| Title |
Nutrient mitigation in a temporary river basin
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10661-013-3533-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ourania Tzoraki, Nikolaos P. Nikolaidis, David Cooper, Elissavet Kassotaki |
| Abstract |
We estimate the nutrient budget in a temporary Mediterranean river basin. We use field monitoring and modelling tools to estimate nutrient sources and transfer in both high and low flow conditions. Inverse modelling by the help of PHREEQC model validated the hypothesis of a losing stream during the dry period. Soil and Water Assessment Tool model captured the water quality of the basin. The 'total daily maximum load' approach is used to estimate the nutrient flux status by flow class, indicating that almost 60% of the river network fails to meet nitrogen criteria and 50% phosphate criteria. We recommend that existing well-documented remediation measures such as reforestation of the riparian area or composting of food process biosolids should be implemented to achieve load reduction in close conjunction with social needs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 64 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 18% |
| Unknown | 17 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 22 | 34% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 14% |
| Engineering | 4 | 6% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 19 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 January 2014.
All research outputs
#19,382,126
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#1,865
of 2,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,362
of 314,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#24
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,748 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 314,286 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.