Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Biogeochemical storm response in agricultural watersheds of the Choptank River Basin, Delmarva Peninsula, USA

  • Published:
Biogeochemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Stream discharge and chemistry (total suspended solids TSS, nitrogen N, and phosphorus P) were monitored for 15 months in six agricultural watersheds on the U.S. Mid-Atlantic coastal plain. Watersheds with similar land uses and a range of hydric soils were used to test the hypothesis that hydric soils generate large storm discharges due to low permeability, resulting in watershed areas with high loss rates of N, P, and TSS. To test the hypothesis, discharge was monitored continuously, and a flow separation method quantified the base and stormflow contributions. Another primary goal was to measure base and stormflow chemistry to quantify N, P, and TSS export. Baseflow chemistry was monitored monthly, and 31 storm events were sampled. Baseflow chemistry varied little over the 15 months, but stormflow chemistry was dynamic, with three major patterns: (1) TSS and particulate N and P had large, brief peaks during the rising limb of storm hydrographs; (2) phosphate and ammonium had broader peaks close to maximum discharges; and (3) nitrate concentrations decreased during the rising limb, slowly returning to pre-storm levels. Event water yields were correlated with volume-weighted mean concentrations (VWMs) of N, P, and TSS, providing a basis for estimating VWMs of unsampled events. Export coefficients (kg ha−1 year−1) ranged over 22–33 for TN, 0.9–1.4 for TP, and 240–1140 for TSS. Most P and TSS export occurred during storms (71–99%), while most N export occurred during baseflow (52–84%). The discharge data did not support the hypothesis, and watershed slope, not hydric soils, was the major control on storm discharge. Surface ponding of water on hydric soils intercepted runoff, reducing the impacts of the low infiltration rates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aguilera R, Melack JM (2018) Concentration-discharge responses to storm events in coastal California watersheds. Water Resour Res 54:407–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akaike H (1973) Information theory as an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Petroy BN, Csaki F (eds) Second international symposium on information theory. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest, pp 267–281

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen JM (1976) An ignition method for determination of total phosphorus in lake sediments. Water Res 10:329–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basu NB, Destouni G, Jawitz JW, Thompson SE, Loukinova NV, Darracq A, Zanardo S, Yaeger M, Sivapalan M, Rinaldo A, Rao PSC (2010) Nutrient loads exported from managed catchments reveal emergent biogeochemical stationarity. Geophys Res Lett 37:L23404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckert KA, Fisher TR, O’Neil JM, Jesien RV (2011) Characterization and comparison of stream nutrients, land use, and loading patterns in Maryland Coastal Bay watersheds. Water Air Soil Pollut 221:255–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buffam IJN, Galloway L, Blum K, McGlathery KJ (2001) A stormflow/baseflow comparison of dissolved organic matter concentrations and bioavailability in an Appalachian stream. Biogeochemistry 53:269–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodal inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Casson, JP, Olson BM, Little JL, Nolan SC (2008) Assessment of environmental sustainability in Alberta’s AgriculturalWatersheds Project, vol 4. Nitrogen loss in surface runoff. Alberta Agricultural and Rural Development, Lethbridge

  • Chanat JG, Rice KC, Hornberger GM (2002) Consistency of patterns in concentration-discharge plots. Water Res Res 38:22-1–22-10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Correll DL, Jordan TE, Weller DE (1995) Livestock and pasture land effects on the water quality. In: Steele K (ed) Animal waste and the land–water interface. Lewis Publisher, New York, pp 107–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Correll DL, Jordan TE, Weller DE (1999) Transport of nitrogen and phosphorus from Rhode River watersheds during storm events. Water Resour Res 35:2513–2521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denver JM, Ator SW, Debrewer LM, Farrari J, Barbaro JR, Hancock TC, Brayton MJ, Nardi MR (2004) water Quality in the Delmarva Peninsula, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia, 1999–2001. USGS Circular 1228

  • Federal Register (1994) Changes in hydric soils of the United States, vol 59(33). Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington DC

