JEQ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online 20 April 2005
Published in J Environ Qual 34:872-876 (2005)
DOI: 10.2134/jeq2003.0097
© 2005 American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
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 Related articles in JEQ
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 (6)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gérard-Marchant, P.
Right arrow Articles by Steenhuis, T. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gérard-Marchant, P.
Right arrow Articles by Steenhuis, T. S.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Gérard-Marchant, P.
Right arrow Articles by Steenhuis, T. S.
Related Collections
Right arrow Animal Waste
Right arrow Surface Water Quality
Right arrow Phosphorus

Simple Models for Phosphorus Loss from Manure during Rainfall

Pierre Gérard-Marchant, M. Todd Walter and Tammo S. Steenhuis*

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 {alpha} 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 {tau} 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.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Vadose Zone Journal
Soil Science Society of America Journal Journal of Plant Registrations The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2005 by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.