TY - JOUR
T1 - The Role of Denitrification in Stormwater Detention Basin Treatment of Nitrogen
AU - Morse, Natalie R.
AU - McPhillips, Lauren E.
AU - Shapleigh, James P.
AU - Walter, M. Todd
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 American Chemical Society.
PY - 2017/7/18
Y1 - 2017/7/18
N2 - The nitrogen (N) cycling dynamics of four stormwater basins, two often saturated sites ("Wet Basins") and two quick draining sites ("Dry Basins"), were monitored over a ∼ 1-year period. This study paired stormwater and greenhouse gas monitoring with microbial analyses to elucidate the mechanisms controlling N treatment. Annual dissolved inorganic N (DIN) mass reductions (inflow minus outflow) were greater in the Dry Basin than in the Wet Basin, 2.16 vs 0.75 g N m-2 yr-1, respectively. The Dry Basin infiltrated a much larger volume of water and thus had greater DIN mass reductions, even though incoming and outgoing DIN concentrations were statistically the same for both sites. Wet Basins had higher proportions of denitrification genes and potential denitrification rates. The Wet Basin was capable of denitrifying 58% of incoming DIN, whereas the Dry Basin only denitrified 1%. These results emphasize the need for more mechanistic attention to basin design because the reductions calculated by comparing inflow and outflow loads may not be relevant at watershed scales. Denitrification is the only way to fully remove DIN from the terrestrial environment and receiving waterbodies. Consequently, at the watershed scale the Wet Basin may have better overall DIN treatment.
AB - The nitrogen (N) cycling dynamics of four stormwater basins, two often saturated sites ("Wet Basins") and two quick draining sites ("Dry Basins"), were monitored over a ∼ 1-year period. This study paired stormwater and greenhouse gas monitoring with microbial analyses to elucidate the mechanisms controlling N treatment. Annual dissolved inorganic N (DIN) mass reductions (inflow minus outflow) were greater in the Dry Basin than in the Wet Basin, 2.16 vs 0.75 g N m-2 yr-1, respectively. The Dry Basin infiltrated a much larger volume of water and thus had greater DIN mass reductions, even though incoming and outgoing DIN concentrations were statistically the same for both sites. Wet Basins had higher proportions of denitrification genes and potential denitrification rates. The Wet Basin was capable of denitrifying 58% of incoming DIN, whereas the Dry Basin only denitrified 1%. These results emphasize the need for more mechanistic attention to basin design because the reductions calculated by comparing inflow and outflow loads may not be relevant at watershed scales. Denitrification is the only way to fully remove DIN from the terrestrial environment and receiving waterbodies. Consequently, at the watershed scale the Wet Basin may have better overall DIN treatment.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026259668&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85026259668&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1021/acs.est.7b01813
DO - 10.1021/acs.est.7b01813
M3 - Article
C2 - 28640610
AN - SCOPUS:85026259668
SN - 0013-936X
VL - 51
SP - 7928
EP - 7935
JO - Environmental Science and Technology
JF - Environmental Science and Technology
IS - 14
ER -