ReviewJournal of environmental quality
A review of the development and implementation of the critical source area concept: A reflection of Andrew Sharpley's role in improving water quality.
Review in Journal of environmental quality. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness of targeted riparian management for sediment and total phosphorus considering convergent surface flow pathways: an Irish case study.Discover geoscience · 2025Article
- Phosphorus leaching and runoff risks from non-calcareous sandy soils with a low sorption capacity and high hydrological connectivity.Journal of environmental qualityArticle
- Toward a transdisciplinary and unifying definition of legacy phosphorus.Journal of environmental qualityArticle
- Through the lens of phosphorus: The legacy of Andrew Sharpley.Journal of environmental qualityReview
- Assessing the topographic distribution of legacy soil phosphorus in agricultural fields of the Delmarva Peninsula, Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain, USA.Journal of environmental qualityArticle
- The importance of consensus science to managing phosphorus in the environment: SERA-17 and the legacy of Andrew Sharpley.Journal of environmental qualityArticle
- Targeting phosphorus loss with carbon farming practices? Results from an on-farm study.Journal of environmental qualityArticle
- A review of the development and implementation of the critical source area concept: A reflection of Andrew Sharpley's role in improving water quality.Journal of environmental qualityReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Critical source areas (CSAs) are small areas of a field, farm, or catchment that account for most contaminant loss by having both a high contaminant availability and transport potential. Most work on CSAs has focused on phosphorus (P), largely through the work in the 1990s initiated by Dr. Sharpley and colleagues who recognized the value in targeting mitigation efforts. The CSA concept has been readily grasped by scientists, farmers, and policymakers across the globe. However, experiences and success have been mixed, often caused by the variation in where and how CSAs are defined. For instance, analysis of studies from 1990 to 2023 shows that the proportion of the annual contaminant load coming from a CSA decreases from field to farm to catchment scale. This finding is consistent with increased buffering of CSAs and greater contribution of other sources with scale, or variation in the definition of CSAs. We therefore argue that the best application of CSAs to target mitigation actions should be at small areas that truly account for most contaminant loss. This article sheds light on the development and utilization of CSAs, paying tribute to Dr. Sharpley's remarkable contributions to the improvement of water quality, and reflecting upon where the CSA concept has succeeded or not in reducing contaminant (largely P) loss.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.