<%BANNER%>

Phosphorus Sorption and Flux in Northern Everglades Soil under Drained and Flooded Conditions

xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20110218_AAAADY INGEST_TIME 2011-02-18T22:50:30Z PACKAGE UFE0013561_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 1051982 DFID F20110218_AACOJK ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH leeds_j_Page_57.jp2 GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
a72f075a4adb4d21edccf437e0d9b11e
SHA-1
4bedab835a40725c4d44a5802b8122b4413428d6
28741 F20110218_AACOEM leeds_j_Page_09.QC.jpg
aa488ff8637c42107717a17ee86f191d
c20d55aa8b8db16b34c8b82b8d443b8da8d2e8ee
102112 F20110218_AACNXP leeds_j_Page_60.jpg
6738ee2a71014a126a321e8caaeace47
e84974ef5ae9221054eefa2b29c2df96dc03560f
592475 F20110218_AACNSS leeds_j_Page_47.jp2
7dabbec249057ee594d2af3c7359d78a
802c7ea9ff3aaac86eb3d9e15526cf1dc013b6e1
104597 F20110218_AACOEN leeds_j_Page_11.jpg
f5ce00062d21728a1aac253092215518
f2eacf742759ad608a76346cb32f0ff871e87ce3
6438 F20110218_AACNXQ leeds_j_Page_06thm.jpg
4f76dd28238dd98184f1fa16abeafe6b
b5b9321f29d38276c4abd8859685d1d0243669e7
2040 F20110218_AACNST leeds_j_Page_55.txt
eecd61a1b96b3ce00c0350e2c963102a
51982812d2bfc9d8a9d9298e8f91960f86fbfdbc
517994 F20110218_AACOJL leeds_j_Page_58.jp2
9be45a2ae3502250f4c140d6900f03c4
c803a8ccd65378614722c6868db00aafd845d183
33834 F20110218_AACOEO leeds_j_Page_11.QC.jpg
18b2bac64f893969e344a9caaa557f87
1e5f75b72beab69fa4772f2ba7f752ec30c9bd07
7357 F20110218_AACNXR leeds_j_Page_35thm.jpg
2362b351add48dfa472dea1901cf6942
3f2fa225bcc8cbffcfdb67c86c995b7de1ee6d4b
18319 F20110218_AACNSU leeds_j_Page_73.pro
272f7b8aee1ff8d145f47c26f51431ba
933fb834530f5151d432a598e5d736d5c3d5ec22
908062 F20110218_AACOJM leeds_j_Page_59.jp2
63b62277f82a0450993c78ff4cb6b25a
a34ae6b48fd0279add89d36766292572dd91db6f
103318 F20110218_AACOEP leeds_j_Page_12.jpg
28eb7bc732fa9cd517d68edd41d30ecf
5e6c180261983abda07c0ac1147467c97b4966a2
467 F20110218_AACNXS leeds_j_Page_01.txt
630b1ae30403cf5699b31e7f92e9f30e
56313c519cbd6302c867eecd15278b17534c11cf
1051980 F20110218_AACOJN leeds_j_Page_60.jp2
502d720cc77adef4c9ed6319ddce4769
be37d6888ab25c436563cb486c162414c566fb8e
97092 F20110218_AACOEQ leeds_j_Page_13.jpg
35078fa4da1b3e65cae21da8f8800454
e4f590e122ec667ebe0363846080ffecaf6ab2e0
38413 F20110218_AACNXT leeds_j_Page_07.pro
6e6428849f60e3e173141f0d6d4569cb
156f3057a0958bb2a504e276ae436f0b07cac9da
4147 F20110218_AACNSV leeds_j_Page_29thm.jpg
1b8f8dcdb29a0452294880bb128e7e38
60b93bc6ec9e4daaa8c74a78d5c5450fd30fccd8
1051912 F20110218_AACOJO leeds_j_Page_61.jp2
3dbac91f68b405a22b3f56c228faa9a2
37cea88cab03178cc73b8b0c3459043fdc77160d
106961 F20110218_AACOER leeds_j_Page_14.jpg
c31900931138b9b3364aa00a77489fdc
2ca373d08efceb516d5e1c5acd5c825d604f9b41
1121 F20110218_AACNXU leeds_j_Page_05.txt
8bf9cd444b8b0207fb89ad6d6d05bc14
4a5eeff86831a5806f36f52d7fdf86a5516571e3
20875 F20110218_AACNSW leeds_j_Page_72.QC.jpg
347a607aa7429a7f2cd1f5faeec34eff
e7026b76399fb810939d4d8f230fe20ea5e72bcc
1051916 F20110218_AACOJP leeds_j_Page_62.jp2
90f7a19a93104d2ad79d4122a64aaa94
28d5143f3e9fff2ee828ed2bc88e31e9f19f3036
104583 F20110218_AACOES leeds_j_Page_15.jpg
cb674bdc9ed33b6d9e52706b9a4e8484
3ed06e9b4b5e0c794e69d23561614bc8e0de670f
2567 F20110218_AACNXV leeds_j_Page_44thm.jpg
ecf67b3d86f57fcfc1e31a08920df44b
d6cc4b5157381ffcc3cd8531c79e7bc5b0c76c6b
49136 F20110218_AACNSX leeds_j_Page_60.pro
651185d0620012d2c1e8d416dca1ad65
ece5436c20245cab137ba5cef0ba25540448ba6e
1051974 F20110218_AACOJQ leeds_j_Page_64.jp2
d49c37da04fd3735a15968abfd30718a
29d2aeb96abf332806d2d370f3ffd7d0b95f9059
472927 F20110218_AACNXW leeds_j_Page_31.jp2
bc27f2e32703d318f0502c472a34f71b
d6075c2c7797a3a3aba5a23c8f418e77e3826696
14564 F20110218_AACNSY leeds_j_Page_52.pro
9e60c1ba7fea2c2d3ecdaa185cc21701
1a8b9ce568d28cdb82f734de27f1b9612763b036
34562 F20110218_AACOET leeds_j_Page_15.QC.jpg
830ba297cb3c326787c7f2c95004faf6
98a546a3e41cbf44b5aba53df24414b1b3db8d95
641237 F20110218_AACOJR leeds_j_Page_66.jp2
6668773a5bcbb15270fc3acb4481bde8
93c13a8ad709e6a8020e8105e69452978c62a123
33723 F20110218_AACNXX leeds_j_Page_63.QC.jpg
89e29fca89ff2b34d8c44612f12e6b7d
92552e688b1daeba97d8d7dda14957210f5abbfc
36859 F20110218_AACNSZ leeds_j_Page_49.pro
0f5b13dcc5d43d1190364a7b720797d4
74d9cf67e6cfb6c986ad42e3ef5a3d87f97c0ad3
53186 F20110218_AACOEU leeds_j_Page_16.jpg
67d45357fba7c16b503bc64ff7c2f35e
0a6b0fdb084b13ab032b66e0f08495b33438cee1
795061 F20110218_AACOJS leeds_j_Page_68.jp2
c0b1a0a97f2f830aaa7d2e0998db94bc
6fd9471251dc5168b566c5ecea808b65e426b0bb
8423998 F20110218_AACNXY leeds_j_Page_19.tif
d3a10ba813f05ac625eebbfada4e1bcd
f9071120ee46dc087b0360ff68b73e82a95872e7
17579 F20110218_AACOEV leeds_j_Page_16.QC.jpg
3bc5e6871ad9bd7a27a12e5bfde10116
9f73ab29a0a4ed193f1b3d9a5be5a065462f1cbf
1051964 F20110218_AACOJT leeds_j_Page_69.jp2
da0c1b0236cf76fc6e495e2da8cc794a
883349466b6ca896d43a8116516a4421d34d844f
11527 F20110218_AACNXZ leeds_j_Page_46.QC.jpg
f41d691eed88a2e4240e16b47eebb9b8
22fff82ff3715988007d464b79f924a2f60ed48c
105782 F20110218_AACOEW leeds_j_Page_17.jpg
35b3e652a610d6abc7eb10bcd704337d
5b4b2b14626e509cd7732a41b1f05450f355a5d2
10728 F20110218_AACNVA leeds_j_Page_50.QC.jpg
9d3778bee767f10d584486221e24dbc7
92ad0f95b060bee8354ae8bb7232b25d65bbc844
F20110218_AACOJU leeds_j_Page_71.jp2
37e9220008b47a169942861f69302687
2d60d963ca5d34c646d5184ddce71d4d4b1292d5
34424 F20110218_AACOEX leeds_j_Page_17.QC.jpg
9d77e234af165fa11e33e55e80e87646
de803b0c0ddd3fdf123232c9c4289981b5e8adf9
8376 F20110218_AACNVB leeds_j_Page_32thm.jpg
a40cfdbe07666b4d9f9c510472751271
9c54fe4190ac5d9a778ba97701b203dc5635f7e1
802504 F20110218_AACOJV leeds_j_Page_72.jp2
0b9a3a2346c8282c76c35335681055a4
6dcb0186dff9546d831cb5b0ddfb39ad35ffc370
1897 F20110218_AACOCA leeds_j_Page_57.txt
bad3b77ecbfed650f989324c08204f27
1dccb41a0111c58b8d4e2446909959b73a744ae1
104372 F20110218_AACOEY leeds_j_Page_18.jpg
6b21951849ce50b770038ee55d2b2459
65726a5a9acad147e33a53c063692577dc8db589
F20110218_AACNVC leeds_j_Page_43.tif
5c9a4e38628024ea919cc7b741a2eec4
35af87a354aaa6a3370de3d4b4261505e4f10002
427158 F20110218_AACOJW leeds_j_Page_73.jp2
d37d67b10e1a1354e1edb8ddfd41c53f
529159fc9c4aadd540e02a6ae6a3ca6ee5168ba3
936 F20110218_AACOCB leeds_j_Page_58.txt
4c7bbf782e8eda7b07f3b4c62c3f03b1
12a538e2b2eddb8c86b853796fa978524223378b
33864 F20110218_AACOEZ leeds_j_Page_18.QC.jpg
9687272eee0743ec231bdf2fbd515ad2
8b6851a4b08634ccd6167abb1e24570efe6d81b4
34844 F20110218_AACNVD leeds_j_Page_62.QC.jpg
f0da4f2b5ff5135dcdf9cab10a221093
185528d9789493a0890565c0c08f418694aefed3
2919 F20110218_AACOJX leeds_j_Page_02thm.jpg
d5829db34b34f9d1e22f4717109cfb2a
99eda50bfa7c2dba67f986ccf7cb426b4c51d1da
1686 F20110218_AACOCC leeds_j_Page_59.txt
7b683fe21853c645805d5a10864d53cf
744ad8586343d257db40047d973ea173ce6d1782
34474 F20110218_AACNVE leeds_j_Page_14.QC.jpg
8800bd9c248d5a872a1f6bda6552a1d7
5745578d4302bfa24f3751d5b0402c4350ceaa9a
4156 F20110218_AACOJY leeds_j_Page_03thm.jpg
9a6c171c9a6179ac02c1a0b2892e94fd
6977ca2aa15715cbea10f41952e0c671e6549ea9
104233 F20110218_AACOHA leeds_j_Page_55.jpg
a0aeb680693d4c36586a74bfcd80f47d
cbfbc74cefe722c0e52cc6207a2f530c1e041674
2063 F20110218_AACOCD leeds_j_Page_62.txt
7487455a80a37479d2e0d0c6f2593889
c9b9939317831e42fee6b780865434f0b78dd5aa
967301 F20110218_AACNVF leeds_j_Page_35.jp2
3637d4a1fd11d6916e56391a163393f4
8b7bcd79dd44f4459dec6d17c63d3f3fb500f1d8
2452 F20110218_AACOJZ leeds_j_Page_04thm.jpg
bf68b4a3bd81b9e5cab39a5b165db590
78897d99619473ba0c5e4a37e43c5f873c991be1
106830 F20110218_AACOHB leeds_j_Page_56.jpg
7dbcdb2c8dcf048a3d91a3a7427c1a4a
