U.S. Geological Survey, Portland, OR, USA.
U.S. Geological Survey, Madison, WI, USA.
Environ Monit Assess. 2024 Feb 9;196(3):248. doi: 10.1007/s10661-023-12266-7.
Increases in fluxes of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) in the environment have led to negative impacts affecting drinking water, eutrophication, harmful algal blooms, climate change, and biodiversity loss. Because of the importance, scale, and complexity of these issues, it may be useful to consider methods for prioritizing nutrient research in representative drainage basins within a regional or national context. Two systematic, quantitative approaches were developed to (1) identify basins that geospatial data suggest are most impacted by nutrients and (2) identify basins that have the most variability in factors affecting nutrient sources and transport in order to prioritize basins for studies that seek to understand the key drivers of nutrient impacts. The "impact" approach relied on geospatial variables representing surface-water and groundwater nutrient concentrations, sources of N and P, and potential impacts on receptors (i.e., ecosystems and human health). The "variability" approach relied on geospatial variables representing surface-water nutrient concentrations, factors affecting sources and transport of nutrients, model accuracy, and potential receptor impacts. One hundred and sixty-three drainage basins throughout the contiguous United States were ranked nationally and within 18 hydrologic regions. Nationally, the top-ranked basins from the impact approach were concentrated in the Midwest, while those from the variability approach were dispersed across the nation. Regionally, the top-ranked basin selected by the two approaches differed in 15 of the 18 regions, with top-ranked basins selected by the variability approach having lower minimum concentrations and larger ranges in concentrations than top-ranked basins selected by the impact approach. The highest ranked basins identified using the variability approach may have advantages for exploring how landscape factors affect surface-water quality and how surface-water quality may affect ecosystems. In contrast, the impact approach prioritized basins in terms of human development and nutrient concentrations in both surface water and groundwater, thereby targeting areas where actions to reduce nutrient concentrations could have the largest effect on improving water availability and reducing ecosystem impacts.
环境中氮(N)和磷(P)通量的增加导致了一系列负面影响,包括饮用水污染、富营养化、有害藻类水华、气候变化和生物多样性丧失。由于这些问题的重要性、规模和复杂性,考虑在区域或国家背景下,对具有代表性的流域内的养分研究进行优先排序的方法可能是有用的。本研究开发了两种系统的、定量的方法来:(1) 确定那些根据地理空间数据表明受养分影响最大的流域;(2) 确定那些影响养分来源和输移的因素变化最大的流域,以便为那些旨在了解养分影响关键驱动因素的研究优先选择流域。“影响”方法依赖于表示地表水和地下水养分浓度、N 和 P 来源以及对受体(即生态系统和人类健康)潜在影响的地理空间变量。“变异性”方法依赖于表示地表水养分浓度、影响养分来源和输移的因素、模型精度和潜在受体影响的地理空间变量。全美 163 个流域在全国范围内和 18 个水文区域内进行了排名。在全国范围内,“影响”方法中排名最高的流域集中在中西部地区,而“变异性”方法中排名最高的流域则分布在全国各地。在区域范围内,两种方法选择的排名最高的流域在 18 个区域中的 15 个区域中有所不同,“变异性”方法选择的排名最高的流域的最低浓度较低,浓度范围较大,而“影响”方法选择的排名最高的流域的最低浓度较高。使用“变异性”方法确定的排名最高的流域可能具有优势,可以用于探索景观因素如何影响地表水质量,以及地表水质量如何影响生态系统。相比之下,“影响”方法根据人类发展和地表水以及地下水中的养分浓度对流域进行了优先排序,从而针对那些可以通过减少养分浓度来最大程度地改善水供应和减少生态系统影响的区域采取行动。