Modeling the applicability of edge-of-field treatment wetlands to reduce nitrate loads in the Elm Creek watershed in southern Minnesota, United States

References

1. 1. AcreValue

   . 2018. Martin County, MN Farmland Values, Soil Survey and GIS Map. San Francisco, CA: AcreValue. https://www.acrevalue.com/map/MN/Martin/.
2. ↵
   1. Addy, K.,
   2. A.J. Gold,
   3. L.E. Christianson,
   4. M.B. David,
   5. L.A. Schipper, and
   6. N.A. Ratigan

   . 2016. Denitrifying bioreactors for nitrate removal: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Quality 45(3):873.

   OpenUrl
3. 1. Agri Drain Corporation

   . 2018. Inline Water Level Control Structures. Adair, IA: Agri Drain Corporation. https://www.agridrain.com/shop/c85/water-level-control-structures/p901/inline-water-level-control-structures/.
4. ↵
   1. Arnold, J.G.,
   2. D.N. Moriasi,
   3. P.W. Gassman,
   4. K.C. Abbaspour,
   5. M.J. White,
   6. R. Srinivasan,
   7. C. Santhi,
   8. D. Harmel,
   9. A. van Griensven,
   10. M.W. Van Liew,
   11. N. Kannan, and
   12. M. Jha

   . 2012. SWAT: Model use, calibration, and validation. Biological Systems Engineering: Papers and Publications 55(4):1491–1508.

   OpenUrl
5. ↵
   1. Bettis, E.A.,
   2. D.J. Quade, and
   3. T.J. Kemmis

   . 1996. Hogs, Bogs and Logs: Quaternary Deposits and Environmental Geology of the Des Moines Lobe; Field Guidebook, May 1996. Guidebook Series No. 18, 182. Des Moines, IA: Iowa Department of Natural Resources.
6. ↵
   1. Christianson, L.,
   2. J. Tyndall, and
   3. M. Helmers

   . 2013. Financial comparison of seven nitrate reduction strategies for Midwestern agricultural drainage. Water Resources and Economics 2–3(October 2013):30–56.

   OpenUrl
7. ↵
   1. Crumpton, W.G.,
   2. D.A. Kovacic,
   3. D.L. Hey, and
   4. J.A. Kostel

   . 2008. Potential of Restored and Constructed Wetlands to Reduce Nutrient Export from Agricultural Watersheds in the Corn Belt. In Final Report: Gulf Hypoxia and Local Water Quality Concerns Workshop, 29–42. St. Joseph, MI: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers.
8. ↵
   1. Crumpton, W., and
   2. G. Stenback

   . 2016. Iowa Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) 2016 Annual Performance Report. Des Moines, IA: Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship.
9. ↵
   1. Geza, M., and
   2. J.E. McCray

   . 2008. Effects of soil data resolution on SWAT model stream flow and water quality predictions. Journal of Environmental Management 88(3):393–406.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
10. ↵
    1. Gordon, B.A.,
    2. C. Lenhart, and
    3. T.M. LaPara

    . 2020. A comparison of nitrate removal and denitrifying bacteria populations among three wetland plant communities. Journal of Environmental Quality 49(1):210–219.

    OpenUrl
11. ↵
    1. Gordon, B.A.,
    2. C. Lenhart,
    3. H. Peterson,
    4. J. Gamble,
    5. J. Nieber,
    6. D. Current, and
    7. A. Brenke

    . 2021. Reduction of nutrient loads from agricultural subsurface drainage water in a small, edge-of-field constructed treatment wetland. Ecological Engineering https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2020.106128.
12. ↵
    1. Hyberg, S.,
    2. R. Iovanna,
    3. W. Crumpton, and
    4. S. Richmond

    . 2015. The cost effectiveness of wetlands designed and sited for nitrate removal: The effect of increased efficiency, rising easement costs, and lower interest rates. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 70(2):30A-32A. https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.70.2.30A.