351c847a7d9a3b2a0530d72ec829f7a7d37c475e
F20110218_AACNVG leeds_j_Page_30.tif
6d2ccbcee5b823bf88ef2f709e83e1c1
e2dbf3978b3790cc4cb0d40773deffb383fa1a12
34631 F20110218_AACOHC leeds_j_Page_56.QC.jpg
ad7c7fb2f29d58958f58e47a9c3eaba1
6746fccacda9c48d8490ecfddbcaa2ac68a959d2
1894 F20110218_AACOCE leeds_j_Page_65.txt
ba50a2cefc99b134f6b77f6fb144af79
82eb0c30a224b5788796b8cd8ab5aeb0028f597e
8517 F20110218_AACNVH leeds_j_Page_10thm.jpg
236f7bb8f631dadff958da791b592d21
3cadcb1a984ea41a19ce70d07fc0dd7ad803f9dc
98410 F20110218_AACOHD leeds_j_Page_57.jpg
a5267627b9cb8eb1a0d1d69b7aa3cbc0
5363ead3d6c44a882a4d03104ead9746fea00f68
1532 F20110218_AACOCF leeds_j_Page_66.txt
185b7b38cda46f004c2e89988f9d4d37
b905b71186cb860b5ed39d4b65add2b19d475109
105388 F20110218_AACNVI leeds_j_Page_64.jpg
aae6c75defe3bfc4e3910bcca5961be3
bca408f3f373367472d52ce535cdc4eefb878f04
32291 F20110218_AACOHE leeds_j_Page_57.QC.jpg
0367af9d431f3f74b263f60d25319cca
e7def472c0c734e3e840ad0df6aa3b669fde326f
551 F20110218_AACOCG leeds_j_Page_67.txt
ab5e4842da5e21a9e76ba8f9fd934c30
eebe4fe961baafe2d8124015c740d1abe0efc300
10199 F20110218_AACNVJ leeds_j_Page_50.pro
a15e0e1a0d679b7028530dc927267563
015fcefe9ea713a32c62e5aa3eaaafa85f778ecf
16293 F20110218_AACOHF leeds_j_Page_58.QC.jpg
8d5085595d0472b0ba9c3afec33e88df
2ffcd358c607d4e0cd83b5e34fec098abf449703
2435 F20110218_AACOCH leeds_j_Page_70.txt
bf882b798bff625c9f0843323535b3eb
4456bb0d97842feedb962e087d3662aaf790aee5
34170 F20110218_AACNVK leeds_j_Page_12.QC.jpg
c932af2b561c1696f2e4b619572d3f1a
ac111763df8f8b4cb8be8bbc763503f7f614d666
26902 F20110218_AACOHG leeds_j_Page_59.QC.jpg
c676f2fb23730ca09c827e4fa3142d03
261f8ef65d299d82896caf8c6238f15b47f058f5
1495 F20110218_AACOCI leeds_j_Page_72.txt
bb4e24b42166ced60dacd9a17cdd7245
55e672dc11160759ef6e26b6966c29578b3e9b99
1051957 F20110218_AACNVL leeds_j_Page_39.jp2
a7447f1ef762cea130afa58c02aba175
3c8013ac69fd6a4c75ac7a5871190c080c1cbd39
32505 F20110218_AACOHH leeds_j_Page_60.QC.jpg
a4a070cb42858e8cbdd14c15e082ac3b
ca7521bdd53eb7522d41b1e47d777bde51ddbd95
15314 F20110218_AACOCJ leeds_j_Page_02.pro
60a9f4e5a347957ff4cd74d15f5751f2
1c689df8a111ae37a8d693ee695d0989e7bd0075
4878 F20110218_AACNVM leeds_j_Page_45thm.jpg
68622d9f74efea63489654a618226192
78abc021bb9c6a94ab0d31bc778d61732105d94e
104271 F20110218_AACOHI leeds_j_Page_61.jpg
f6158e10bbf4f86bc9d240db2e0108ea
6f9e981a2d4fe4efe7926f2ef50ab7aec6422407
69713 F20110218_AACOCK leeds_j_Page_03.pro
f66cc9569a3eca5d94b912b2c2737548
78fde3d4dd795517fa73514432291f6b17142620
34408 F20110218_AACNVN leeds_j_Page_64.QC.jpg
a2df9a34e0d0b5171b62c57d88641418
9e1565eb9c3196a9ef602d6cb3ba97769e229524
62164 F20110218_AACOCL leeds_j_Page_06.pro
975956c80361a0cb4e066b11db5f9e6f
f866987066a2368f0a35dc14b242117907078ad7
2064 F20110218_AACNVO leeds_j_Page_14.txt
f6bfced260dd11d052bdb28f6e98d5b9
2134fb4a67652a5117d041d5c13eedfc6737032a
33442 F20110218_AACOHJ leeds_j_Page_61.QC.jpg
687da8b4acae25180b29516c10c227c8
9e91719177e9445cf0f108621dac3bc7e6dac5d6
45280 F20110218_AACOCM leeds_j_Page_08.pro
3653b158148477de6675da317dedc296
b4f773111fad81d79839f00a354ce2771f199835
F20110218_AACNVP leeds_j_Page_25.tif
89c31856838da5fab19887fdf5742a31
841939044b697e61747cf28af5d3a78d3a0d00c3
98889 F20110218_AACOHK leeds_j_Page_65.jpg
4e75f568d72647fa44bfe3d22727cf18
a3a34bf3d188f791477292f873d33ba2828ec67e
52546 F20110218_AACOCN leeds_j_Page_10.pro
a4ff7392c27f3a17c857c88e62eff657
316a267195662be0b6c3a6ae08671353d2d23a7a
F20110218_AACNVQ leeds_j_Page_58.tif
6413faab0ace9be36c29b5a0cf56e664
7d5b7bac47c4adbdd12b1a917bc41e233e4fdc52
32233 F20110218_AACOHL leeds_j_Page_65.QC.jpg
cc3eeb2b2d846bc5e15a096d11c88013
5fd6256fef95687b8fdf6b73cd76df6a078ac509
51900 F20110218_AACOCO leeds_j_Page_11.pro
edd545d20360ba024f02997ea6bbf408
263a25350597f626866fb6c867504bb8c18b7158
89986 F20110218_AACNVR leeds_j_Page_35.jpg
cb56bb6d7ac30cd475b88be17c8181e5
4d1c41a23d01da1355e5aff6d850f4e1d94801b4
66673 F20110218_AACOHM leeds_j_Page_66.jpg
e64cc3b916026dd30dfe845021af6ba3
1cdaa6b12688ec6e0b07ee61053051da685a78d8
47830 F20110218_AACOCP leeds_j_Page_13.pro
372436f8e5bf3c885f20fa12209d2631
c3d9682ed333d5b9bc5dde77378b70656765e7be
2053 F20110218_AACNVS leeds_j_Page_69.txt
221d4c09997d7710cacb15eb098d4ea0
d9221c15523954d6cd8ac4111a3ba57aa73fefb2
20407 F20110218_AACOHN leeds_j_Page_66.QC.jpg
934bd10c321d4e2f2e6c2b7f229de25b
4009f14d3e53d7c878ba78241a6d1245705b1461
14930 F20110218_AACOCQ leeds_j_Page_16.pro
d85479d720c10040854325a24e5ca332
61f1eb222cd8281e7d3d4a9d743e0ed136e411fe
286226 F20110218_AACNVT leeds_j_Page_27.jp2
8dc1c93c089c9d37ea6b99e30b0c15cd
102a6774a3399df7cf263c7988c0a5ba02a51c0a
21318 F20110218_AACOHO leeds_j_Page_67.jpg
b3bbabd0011b9d624d7d1a0ef4546c78
f276cc18c81136157412e49c255fe3ef2c16bb4f
51095 F20110218_AACOCR leeds_j_Page_17.pro
ae9517b6b061b7cdc4bcd543f498847a
24bd02a5e464282169c7a739b6a1438de21e288e
50377 F20110218_AACNVU leeds_j_Page_12.pro
7994177e3d2773f77d56d886bc238a62
6fd7d9c709d568509353902d855f2b74704db7c7
7098 F20110218_AACOHP leeds_j_Page_67.QC.jpg
6cc31b18ecbb30e6295a5125aaaad4f3
e560b69ef3a3dfcc78e575ba43e3a0ed9a2db27d
7644 F20110218_AACOCS leeds_j_Page_19.pro
1b56cabd4eea907c6b7b9854817e4146
fb32199450ea1265e2f4b2b186158ba9514c50c7
85412 F20110218_AACNVV leeds_j_Page_68.jpg
38db2b38a8afdbb87f314dbff9e70d9a
ae3d999839eaca6644d1e2ed436b1838512a690d
99448 F20110218_AACOHQ leeds_j_Page_69.jpg
0ef5b2fc51c351f66d5ce2b833d91d73
ff229f1e49dda03e509c6a797dfab0a27320491e
46449 F20110218_AACOCT leeds_j_Page_20.pro
30dba3210dc01d51a2f1ecb3d3ea16a6
76cdad41ada748af06af755c99517ac38a677d5f
347 F20110218_AACNVW leeds_j_Page_19.txt
bd4c5a7bddf5ffcbc3dcb428c1c6acd7
0d17c3dd82487eb4fafb903f355795ae9ebd703a
121270 F20110218_AACOHR leeds_j_Page_70.jpg
cb7fedd22ca23694b77f10ef1611460f
e73ff163397f0d31ce820a1e2d6a287ce499a1a9
52802 F20110218_AACOCU leeds_j_Page_22.pro
0333b977281735b44630adad35ed1a2b
12a2e7a02531cdde2a020280bb897d2cede00d3a
3801 F20110218_AACNVX leeds_j_Page_46thm.jpg
8c7076718b0a6da370922dc52a7c8466
173cee4aff529a38a1e72ff9b7e86e6e123c87c6
119010 F20110218_AACOHS leeds_j_Page_71.jpg
d2e6c08c2048d368e55420b1bc2e03b7
de5bd1be156a51e9474f3b4399407a0092873c09
51331 F20110218_AACOCV leeds_j_Page_23.pro
686cf3bad624369c71046c93ed91dcc8
b76a4e745a22414c907ed42ddcfb9edaabe9d4cb
74410 F20110218_AACOHT leeds_j_Page_72.jpg
66db074bbea8b5002be5e7a2df2f5f55
aeb810332de8b117a65e002180697659b26f8027
34039 F20110218_AACOCW leeds_j_Page_24.pro
789f1030f4e880d2637f12e858dec3b3
235cbfb73e1e997570dd72ffef94a6c02e75692b
2037 F20110218_AACNTA leeds_j_Page_61.txt
7a649df08e443d73e10381ce2ed1f2cf
26b348e5f6b09c489d93f1552314681f17690f9a
83555 F20110218_AACNVY leeds_j_Page_59.jpg
3319cd42eb92ad250079407077fd7fde
6bc05299f94b368b21c53096616b336546215f12
13196 F20110218_AACOHU leeds_j_Page_73.QC.jpg
2f4b6d1ce42b01c5b027b1fc4199e852
550a56140f47e8f6a783fa9d8016c60569797095
37950 F20110218_AACOCX leeds_j_Page_25.pro
f3f9e42422214b49235c406a442925a5
b22eafe391cbca481248cffed426398b5d30ce08
51777 F20110218_AACNTB leeds_j_Page_61.pro
e87f3d1b27ffaef09b7659f2d6619a9c
cf23406288142e2a8fffce920437a425a762f083
15925 F20110218_AACNVZ leeds_j_Page_45.QC.jpg
df8a5bd383b2ba319c3a2a30972eb3d9
952ddb92c7ddad7799ec87c8dec0c393c54a5046
246800 F20110218_AACOHV leeds_j_Page_01.jp2
0435231c7779ece3a6f28281fb0eedb2
a380f70149060f44a1eea4ed3cc55f2f6cbb88bb
F20110218_AACOAA leeds_j_Page_52.tif
517217fa8235b7af0a55b8bf4adb5365
495430564523b31639cf7e6bf9b4aaa07b370e55
19810 F20110218_AACOCY leeds_j_Page_26.pro
b5a80c7a1a23de7c7701bb95d4d7a1ea
178e0af78c37236bae92607935d8ccf0c64220e8
31562 F20110218_AACNTC leeds_j_Page_13.QC.jpg
