Evaluation of three vegetation treatments in bioretention gardens in a semi-arid climate

C. Dasch Houdeshel, Kevin R. Hultine, Nancy Johnson, Christine A. Pomeroy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Bioretention is a well-established tool to reduce nutrient transport from impervious urban landscapes to sensitive riparian habitat in mesic climates. However, the effectiveness of bioretention is less tested in arid and semi-arid climates. Nutrient retention performance was evaluated in three 10m2 bioretention cells with different vegetation communities: (1) an irrigated wetland vegetation community, (2) an un-irrigated upland vegetation community, and (3) a no-vegetation control. Synthetic stormwater was added to each cell to simulate the average annual runoff of precipitation from a 220m2 impervious surface in Salt Lake City, UT. A significant amount of phosphate (≈50%) was retained by all treatments during the 12-month study. However, total nitrogen (TN) retention was only achieved in the Wetland and Upland treatments (59% and 22%, respectively), and nitrate retention was only achieved in the Wetland treatment (38%). In contrast, the Upland and Control treatments exported 2 and 9 times more nitrate than was added in the simulated rainfall events. Improved nitrogen retention by the Wetland treatment came at the cost of over 12,000l (3200gal) of irrigation to sustain the vegetation through the hot, dry summer. We hypothesize that plant uptake and soil microbial communities are driving nutrient retention in bioretention systems, and that increasing net primary production will increase nutrient retention. In water-limited climates, this can be sustainably achieved by either: increasing native upland vegetation densities above naturally expected densities, or, by using gray water instead of municipal water sources to irrigate wetland communities through dry summer periods.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)62-72
Number of pages11
JournalLandscape and Urban Planning
Volume135
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2015

Fingerprint

garden
wetland
vegetation
climate
nutrient
nitrate
nitrogen
net primary production
summer
stormwater
water
evaluation
microbial community
phosphate
irrigation
runoff
rainfall
habitat
soil

Keywords

  • Arid climates
  • Bioretention
  • Green infrastructure
  • Low impact development
  • Nutrient treatment
  • Stormwater

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Evaluation of three vegetation treatments in bioretention gardens in a semi-arid climate. / Houdeshel, C. Dasch; Hultine, Kevin R.; Johnson, Nancy; Pomeroy, Christine A.

In: Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 135, 01.03.2015, p. 62-72.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Houdeshel, C. Dasch ; Hultine, Kevin R. ; Johnson, Nancy ; Pomeroy, Christine A. / Evaluation of three vegetation treatments in bioretention gardens in a semi-arid climate. In: Landscape and Urban Planning. 2015 ; Vol. 135. pp. 62-72.
@article{3386ff0417e44a14a3de1899fc183533,
title = "Evaluation of three vegetation treatments in bioretention gardens in a semi-arid climate",
abstract = "Bioretention is a well-established tool to reduce nutrient transport from impervious urban landscapes to sensitive riparian habitat in mesic climates. However, the effectiveness of bioretention is less tested in arid and semi-arid climates. Nutrient retention performance was evaluated in three 10m2 bioretention cells with different vegetation communities: (1) an irrigated wetland vegetation community, (2) an un-irrigated upland vegetation community, and (3) a no-vegetation control. Synthetic stormwater was added to each cell to simulate the average annual runoff of precipitation from a 220m2 impervious surface in Salt Lake City, UT. A significant amount of phosphate (≈50{\%}) was retained by all treatments during the 12-month study. However, total nitrogen (TN) retention was only achieved in the Wetland and Upland treatments (59{\%} and 22{\%}, respectively), and nitrate retention was only achieved in the Wetland treatment (38{\%}). In contrast, the Upland and Control treatments exported 2 and 9 times more nitrate than was added in the simulated rainfall events. Improved nitrogen retention by the Wetland treatment came at the cost of over 12,000l (3200gal) of irrigation to sustain the vegetation through the hot, dry summer. We hypothesize that plant uptake and soil microbial communities are driving nutrient retention in bioretention systems, and that increasing net primary production will increase nutrient retention. In water-limited climates, this can be sustainably achieved by either: increasing native upland vegetation densities above naturally expected densities, or, by using gray water instead of municipal water sources to irrigate wetland communities through dry summer periods.",
keywords = "Arid climates, Bioretention, Green infrastructure, Low impact development, Nutrient treatment, Stormwater",
author = "Houdeshel, {C. Dasch} and Hultine, {Kevin R.} and Nancy Johnson and Pomeroy, {Christine A.}",
year = "2015",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.11.008",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "135",
pages = "62--72",
journal = "Landscape and Urban Planning",
issn = "0169-2046",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of three vegetation treatments in bioretention gardens in a semi-arid climate

