JEQ Grow Your Career With ASA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (20)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Westerhoff, P.
Right arrow Articles by Esparza, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Westerhoff, P.
Right arrow Articles by Esparza, M.
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Westerhoff, P.
Right arrow Articles by Esparza, M.
Related Collections
Right arrow Water Quality
Right arrow Organic Compounds
Right arrow Water Pollution
Journal of Environmental Quality 30:2037-2046 (2001)
© 2001 American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America

TECHNICAL REPORT
Organic Compounds in the Environment

Fluorescence Analysis of a Standard Fulvic Acid and Tertiary Treated Wastewater

Paul Westerhoff*, Wen Chen and Mario Esparza

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Arizona State University, Box 5306, Tempe, AZ

* Corresponding author (p.westerhoff{at}asu.edu)

Received for publication July 2, 1999. Fluorescence measurements (emission scan, synchronous scan, and excitation–emission matrix [EEM] scan) were used to compare characteristics of two sources of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) from distinctly different origins: (i) a standard fulvic acid from the Suwannee River (SRF sample) and (ii) an unfractionated DOC sample from a tertiary wastewater treatment plant (MWW sample). Two methods were demonstrated that quantitatively differentiated allochthonous DOC (e.g., SRF) from autochthonous DOC (e.g., MWW). The MWW sample exhibited fluorescence peaks undetected in the SRF sample, at shorter wavelength pairs (e.g., 220 nm:300 to 350 nm) than the dominant peaks in the SRF sample (e.g., 220 nm:450 nm). These peaks may be associated with base or neutral fractions, potentially enriched in organic nitrogen. Effects of DOC concentration and solution pH were discussed. A simple procedure was recommended (pH = 3; DOC = 1 mg/L; dilution with 0.01 M KCl) that minimizes the need to correct spectra for inner-filter absorbance effects. A method, using synchronous fluorescence, to estimate the percentage of DOC from different sources when mixed together was also presented. Further work to understand the structural properties of DOC that fluoresce in wastewater samples, especially at shorter EEM wavelength pairs, will enable water managers to better understand the influence of wastewater on DOC in receiving waters (e.g., rivers, lakes).

Abbreviations: DOC, dissolved organic carbon • EEM, excitation–emission matrix • MWW, unfractionated dissolved organic carbon sample from a tertiary wastewater treatment plant • SRF, Suwannee River fulvic acid sample




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Soil Sci.Home page
T. Ohno and R. Bro
Dissolved Organic Matter Characterization Using Multiway Spectral Decomposition of Fluorescence Landscapes
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., October 27, 2006; 70(6): 2028 - 2037.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Vadose Zone Journal Journal of Plant Registrations
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Copyright © 2001 by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.