↓ 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, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 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, July 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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 19%
Student > Master 15 17%
Researcher 13 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 15 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 27 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 15%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Engineering 4 5%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 23 26%

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
#4,730,263
of 17,913,039 outputs
Outputs from Science of the Total Environment
#5,090
of 17,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,155
of 269,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science of the Total Environment
#96
of 276 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,913,039 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,857 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 269,016 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 276 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 65% of its contemporaries.