Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40012904›Full record

ArticleJournal of soil and water conservation2022

Ecosystem services in Iowa agricultural catchments: Hypotheses for scenarios with water quality wetlands and improved tile drainage.

M E Mitchell, S D Shifflett, T Newcomer-Johnson, A Hodaj, W Crumpton, J Christensen, B Dyson, T J Canfield, S Richmond, M Helmers and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of soil and water conservation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

14 authors.

M E MitchellOak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) Research Participation Program, US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Cincinnati, Ohio.
S D ShifflettOffice of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, USEPA, Washington, DC.
T Newcomer-JohnsonOffice of Research and Development, USEPA, Cincinnati, Ohio.
A HodajWater Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Branch, USEPA Region 5, Chicago, Illinois.
W CrumptonDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa.
J Christensenoperations research analyst in the Office of Research and Development, USEPA, Cincinnati, Ohio.
B DysonOffice of Research and Development, USEPA, Cincinnati, Ohio.
T J CanfieldOffice of Research and Development, USEPA, Ada, Oklahoma.
S RichmondIowa Nutrient Research and Education Council, Des Moines, Iowa.
M HelmersDepartment of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa.
D LemkeNutrient Management and Environmental Stewardship at the Iowa Nutrient Research and Education Council, Des Moines, Iowa.
M LechtenbergWater Quality Initiative coordinator in the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship, Des Moines, Iowa.
C TaylorUSEPA Region 7, Lenexa, Kansas.
K J ForshayOffice of Research and Development, USEPA, Ada, Oklahoma.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nutrient loads from agricultural runoff in the upper Midwest continue to contribute to Gulf Coast hypoxia and harmful algal blooms due to insufficient retention of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) associated with row crop agriculture and highly productive soils. In the coming decades, much of the drainage infrastructure in this region will be rebuilt to modern design standards. At the same time, the region is developing and implementing strategies to reduce nutrient export. A group of Iowa stakeholders representing agricultural producers, land managers, and researchers met seven times in late 2018 and early 2019 and was asked to describe ecosystem service information needs that could support nutrient best management practice decisions in Iowa. The stakeholder group identified the importance and relevance of a catchment-scale (i.e., small watershed) analysis of a set of priority ecosystem services associated with agricultural tile drainage improvements and targeted water quality wetlands. Water quality wetlands are wetlands installed strategically to intercept agricultural drainage channels and receive runoff and tile drainage. These potential modifications were codified into four scenarios for literature analysis and hypothesis development including (1) a baseline, no change scenario representing the most prevalent current landscape with underperforming tile drainage infrastructure and degraded wetland functions; (2) upgrade of tile drainage infrastructure without a water quality wetland; (3) installation of a water quality wetland at the drainage district catchment scale but with no drainage improvements; and (4) a combination of adding a water quality wetland and tile drainage infrastructure upgrades at the catchment scale. Synthesizing published field-scale and modeling results across a collection of relevant studies suggests that the combined scenario of improved drainage paired with a water quality wetland may result in increased crop yields, habitat, pollination, and educational and cultural services as well as decreased global warming potential relative to the baseline scenario. Nitrate (

Indexed as

Corn Beltcrop yieldgreenhouse gasesnitrogenphosphoruswildlife habitat

Identifiers

PMID40012904
PMCPMC11864058

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.