    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
13. ↵
    1. IDA (Iowa Department of Agriculture)

    . 2009. Landowner guide to CREP. Des Moines, IA: Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship and United States Department of Agriculture.
14. ↵
    1. IDALS (Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship)

    . 2016. Iowa nutrient reduction strategy. Ames, IA: Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship, Iowa Department of Natural Resources, and Iowa State University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.
15. ↵
    1. IEPA (Illinois Environmental Protection Agency)

    . 2014. Illinois nutrient loss reduction strategy. Springfield, IL: Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.
16. 1. ISU Extension (Iowa State University)

    . 2018. 2018 Iowa Farm Custom Rate Survey Ag Decision Maker. Ames, IA: Iowa State University-Extension.
17. ↵
    1. Jaynes, D.B., and
    2. T.M. Isenhart

    . 2014. Reconnecting tile drainage to riparian buffer hydrology for enhanced nitrate removal. Journal of Environmental Quality 43(2014):631–638.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
18. ↵
    1. Jirsa, M.A.,
    2. T.J. Boerboom,
    3. V.W. Chandler,
    4. J.H. Mossler,
    5. A.C. Runkel, and
    6. D.R. Setterholm

    . 2011. S-21 Geologic Map of Minnesota-Bedrock Geology. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Geological Survey.
19. ↵
    1. Karlheim, L.

    2012. Free water surface agriculture runoff treatment wetland design for the Roberts farm in Granada, MN. Master’s thesis, University of Minnesota.
20. ↵
    1. Larson, A.C.,
    2. L.E. Gentry,
    3. M.B. David,
    4. R.A. Cooke, and
    5. D.A. Kovacic

    . 2000. The role of seepage in constructed wetlands receiving agricultural tile drainage. Ecological Engineering 15(1):91–104.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
21. 1. Lenhart, C.,
    2. B. Gordon,
    3. J. Gamble,
    4. D. Current,
    5. N. Ross,
    6. L. Herring,
    7. J. Nieber, and
    8. H. Peterson

    . 2016b. Design and hydrologic performance of a tile drainage treatment wetland in Minnesota, USA. Water 8(12):549.

    OpenUrl
22. ↵
    1. Lenhart, C.,
    2. H. Peterson,
    3. B. Gordon,
    4. J. Peterson,
    5. W. Eshenaur,
    6. L. Gifford,
    7. B.N. Wilson,
    8. J. Stamper,
    9. L. Krider, and
    10. N. Utt

    . 2017. Agricultural BMP Handbook for Minnesota 2017, 2nd edition. St Paul, MN: Minnesota Department of Agriculture.
23. ↵
    1. Lenhart, C.F.,
    2. B.N. Wilson, and
    3. B. Gordon

    . 2016a. Factors impacting the variability of effectiveness of agricultural best management practices (BMPs) in Minnesota. In 2016 10th International Drainage Symposium, 1–8. St. Joseph, MI: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers.
24. ↵
    1. Lewandowski, A.M.,
    2. M.D. Tomer,
    3. J.I. Buchanan,
    4. A. Kiel,
    5. L. Olson,
    6. R.L. Power, and
    7. J.J. Sloan

    . 2020. Agricultural Conservation Planning Framework: Watershed applications, research opportunities, and training resources. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 75(4):427–433. https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.2020.00073.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
25. ↵
    1. Lucas, F.

    2014. Agricultural Act of 2014. 357. Washington, DC: US Congress.
26. ↵
    1. Matzdorf, K.D.

    1989. Soil Survey of Martin County, Minnesota. Washington, DC: USDA Soil Conservation Service.
27. ↵
    1. Mitsch, W.J.,
    2. J.W. Day,
    3. L. Zhang, and
    4. R.R. Lane

    . 2005. Nitrate-nitrogen retention in wetlands in the Mississippi River Basin. Ecological Engineering 24(4 SPEC. ISS.):267–278.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
28. ↵
    1. Moriasi, D.N.,
    2. J.G. Arnold,
    3. M.W. Van Liew,
    4. R.L. Bingner,
    5. R.D. Harmel,
    6. T.L. Veith,
    7. J.G. Arnold,
    8. C.W. Van Liew, and
    9. D.N. Moriasi

    . 2007. Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Transactions of the ASABE 50(3):885–900.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
29. ↵
    1. MPCA (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency)

    . 2014. The Minnesota Nutrient Reduction Strategy. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
30. ↵
    1. MPCA

    . 2016. Elm Creek Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) Report. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
31. ↵
    1. Phipps, R.G., and
    2. W.G. Crumpton

    . 1994. Factors affecting nitrogen loss in experimental wetlands with different hydrologic loads. Ecological Engineering 3(4):399–408.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
32. ↵
    1. Porter, S.A.,
    2. M.D. Tomer,
    3. D.E. James, and
    4. K.M.B. Boomer

