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

This Article Abstract 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 ISI 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 ISI Web of Science (6) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Gérard-Marchant, P. Articles by Steenhuis, T. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Gérard-Marchant, P. Articles by Steenhuis, T. S. Agricola Articles by Gérard-Marchant, P. Articles by Steenhuis, T. S. Related Collections Animal Waste Surface Water Quality Phosphorus

Simple Models for Phosphorus Loss from Manure during Rainfall

Department of Biological and Environmental Engineering, Cornell University, Riley-Robb Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-5701

View larger version (41K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Cumulative dissolved total P leached from manures and composts with time. Values are expressed as percentage of total water-extractable phosphorus (WEP). Data from Sharpley and Moyer (2000). (a) Comparison of first-order (dashed lines) and second-order (solid lines) kinetic models. (b) Comparison of power function (dashed lines) and Elovitch (solid lines) relationships.

View larger version (28K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Comparison between Sharpley and Moyer's (2000) observed water-extractable phosphorus (WEP) in the manure and fitted parameter M0 for the first- and second-order kinetic models, and the parameter for the Elovitch model. The dashed lines are the best-fit linear regressions lines. The solid line is the 1:1 line.

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Comparison of Muck's (1978) observed orthophosphate release from the manure data (symbols) and predictions using the first- (dashed lines) and second-order models (solid lines) for different flow rates and an aggregate size of 4.75 mm.

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Comparison between the estimates of characteristic time for each model, applied to the Muck (1978) experimental data: (a) relative to experimental flow rates and (b) relative to aggregate sizes. Open symbols are first-order results; solid symbols are second-order results; dashed line is regression for first-order results; solid line is the regression for second-order results. Error bars are ±95% confidence interval.