near the 124 and 248 Mg ha −1 rates in the future to capture urban runoff soluble P in the Boise, ID, engineered wetland.

show abstract

Water Treatment Residuals and Biosolids Coapplications Affect Semiarid Rangeland Phosphorus Cycling

Cited by 18 publications

References 30 publications

Efficacy of Drinking‐Water Treatment Residual in Controlling Off‐Site Phosphorus Losses: A Field Study in Florida

Efficacy of Drinking‐Water Treatment Residual in Controlling Off‐Site Phosphorus Losses: A Field Study in Florida

Assessment of Selected Bioretention Blends for Nutrient Retention Using Mesocosm Experiments

Aluminum-Based Water Treatment Residual Use in a Constructed Wetland for Capturing Urban Runoff Phosphorus: Column Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About