  • Fisher TR, Lee KY, Berndt H, Benitez JA, Norton MM (1998) Hydrology and chemistry of the Choptank River Basin. Water Air Soil Pollut 105:387–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher TR, Hagy JD, Boynton WR, Williams MR (2006) Cultural eutrophication in the Choptank and Patuxent estuaries of Chesapeake Bay. Limnol Oceanogr 51:435–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher TR, Jordan TE, Staver KW, Gustafson AB, Koskelo AI, Fox RJ, Sutton AJ, Kana T, Beckert KA, Stone JP, McCarty G, Lang M (2010) The Choptank Basin in transition: intensifying agriculture, slow urbanization, and estuarine eutrophication. In: Kennish MJ, Paerl HW (eds), Coastal lagoons: systems of natural and anthropogenic change. CRC Press, pp 135-165

  • Focazio MJ, Cooper RE (1995) Selected characteristics of stormflow and baseflow affected by land use and cover in the Chickahominy River Basin, Virginia, 1989–1991. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Res. Invest. Rep. 94-4225

  • GOM Watershed Nutrient Task Force (2001) Action plan for reducing, mitigating, and controlling hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico. https://www.epa.gov/ms-htf/hypoxia-task-force-2001-action-plan

  • Fox RJ, Fisher TR, Gustafson AB, Jordan TE, Kana TM, Lang MW (2014) Searching for the missing nitrogen: biogenic nitrogen gases in groundwater and streams. J Agric Sci 152:S96–S106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gachter R, Steingruber SM, Reinhardt M, Wehrli B (2004) Nutrient transfer from soil to surface waters: differences between nitrate and phosphate. Aquat Sci 66:117–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Hidalgo JC, Batalla RJ, Cerda A (2013) Catchment size and contribution of the largest daily events to suspended sediment load on a continental scale. CATENA 102:40–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groffman PM, Bain DJ, Band LE, Belt KT, Brush GS, Grove JM, Pouyat RV, Yesilonis IC, Zipperer WC (2003) Down by the riverside: urban riparian ecology. Front Ecol Environ 1:315–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haggard BE, Moore PA Jr, Brye KR (2005) Effect of slope on runoff from a small variable slope box-plot. J Environ Hydrol 13:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton PA, Denver JM, Phillips PJ, Shedlock RJ (1993) Water-quality assessment of the Delmarva Peninsula, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia—effects of agricultural activities on, and distribution of, nitrate and other inorganic constituents in the surficial aquifer. US Geological Survey Open-File Report 93-40

  • Harlin JM (1984) Watershed morphometry and time to hydrograph peak. J Hydrol 67:141–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins KG, Morse NB, Bain DJ, Bettez ND, Grimm NB, Morse JL, Palta MM, Shuster WD, Bratt AR, Suchy AK (2015) Assessment of regional variation in streamflow responses to urbanization and the persistence of physiography. Environ Sci Technol 49:2724–2732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopp L, McDonnell JJ (2009) Connectivity at the hillslope scale: identifying interactions between storm size, bedrock permeability, slope angle, and soil depth. J Hydrol 376:378–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan TE, Correll DL, Weller DE (1997a) Effects of agriculture on discharges of nutrients from coastal plain watersheds of Chesapeake Bay. J Environ Qual 26:836–848

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan TE, Correll DL, Weller DE (1997b) Nonpoint source discharges of nutrients from Piedmont watersheds of Chesapeake Bay. J Am Water Resour Assoc 33:631–645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan TE, Correll DL, Weller DE (1997c) Relating nutrient discharges from watersheds to landuse and streamflow variability. Water Res Res 33:2579–2590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp WM, Boynton WR, Adolf JE, Boesch DF, Boicourt WC, Brush G, Cornwell JC, Fisher TR, Glibert PM, Hagy JD, Harding LW, Houde ED, Kimmel DG, Miller WD, Newell RIE, Roman MR, Smith EM, Stevenson JC (2005) Eutrophication of Chesapeake Bay: historical trends and ecological interactions. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 303:1–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline KM, Eshleman KN, Morgan RP, Castro NM (2007) Analysis of trends in episodic acidification of streams in western Maryland. Environ Sci Technol 41:5601–5607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koskelo AI (2008) Hydrologic and biogeochemical storm response in Choptank Basin headwaters. Master’s Thesis, University of Maryland

