↓ Skip to main content

Influence of stormflow and baseflow phosphorus pressures on stream ecology in agricultural catchments

Overview of attention for article published in Science of the Total Environment, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Influence of stormflow and baseflow phosphorus pressures on stream ecology in agricultural catchments
Published in
Science of the Total Environment, March 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.02.100
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mairead Shore, Sinead Murphy, Per-Erik Mellander, Ger Shortle, Alice R. Melland, Lucy Crockford, Vincent O'Flaherty, Lauren Williams, Ger Morgan, Phil Jordan

Abstract

Stormflow and baseflow phosphorus (P) concentrations and loads in rivers may exert different ecological pressures during different seasons. These pressures and subsequent impacts are important to disentangle in order to target and monitor the effectiveness of mitigation measures. This study investigated the influence of stormflow and baseflow P pressures on stream ecology in six contrasting agricultural catchments. A five-year high resolution dataset was used consisting of stream discharge, P chemistry, macroinvertebrate and diatom ecology, supported with microbial source tracking and turbidity data. Total reactive P (TRP) loads delivered during baseflows were low (1-7% of annual loads), but TRP concentrations frequently exceeded the environmental quality standard (EQS) of 0.035mgL(-1) during these flows (32-100% of the time in five catchments). A pilot microbial source tracking exercise in one catchment indicated that both human and ruminant faecal effluents were contributing to these baseflow P pressures but were diluted at higher flows. Seasonally, TRP concentrations tended to be highest during summer due to these baseflow P pressures and corresponded well with declines in diatom quality during this time (R(2)=0.79). Diatoms tended to recover by late spring when storm P pressures were most prevalent and there was a poor relationship between antecedent TRP concentrations and diatom quality in spring (R(2)=0.23). Seasonal variations were less apparent in the macroinvertebrate indices; however, there was a good relationship between antecedent TRP concentrations and macroinvertebrate quality during spring (R(2)=0.51) and summer (R(2)=0.52). Reducing summer point source discharges may be the quickest way to improve ecological river quality, particularly diatom quality in these and similar catchments. Aligning estimates of P sources with ecological impacts and identifying ecological signals which can be attributed to storm P pressures are important next steps for successful management of agricultural catchments at these scales.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 111 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 19%
Student > Master 17 15%
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 28 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 33 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 5 5%
Engineering 5 5%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 36 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 June 2020.
All research outputs
#7,338,190
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Science of the Total Environment
#9,593
of 29,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,091
of 321,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science of the Total Environment
#124
of 319 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,635 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 321,120 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 319 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.