Effects of watershed land use on nitrogen concentrations and δ15 Nitrogen in groundwater

Author Posting. © The Authors, 2005. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of Springer for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Biogeochemistry 77 (2006): 199-215, doi:10.1007/s10533-005-1036-2.Eutrophication is a major agent of change affecting freshwater, estuarine, and marine systems. It is largely driven by transportation of nitrogen from natural and anthropogenic sources. Research is needed to quantify this nitrogen delivery and to link the delivery to specific land-derived sources. In this study we measured nitrogen concentrations and δ15N values in seepage water entering three freshwater ponds and six estuaries on Cape Cod, Massachusetts and assessed how they varied with different types of land use. Nitrate concentrations and δ15N values in groundwater reflected land use in developed and pristine watersheds. In particular, watersheds with larger populations delivered larger nitrate loads with higher δ15N values to receiving waters. The enriched δ15N values confirmed nitrogen loading model results identifying wastewater contributions from septic tanks as the major N source. Furthermore, it was apparent that N coastal sources had a relatively larger impact on the N loads and isotopic signatures than did inland N sources further upstream in the watersheds. This finding suggests that management priorities could focus on coastal sources as a first course of action. This would require management constraints on a much smaller population.This work was supported by funds from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Sea Grant Program, from the Cooperative Institute for Coastal and Estuarine Environmental Technology, from Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection to Applied Science Associates, Narragansett, RI, as well as from Palmer/McLeod and NOAA National Estuarine Research Reserve Fellowships to Kevin Kroeger. This work is the result of research sponsored by NOAA National Sea Grant College Program Office, Department of Commerce, under Grant No. NA86RG0075, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Sea Grant Project No. R/M-40

Differentiated free-living and sediment-attached bacterial community structure inside and outside denitrification hotspots in the river–groundwater interface.

This study assessed the functional significance of attached and free-living bacterial communities involved in the process of denitrification in a shallow aquifer of a riparian zone (Garonne River, SW France). Denitrification enzyme activity (DEA), bacterial density (BD) and bacterial community composition (BCC) were measured in two aquifer compartments: the groundwater and the sandy fraction of the sediment deposit. Samples were collected in wells located inside (IHD) and outside (OHD) identified hotspots of denitrification. Despite high BD values (up to 1.14 × 1012 cells m−3), DEA was not detected in the water compartment (< 0.32 mg N–N2O m−3 d−1). The sandy fraction showed detectable DEA (up to 1,389 mg N–N2O m−3 d−1) and, consistent with BD pattern, higher DEA values were measured in IHD zones than in OHD zones. The BCC assessed by 16S rDNA polymerase chain reaction-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (PCR-DGGE) partly supported this result: attached and free-living communities were significantly different (< 30% similarity) but patterns of BCC did not cluster according to IHD and OHD zones. Targeting the denitrifying communities by means of a culture enrichment step prior to 16S rDNA PCR-DGGE showed that the free-living and sediment attached communities differed. Most sequences obtained from DGGE profiles of denitrifying communities were affiliated to Proteobacteria and showed low genetic distance with taxa that have already been detected in aquifers (e.g., Azoarcus sp., Acidovorax sp. and Pseudomonas spp.). This study confirms that in the aquifer the sediment-attached fraction exhibits different functions (DEA) from free-living communities and suggests that this functional difference is related to the communities’ structure