HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Related articles in JEQ Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (9) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kuang, Z. Articles by Tobash, S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kuang, Z. Articles by Tobash, S. Agricola Articles by Kuang, Z. Articles by Tobash, S. Related Collections Agricultural Pesticides Pesticides Air Pollution

TECHNICAL REPORTS

Atmospheric Pollutants and Trace Gases

Atmospheric Deposition of Pesticides to an Agricultural Watershed of the Chesapeake Bay

^a Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742
^b Environmental Quality Laboratory, USDA, Beltsville, MD 20705
^c Center for Environmental Science, University of Maryland, Horn Point Laboratory, Cambridge, MD 21613

^* Corresponding author (mcconnel{at}ba.ars.usda.gov).

Received for publication July 5, 2002. The Choptank River watershed, located on the Delmarva Peninsula of the Chesapeake Bay, is dominated by agricultural land use, which makes it vulnerable to runoff and atmospheric deposition of pesticides. Agricultural and wildlife areas are in close proximity and off-site losses of pesticides may contribute to toxic effects on sensitive species of plants and animals. High-volume air samples (n = 31) and event-based rain samples (n = 71) were collected from a single location in the watershed representing regional background conditions. Surface water samples were collected from eight stations in the tidal portion of the river on five occasions during 2000. Chlorothalonil, metolachlor, atrazine, simazine, endosulfan, and chlorpyrifos were frequently detected in the air and rain, with maximal concentrations during the period when local or regional crops were planted. The wet deposition load to the watershed was estimated at 150 ± 16, 61 ± 7, and 51 ± 6 kg yr^-1 for chlorothalonil, metolachlor, and atrazine, respectively. The high wet deposition load compared with the estimated annual usage for chlorothalonil (13%) and endosulfan (14–90%) suggests an atmospheric source from outside the watershed. Net air–water gas exchange fluxes for metolachlor varied from -44 ± 19 to 9.3 ± 4.1 ng m^-2 d^-1 with negative values indicating net deposition. Wet deposition accounted for 3 to 20% of the total metolachlor mass in the Choptank River and was a more important source to the river than gas exchange. Estimates of herbicide flux presented here are probably a low estimate and actual rates may be significantly higher in areas closer to pesticide application.

Abbreviations: HCH, hexachlorocylcohexane • MDL, method detection limit • PUF, polyurethane foam

Related articles in JEQ:

This Issue in Journal of Environmental Quality

JEQ 2003 32: 1577-1582. [Full Text]  

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. J. Gish, J. H. Prueger, W. P. Kustas, C.S.T. Daughtry, L. G. McKee, A. Russ, and J. L. Hatfield Soil Moisture and Metolachlor Volatilization Observations over Three Years J. Environ. Qual., July 23, 2009; 38(5): 1785 - 1795. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G.W. McCarty, L.L. McConnell, C.J. Hapeman, A. Sadeghi, C. Graff, W.D. Hively, M.W. Lang, T.R. Fisher, T. Jordan, C.P. Rice, et al. Water quality and conservation practice effects in the Choptank River watershed Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, November 1, 2008; 63(6): 461 - 474. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C M Villanueva, G Durand, M-B Coutte, C Chevrier, and S Cordier Atrazine in municipal drinking water and risk of low birth weight, preterm delivery, and small-for-gestational-age status Occup. Environ. Med., June 1, 2005; 62(6): 400 - 405. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]