f16748b83f0a9262439473b66c24063a
4e74dd3c81658d6bc2afcefb5acff24a4de792f8
356951 F20110218_AACOHW leeds_j_Page_02.jp2
b46bce8500c390885397f26181192e13
678e61eb821784d49a18fc5a46cf69ced51dd993
F20110218_AACOAB leeds_j_Page_53.tif
0172e12f90ee5e60d5fdd40213993354
44ac315a68c83d29338048e6e3a54a90280b9233
13039 F20110218_AACOCZ leeds_j_Page_27.pro
0801c9c8003ec61ea2ccabd7179b9020
39b44acfebdba7a45c469cb3c99592fe94ef4c2e
6355 F20110218_AACNTD leeds_j_Page_25thm.jpg
c09e2a0567193b48dccb2021cd5376fe
f58aade99959f885f2f3ae971ad32184d1f4947f
104735 F20110218_AACNYA leeds_j_Page_62.jpg
de63df80936e1398e99a1a7ca2abf2c4
29e4734273824c6b06c0109abad0d8efdaffad42
699537 F20110218_AACOHX leeds_j_Page_03.jp2
817ce010a94a559022e95c1ec27e7928
ce404be4ef3119d49ef8c04a564e763bff3d7a2c
51689 F20110218_AACNTE leeds_j_Page_62.pro
b9676c2465c31519823dd9c865c341e9
393eed0b649188f60f9365f1580f62d88c9fd743
52163 F20110218_AACNYB leeds_j_Page_18.pro
767f5b0c8dfb46f87d8e03bac90e0273
c942bc538ee9567525712a7de50f4854f28e7593
495090 F20110218_AACOHY leeds_j_Page_05.jp2
068117bdc1b80025d00420abf746135c
e0adc76aa5dec3d591424d7a53607c8191e3fb51
5735 F20110218_AACNTF leeds_j_Page_44.pro
7a610675874c4b9d709fd823cef73c8a
5982c20ddd6860a4844ed45fc30fabea3f126784
18459 F20110218_AACOFA leeds_j_Page_19.jpg
43507d7f81c6f10dcc2e6a49e9991015
55c0e0e007015caba304857c35e7dc9eaf6e7ccb
580600 F20110218_AACNYC leeds_j_Page_16.jp2
e990ed8833651eb7750792c9f9be64d5
4319739853c1884cfcc1f89d87b187f0f1bb9219
F20110218_AACOAC leeds_j_Page_55.tif
4afdc0ddaf84df5d701fb08d60ca366d
1fe2925e94bf9f3733cd5285c1a1a634b7084008
919294 F20110218_AACOHZ leeds_j_Page_06.jp2
8015f6240763ab3f15504fb5b893f33a
71b320d8848b4fb00b5727bae4b4bb021cc0bbee
323629 F20110218_AACNTG leeds_j_Page_04.jp2
df2fbe681d124da5a85c848d3621b143
0fe9cd788d931ed99d7954877d0c645f92cdda13
6539 F20110218_AACOFB leeds_j_Page_19.QC.jpg
4cbe77cd33b07689d5fc3efe159857f6
cb3d47ca6935f6ff210d76cc3bff270c9fb1748a
F20110218_AACNYD leeds_j_Page_63.tif
656b6e114e45a1bc67f89750fff7e3ca
23ae0a72f869fd7a58612b17c3de023ec60db7a3
F20110218_AACOAD leeds_j_Page_56.tif
52b1c35a998647d2e10e3cbce79e3c45
0c3b258a755d08582be9bf6b911d5f0b2f99b4fc
1702 F20110218_AACNTH leeds_j_Page_48.txt
b734c8cab20181db25245f187d3c32d1
730021e35f351af4676ca1365f6610bbfdc41e9c
30701 F20110218_AACOFC leeds_j_Page_20.QC.jpg
b35753878eb60cde4d9ae1e70acef640
dd1f1c048d208380127b87f3ed14fb7d16aa9c13
52888 F20110218_AACNYE leeds_j_Page_56.pro
dddb8e362cf73a4fed12961875a7330c
2fbb25f1fb450dd94d2f23b3c8cd191f51dce2e9
F20110218_AACOAE leeds_j_Page_57.tif
3325ad46a3d29d3bca8e6ad297d3e703
7b772671a8564fa34ea383e9231be8dc9f44458c
3628 F20110218_AACOKA leeds_j_Page_05thm.jpg
14a04929c67db0ffc227904ea8ee81d4
a9cb240338510a86ae1c7ff424a629a2f6ce5cdf
592964 F20110218_AACNTI leeds_j.pdf
89264a45501ded4f347432b56bca6ca4
7514544642d3f9c24a03a0e7f070291a883615fe
105025 F20110218_AACOFD leeds_j_Page_21.jpg
8358649231f816791795030207e48288
438cd7012cb5d15010057fde1a40c6e67995f121
8032 F20110218_AACNYF leeds_j_Page_57thm.jpg
251add310cd87ea16e068aff3c03363d
093a2faaac54b2e3ddcc1a46b9dc7727d5ad877c
F20110218_AACOAF leeds_j_Page_59.tif
52989e53f312f0bca2084454f19f6dc2
b64c94a365a694edec4e2ebe7f7c655e80ef02b0
6477 F20110218_AACOKB leeds_j_Page_07thm.jpg
2532540c56b325f053659a594f69a560
9884191cfb8108f76196a06c283ab18bebad4727
F20110218_AACNTJ leeds_j_Page_54.tif
eca9162eb278b86854d8f411abb39c0d
9b7ed6b0a638932e7819d866e9adb91a80b4ae35
34924 F20110218_AACOFE leeds_j_Page_21.QC.jpg
59c2f47e3e51a97b3badc139acaaa9a0
22ba797d5425567530aa17ad7d60a7fbec874e65
F20110218_AACNYG leeds_j_Page_12.tif
f60739e6962fd7a053c3ec023f3d08a8
74afd09e422c5c729cf6e22e6aac76a124d8ec92
F20110218_AACOAG leeds_j_Page_61.tif
ce2cb74b77d824b6964aee2524d64f12
c68b0b2ac72f71b36c6f84229d87d5dbe5841fba
7414 F20110218_AACOKC leeds_j_Page_08thm.jpg
c71d04ece3770b614965b75bd5de95dc
07948ac411cd8bd0846e6c1b9b4d3b2871378394
F20110218_AACNTK leeds_j_Page_21.tif
e61cf3a1b3e9818e827a5544da33c720
6bc951e56a3ccf0ec77fa2f6c4c1048f1e145022
34965 F20110218_AACOFF leeds_j_Page_22.QC.jpg
6d2b6f31a4270c0aa7b5b5524b02d769
3f96099fce7c4876d5b6cfb9debc39b707da0efa
F20110218_AACNYH leeds_j_Page_69.tif
524aaba537b446d3827bcc76b7e9a24e
85858409949f801736d236bccf5aaec72039acab
F20110218_AACOAH leeds_j_Page_62.tif
63fc2143e29bbe76be84f222d933ffae
051fb8c5f93ed924fa48801f450c02d260472caa
8510 F20110218_AACOKD leeds_j_Page_11thm.jpg
954f0629ec97627b9b600d1ace1148dd
5babdc4c5bf1a0455f2cc9f433161cece9cd018a
F20110218_AACNTL leeds_j_Page_34.tif
e00152fa368c4222d472d6c1204b7a6f
58407c9313712257e8a5aa023ca8151fd1beef7a
36034 F20110218_AACOFG leeds_j_Page_23.QC.jpg
c57c1f791d841aa34fea68af841e7757
321a1c7d0ad930914e805917820a2094a820e934
33952 F20110218_AACNYI leeds_j_Page_46.jpg
031ab1ef6ad298c9aea3ac9e3c9f358e
df33c9030fb96f5bff1476363303d37eab21d0b6
F20110218_AACOAI leeds_j_Page_64.tif
664b720fe1f040f31c8609d07af1b105
208c3960f8406bb12eea1ef034165318f850f249
8454 F20110218_AACOKE leeds_j_Page_12thm.jpg
c8dfe50495ba765a957881422aac5300
43df2f813a4810d328958295729688f7a622a353
23008 F20110218_AACNTM leeds_j_Page_24.QC.jpg
cc3a5d3190e3743a1ae47c4f370f9e62
e51f176fd7c689b6f6275b4e2c0560f81aeaf00c
1051956 F20110218_AACNYJ leeds_j_Page_37.jp2
0f9458809cf77edda0e24c6f29e0d4d4
f700b66ebfdeb3f2a7116a8334436222df3b9838
F20110218_AACOAJ leeds_j_Page_65.tif
6174cdbf27ec42083c1f023cebff81d5
06173cf91b03f3a6c3f1cabe57918db84a20203b
8209 F20110218_AACOKF leeds_j_Page_13thm.jpg
a3dfa5ab07c216eebb85ce761d673ada
8d070895a070e0ff61083676cf5a789d39aec688
946 F20110218_AACNTN leeds_j_Page_27.txt
13b36c2ca1556b18c06714e439ceca1c
2f1317c845cf34bd9b91d235788873ffddfeed6b
70405 F20110218_AACOFH leeds_j_Page_24.jpg
e5a6c3f831b81228a0b8a8fd05990ebf
f87a01519922be88cbf5a248242e627b6bbfebeb
11750 F20110218_AACNYK leeds_j_Page_26.QC.jpg
e3dea9a7416b4a8b4af5d8a3d1744d95
46033ed6eff75ca58934617c536a2680de50955d
F20110218_AACOAK leeds_j_Page_67.tif
92da6f4fe50bb7d03c4dbd47f4b91dfe
7b80a3f75332e44900e6c4f07e1c00bce3bcd556
5010 F20110218_AACOKG leeds_j_Page_16thm.jpg
53837c290eaad81d4237987c277561e9
022ec9d85696aa3a17704c4a6b2df88f63ec70ec
1807 F20110218_AACNTO leeds_j_Page_35.txt
aef1123915f9683a67eaad9574cf887f
1406cb5f616b2de9f91ead51c4ce289e054b28fe
78250 F20110218_AACOFI leeds_j_Page_25.jpg
fa9979d67914ed922879ecf4ece5272c
be5b6823a0732e36b4f60ada21781feb6cab832a
6300 F20110218_AACNYL leeds_j_Page_47thm.jpg
5aa4fc5caebcd60e69e7390668a76a61
7c7b9bf3ee725ab63f0ada4f9e67e0863a8d3d75
F20110218_AACOAL leeds_j_Page_68.tif
2b89368a0208e58195acb738cf956542
1811b9873016e59f34385facb7bfc4b60024d3f4
8310 F20110218_AACOKH leeds_j_Page_17thm.jpg
d32ce25dd0dddc3f90fe4d383b2c9874
a3b5adbfdf7b649cc623754026efdbbbe3480b66
8672 F20110218_AACNTP leeds_j_Page_33thm.jpg
48686ff30ad79614e99fbc2120671b61
77b956a6cf27cd34d5437e3bfde1560219a5baf9
25881 F20110218_AACOFJ leeds_j_Page_25.QC.jpg
d271880dbf54e6b54e8aff1e1adae594
de6c27c88ba0c07e6d4f97c8a1446e9efb4ac456
1693 F20110218_AACNYM leeds_j_Page_07.txt
bc8d724e4f1e33e13b827fece6d459e4
9937832b1fe4e6050dfe25300e4f0610e83a8b3c
F20110218_AACOAM leeds_j_Page_70.tif
1203a768481da2584cf807b916d15f51
d5a607e5c97a0c0aa50c19c1a18013c7ed5bbdc3
1839 F20110218_AACOKI leeds_j_Page_19thm.jpg
18676afdef7a0f6cd4a223b40608f518
40e8f55dad48e036d9c9379ee881d1f094473a7c
F20110218_AACNTQ leeds_j_Page_60.tif
58358449175831cb7f9dafea0de3857b
bbc2fa85589ea5b34bc482eb7507f6cd1eb68dbc
11148 F20110218_AACOFK leeds_j_Page_27.QC.jpg
219ea0f5ef1c67e434434d59ee785983
c7810823c8aa9c74e30732256c4587bfb2673980
95451 F20110218_AACNYN leeds_j_Page_20.jpg
