Ottawa Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, ONT, K1A 0C6, Canada.
London Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, London, ONT, N5V 4T3, Canada.
Water Res. 2019 Mar 15;151:423-438. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2018.11.074. Epub 2018 Nov 30.
Predicting bacterial levels in watersheds in response to agricultural beneficial management practices (BMPs) requires understanding the germane processes at both the watershed and field scale. Controlling subsurface tile drainage (CTD) is a highly effective BMP at reducing nutrient losses from fields, and watersheds when employed en masse, but little work has been conducted on CTD effects on bacterial loads and densities in a watershed context. This study compared fecal indicator bacteria (FIB) [E. coli, Enterococcus, Fecal coliform, Total coliform, Clostridium perfringens] densities and unit area loads (UAL) from a pair of flat tile-drained watersheds (∼250-467 ha catchment areas) during the growing season over a 10-year monitoring period, using a before-after-control-impact (BACI) design (i.e., test CTD watershed vs. reference uncontrolled tile drainage (UCTD) watershed during a pre CTD intervention period and a CTD-intervention period where the test CTD watershed had CTD deployed on over 80% of the fields). With no tile drainage management, upstream tile drainage to ditches comprised ∼90% of total ditch discharge. We also examined FIB loads from a subset of tile drained fields to determine field load contributions to the watershed drainage ditches. Statistical evidence of a CTD effect on FIB UAL in the surface water systems was not strong; however, there was statistical evidence of increased FIB densities [pronounced when E. coli >200 most probable number (MPN) 100 mL] in the test CTD watershed during the CTD-intervention period. This was likely a result of reduced dilution/flushing in the test CTD watershed ditch due to CTD significantly decreasing the amount of tile drainage water entering the surface water system. Tile E. coli load contributions to the ditches were low; for example, during the 6-yr CTD-intervention period they amounted to on average only ∼3 and ∼9% of the ditch loads for the test CTD and reference UCTD watersheds, respectively. This suggests in-stream, or off-field FIB reservoirs and bacteria mobilization drivers, dominated ditch E. coli loads in the watersheds during the growing season. Overall, this study suggested that decision making regarding deployment of CTD en masse in tile-fed watersheds should consider drainage practice effects on bacterial densities and loads, as well as CTD's documented capacity to boost crop yields and reduce seasonal nutrient pollution.
预测流域中细菌水平对农业有益管理措施 (BMP) 的响应需要了解流域和田间尺度上的相关过程。控制地下暗管排水 (CTD) 是减少农田和流域中养分流失的一种非常有效的 BMP,但在流域背景下,对 CTD 对细菌负荷和密度的影响的研究很少。本研究比较了一对平排暗管排水流域(∼250-467 ha 集水区)在 10 年监测期间生长季节的粪便指示菌 (FIB) [大肠杆菌、肠球菌、粪便大肠菌群、总大肠菌群、产气荚膜梭菌] 密度和单位面积负荷 (UAL),使用前后对照影响 (BACI) 设计(即在 CTD 干预前和 CTD 干预期间,对试验 CTD 流域(有 CTD 部署在超过 80%的农田上)和对照无 CTD 排水 (UCTD) 流域进行测试)。没有暗管排水管理,上游暗管排水到沟渠构成了总沟渠排放量的约 90%。我们还检查了从一部分暗管排水的农田中 FIB 的负荷,以确定农田负荷对流域排水沟渠的贡献。CTD 对地表水系统中 FIB UAL 的影响没有很强的统计证据;然而,有统计证据表明,在 CTD 干预期间,试验 CTD 流域的 FIB 密度增加[当大肠杆菌>200 个最可能数 (MPN) 100 mL 时,情况更为明显]。这可能是由于 CTD 显著减少了进入地表水系统的暗管排水量,导致试验 CTD 流域沟渠的稀释/冲刷减少。暗管大肠杆菌对沟渠的负荷贡献很低;例如,在 6 年的 CTD 干预期间,它们仅分别占试验 CTD 和对照 UCTD 流域沟渠负荷的平均约 3%和 9%。这表明在生长季节,溪流或场外 FIB 储层和细菌迁移驱动因素主导了流域沟渠中的大肠杆菌负荷。总的来说,本研究表明,在暗管供水流域大规模部署 CTD 时,应考虑排水实践对细菌密度和负荷的影响,以及 CTD 已被记录的提高作物产量和减少季节性营养污染的能力。