    . 2016. Agricultural Conservation Planning Framework ArcGIS Toolbox User’s Manual. Ames, IA: National Laboratory for Agriculture & the Environment, USDA Agricultural Research Service.
33. 1. Prairie Land Management

    . 2005. Prairie Land Management Habitat Outlet: Wildflower and Food Plot Seeds, Trees, Feeders, Waterfowl Food Plots and Nests. Glenwood, MN: Prairie Land Management. http://www.habitatnow.com/store/shop/shop.php?pn_selected_category=37.
34. ↵
    1. Prato, T.,
    2. Y. Wang,
    3. T. Haithcoat,
    4. C. Barnett, and
    5. C. Fulcher

    . 1995. Converting hydric cropland to wetland in Missouri: A geoeconomic analysis. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 50(1):101.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
35. ↵
    1. Prior, J.C.

    1991. Landforms of Iowa, 1st edition. Iowa City, IA: University of Iowa Press for the Iowa Department of Natural Resources.
36. ↵
    1. Srinivas, R.,
    2. M. Drewitz, and
    3. J. Magner

    . 2020. Evaluating watershed-based optimized decision support framework for conservation practice placement in Plum Creek Minnesota. Journal of Hydrology 583(2020):124573.

    OpenUrl
37. ↵
    1. Tomer, M.D.,
    2. W.G. Crumpton,
    3. R.L. Bingner,
    4. J.A. Kostel, and
    5. D.E. James

    . 2013. Estimating nitrate load reductions from placing constructed wetlands in a HUC-12 watershed using LiDAR data. Ecological Engineering 56(2013)69-78.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
38. ↵
    1. Tomer, M.D.,
    2. S.A. Porter,
    3. K.M.B. Boomer,
    4. D.E. James,
    5. J.A. Kostel,
    6. M.J. Helmers,
    7. T.M. Isenhart, and
    8. E. McLellan

    . 2015. Agricultural conservation planning framework: 1. Developing multipractice watershed planning scenarios and assessing nutrient reduction potential. Journal of Environmental Quality 44(3):754–67.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
39. ↵
    1. University of Illinois

    . 2018. Denitrifying ‘Woodchip’ Bioreactor Projects – Illinois Drainage Research and Outreach Program (I-DROP). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois. http://draindrop.cropsci.illinois.edu/index.php/i-drop-research/denitrifying-woodchip-bioreactor-projects/.
40. ↵
    1. USDA NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service)

    . 2009. Chapter 10: Agricultural Waste Management System Component Design. Part 651, Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook. In National Engineering Handbook, 216. Washington, DC: USDA NRCS.
41. ↵
    1. USDA NRCS

    . 2018. Field Office Technical Guide: Constructed Wetland Practice 656. Washington, DC: USDA. https://efotg.sc.egov.usda.gov/#/details.
42. ↵
    1. USDA NRCS

    . 2019. CropScape – NASS CDL Program. Washington, DC: USDA NRCS. https://nassgeodata.gmu.edu/CropScape/.
43. ↵
    1. USDA NRCS Minnesota

    . 2015. National Water Quality Initiative Fact Sheet. Fairmont, MN: USDA NRCS Minnesota.
44. ↵
    1. USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency)

    . 2018. Nutrient and Sediment Estimation Tools for Watershed Protection. Washington, DC: USEPA.
45. ↵
    1. Zak, D.,
    2. B. Kronvang,
    3. M.V. Carstensen,
    4. C.C. Hoffmann,
    5. A. Kjeldgaard,
    6. S.E. Larsen,
    7. J. Audet,
    8. S. Egemose,
    9. C.A. Jorgensen,
    10. P. Feuerbach,
    11. F. Gertz, and
    12. H.S. Jensen

    . 2018. Nitrogen and phosphorus removal from agricultural runoff in integrated buffer zones. Environmental Science and Technology 52(11):6508–6517.

    OpenUrl
46. ↵
    1. Zak, D.,
    2. M. Stutter,
    3. H.S. Jensen,
    4. S. Egemose,
    5. M.V. Carstensen,
    6. J. Audet,
    7. J.A. Strand,
    8. P. Feuerbach,
    9. C.C. Hoffmann,
    10. B. Christen,
    11. S. Hille,
    12. M. Knudsen,
    13. J. Stockan,
    14. H. Watson,
    15. G. Heckrath, and
    16. B. Kronvang

    . 2019. An assessment of the multifunctionality of integrated buffer zones in northwestern Europe. Journal of Environmental Quality 48(2):362–375.

    OpenUrl