fcf29b1fa834ef00398b04efce41bc14
f830332d819b78707e73ac096b180fc4087bf42f
F20110218_AACOAN leeds_j_Page_71.tif
4679e883cde537f3d6957ee054d2f250
6e1de1e4fd328f656ceec5c062c11e4581dd29bf
8718 F20110218_AACOKJ leeds_j_Page_21thm.jpg
45d7917832d2a966b67b5d4d074a7436
6b8b8243a2fa243f400599ca4be816f7926aaaa6
8465 F20110218_AACNTR leeds_j_Page_15thm.jpg
1e4ff35a6cd3b195ffafea60da7b3639
c8be5c082579d91b50fe0f56b370443576fd5f3a
103164 F20110218_AACOFL leeds_j_Page_28.jpg
4d2d3eb4e6a6b02b3dd2de2cfa552fd1
f7749dc4f8af5f149661ce8ffd2f8e4e41e2c089
1749 F20110218_AACNYO leeds_j_Page_68.txt
b4d102aa96d9eac123de300d89705b3a
c9508b0cf45fae7559106aa40cca72146492eacd
F20110218_AACOAO leeds_j_Page_72.tif
50e261e5929d2f0f5b08931d7c2cebba
3bd63ee65cc85e62129403df5fc9c8d2d2a0a0eb
8762 F20110218_AACOKK leeds_j_Page_22thm.jpg
bef16e23490113a2bb5c92eb2dd99a83
de8d52782571ce1b77da1462fb196625df7e8796
2383 F20110218_AACNTS leeds_j_Page_71.txt
7f3a486d2e59551dbe6bc09913a9255d
fd66aa4e5daa8d9244814b8b00dccf0e200ecbc8
31624 F20110218_AACOFM leeds_j_Page_28.QC.jpg
6c33e5c00e6ae73b2d67b348a0befc92
aaedd49fbd9b68eff9e0d43f5f5a3ed811694c9d
35086 F20110218_AACNYP leeds_j_Page_10.QC.jpg
697f3cbc26524d45488e30a5e91a7b81
d299747f6fc42354eb865156ca3f5c8ea059b406
657 F20110218_AACOAP leeds_j_Page_02.txt
94a756f082a17d814fb8d1c012f8a733
e1702ced48bb9be5c78529f34871f7da42dabc02
5828 F20110218_AACOKL leeds_j_Page_24thm.jpg
a64a8ca6f49cfd2fccdc2d37f968a4d0
b7821172aa865f281a1af34590effd8489a3b91d
F20110218_AACNTT leeds_j_Page_13.tif
801a684c20ee465a38aface38e358bb0
eaa4843a0c1035da0e42873de6bc7ebb3f2e667e
35562 F20110218_AACOFN leeds_j_Page_29.jpg
35e6d7cf4836da414badcdfcaca7ee54
e5a87ebc99271448eed64f794edf3b9e96533b95
118657 F20110218_AACNYQ UFE0013561_00001.xml FULL
cbc2345b75286fa2091a957876fb5c78
1f692b45e32a326c272a2b7585a4a5a2a3c8ad5e
2757 F20110218_AACOAQ leeds_j_Page_03.txt
41d604801e4a758dd17d0d238f9c0f85
90b30b7d4b26b8abd5b44d2dfa1cb69b6640b3b1
F20110218_AACNTU leeds_j_Page_28.tif
9d571b6864eeaad00779a533a433fa15
b1dad22fb9a1972ddc9d1b010e219d0f42f6ca92
12233 F20110218_AACOFO leeds_j_Page_29.QC.jpg
a1ccaa08dc86d50fe8b1aa3c8654cf3e
71ce10e0091b778c74b5995fdc41c5ef8a4576f0
992 F20110218_AACOAR leeds_j_Page_04.txt
a8d4d708994aeab4da122b37b9c93e7f
b28154e7521036aad8952948d00b4af9b8d50092
3692 F20110218_AACOKM leeds_j_Page_26thm.jpg
6a15ef2a2be20e4b296da7f7273748f2
ab012bf3d7363ec6619bee09045b0e801d74406f
52470 F20110218_AACNTV leeds_j_Page_14.pro
962c0dc0353cc41be39fed0c3a539b85
1e03289104daa28f7c5b3625d09a4b0bb46a1050
29385 F20110218_AACOFP leeds_j_Page_30.jpg
3078b776e555dec8de184cd8bc3442b1
fa222f242d9f3dabeaf1694494940c6d405dd42e
2473 F20110218_AACOAS leeds_j_Page_06.txt
92e4c84885f525336073eb64178da6fb
924a33a1402ab126d91e4902fa7aaa5b140126e4
3771 F20110218_AACOKN leeds_j_Page_27thm.jpg
9e31a6da360fd8e2ebe9f56e4b8d9883
daa9fa69030018c1ba14564ccad0b7ba3f09b78d
10434 F20110218_AACOFQ leeds_j_Page_30.QC.jpg
4c772fd60f5a7db63f838258851c1389
8d67198da321e0ef063d00e7f7f312205e3bbe81
F20110218_AACNYT leeds_j_Page_02.tif
3e90d2d4400199a8f91b98b2a043877e
000057580d316678350b7f82b7435b79ef7578ad
1789 F20110218_AACOAT leeds_j_Page_08.txt
fb44634360f89138fb8c71e0e9f3e29d
5ea1c1c5f18ff42261baea58633e8c8dd1ade0bb
3435 F20110218_AACOKO leeds_j_Page_30thm.jpg
83bdfb2fdadc214f40c307fe057e9af1
0127b5d9866ed8558201c0a4def25a6e7a4f5837
106941 F20110218_AACNTW leeds_j_Page_23.jpg
9da43dc52a9a288b1bb6e62acb8ec2cd
dda268767e8207792d65a6f977a62c5bfa28f5cc
51765 F20110218_AACOFR leeds_j_Page_31.jpg
7a31f32e204f00ea579d339b1b64e610
bab0a69d56d4a219227633be67b122a69f56f86e
F20110218_AACNYU leeds_j_Page_03.tif
50ccf84eab2e2bb51636bfce71da6c7f
56c99c4c0c123489b86f98e390abe35fa5e8c66d
1752 F20110218_AACOAU leeds_j_Page_09.txt
98daf50df083c5c0955fe6ee406a4a2f
3d81c6a142062972620d3f988d13b417fbc0dfd5
8434 F20110218_AACOKP leeds_j_Page_36thm.jpg
f71e47def550b6c9468ffbb0de2faba0
a73a9a32d8b23b09e8d12aaf2482ea38bee8e2c1
18548 F20110218_AACOFS leeds_j_Page_31.QC.jpg
e9ba5d25a7e2f3c2ce2a6ebf34f1bf71
8395fc130fb6c86ffbb19177f59b41df27535438
F20110218_AACNYV leeds_j_Page_04.tif
dafca827a3e8119b22a03c0a7713cc25
327209476edcc4a9679f3840e422818e6d6181db
2035 F20110218_AACOAV leeds_j_Page_11.txt
c234a3fe33904e08a2d39a4330e367d0
0a9ebdbb3c262d3768cb7f7db3ffe50776471df7
1051972 F20110218_AACNTX leeds_j_Page_65.jp2
d82b4f1ae5d41ebb0fc5a9ac323de16a
3244d360fa8ff10c1f87f4ab52a52cfedf9dc377
8678 F20110218_AACOKQ leeds_j_Page_37thm.jpg
5a3c13a7e5b8da17c8b427316c8f62d8
98059761fa04da7f632b2c89ee48aa9cfc00b9b2
114020 F20110218_AACOFT leeds_j_Page_32.jpg
505d83698ae54168e5d04eb7e9c9e7fb
9d1dce3eee008a972024a2ba5522db4d0f9ab9d5
F20110218_AACNYW leeds_j_Page_05.tif
ba6060734711d825838cf2bc6d827be7
7fcffa0d401751107ba5fc3eb6d19fc2c12d9764
2004 F20110218_AACOAW leeds_j_Page_12.txt
8d156004d25c1534a6c1639794d4cb0f
dcf6a86576662f28177dd07b99d7e49310c695f6
28489 F20110218_AACNTY leeds_j_Page_69.QC.jpg
c280a7c6b53fc53da0ff5b5145f40f4a
cf8d9f69864830013e36f42a03d921f51d1074e6
8258 F20110218_AACOKR leeds_j_Page_38thm.jpg
de1e0b42d6eda5e50cbf548a7c49029e
28b64d451893f442deb4b5f92e81416da884a237
35724 F20110218_AACOFU leeds_j_Page_32.QC.jpg
9cdbea3e18e1c36749948a470a9e9dbd
61072595b32244ac11528cd76a5d7501e42829ae
F20110218_AACNYX leeds_j_Page_06.tif
07265f62e4cb0b1e5dbbebb53f693379
8f3a17747a287994e1948e1609af7f8ec5e887f5
1920 F20110218_AACOAX leeds_j_Page_13.txt
fd58e61ae0dd8cefe0f523d918f1b984
c0e6bc2a33d8e849414cb64b455bde473790b242
2105 F20110218_AACNTZ leeds_j_Page_64.txt
7e14cbaaa83ce0c184a33ad26e0bfe4a
b3d3d12e856ce10b760d9968850e57fe61daedf0
7961 F20110218_AACOKS leeds_j_Page_39thm.jpg
90e135a2afa62fdce98e6e446b51a2e9
6ca3fee7ab68f2f11b9e670958cf92b3029bf567
107267 F20110218_AACOFV leeds_j_Page_33.jpg
561211823728d75d201f503f692f3bce
12364c50cdeafa5ca1252ab5aaf645c34ba7df36
F20110218_AACNYY leeds_j_Page_07.tif
eb50bf6b16bab2ca25aff1acfc69f338
954a457ddf0dd24d258d5f22961769d6d0eb8ea9
2026 F20110218_AACOAY leeds_j_Page_15.txt
981aae453b1af583ac5bb363e78d6fd3
888d076ad3f3a36de51dffa62fe41f349140b641
5477 F20110218_AACOKT leeds_j_Page_41thm.jpg
3cd28a7e0f3b298db47943deb4f3d04d
850cb3d7cf5a30b2abe9297d994411aba134ee6c
34977 F20110218_AACOFW leeds_j_Page_33.QC.jpg
46a252feff8efee9634904dad715fc94
cfb0b86945d1000b28da3da7f11d88b2c7db5ad0
27659 F20110218_AACNWA leeds_j_Page_05.pro
01cadf88ab4e85b77a674ee52c42a39e
3bebdf7484244984e1498d6d7ee0c61edb345bb9
F20110218_AACNYZ leeds_j_Page_08.tif
9a6f22dec542bee163a3554602b8aa4d
135cf1aaaceb9a77ad7dd28a0972e83232cb0662
596 F20110218_AACOAZ leeds_j_Page_16.txt
15783ad8aaf515674c30941f9b51cf6c
e9c26ef375607ee7c0546b371fc89fb19bf78f31
5856 F20110218_AACOKU leeds_j_Page_43thm.jpg
e3163211871c915e8db640874338ab39
6ee3dedc8dbe9247e17b268a07df77bea826f948
100206 F20110218_AACOFX leeds_j_Page_34.jpg
0edbc5e0c2bfd55e9a1f8d2169351805
55d281bcf9371fda991d9e25475c1235e0500059
4937 F20110218_AACNWB leeds_j_Page_51thm.jpg
3fdc57167a66fe79ab74a862aa431155
fc2c07fbe40bf02a5272903558268c9b2748cf9b
6490 F20110218_AACOKV leeds_j_Page_49thm.jpg
0e49dc1ef66fec9c005f9cbc2d625e8b
c4b6fcb5d7c5f09dfa45c305d95373dc7df33143
32512 F20110218_AACOFY leeds_j_Page_34.QC.jpg
e4ceac15f2424e9ae609957eacafe6d6
1ce7828564dd802c60c78ca480da6bf2fefbf224
105532 F20110218_AACNWC leeds_j_Page_22.jpg
92fa3970a4c051690a00f92bb73ecaa8
ce9f8c0617afa2dec451d5b7db1fed7ed82722af
11372 F20110218_AACODA leeds_j_Page_29.pro
f0cdecad0327764ee9ba16ac70f1014e
0b81d4cefb6cc29327029e24af7fbbd253f45662
3479 F20110218_AACOKW leeds_j_Page_50thm.jpg
754d7ff4d80d12c11141765820c67895
7b4bfcd7288b347fecdddb2ce0ed3bef6da849b0