  • Koskelo AI, Fisher TR, Utz R, Jordan TE (2012) A new precipitation-based method of baseflow separation and event identification for small watersheds (< 50 km2). J Hydrol 450–451:267–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhnle RA, Bingner RL, Foster GR, Grissinger EH (1996) Effect of land use changes on sediment transport. Water Resour Res 32:3189–3196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee KY, Fisher TR, Rochelle-Newall E (2001) Modeling the hydrochemistry of the Choptank River Basin using GWLF and Arc/Info: 2. Model validation and application. Biogeochemistry 56:311–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarty GW, McConnell LL, Hapeman CJ, Sadeghi A, Graff C, Hively WD, Lang MW, Fisher TR, Jordan T, Rice CP, Codling EE, Whitall D, Lynn A, Keppler J, Fogel ML (2008) Water quality and conservation practice effects in the Choptank River watershed. J Soil Water Conserv 63:461–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moatar F, Abbott BW, Minaudo C, Curie F, Pinay G (2017) Elemental properties, hydrology, and biology interact to shape concentrations-discharge curves for carbon, nutrients, sediment, and major ions. Water Resour Res 53:1270–1287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohamoud YM (2010) Prediction of daily flow duration curves and streamflow for ungauged catchments using regional flow duration curves. Hydrol Sci J 53:706–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musolff A, Fleckenstein JH, Rao PSC, Jawitz JW (2017) Emergent archetype patterns of coupled hydrologic and biogeochemical responses in catchments. Geophys Res Lett 44:4143–4151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NAS (2000) Clean coastal waters. Understanding and reducing the effects of nutrient pollution. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/9812.html

  • Norton MGM, Fisher TR (2000) The effects of forest on stream water quality in two coastal plain watersheds of the Chesapeake Bay. Ecol Eng 14:337–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norvell WA, Frink CR, Hill DE (1979) Phosphorus in Connecticut lakes predicted by land use. Proc Natl Acad Sci 76:5426–5429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novotny V, Sung H-M, Bannerman R, Baum K (1985) Estimating nonpoint pollution from small urban watersheds. J Water Pollut Control 57:339–348

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien AK, Rice RC, Kennedy MM (1993) Comparison of episodic acidification of Mid-Atlantic upland and coastal plain streams. Water Res Res 29:3029–3039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips PJ, Denver JM, Shedlock RJ, Hamilton PA (1993) Effect of forested wetlands on nitrate concentrations in ground water and surface water on the Delmarva peninsula. Wetlands 13:75–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pionke HB, Gburek WJ, Sharpley AN, Schnabel RR (1996) Flow and nutrient export patterns for an agricultural hill-land watershed. Water. Res. Res. 32:1795–1804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pionke HB, Gburek WJ, Sharpley AN (2000) Critical source area controls on water quality in an agricultural watershed located in the Chesapeake Basin. Ecol Eng 14:325–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitt R, Chen S-E, Clark S (2004) Compacted urban soils effects on infiltration and bioretention stormwater control designs. In: Proceedings of 9th international conference on urban drainage, 8–13 September 2002, Portland OR, USA

  • Powers SM, Bruulsema TW, Burt TP, Chan NL, Elser JJ, Haygarth PM, Howden NJK, Jarvie HP, Lyu Y, Peterson HM, Sharpley AN, Shen J, Worrall F, Zhang F (2016) Long-term accumulation and transport of anthropogenic phosphorus in three river basins. Nat Geosci. https://doi.org/10.1028/ngeo2693

