Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39830715›Full record

ReviewACS environmental Au2025

Effective Nutrient Management of Surface Waters in the United States Requires Expanded Water Quality Monitoring in Agriculturally Intensive Areas.

Christopher Oates, Hector Fajardo, Khara Grieger, Daniel Obenour, Rebecca L Muenich, Natalie G Nelson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in ACS environmental Au, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

6 authors.

Christopher OatesBiological and Agricultural Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4278-0896
Hector FajardoBiological and Agricultural Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0055-3580
Khara GriegerNorth Carolina Plant Sciences Initiative, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0821-0534
Daniel ObenourCivil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7459-218X
Rebecca L MuenichBiological and Agricultural Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701, United States.
Natalie G NelsonBiological and Agricultural Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3258-7622

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The U.S. Clean Water Act is believed to have driven widespread decreases in pollutants from point sources and developed areas, but has not substantially affected nutrient pollution from agriculture. Today, the highest nutrient concentrations in surface waters are often associated with agricultural production. In this Perspective, we explore whether challenges stemming from the Clean Water Act's inability to mitigate agricultural nutrient pollution are also exacerbated by coarse nutrient monitoring. We evaluate the current state of nutrient monitoring in surface waters of the contiguous U.S. relative to agricultural nutrient inputs to assess how monitoring effort varies across agriculturally intensive areas. The locations of nutrient monitoring stations with approximately seasonal sampling frequency (4 samples per year, on average) from 2012 to 2021 were compiled from the U.S. Water Quality Portal. Monitoring station locations were then compared to watershed-scale (HUC-8) nutrient inventory estimates for agricultural fertilizer and livestock manure inputs. From this assessment, we found that many, but not all, of the nation's most agriculturally intensive areas are under-monitored, and often unmonitored. While it is well-known that the Midwest is the epicenter of agricultural production in the U.S., our results reveal it is poorly monitored relative to its agricultural nutrient inputs. Other regions, like the California Central Valley and parts of the southeastern Coastal Plain were also coarsely monitored relative to nutrient inputs. Conversely, some agriculturally intensive watersheds were moderately-to-well monitored (e.g., western Lake Erie basin, eastern North Carolina, and the Delmarva Peninsula), with these basins largely having established Total Maximum Daily Loads and discharging to prominent waterways. In closing, we argue that sparse monitoring across many of the nation's most agriculturally intensive areas motivate a need to re-envision nutrient monitoring networks, and that increased resources and advanced technologies are likely required to enable effective nutrient source identification throughout the nation.

Identifiers

PMID39830715
PMCPMC11740920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.