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
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 (15)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McIsaac, G. F.
Right arrow Articles by Goolsby, D. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McIsaac, G. F.
Right arrow Articles by Goolsby, D. A.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by McIsaac, G. F.
Right arrow Articles by Goolsby, D. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Surface Water Quality
Right arrow Watershed and Landscape Processes
Right arrow Nutrient Cycling
Right arrow Nitrogen
Journal of Environmental Quality 31:1610-1622 (2002)
© 2002 American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America

TECHNICAL REPORTS
Landscape and Watershed Processes

Relating Net Nitrogen Input in the Mississippi River Basin to Nitrate Flux in the Lower Mississippi River

A Comparison of Approaches

Gregory F. McIsaac*,a, Mark B. Davida, George Z. Gertnera and Donald A. Goolsbyb

a University of Illinois, Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, W-503 Turner Hall, 1102 S. Goodwin Ave., Urbana, IL 61801
b United States Geological Survey, Denver Federal Center, MS 406, Denver, CO 80225

* Corresponding author (gmcisaac{at}uiuc.edu)

Received for publication November 16, 2001. A quantitative understanding of the relationship between terrestrial N inputs and riverine N flux can help guide conservation, policy, and adaptive management efforts aimed at preserving or restoring water quality. The objective of this study was to compare recently published approaches for relating terrestrial N inputs to the Mississippi River basin (MRB) with measured nitrate flux in the lower Mississippi River. Nitrogen inputs to and outputs from the MRB (1951 to 1996) were estimated from state-level annual agricultural production statistics and NOy (inorganic oxides of N) deposition estimates for 20 states that comprise 90% of the MRB. A model with water yield and gross N inputs accounted for 85% of the variation in observed annual nitrate flux in the lower Mississippi River, from 1960 to 1998, but tended to underestimate high nitrate flux and overestimate low nitrate flux. A model that used water yield and net anthropogenic nitrogen inputs (NANI) accounted for 95% of the variation in riverine N flux. The NANI approach accounted for N harvested in crops and assumed that crop harvest in excess of the nutritional needs of the humans and livestock in the basin would be exported from the basin. The U.S. White House Committee on Natural Resources and Environment (CENR) developed a more comprehensive N budget that included estimates of ammonia volatilization, denitrification, and exchanges with soil organic matter. The residual N in the CENR budget was weakly and negatively correlated with observed riverine nitrate flux. The CENR estimates of soil N mineralization and immobilization suggested that there were large (2000 kg N ha-1) net losses of soil organic N between 1951 and 1996. When the CENR N budget was modified by assuming that soil organic N levels have been relatively constant after 1950, and ammonia volatilization losses are redeposited within the basin, the trend of residual N closely matched temporal variation in NANI and was positively correlated with riverine nitrate flux in the lower Mississippi River. Based on results from applying these three modeling approaches, we conclude that although the NANI approach does not address several processes that influence the N cycle, it appears to focus on the terms that can be estimated with reasonable certainty and that are correlated with riverine N flux.

Abbreviations: CENR, Committee on Natural Resources and Environment • MRB, Mississippi River basin • NANI, net anthropogenic nitrogen input • NNI, net nitrogen input




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Environ. Qual.Home page
X. Hu, G. F. McIsaac, M. B. David, and C. A. L. Louwers
Modeling Riverine Nitrate Export from an East-Central Illinois Watershed Using SWAT
J. Environ. Qual., May 25, 2007; 36(4): 996 - 1005.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Agron. J.Home page
M. P. Russelle and A. S. Birr
Large-Scale Assessment of Symbiotic Dinitrogen Fixation by Crops: Soybean and Alfalfa in the Mississippi River Basin
Agron. J., November 1, 2004; 96(6): 1754 - 1760.
[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 © 2002 by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.