↓ Skip to main content

Predicting Redox Conditions in Groundwater at a Regional Scale

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Science & Technology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Predicting Redox Conditions in Groundwater at a Regional Scale
Published in
Environmental Science & Technology, July 2015
DOI 10.1021/acs.est.5b01869
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anthony J. Tesoriero, Silvia Terziotti, Daniel B. Abrams

Abstract

Defining the oxic-suboxic interface is often critical for determining pathways for nitrate transport in groundwater and to streams at the local scale. Defining this interface on a regional scale is complicated by the spatial variability of reaction rates. The probability of oxic groundwater in the Chesapeake Bay watershed was predicted by relating dissolved O2 concentrations in groundwater samples to indicators of residence time and/or electron donor availability using logistic regression. Variables that describe surficial geology, position in the flow system, and soil drainage were important predictors of oxic water. The probability of encountering oxic groundwater at a 30 m depth and the depth to the bottom of the oxic layer were predicted for the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The influence of depth to the bottom of the oxic layer on stream nitrate concentrations and time lags (i.e., time period between land application of nitrogen and its effect on streams) are illustrated using model simulations for hypothetical basins. Regional maps of the probability of oxic groundwater should prove useful as indicators of groundwater susceptibility and stream susceptibility to contaminant sources derived from groundwater.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Saudi Arabia 1 2%
Unknown 58 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 27%
Researcher 12 20%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 7 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 24 40%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 10 17%
Engineering 8 13%
Chemistry 2 3%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 15 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 23 August 2015.
All research outputs
#5,918,883
of 18,460,911 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science & Technology
#7,328
of 17,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,664
of 243,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science & Technology
#130
of 290 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,460,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,532 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 243,352 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 290 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 55% of its contemporaries.