TY - JOUR
T1 - Agricultural chemicals in the alluvial aquifer of a typical county of the Arkansas delta
AU - Lin, H. S.
AU - Scott, H. D.
AU - Steele, K. F.
AU - Inyang, H. I.
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding for this research was provided by the USDA-CSREES-NRI (under Grant No. 96-35102-3774), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Arkansas State Plant Board, and the Arkansas Water Resources Center. We express our thanks to Dr. T. Nichols, Dr. P. Vendrell and Mr. Steven Hill of the Arkansas Water Resources Center for their assistance in ground water sampling and analysis, and to Dr. A. Mauromoustakos of the Agricultural Statistics Laboratory at the University of Arkansas for helpful discussions on statistical analyses.
PY - 1999
Y1 - 1999
N2 - Statistical methods and a Geographic Information System (GIS) were used to investigate potential indicators of ground water vulnerability to agricultural chemical contamination in a representative area of the Mississippi River alluvial aquifer. A total of 47 wells were sampled for analysis of nitrate, phosphorus, potassium, and 13 pesticides commonly-used in the area. Ten soil and hydrogeologic variables and five ground water vulnerability indices were examined to explain the variations of chemical concentrations. The results showed that no individual soil or hydrogeologic variables or their linear combinations could explain more than 25% of the variation of the chemical concentrations. A quadratic response surface model with the values of confining unit thickness, slope, soil permeability, depth to ground water, and recharge rate accounted for 62% of the variation of nitrate, 43% of P, and 83% of K, suggesting that the interactions among soil and hydrogeologic variables were significant. Observed trends of decreasing nitrate and P concentrations with increasing well depth and/or depth to ground water seemed to correlate with carbonate equilibrium in the aquifer and more reduced environment with depth. In view of uncertainties involved, it was recognized that the limitations associated with input data resolution used in GIS and the formulation of leaching indices limited their use for predicting ground water vulnerability. Misuse of pesticides could be another factor that would complicate the relationships between pesticide concentrations and the vulnerability indices.
AB - Statistical methods and a Geographic Information System (GIS) were used to investigate potential indicators of ground water vulnerability to agricultural chemical contamination in a representative area of the Mississippi River alluvial aquifer. A total of 47 wells were sampled for analysis of nitrate, phosphorus, potassium, and 13 pesticides commonly-used in the area. Ten soil and hydrogeologic variables and five ground water vulnerability indices were examined to explain the variations of chemical concentrations. The results showed that no individual soil or hydrogeologic variables or their linear combinations could explain more than 25% of the variation of the chemical concentrations. A quadratic response surface model with the values of confining unit thickness, slope, soil permeability, depth to ground water, and recharge rate accounted for 62% of the variation of nitrate, 43% of P, and 83% of K, suggesting that the interactions among soil and hydrogeologic variables were significant. Observed trends of decreasing nitrate and P concentrations with increasing well depth and/or depth to ground water seemed to correlate with carbonate equilibrium in the aquifer and more reduced environment with depth. In view of uncertainties involved, it was recognized that the limitations associated with input data resolution used in GIS and the formulation of leaching indices limited their use for predicting ground water vulnerability. Misuse of pesticides could be another factor that would complicate the relationships between pesticide concentrations and the vulnerability indices.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032841473&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032841473&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1023/A:1006023731801
DO - 10.1023/A:1006023731801
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0032841473
SN - 0167-6369
VL - 58
SP - 151
EP - 172
JO - Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
JF - Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
IS - 2
ER -