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 Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Larsbo, M. Articles by Stamm, C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Larsbo, M. Articles by Stamm, C. Agricola Articles by Larsbo, M. Articles by Stamm, C. Related Collections Pharmaceuticals Uncertainty Analysis Solute Transport Models Vadose Zone Processes and Chemical Transport

Simulating Sulfadimidine Transport in Surface Runoff and Soil at the Microplot and Field Scale

^a Swiss Federal Inst. for Aquatic Science and Technology (Eawag), Ueberlandstrasse 133, CH-8600 Duebendorf, Switzerland
^b current address: Dep. of Soil Sciences, Swedish Univ. of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), P.O. Box 7014, 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
^c Institute of Biogeochemistry and Pollutant Dynamics, Swiss Federal Inst. of Technology (ETH), Universitätsstrasse 16, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland
^d RCC, Ltd., Zelgliweg 1, 4452 Itigen, Switzerland

View larger version (16K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Simulated results compared with measured runoff volumes at 15-min intervals. (a) Control plots. (b) Manured plots. The best simulation is the simulation with the highest posterior probability.

View larger version (16K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Simulated results compared with measured bromide concentrations in runoff. (a) Control plots. (b) Manured plots. The best simulation is the simulation with the highest posterior probability.

View larger version (19K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Simulated results compared with measured bromide concentrations in soil pore water. (a) Control plots. (b) Manured plots. The best simulation is the simulation with the highest posterior probability.

View larger version (15K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Simulated results compared with measured sulfadimidine concentrations on manured plots. (a) Runoff. (b) Soil pore water. The best simulation is the simulation with the highest posterior probability.

View larger version (20K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Measured and simulated losses from the fields. (a) Measured losses and precipitation. (b) Uncertainty interval for simulated sulfadimidine losses for the drainage scenario. (c) Uncertainty interval for simulated sulfadimidine losses for the runoff scenario. Note the different scales and units on the y axes. The uncertainty intervals are defined by the 2.5th and the 97.5th percentiles.

View larger version (15K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Measured values and simulated uncertainty intervals for pore water concentrations. The uncertainty intervals are defined by the 2.5th and the 97.5th percentiles.