102184 F20110218_AACOFZ leeds_j_Page_36.jpg
a6409e6c891cbf7500bac64b7ef84997
c75ae9190175ec54c096d21f40d21146cabc9cd9
F20110218_AACNWD leeds_j_Page_66.tif
b4ea357c03d642185b0b106294f7f758
297bf4ea28f027ab9cb1cf6f81c4e6f25beadbbb
8690 F20110218_AACODB leeds_j_Page_30.pro
b056ff277380dddf50f8592a466f17ea
2d2492032e4d320a2e19861e1da9aa4ce8ff38c2
4633 F20110218_AACOKX leeds_j_Page_52thm.jpg
6bad4f8fda8f658fc8ace74a4a9f9d78
c12946e89b99c9ef1d027140fed75b04948539f6
44370 F20110218_AACNWE leeds_j_Page_53.pro
6dc713ab953da2c4d0f30685bcbbd000
a22312dde0a8b1facef2d675298f815224b0ec47
18158 F20110218_AACODC leeds_j_Page_31.pro
41290619de3bb5611bc9d55f4b536270
3000e8d2cedfde9d043f17f2e1e7f82f1239a7e5
7658 F20110218_AACOKY leeds_j_Page_53thm.jpg
e0a8a0d78f45b7a04cfad61712529087
a609ebe88d7dafe80087ba9392c8369690e91783
885592 F20110218_AACOIA leeds_j_Page_07.jp2
9f03d436b883a18057634eee82fda192
427ba29b9a8e9799d3db8a256b863ea5ee5adf44
F20110218_AACNWF leeds_j_Page_17.tif
c695693fbb15592f4531ff0e54eab431
45abe5928472f94cf53847845f63d5d6c0dfa55a
53674 F20110218_AACODD leeds_j_Page_32.pro
cbf6c13d917353a834f124e98639419e
0fd1f0150368217e350665890736e86bd3b39f80
7865 F20110218_AACOKZ leeds_j_Page_54thm.jpg
7a412030debafff7e12db70ba18d3793
548377d2590b014ea8f64e25699abfea666fea69
950962 F20110218_AACOIB leeds_j_Page_09.jp2
7dc4c5652fdf20a9d05a917eb465af28
04bb74b3feee2f2ceac01941c874e6e42e8490f8
F20110218_AACNWG leeds_j_Page_44.tif
fe30999baba3d53c719f19cbd441f8d1
0dcf3fbe41535b8a91e9b87e03565a51e33700ef
48441 F20110218_AACODE leeds_j_Page_34.pro
c280056b9f65bf7060aaa5f1a7117a2a
719b380c351a8ad64129e9e6d429a4308e17ad3a
1051973 F20110218_AACOIC leeds_j_Page_11.jp2
2da388fca91e36a337832fa552c58813
4e5df909feb581da24651c3baa4fe71f62b1c0a9
24626 F20110218_AACNWH leeds_j_Page_06.QC.jpg
f5d62488ba02cf1d870eb955230b1c57
20f78d094226dd15c513a8949a8de14b1f7337cf
1051968 F20110218_AACOID leeds_j_Page_12.jp2
0bca9916559529756fb2b136da0bc53f
680c4000eb07bdbe40de1837fd08535355fe1f41
50393 F20110218_AACNWI leeds_j_Page_28.pro
2214fe41526fa635f6577e04054ebefd
48ab3e39f2f2c936e109f75432c04a342854d365
43119 F20110218_AACODF leeds_j_Page_35.pro
d8f64743a02c4f6f2a6a7fb889207211
ee2ae16aa7b82830a98245ef98e1a32a5a07dad8
1043752 F20110218_AACOIE leeds_j_Page_13.jp2
6e82872da0856a69803f7aec7a7c881b
e372b26fa703d7c3386f1ff92635aa29472a8b68
6787 F20110218_AACNWJ leeds_j_Page_48thm.jpg
1d2c40ee25363ff2a1299d71961a179a
793e4fc7f4167dd2da6787cc8801fdd9c98cbabe
49568 F20110218_AACODG leeds_j_Page_36.pro
ebfe40df787456c4cc153d70f413187f
588ff5d4387311cdc4b10ffd27cf908350a76574
1051895 F20110218_AACOIF leeds_j_Page_14.jp2
613e28d23e8c0626cac3e922bf28e214
699a43ca611dd4f2f4823b8980ad661f3f7e08ec
7570 F20110218_AACNWK leeds_j_Page_20thm.jpg
30a7d08087865999ec3d5d80b9b06d35
b0446ac8ea07e82384c1a02bfa4e70e7161619af
50112 F20110218_AACODH leeds_j_Page_38.pro
63fbf0f3375d19f85f3484baad28c110
dc76958e9e12bc292ba5c22473dbcda6855aba16
1051981 F20110218_AACOIG leeds_j_Page_15.jp2
b8cce6e97b247d686fae28ecf760a02c
e3208cc4630dbd00c88bcb74b198be477bd6866c
25180 F20110218_AACNWL leeds_j_Page_04.pro
55f09f102312fb199d179a698b8da430
3d73da21a5bff579eb2bd52c9b644e04646fd48e
50585 F20110218_AACODI leeds_j_Page_39.pro
5e07500c745c7722fe7e9008ce2b0484
7bbbee4adb1581337910d4092ac3d0a5e66e4835
1051984 F20110218_AACOIH leeds_j_Page_17.jp2
eff14814ba665bb6b51d8b74bd2feefb
ffbb74370cb18342ce4d0552fa2b55d13cbd8923
87750 F20110218_AACNWM leeds_j_Page_09.jpg
be6271486d4dd6463c298a9d3b82d060
8a5d27442f84414c555353ab83004777f8d8eb73
42987 F20110218_AACODJ leeds_j_Page_40.pro
38f12efd25525d48277764cb637e9347
80184cd8e666026d66a1f7a4e1b8842ed4d36261
1051966 F20110218_AACOII leeds_j_Page_18.jp2
f809b5e55e534a499dd391534bfe88a3
cd6b0d5a898d5534da5e94d339f31c4dd2c8b52c
8530 F20110218_AACNWN leeds_j_Page_14thm.jpg
df4c72505693a2891e6bb67f6a6d23bd
29039b90cf51dec52aaaf48f322affa00ef7fab2
19251 F20110218_AACODK leeds_j_Page_41.pro
f058827ca8bd3bb314a9652c89a4e28d
99fa725417669c434e5696f5dced107fbf351a6c
173127 F20110218_AACOIJ leeds_j_Page_19.jp2
ec4470cc77c5e1ff051587c2d940c89e
3c1676d69e83d7a8995f9cab494a875e10c3ddc8
F20110218_AACNWO leeds_j_Page_45.tif
53fa210e948f3dfe00f20db53a620f6a
16015623de0a457c73e555aaca01d0ff0f7a4dc0
36100 F20110218_AACODL leeds_j_Page_42.pro
47a7cad86012a7ee3a8b13add4e251e9
2a7aac243a9394480d634216ea0db20a04fc7ca7
1012528 F20110218_AACNWP leeds_j_Page_08.jp2
77a02b0a6c43a9020f73c51f095e331f
4ae5d0082de37bff7d239392efec279e96f4d649
28284 F20110218_AACODM leeds_j_Page_43.pro
798ee1b76e2fc1e6de6f8b5af986b053
01e3bca3209d1c74dc819a338a46ff09d9c73e9e
1024133 F20110218_AACOIK leeds_j_Page_20.jp2
b4d218190d7f6c0d9cbf651a455b55c7
0385f852bcbb68fef3d425d671175ae975e3d41e
40905 F20110218_AACNWQ leeds_j_Page_73.jpg
561f36816d4e0a2bf927997f46a612b0
f1c13524e7438968f6cb040fdf25ebea9c2f8dd4
12625 F20110218_AACODN leeds_j_Page_45.pro
602c70c603d16b430b3677dc9355bc09
8cfc2c59520e0470ff54d8a73b801bcffb9cd365
F20110218_AACOIL leeds_j_Page_21.jp2
d704bd71e12c6f28ba0549c48e5058f9
8dfbf2ed72587303df8b25328fc4213426eda454
8319 F20110218_AACNWR leeds_j_Page_01.QC.jpg
140b4a3a16d17a12b0ceaad555852f6b
539fe55f6d3252ec60d650a2694d75256cf44b86
7522 F20110218_AACODO leeds_j_Page_46.pro
10e198641bcc6e910dfcac550b67daa1
25e5d9855f6d508bb7a319f47d821b1b873d0654
1051938 F20110218_AACOIM leeds_j_Page_22.jp2
ff431c49b5c17d77b03a959ec82c7958
0f82de83d5de722a5ce59f8ce89238f8ed1da2fc
35251 F20110218_AACNWS leeds_j_Page_26.jpg
b665e708496f58a425dec02e116095a5
523c5cf3839d16683e4159c8ad72e8c087161f43
26015 F20110218_AACODP leeds_j_Page_47.pro
8aedc0ce35ef6f1759af364c215d1454
763c6a933d54db4f3d700dce0d973c09272efd6e
1051941 F20110218_AACOIN leeds_j_Page_23.jp2
cb7c69aad39b3fd1dc22cd4372d9649c
e6d5472d35ff86da8ea568b6ba89354ebb02c49a
325568 F20110218_AACNWT leeds_j_Page_26.jp2
4feadcccc8faecc9ca89479dbe7d6e26
7f5f54510ede14ea4eee93b5e9e5a4d5545092c0
29553 F20110218_AACODQ leeds_j_Page_48.pro
4529defc3245e028e018a049e3e9621c
35aa25ea3dd0fadc2d6bd9a893a056627370f2a1
728436 F20110218_AACOIO leeds_j_Page_24.jp2
3570990051085a9cf927ec517df5bdfb
078fccf38312b0433389e1cf05d8534f4303c751
106313 F20110218_AACNRW leeds_j_Page_10.jpg
3357f915efe7619cf1225563f829e320
c845eb9a57713d4a5b0377830e45813bc9bdbdfd
45706 F20110218_AACODR leeds_j_Page_54.pro
1553f85e51a0c38c43b8b09ec9ba9fa3
0ac1b846e0c84721f215fe44cbce300b0b6db8e2
34070 F20110218_AACNWU leeds_j_Page_55.QC.jpg
8966dd5fdc1c7e4fea7a8dd115330bad
ac1d3e96a19abfeec5ce0c84d3fd9a6eb195516e
838645 F20110218_AACOIP leeds_j_Page_25.jp2
0f8840a0da72f645ea579db4580bfb82
6dae0aed3af45edbd19323265cf04f2cb31d3a69
51041 F20110218_AACNRX leeds_j_Page_15.pro
fceac1d7319cef5ecb616a689e6dcfab
bf4e8a277736104b6d353b0c647f41a3e8acb1ec
52034 F20110218_AACODS leeds_j_Page_55.pro
76acf0895c0da337b734006009941939
b4497787ff3a2ecef93b531ddac5f9e8788d938c
776 F20110218_AACNWV leeds_j_Page_73.txt
32a0f85f90a2c32aee359996983956b6
828820106086848f23f759fe53cfd1c1265ce056
341005 F20110218_AACOIQ leeds_j_Page_29.jp2
ec8f920e41c246e7945ba5fbf9bb145f
8d1d5b7f37eb2bc426a2cccdcec497def86d0ad9
2062 F20110218_AACNRY leeds_j_Page_63.txt
8e395dca863de90f9eec519da3aca27c
9ce2f6d9c1bcfb6d90d54e47632f0b5c590ea0ea
23394 F20110218_AACODT leeds_j_Page_58.pro
98d5c7c60593ac208d15dae9648aca98
be754d2e2c904bff6789c568108f970f72dc8ba7
34123 F20110218_AACNWW leeds_j_Page_70.QC.jpg
65c9346a2e259ff0e78b6bddf2237572
3628356c461692e7afc3ae027524eaa5cffa2e86
262704 F20110218_AACOIR leeds_j_Page_30.jp2
32658daf1aa106473c60f5b252a0891d
fa1219d76fc2c95f8ff0f5db9e8a4a49a10c63db
15217 F20110218_AACNRZ leeds_j_Page_51.pro
16cf0726d37a0448f0b3c7e4e09b7625