    Google Scholar 

  • Press WH, Teukolsky S, Vetterling WT, Flannery B (2007) Numerical recipes in C: the art of scientific computing, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Primrose NL, Millard CJ, McCoy JL, Dobson MG, Sturm PE, Bowen SE, Windschitl RJ (1997) German Branch targeted watershed project: biotic and water quality monitoring evaluation report 1990–1995. Maryland Department of Natural Resources Report No. CCWS-WRD-MN-97-03

  • Rose S, Peters NE (2001) Effects of urbanization on streamflow in the Atlantia area (Georgia, USA): a comparative hydrological approach. Hydrol Process 15:1441–1457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scudlark JR, Russell KM, Galloway JN, Church TM, Keene WC (1998) Organic nitrogen in precipitation at the mid-Atlantic U.S. coast—methods evaluation and preliminary measurements. Atmos Environ 32:1719–1928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma D, Gupta R, Singh RK, Kansal A (2012) Characteristics of the event mean concentration (EMCs) from rainfall runoff on mixed agricultural land use in the shoreline zone of the Yamuna River in Delhi, India. Appl Water Sci 2:55–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharpley AN, Kleinman PJA, Heathwaite AL, Gburek WJ, Folmar GJ, Schmidt JP (2008) Phosphorus loss from an agricultural watershed as a function of storm size. J Environ Qual 37:362–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shields CA, Band LE, Law N, Groffman PM, Kaushal SS, Savvas K, Fisher GT, Belt KT (2008) Streamflow distribution of non-point source nitrogen export from urban-rural catchments in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Water Resour Res 44:W09416. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007wr006360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strickland JDH, Parsons TR (1972) A practical handbook of seawater analysis, 2nd edn. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Ottawa

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton AJ (2006) Evaluation of agricultural nutrient reductions in restored riparian buffers. Dissertation, University of Maryland

  • Sutton AJ, Fisher TR, Gustafson AB (2009) Historical changes in water quality at German Branch in the Choptank River Basin. Water Air Soil Pollut 199:353–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton AJ, Fisher TR, Gustafson AB (2010) Effects of restored stream buffers (CREP) on water quality in non-tidal streams in the Choptank River Basin. Water Air Soil Pollut 208:101–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson DM (2008) The influence of lee sediment behind large bed elements on bedload transport rates in supply-limited channels. Geomorphology 99:420–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valderrama JC (1981) The simultaneous analysis of total nitrogen and total phosphorus in natural waters. Mar Chem 10:109–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanni MJ, Renwick WH, Headworth JL, Auch JD, Schaus MH (2001) Dissolved and particulate nutrient flux from three adjacent agricultural watersheds: a five-year study. Biogeochemistry 54:85–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volk JA, Savidge KB, Scudlark JR, Andres AS, Ullman WJ (2006) Nitrogen loads through baseflow, stormflow, and underflow to Rehoboth Bay, Delaware. J Environ Qual 35:1742–1755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolman MG, Miller JP (1960) Magnitude and frequency of forces in geomorphic processes. J Geol 68:54–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis, 4th edn. Prentice Hall, Singapore

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the USDA-NRCS CEAP Watersheds Program and National Science Foundation Ecosystem Studies Program (Awards # 1252923 and 1325553 to TRF). We thank Greg McCarty and Walter Stracke (USDA Agricultural Research Service Laboratory, Beltsville MD) for nutrient analyses, and we acknowledge the field assistance and support for the StreamPro ADCP profiler by Dave Whitall (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). Peter Downey (USDA), and Rebecca Fox (HPL UMCES) also provided valuable field assistance and data interpretation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Antti I. Koskelo or Thomas R. Fisher.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: J.M. Melack.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Koskelo, A.I., Fisher, T.R., Sutton, A.J. et al. Biogeochemical storm response in agricultural watersheds of the Choptank River Basin, Delmarva Peninsula, USA. Biogeochemistry 139, 215–239 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-018-0464-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-018-0464-8

Keywords

Navigation