『Abstract
Lake Minnetonka, located in southeastern Minnesota, U.S.A., is
currently experiencing increased eutrophication due to excessive
phosphorus (P) loading in runoff from agriculture and urban areas.
This phenomenon has been exacerbated by the isolation of wetlands
in the surrounding watershed from the surface water drainage network.
In order to determine if rerouting surface water through these
wetlands would be a feasible method for reducing P input, we assessed
the P retention capacity of wetlands in a subwatershed of Lake
Minnetonka, the Painter Creek Watershed (PCW). The objectives
of our study were to determine which of 15 different wetland sites
in the PCW had the highest P sorption capacity, identify which
soil properties best explained the variability in P sorption,
and utilize P fractionation to determine the dominant from of
soil P. Our results indicated that despite similar vegetation
and hydrogeomorphic settings, wetlands in the PCW had considerably
different P sorption capacities. Depth-averaged P sorption index
(PSI) values showed considerable variability, ranging from 14.6
to 184. The Katrina Marsh, Painter Marsh, South Highway 26, and
West Jennings Bay sites had the highest depth-averaged PSIs. The
soil properties that best predicted PSI were soil organic matter,
exchangeable calcium, and oxalate extractable iron. Phosphorus
fractionation data revealed organic P to be the dominant form
of soil P, indicating that organic matter accumulation is another
P storage mechanism in these wetlands.
Keywords: Lake Minnetonka; Minnesota; phosphorus fractionation;
phosphorous sorption; water quality; watershed; wetland』
1. Introduction
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Study area
2.2. Sample collection
2.3. Laboratory analyses of soil properties
2.4. Statistical analysis
3. Results
3.1. PSI values and soil chemistry
3.2. Factors controlling P retention
3.3. P fractionation
4. Discussion
4.1. PSI values and soil chemistry
4.2. Factors controlling P retention
4.3. P fractionation
4.4. Management recommendations
5. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
References