AU - Houdeshel, C. Dasch

AU - Hultine, Kevin R.

AU - Johnson, Nancy

AU - Pomeroy, Christine A.

PY - 2015/3/1

Y1 - 2015/3/1

N2 - Bioretention is a well-established tool to reduce nutrient transport from impervious urban landscapes to sensitive riparian habitat in mesic climates. However, the effectiveness of bioretention is less tested in arid and semi-arid climates. Nutrient retention performance was evaluated in three 10m2 bioretention cells with different vegetation communities: (1) an irrigated wetland vegetation community, (2) an un-irrigated upland vegetation community, and (3) a no-vegetation control. Synthetic stormwater was added to each cell to simulate the average annual runoff of precipitation from a 220m2 impervious surface in Salt Lake City, UT. A significant amount of phosphate (≈50%) was retained by all treatments during the 12-month study. However, total nitrogen (TN) retention was only achieved in the Wetland and Upland treatments (59% and 22%, respectively), and nitrate retention was only achieved in the Wetland treatment (38%). In contrast, the Upland and Control treatments exported 2 and 9 times more nitrate than was added in the simulated rainfall events. Improved nitrogen retention by the Wetland treatment came at the cost of over 12,000l (3200gal) of irrigation to sustain the vegetation through the hot, dry summer. We hypothesize that plant uptake and soil microbial communities are driving nutrient retention in bioretention systems, and that increasing net primary production will increase nutrient retention. In water-limited climates, this can be sustainably achieved by either: increasing native upland vegetation densities above naturally expected densities, or, by using gray water instead of municipal water sources to irrigate wetland communities through dry summer periods.

AB - Bioretention is a well-established tool to reduce nutrient transport from impervious urban landscapes to sensitive riparian habitat in mesic climates. However, the effectiveness of bioretention is less tested in arid and semi-arid climates. Nutrient retention performance was evaluated in three 10m2 bioretention cells with different vegetation communities: (1) an irrigated wetland vegetation community, (2) an un-irrigated upland vegetation community, and (3) a no-vegetation control. Synthetic stormwater was added to each cell to simulate the average annual runoff of precipitation from a 220m2 impervious surface in Salt Lake City, UT. A significant amount of phosphate (≈50%) was retained by all treatments during the 12-month study. However, total nitrogen (TN) retention was only achieved in the Wetland and Upland treatments (59% and 22%, respectively), and nitrate retention was only achieved in the Wetland treatment (38%). In contrast, the Upland and Control treatments exported 2 and 9 times more nitrate than was added in the simulated rainfall events. Improved nitrogen retention by the Wetland treatment came at the cost of over 12,000l (3200gal) of irrigation to sustain the vegetation through the hot, dry summer. We hypothesize that plant uptake and soil microbial communities are driving nutrient retention in bioretention systems, and that increasing net primary production will increase nutrient retention. In water-limited climates, this can be sustainably achieved by either: increasing native upland vegetation densities above naturally expected densities, or, by using gray water instead of municipal water sources to irrigate wetland communities through dry summer periods.

KW - Arid climates

KW - Bioretention

KW - Green infrastructure

KW - Low impact development

KW - Nutrient treatment

KW - Stormwater

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84920164853&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84920164853&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.11.008

DO - 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.11.008

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84920164853

VL - 135

SP - 62

EP - 72

JO - Landscape and Urban Planning

JF - Landscape and Urban Planning

SN - 0169-2046

ER -