Methodology:
In order to get a snapshot of nutrient levels in local waters, samples were collected from four springs within the VT StREAM Lab, two of Blacksburg’s headwater springs, and ten local ponds (8 urban and 2 agricultural). Realtime data (temperature, pH, %DO, and specific conductivity) were collected from these locations and the samples were filtered and analyzed for nitrate, phosphate, carbon, and iron content.
In order to get a snapshot of nutrient levels in local waters, samples were collected from four springs within the VT StREAM Lab, two of Blacksburg’s headwater springs, and ten local ponds (8 urban and 2 agricultural). Realtime data (temperature, pH, %DO, and specific conductivity) were collected from these locations and the samples were filtered and analyzed for nitrate, phosphate, carbon, and iron content.
Results:
The figure on the right shows the average nutrient levels broken down by water source. Not surprisingly, the average values of dissolved inorganic carbon were higher in the springs. The springs also had higher average nitrate and total nitrogen levels, indicating high nitrate levels are not exclusively a result of surface water run-off, but can naturally occur in groundwater.
The figure on the right shows the average nutrient levels broken down by water source. Not surprisingly, the average values of dissolved inorganic carbon were higher in the springs. The springs also had higher average nitrate and total nitrogen levels, indicating high nitrate levels are not exclusively a result of surface water run-off, but can naturally occur in groundwater.
Because in reality a DNBR system would be installed at a spring, we sampled six local springs to determine the highest nitrogen content to use as source water for the lab-scale DNBR. Bringing spring water into the lab allowed us both a realistic water source and the simplicity of sampling and analyzing nutrient levels. Spring 3 was chosen due to logistical constraints at Spring 6.