Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37089436›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental research communications2022

Major point and nonpoint sources of nutrient pollution to surface water have declined throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

Robert D Sabo, Breck Sullivan, Cuiyin Wu, Emily Trentacoste, Qian Zhang, Gary W Shenk, Gopal Bhatt, Lewis C Linker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental research communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Robert D SaboU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-8713-7699
Breck SullivanU.S. Geological Survey, Chesapeake Research Consortium, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9199-7568
Cuiyin WuERT, Inc., Laurel, MD, United States of America.
Emily TrentacosteU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Immediate Office of the Assistant Administrator, Washington, DC, United States of America.
Qian ZhangUniversity of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0500-5655
Gary W ShenkU.S. Geological Survey, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6451-2513
Gopal BhattPennsylvania State University, Chesapeake Bay Program Office, Annapolis, MD, United States of America.
Lewis C LinkerU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Immediate Office of the Assistant Administrator, Washington, DC, United States of America.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding drivers of water quality in local watersheds is the first step for implementing targeted restoration practices. Nutrient inventories can inform water quality management decisions by identifying shifts in nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) balances over space and time while also keeping track of the likely urban and agricultural point and nonpoint sources of pollution. The Chesapeake Bay Program's Chesapeake Assessment Scenario Tool (CAST) provides N and P balance data for counties throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and these data were leveraged to create a detailed nutrient inventory for all the counties in the watershed from 1985-2019. This study focuses on three primary watershed nutrient balance components-agricultural surplus, atmospheric deposition, and point source loads-which are thought to be the leading anthropogenic drivers of nutrient loading trends across the watershed. All inputs, outputs, and derived metrics (n=53) like agricultural surplus and nutrient use efficiency, were subjected to short- and long-term trend analyses to discern how sources of pollution to surface water have changed over time. Across the watershed from 1985-2019, downward trends in atmospheric deposition were ubiquitous. Though there are varying effects, long-term declines in agricultural surplus were observed, likely because nutrients are being managed more efficiently. Multiple counties' point source loads declined, primarily associated with upgrades at major cities that discharge treated wastewater directly to tidal waters. Despite all of these positive developments, recent increases in agricultural surpluses from 2009-2019 highlight that water quality gains may soon be reversed in many agricultural areas of the basin. Besides tracking progress and jurisdictional influence on pollution sources, the nutrient inventory can be used for retrospective water quality analysis to highlight drivers of past improvement/degradation of water quality trends and for decision makers to develop and track their near- and long-term watershed restoration strategies.

Indexed as

agricultureatmospheric depositionnitrogennutrientsphosphoruswastewaterwater

Identifiers

PMID37089436
PMCPMC10116850

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.