987d7a64590a53d927ce50a1000cb6ca0a1f31ee
51529 F20110218_AACODU leeds_j_Page_63.pro
3daef13c0c3d52912f4c2c1c28add51c
bf338b4f70b6f9fceb43c31ea0d558d5ad318d80
2029 F20110218_AACNWX leeds_j_Page_53.txt
dc07a1c588a7b6a052e984fdc5f35a68
0594161d51e6d0e6108be87040a82015ed316d1d
F20110218_AACOIS leeds_j_Page_32.jp2
d729ef9f1a3f0a08b165f53fefc35d13
345118b51f5eab0ab85737cfb484aeb02d0b6fb2
52717 F20110218_AACODV leeds_j_Page_64.pro
2af78d2fdf7481c3630187e3a586329e
f2afcf009ccc2011e2b759a643952ecc41c1db0b
6974 F20110218_AACNWY leeds_j_Page_42thm.jpg
3f068f4a6d1cd6acfcda31de8541b6e6
3d89cdb32e0f0193dfe23f562516f9f94023dc0e
1051940 F20110218_AACOIT leeds_j_Page_34.jp2
68d6948dddc507bd2be9f404462896e7
90e496f53390752f7ae4b4ab11b5ad3bbece58da
48154 F20110218_AACODW leeds_j_Page_65.pro
831b1623bfd73b5de83adb790079180c
aa69e33b1e5cb74f0611e35084dd1a13d89a11d5
2318 F20110218_AACNUA leeds_j_Page_01thm.jpg
033b9b7dca00ff92345532cafb2d64ea
9b44e8d87a1009e1b700b0e1c3b5a4adef3215b9
1051971 F20110218_AACOIU leeds_j_Page_36.jp2
ac978a2949c0fdb8e762dc99dce8745e
83a09478db9b25e69bcf74d5487f9ad63c0f7242
32489 F20110218_AACODX leeds_j_Page_66.pro
2a78a4a83963017f76489440f83e1767
6ae986cc3799344c8a980dd174e4c394e2f33e25
26082 F20110218_AACNUB leeds_j_Page_68.QC.jpg
72829a2f8ac286cf1a6263395d48c541
167ebac5c22e9706a5e8cba48fb0a4f5f3f8545c
F20110218_AACNWZ leeds_j_Page_50.tif
ac7e11781ffc1981e3fcf7a052906919
09309d8f02a49e50c28f7857745b072746f80ec3
1051985 F20110218_AACOIV leeds_j_Page_38.jp2
155f768eea856121f84048b61b0dd6aa
09eaa2826b5a0fd363151a053513702ba56a1861
1927 F20110218_AACOBA leeds_j_Page_20.txt
93b6c2c892032c3e07034765cc4a5641
fbb0de88e6c015ba52c1147499bc9f37f1e33d9b
10177 F20110218_AACODY leeds_j_Page_67.pro
d24a096e1f026bd04d6a169e07dfc645
19c43c2f106fb793c35f60e5c6ad1eb57ac4fb73
22009 F20110218_AACNUC leeds_j_Page_43.QC.jpg
dc3a44d976ad8a0014283f7ae277b69d
8be8e48d8425903996cf8b4c696cf29b6c42f023
953930 F20110218_AACOIW leeds_j_Page_40.jp2
c234de0a86a5c55ef3bd7a41e6178448
3c85b4423dce0e76a4722c13decb3c2f357e4857
F20110218_AACNZA leeds_j_Page_10.tif
ec854a5ded99deb2cf97a102b4ab383f
f857861647a20c6d0d15c8e92f7017050a81b8cf
2073 F20110218_AACOBB leeds_j_Page_21.txt
f5f1f9b928e74ab60b29ff7f086a2eac
46fc5a0e62d97e177499b49a59488b1434f1ed9c
37287 F20110218_AACODZ leeds_j_Page_68.pro
2c30543306dbdb7dcb18967a391d0b57
2aff50f23052a796a312c514efa1f19e49acebbf
2038 F20110218_AACNUD leeds_j_Page_17.txt
e87ca44920bd8a94ff722de48b249ad2
312ad27d2b399e6c7dc2a98bba9ba187d04decb5
461780 F20110218_AACOIX leeds_j_Page_41.jp2
41807bb841092a049030a347445fb536
0c09e28338816412dd190c574d12f125566dbb9a
F20110218_AACNZB leeds_j_Page_11.tif
0fc9c952c6c4b574cc160fd454c906eb
578497ac81c3e8d8dd53aba8ce97938786033f20
2075 F20110218_AACOBC leeds_j_Page_22.txt
1a8e544bfc9db750431192afac8bf858
85df519bf9c082215d15691cb78696605b4225f0
22749 F20110218_AACNUE leeds_j_Page_44.jpg
684aacce3acca2085870ae539ca7ede1
68660e290819a87cb388707d87e0257ce35eadf1
795262 F20110218_AACOIY leeds_j_Page_42.jp2
abf7144566339564a069886e80e37fbb
4d74259492dfcc918bc6325f32e7b9831ea22237
F20110218_AACNZC leeds_j_Page_14.tif
8347dc992fd00faaaa8450ff32933029
4bb34f7ee87313dab7e28d0a2a3fe3f2e3a53e0c
8634 F20110218_AACNUF leeds_j_Page_23thm.jpg
a1be825ac1995ebae2f632faa998caf0
011ebcc4659463d16571058ab75083848e1765e7
34274 F20110218_AACOGA leeds_j_Page_36.QC.jpg
577d23ab53b7fea88668ae6dd4657536
4c4b5b0e2c9e9550987e9fe374ba7054bd0b40ec
649717 F20110218_AACOIZ leeds_j_Page_43.jp2
79ac7d2cffc3001e02137119871ca262
42641f18259d211eb6c3db73e5e0cf2b92e87544
F20110218_AACNZD leeds_j_Page_15.tif
bb4ed86dc309beace6b013986e6fd980
1e3ef9df432798d87dcc53be4760709c364585c0
1539 F20110218_AACOBD leeds_j_Page_24.txt
f717ca489da7b25aeb3e59b216c00fef
27a77179449d37a13857acbd676fb8c3f8ae8229
2052 F20110218_AACNUG leeds_j_Page_18.txt
db0411e6d8080e1baeda39e181b77013
6435ff9d4cd4cc3934fe9260ee68af114079037e
106785 F20110218_AACOGB leeds_j_Page_37.jpg
a782fb9dd21f2cfe3b483ba6c75b65ec
688343cabe3def34293daa4ab6b0a6b9bef0ce31
F20110218_AACNZE leeds_j_Page_16.tif
f2155b71d19a9ecde3fefb554bb51f7e
e1aa29b2f5e416d3b403f522faa8413291e185d2
2324 F20110218_AACOBE leeds_j_Page_28.txt
1506535fe740534d3502b329cfb96abe
bd6248439d0c245f3bd5542485c2845726f96030
F20110218_AACNUH leeds_j_Page_63.jp2
f9d17ec496d4b71feadb1fc7f971a0ed
adfe22a936f3eb7d9f2e40cbd9ed8c42d1eb4dad
34793 F20110218_AACOGC leeds_j_Page_37.QC.jpg
b5d0f7b648ba79cbc393cdea9dde0f74
0259234f0062f3e2a47c73004ddaf78cf9b1bb3d
8711 F20110218_AACOLA leeds_j_Page_56thm.jpg
864e5a4a94f562224570348351d64531
665d02eaaf7c712a8b6cf2d4c171a11a4e9b66b2
F20110218_AACNZF leeds_j_Page_18.tif
effafc70a69562ee1ec5e053bdea6541
e0ce9b05115929d2666b1acb128a3972664e9c58
559 F20110218_AACOBF leeds_j_Page_29.txt
819884e611c5f54a85f1d911cc152511
cbd43d19a6e70933eb71f39257357d8fca17b7d6
8187 F20110218_AACNUI leeds_j_Page_34thm.jpg
ce26742f69ef324dda90b645cda54728
3cdf995b6c2ce0939fe4d29e2f6073db1a9b76ce
102077 F20110218_AACOGD leeds_j_Page_38.jpg
590f8f1f35dbcf1f50487f490e225a70
5818d9e520b3062ad32887b0b4af174ff69b0593
4100 F20110218_AACOLB leeds_j_Page_58thm.jpg
87eb59960dfa79ceea6032445265326c
a23ec407dea94ba8c484727bed71e24718ae1340
F20110218_AACNZG leeds_j_Page_20.tif
617780af527d366ecae3014d2cedd38e
f74da055374efd989c2416f5db5c4dc2a526b1b9
2422 F20110218_AACOBG leeds_j_Page_32.txt
83a7a1ed2722e12c59bfd952acf71540
b478778fe4fde879dcbf28e0dd05dbd448751bba
93703 F20110218_AACNUJ leeds_j_Page_08.jpg
d470faf2f4ed24508d2561245e79af4c
7ac78728f127ce9db77b56b4c331c1b6f4065215
33029 F20110218_AACOGE leeds_j_Page_38.QC.jpg
367548d88344588c51132d101f2722ae
5f4f40ca4c92c8b9dcd5a36b5c8935c72096d157
6982 F20110218_AACOLC leeds_j_Page_59thm.jpg
0265ab5c010fd0bd18e6a6ff176f9cc6
95574f6f7c0014808e811e5a4992f541953949e6
F20110218_AACNZH leeds_j_Page_23.tif
b786bdf4fb515454d27e81ccb16f68e4
b209e3a428a0024d4685afbad0c81a689ffdd38b
2039 F20110218_AACOBH leeds_j_Page_33.txt
927b369d2ffa52059f4d20102d651df7
7d185399b3681bfd08a07ce59cb50eaa3972e6f0
5464 F20110218_AACNUK leeds_j_Page_31thm.jpg
a715b6e5aad8277eace54951a668387d
99c729be2cd7c4fdc3493e617aa46ed1156eaf79
105885 F20110218_AACOGF leeds_j_Page_39.jpg
b7e53d7319bfd4244f1b273e82b25528
732d8293d17ea051ae70689c97631f507f5f0ac9
8248 F20110218_AACOLD leeds_j_Page_60thm.jpg
380d7c8f0f6a1016182cc88f4ac8086e
134b6dd10c21352b9adc518609d259026277a557
F20110218_AACNZI leeds_j_Page_24.tif
ce9bc5bf3ad8c0cce82fd448dacdc926
00a8332773bbb0aa0f4282ea017acd7ee5cd7e9f
1916 F20110218_AACOBI leeds_j_Page_34.txt
8848f8f51a669c2101a9f9df315fb4ff
545796d1f6c31c1658dd6cbfdb105ac487f87a03
45420 F20110218_AACNUL leeds_j_Page_45.jpg
da55276375210cc503ea2e62ca6c923a
0394d799842e7451760b1bc90e548cf17816962e
32013 F20110218_AACOGG leeds_j_Page_39.QC.jpg
f32cacfd195611190d8e851ad9a1e483
280e77b616e709dd1eb1083bc560a08683a69e5b
8544 F20110218_AACOLE leeds_j_Page_61thm.jpg
d543c59f275c9dce206e1fca05e67e9f
7b2cc59d98df1b4314b6b0df02bf9815f842f7c1
F20110218_AACNZJ leeds_j_Page_26.tif
e1dc7f3b65776c8227f2a84b0475cf53
96b6449cbe57e341097578a0fd9550ea206f1328
1998 F20110218_AACOBJ leeds_j_Page_36.txt
7ed4016c192aa2e8ff730ff5148291a2
a8f16a270bcc26bd5b37ae7d09482c973ef0f1f8
33332 F20110218_AACNUM leeds_j_Page_71.QC.jpg
8411069192d8d5c3b77fbce66a97a762
4ab4cd066a1139d801aa5410eacf906caf0f54f5
86642 F20110218_AACOGH leeds_j_Page_40.jpg
b787575e7d50db51cd0a9f6731bc2c85
b0554f66ed3eda54544cd6655de8d94a025b174d
8378 F20110218_AACOLF leeds_j_Page_62thm.jpg
9ff12d9fdbd8f4393f342f0219058b9f
a67c55d30383b1f651e88d1fe5d5609725c7d4b0
F20110218_AACNZK leeds_j_Page_27.tif
fcaf4a218fb22b86d5909d29aeb5c027
