IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agiwat/v148y2015icp97-105.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Storm flow dynamics and loads of fecal bacteria associated with ponds in southern piedmont and coastal plain watersheds with animal agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Jenkins, Michael B.
  • Adams, M. Paige
  • Endale, Dinku M.
  • Fisher, Dwight S.
  • Lowrance, Richard
  • Newton, G. Larry
  • Vellidis, George

Abstract

Storm events that increase flow rates can disturb sediments and produce overland runoff in watersheds with animal agriculture, and, thus, can increase surface water concentrations of fecal bacteria and risk to public health. We tested the hypothesis that strategically designed and placed ponds in watersheds with animal agriculture would attenuate downstream fluxes of fecal bacteria. We measured concentrations and fluxes of fecal indicator bacteria (commensal Escherichia coli and fecal enterococci) and manure pathogens (Salmonella and E. coli 0157:H7) in in- and outflows of Bishop Pond in the Southern Piedmont of Georgia during three storm events and in- and outflow concentrations and fluxes of fecal indicator bacteria at Ponds A and C in the Coastal Plain of Georgia during two storm events. Mean concentrations and fluxes of fecal indicator bacteria associated with pond in- and outflow during hydrograph rise, peak, fall, and 5-days after peak flow at Bishop Pond were significantly greater than their mean base flow concentrations and fluxes. In storm flow Bishop Pond significantly reduced the outflow concentrations and fluxes of fecal indicator bacteria compared with corresponding inflow measurements. Unlike fecal indicator bacteria, Bishop Pond appeared not to reduce outflow concentrations and fluxes of Salmonella or E. coli 0157:H7. At Ponds A and C in the Coastal Plain mean in- and outflow concentrations and fluxes of the fecal indicator bacteria associated with the hydrograph rise and peak flows of the storms were not different. Bishop Pond, with a length to width ratio of 3.3, attenuated downstream fluxes of fecal bacteria. In contrast, Ponds A and C were not effective at reducing downstream fluxes of fecal bacteria under storm flow conditions. The ineffectiveness of Ponds A and C may be attributed to their having length to width ratios of 1.2 and 2.5, respectively, both of which are below the minimum for effective pond performance. Our results indicated that in the humid Southeast an appropriately placed and configured pond in watersheds with animal agriculture can reduce storm flow loads of fecal indicator bacteria but not necessarily pathogenic E. coli 0157:H7.

Suggested Citation

  • Jenkins, Michael B. & Adams, M. Paige & Endale, Dinku M. & Fisher, Dwight S. & Lowrance, Richard & Newton, G. Larry & Vellidis, George, 2015. "Storm flow dynamics and loads of fecal bacteria associated with ponds in southern piedmont and coastal plain watersheds with animal agriculture," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 97-105.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:148:y:2015:i:c:p:97-105
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2014.09.022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377414003126
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agwat.2014.09.022?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:148:y:2015:i:c:p:97-105. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.