ca4525bb775e850dcaef3c2cfdfee1e9956b12ae
2085 F20110218_AACOBK leeds_j_Page_37.txt
d28472781035a9e92fde41dd3b1c2e2e
64242f2005f0fab551667b4185b4be8ad2cb4ab6
8334 F20110218_AACNUN leeds_j_Page_01.pro
cc194f6b8fd7bbec2eddf6a1da459140
eb728e7027cbef94603eb3bad4f7001fe66a2e29
8266 F20110218_AACOLG leeds_j_Page_63thm.jpg
540d0207fe83899a8cf5a6dce86ffdfc
187c861446b15b30d28dc5f61468b88e4ae2b640
F20110218_AACNZL leeds_j_Page_29.tif
a11eab2489979e4de837ace4ed3e931b
050b189b57ec85644ae98b71f8a3648f64fd70ce
1979 F20110218_AACOBL leeds_j_Page_38.txt
8a6dfb352d414987d72f03dd690647f9
79d717a04a30790a7b4ac117ec9742e4f6973148
49754 F20110218_AACNUO leeds_j_Page_58.jpg
89ab9e5bf28a269d98cd6094029092e4
21a93af923d933db496d1ebd02c6a71b081893c8
28609 F20110218_AACOGI leeds_j_Page_40.QC.jpg
4ebd9cc578387c1ec5729bdc75bd7ac2
73a59444f65cf75ad2a2da43c566b49fdbb960d1
8468 F20110218_AACOLH leeds_j_Page_64thm.jpg
9cb3897332df8b38dafc67b0019b47af
751ae3dd0669d5d67dd49a9bc00664f515dfab1d
F20110218_AACNZM leeds_j_Page_31.tif
0cb084753c618b42013e71669d366432
9fdd0ef0c3a23be2c3eac31b895c6ec626ab3228
2137 F20110218_AACOBM leeds_j_Page_39.txt
03239f936fb51dd92736b7fbea208840
6468cb96f070022e57265ad4bb83b30a85b6683c
52612 F20110218_AACNUP leeds_j_Page_41.jpg
00a0568ca403936a0c2d494317a1bc0e
8d04543601ad2e0f7aea2913b780d68e2b47e371
17556 F20110218_AACOGJ leeds_j_Page_41.QC.jpg
7d8b3f1ba1ee9b4c875cf99d6a132743
bd862ecbc53112671a66796a2ca0231ede9b311d
7880 F20110218_AACOLI leeds_j_Page_65thm.jpg
4526aa3a12e268ffd4a3525f619564cd
1c621bd307eca8ae9641fdab818769a26cbb68ea
F20110218_AACNZN leeds_j_Page_32.tif
51e57fe6af3200f431ea2bc198c07d59
289ab4ba748fd3ff6324c7c3b2c63c93e8df4e9e
1750 F20110218_AACOBN leeds_j_Page_40.txt
804a195f2e57fcd63125b055c245ded0
de64b223617a79dd917f7f00cd97ffc0da58d47e
F20110218_AACNUQ leeds_j_Page_70.jp2
385327914c6ddb6d86b3ee992c59bcbb
88a2f81c6030d37d7fff46a5030aec4ededa6ea4
78517 F20110218_AACOGK leeds_j_Page_42.jpg
a9df05b4e1e076ad5b400a6abb8c969d
a0055b4f332ae8f22e7ab5879a67ca6e93460661
5413 F20110218_AACOLJ leeds_j_Page_66thm.jpg
fb88470a85799043b4bd0cd05af57e67
9f8a6bf4ca9f699e18a9f313ddf36bc282203065
F20110218_AACNZO leeds_j_Page_33.tif
b62cd9608c5d196db70f9558ba7eb25b
33fe8eda2f6e6fd286a3c28e4d82fa72d95ad029
1226 F20110218_AACOBO leeds_j_Page_41.txt
31104ccea0ed74d042877d5c9257b86a
171def1245edfdc71e71736e650948316d237d16
2055 F20110218_AACNUR leeds_j_Page_23.txt
952dcbdc4d6490a0755e93bca380956c
2e0fed07643582dbc69bbd47d7a9696658481180
65415 F20110218_AACOGL leeds_j_Page_43.jpg
5ceaebb2525080ddf29220205bb4601b
ca547b994f25243b2565e725f0bf240c79888b11
1881 F20110218_AACOLK leeds_j_Page_67thm.jpg
4a34c10efd151fac3032f0c22bd8cba7
0252019f2557a1e1204be40d2a58b9c5097ad30b
F20110218_AACNZP leeds_j_Page_35.tif
a8dea3eda0b356ef956d2dea617dca08
c687d7bd091aa92e274c0bdef39070560b654c4c
1664 F20110218_AACOBP leeds_j_Page_42.txt
8989bb44bd6d9d3222a9f4a052db6981
eecd37a1c1ddee5efe7e01b1be8063510e643fcb
1513 F20110218_AACNUS leeds_j_Page_25.txt
1257cf938f8385c3cdd373a43ed33a70
4250517f3db999e37096ca780ae2e9e6ce4ae802
8139 F20110218_AACOGM leeds_j_Page_44.QC.jpg
75445947efcabb0f188ec0978a8a5f12
c993635df24ee37ed159f248f1af5e64d384094e
7051 F20110218_AACOLL leeds_j_Page_68thm.jpg
b0f9e2bd3b7bde83d021ddd362b320dd
50c85627fdc0e150ff5823d096d8c8e7e38e5d31
1332 F20110218_AACOBQ leeds_j_Page_43.txt
6b44def9a76f64da04bf70c7332d304a
e7d716065a89209180105423ada969f35fbf7cc6
820 F20110218_AACNUT leeds_j_Page_31.txt
cf5f4b3a5175b09198c5395f3d993ed5
2847f49cc19fb40967f8a0bda7912bff85cc372c
62320 F20110218_AACOGN leeds_j_Page_47.jpg
a081cfbdc4f3d8911b42ff50585271cf
5490b01b44b0524d5acc54056b3381f9b7e104e3
F20110218_AACNZQ leeds_j_Page_37.tif
301261c03fdcc8719faf326c69933f24
bf40b69a4bb2c0325ed54965ffacd6832bd6effd
7254 F20110218_AACOLM leeds_j_Page_69thm.jpg
1e20cc48fabef691c52438c00d3a6822
8858f3ea375faa775caf517c5e6cd8e445ce8277
306 F20110218_AACOBR leeds_j_Page_44.txt
cf774efbd32190b74a0a46a3e71abd10
e58c58215b1e98dba97b1fc6fb5adb5299113818
102140 F20110218_AACNUU leeds_j_Page_63.jpg
e700c7fe4447d4b57f8ffefaf500c77a
8e9f40a4c054debcea9914fa7ee022c2696d7b52
21559 F20110218_AACOGO leeds_j_Page_47.QC.jpg
8f5197c684dea9b08fd8802ce3159dda
a052c09645cfc5b555cd3134ffc2efec6abe13a0
F20110218_AACNZR leeds_j_Page_38.tif
10153b88da648d295b76582ce2aa035d
6e35ff0f54b156c93324e526e7c7d6b23e35b5cc
616 F20110218_AACOBS leeds_j_Page_45.txt
c803f9b07a51f9c10eab6559039673be
76eafdf594d73c3079f3c6047d6f70ed9f58ed47
51240 F20110218_AACNUV leeds_j_Page_21.pro
58fd51b4bb3aaf6ab20a4ef2355171ed
00d957a12f3439815498945b04b6e7415a76abe4
77097 F20110218_AACOGP leeds_j_Page_48.jpg
8268dd2f1dbae6c7f16e7be1e0a0a65d
082dd7df19ac0249e5393dce71ed158a768310c5
F20110218_AACNZS leeds_j_Page_39.tif
82f1498ffc8d5b5344a9c1792a70d660
9e77b5337bb4d096178cce2b3c7314ee966bc8b8
8440 F20110218_AACOLN leeds_j_Page_70thm.jpg
14d1e5e1f4b194c82767e9488baa0c1b
829a5b2252668fc171d7b2c6cb0e61ef59727814
392 F20110218_AACOBT leeds_j_Page_46.txt
0819c42eebcc59e569ff1f8608898adf
9c5b00956fc5fffb58be9aeec764976c42410acc
1966 F20110218_AACNUW leeds_j_Page_60.txt
1e2a2265d73a471a76cbe3843feeb952
eee5c03a72810f19a7ca09ebd715c7150048d3ee
25023 F20110218_AACOGQ leeds_j_Page_48.QC.jpg
704d65c6b4c345120e795de387e361bc
2cd5bd787d649c24fedf7bd18419df96b7c7f81a
F20110218_AACNZT leeds_j_Page_40.tif
b65d9cafdb2e307f160d02a47072f5a7
537beac442b8c3d0b050715263362eac63820f17
8296 F20110218_AACOLO leeds_j_Page_71thm.jpg
34cca89d530f664a83fd30fcbd9abb13
1c98fa621cb1a4f46b8eb4750115db506724589f
1432 F20110218_AACOBU leeds_j_Page_47.txt
9504bcec8aa234036c5cdcbf0665ec2a
6d990100923dcf978b783558fe39366bf4db71ed
25529 F20110218_AACOGR leeds_j_Page_49.QC.jpg
c4e099e44d0becb91012566480c4cf30
9349250c81954c4398492bd3a6a807e3219092c9
F20110218_AACNZU leeds_j_Page_41.tif
fdc7dbbf82fc03c98c86add607b92fdb
8d1dbb9ecffb1cdf3b1e05f1f4d39e392709c9f3
5338 F20110218_AACOLP leeds_j_Page_72thm.jpg
1ca6ec697ceda3c838578d217ab4c230
273f85f493b79b75890cc351804c2e2d1b1fa62b
1609 F20110218_AACOBV leeds_j_Page_49.txt
48e7101c944caf2d7be3ca38a6a75436
562b219e3f01219bc2aaa240b1cb37ab65dcb98f
F20110218_AACNUX leeds_j_Page_73.tif
84149162d5d7ad8182909d595fb4f655
b03ee2f010a3ec4d762e92c046848f9ab2d3e3c0
30139 F20110218_AACOGS leeds_j_Page_50.jpg
307dcd323c9d2b9234313aec3377200e
6f90e3c18d9fb3c4410eb68885eaab795d7698a5
F20110218_AACNZV leeds_j_Page_46.tif
47d0d46643b474502115fec987964221
888fe463810e2a6e82d81d01d488155dbce18d62
3491 F20110218_AACOLQ leeds_j_Page_73thm.jpg
30b253b09b81fb745854d6878e594e6c
2f7e3975db671743d0f1cb77b7ed23ebc6c57f73
682 F20110218_AACOBW leeds_j_Page_50.txt
fb4bfcd222036dc61f36e4c310f02504
eb1f405bcf6f13a436c462bf4afaae3100dcf6e5
1051958 F20110218_AACNSA leeds_j_Page_33.jp2
23935f979f6f7fa63a4af0941fca9b25
cd976011016a651d5e958bb56e703aebefd2b22d
11463 F20110218_AACNUY leeds_j_Page_02.QC.jpg
62cbae22b5ed0aed8be7175ebe880d59
463a6907bcfeaa101e6afccfdffb49d5224072d8
47238 F20110218_AACOGT leeds_j_Page_51.jpg
905fd483970f29d59ad14a56d5d2d84d
cb9dd9082ab552593a4cf07af8bc7f85505235f8
F20110218_AACNZW leeds_j_Page_47.tif
c2e8bf6ead3852bd307959436eb3ff8c
4dc1929118066cb5ff92d13314f50203c8355249
87417 F20110218_AACOLR UFE0013561_00001.mets
b9bbcf4ff15346c9cbbbf9118814ea94
6079fe41378b40eca826003318c1be7d4a51c474
48174 F20110218_AACNSB leeds_j_Page_57.pro
eb6fdfe89c8069e16b5e57a9aa3437ec
c9f042c605deb3afdd4a845a5a3035ae704d8920
F20110218_AACNUZ leeds_j_Page_42.tif
95af85aa01a505c03aec93f4e83031b0
b6432e154288fa70d1563f7bfbcb026a42313bd3
15768 F20110218_AACOGU leeds_j_Page_51.QC.jpg
4effc5a388990c84a9437c4394954fce
84ea7eb8f291915306c10c6a3e8dcfd49a61c378
F20110218_AACNZX leeds_j_Page_48.tif
91595d3a1d0b2f833bd2fc904441f0bb
14e2512c48fd8fdb8e3fe27f52e24db5e21a2711
815 F20110218_AACOBX leeds_j_Page_51.txt
244f85abee2932db9c9cb871fa57150d
77d6642878c3adbe1295e85d0254dde381665904
F20110218_AACNSC leeds_j_Page_22.tif
46d99849dece9168c5b4fb6e2cc838d7
211057c654bc8e4c7b1dd48bdc90bb6a56ed5f1b
44438 F20110218_AACOGV leeds_j_Page_52.jpg
889846ff38c1079b9e258f8b83a436c7
db85b232b25227b29fda1c38d1fab3f4cc1b451e
F20110218_AACNZY leeds_j_Page_49.tif
3817069b40bddc3d829c0708201555b3
d74e7cabe1eb49eae61e3044461e8100d44ac56e
709 F20110218_AACOBY leeds_j_Page_52.txt
46f1b7d6bf5e6ee61e4759676a0a06ac
20b91bd35f9b448875e10b4b242aefd6bf6409cc
95167 F20110218_AACOGW leeds_j_Page_53.jpg
b74a793dfe70fac77f49d0030ecf2309
9f8fcc1bec8155f25cb9cc88fd17961d49309d77
14885 F20110218_AACNXA leeds_j_Page_52.QC.jpg
9a22ba4dc3e8a897c132871732d147d1
94d9b33759862b6d1807e4a7453b90cd3b0cc66e
F20110218_AACNZZ leeds_j_Page_51.tif
ba8ce1e2b36a10526ba604ba140efc9f
9445a02244ee87551bba10b0d1e1a1203c998834
2080 F20110218_AACOBZ leeds_j_Page_56.txt
0e70e14b10ca0a8cfbd57bf7527aea77
694977b645ab3eec13002d9d1a4e7bc597a9723c
181776 F20110218_AACNSD leeds_j_Page_67.jp2
2bc992833cc3c903e2b9ba2fd8da77e3
38cbab90b425bdae735c0ced08d5de863df84862
30619 F20110218_AACOGX leeds_j_Page_53.QC.jpg
7feaf764e688225993e3a17d680f31da
c32fcba8eb2d9c7e4818e9b36aa8b3f15edb2377
40650 F20110218_AACNXB leeds_j_Page_59.pro
178908264db91f3f154146db24a27749
7bc2e0ecfe72072e6477865f45e0fe07c8a84588
1281 F20110218_AACNSE leeds_j_Page_26.txt
19eb7ead9a237db8bc4ee2ef744a3ecd
124226b8e9ecc18fbeb08b0eed7f6906a1af05e3
50140 F20110218_AACOEA leeds_j_Page_69.pro
d4ef4f4d6ade32a2ec74f38d8d2f380e
d9ea4d8ab8a5d91427520d46f6cc7eb132090891
93079 F20110218_AACOGY leeds_j_Page_54.jpg
16107b49f780b4ea6529590c8b86d859
146f4720c781abcd54b189b5bd001fc2b1d3db94
667 F20110218_AACNXC leeds_j_Page_30.txt
c38949f5e8a207328df723785adebb18
3e44e1cb900156c796a6dae71cc7b14bec651503
41775 F20110218_AACNSF leeds_j_Page_09.pro
9cc68b65aa4a8c6b2128a24b5a8c0fb9
86658ae6a4e1ebba667ed1398a4d25294e6014bc
59782 F20110218_AACOEB leeds_j_Page_70.pro
05ff8e21f742a80fac77ff506ba2287a
34fde98a245427680ea59cb4a8bcd74338ddb2c9
29693 F20110218_AACOGZ leeds_j_Page_54.QC.jpg
69d3d7de8f22b9bd839c3bde7b86d5c5
5e2e717bc38869eaedd58773bfdc118dea2b75f3
F20110218_AACNXD leeds_j_Page_01.tif
c5bba5055337b5574576609bdcb751a3
4522cc785e5071797a500faaaa4b22970ba62f29
F20110218_AACNSG leeds_j_Page_36.tif
d9f56900b397a50a8ce0c95f261c5284
6c896ab272bfef0f8c13ccc3e661c4c0784ea130
36310 F20110218_AACOEC leeds_j_Page_72.pro
e39029af97d821ef3e65be3a6b8f8832
73ccbd4a2a64939e9c06a5dd1df61806a1754793
26313 F20110218_AACNXE leeds_j_Page_42.QC.jpg
b092b7a51ce47575136e1f9bfb7ef1a0
1d899a79f096b3e41f758dab1c776e68cb88fbec
30577 F20110218_AACNSH leeds_j_Page_08.QC.jpg
fe1152b18ec99cca044fd2f509a11361
2e4a245337abe48674e11239356a03f5f108fd63
181913 F20110218_AACOJA leeds_j_Page_44.jp2
5615d06e501663b45880e1c2a9010f4f
ed6a3ffca32d461283738a7c33b42a0646b3935e
27505 F20110218_AACOED leeds_j_Page_01.jpg
9b66140122fd0b6b6a511cac56a9b2b4
f651a026a6ddb7771badb501a6f0892a775450b0
402853 F20110218_AACNXF leeds_j_Page_45.jp2
20d1b54df810227535cf77465bf538c1
82bf6fdf72e3954e9228dcd8b15d6241d9bc4d9f
1051967 F20110218_AACNSI leeds_j_Page_28.jp2
8742748f5002e97ad20517ddcf9a2f3e
21724a17802c7e6501efe444e0ba2f68737f37bd
277791 F20110218_AACOJB leeds_j_Page_46.jp2
25d53849738101ae2adb4adfde8d1418
4cf0372e52ecd0ab1999f79026d5b527974233f9
70752 F20110218_AACOEE leeds_j_Page_03.jpg
1f41904f6d4409ff956219a4fd91f1bc
830aea7203f1a8141d79cc290142172e5a4e0c85
F20110218_AACNXG leeds_j_Page_09.tif
60a552a601e227dbc3146ad176ecad64
58d5f7feea6428a771865b0d41add4e1ae10ac36
2011 F20110218_AACNSJ leeds_j_Page_54.txt
109c967a41d790f9e8e5277a913f7162
08a52284af715df1f58264f18e4355bd7c08a459
762045 F20110218_AACOJC leeds_j_Page_48.jp2
0ac257d2bb4edf7d13b83129750fb525
370e2ec6818eb38311c4081f67e2aa6554c1650f
16787 F20110218_AACOEF leeds_j_Page_03.QC.jpg
4061714a6671b48112b9f155d471e447
4715b9684f0214a2a0f1e22b60a77373029ca0a4
2082 F20110218_AACNXH leeds_j_Page_10.txt
bda99ebbb2b8b8d5899705eabf66dda6
14f79d98291bc7ac9ca67e53c870352d045e3e3e
51994 F20110218_AACNSK leeds_j_Page_33.pro
37d46a45b24416be1ab83e5129201d58
1cf09536278d6e307c46a21d8861ddfb9098cc27
832053 F20110218_AACOJD leeds_j_Page_49.jp2
4c0e8a3f01cdf0cf430f74bc80e510d5
4b16c9d6adf427c579d97a99fcdfdc039da24213
248192 F20110218_AACNXI leeds_j_Page_50.jp2
1bdd78364363edc77fe635a53dcada31
63105ed25fc981145b8018b181d08b17e91c98a4
53123 F20110218_AACNSL leeds_j_Page_37.pro
d7483d135c4b8fbe00685100d2df0e52
c57718810240b6ea9003fb0e41a9530b6b3f4b14
417958 F20110218_AACOJE leeds_j_Page_51.jp2
a8a780c32fd8be13f27f76e5c3b5b580
282628ca2dd30dbe0d7464485e6e3fb350219d9a
35263 F20110218_AACOEG leeds_j_Page_04.jpg
096b62f6b32ff41de3326afbdf39d985
926eaf1307bed0e4ba039d5df31916299e424e7e
33155 F20110218_AACNXJ leeds_j_Page_27.jpg
729a91b32b2d0a165b028ba1a0e4d9ae
4fb3444bd10138b4e123ade3aea30980dffc51f0
58326 F20110218_AACNSM leeds_j_Page_71.pro
f5c7382047d68da261851b8c7db09ade
9efdbb3292e9f1f63783d56bf62b8081ca365087
394393 F20110218_AACOJF leeds_j_Page_52.jp2
69f388d843b2854d8697c5ee8c781715
52d5b1187850f31e6694758527b96f32393d6dac
9441 F20110218_AACOEH leeds_j_Page_04.QC.jpg
f38ddc254fe1556f53ab5e34b1874e94
961608b1500ad9077ef8dd4c4978afacab07226c
1051975 F20110218_AACNXK leeds_j_Page_10.jp2
38f53ac412ed7b0257583ef7740880b7
4f39531dffc68c8f92e32d3692b26811593fc31c
14146 F20110218_AACNSN leeds_j_Page_05.QC.jpg
ffec8694f809802fc02a940d4e5c6f0c
fb0d0caaaea805f5e4f93db86a155b7871361577
1006057 F20110218_AACOJG leeds_j_Page_53.jp2
f0439893a518c5c89b06dd5a31fcc03f
8ac23cf8f1ae2ce0efd06c0333c45f431843f131
48045 F20110218_AACOEI leeds_j_Page_05.jpg
8ad6b76ef3f4e5dbcc25c000df2df8ab
862e7aebbf768c8471cc0e7c688ead100fbd56ee
7887 F20110218_AACNXL leeds_j_Page_28thm.jpg
62553ef5501e7634eb8c59f2a6e59c7a
353cbe913abf88c2b7530c3e2c85a0b26e592cd8
8487 F20110218_AACNSO leeds_j_Page_18thm.jpg
f9cc81146724f102e904c780ab3da449
f78413be852755c6aba0dd91972d28fe7fe959d1
1002962 F20110218_AACOJH leeds_j_Page_54.jp2
b881dda4c2349dfa16dd9e9854adce17
b920b1e0cc3f9daffa9bc4e2fabd9f173dc84dda
88329 F20110218_AACOEJ leeds_j_Page_06.jpg
339fccc8ee5cafbe270957d03eda7622
2a0bf33f405f0045ee87848185857bfd5df6a567
8618 F20110218_AACNXM leeds_j_Page_55thm.jpg
998154d1383374b7a6b1fa7000022375
1f431439981e6b58a3e1be2572d8f2c817228683
79256 F20110218_AACNSP leeds_j_Page_49.jpg
02315b84fdb9647e84dc9acaa1eb082a
4ab08349955d9b84a6723991e2a41254501fd4b5
F20110218_AACOJI leeds_j_Page_55.jp2
7895d502e2aeb9e6313994c3c41505af
81e62abfb88e34967796c4af456e71f142d340a2
82278 F20110218_AACOEK leeds_j_Page_07.jpg
d35af329032c4937c909f5dfe8e59d8b
0878a2b279894acc7ed53bdf75e1d0eda64cd77c
35259 F20110218_AACNXN leeds_j_Page_02.jpg
79d5bc853d869ca68b8279bb8317d445
ae9d49283e61f21e923ce11fb9ef0425c7007b8b
28603 F20110218_AACNSQ leeds_j_Page_35.QC.jpg
ad08e49143692aca23a69dc878ef2d13
5a01e9f839f00101c3d29513454bd954a22c399d
1051977 F20110218_AACOJJ leeds_j_Page_56.jp2
a6a69a185dc97449ea5d0b0c1ec1c52c
1656b8fbfbb6211597e6da00f859ce2563256d2a
25559 F20110218_AACOEL leeds_j_Page_07.QC.jpg
205b0b53e3acf358068fe4353271d027
c9c672d79f1e64f67ab7ac31e297c244a6418b86
7088 F20110218_AACNXO leeds_j_Page_40thm.jpg
d980c47fc64a81c7f2b13ac2fd9ca31c
4a0392afaf69053e9eed3c3d7982a6a8ee943030
7050 F20110218_AACNSR leeds_j_Page_09thm.jpg
017551bc0dde65ab9b13519636ef8d82
01e6c0b3e1681aa1d8e739cac69955f942adb965



PAGE 1

PHOSPHORUS SORPTION AND FLUX IN NORTHERN EVERGLADES SOIL UNDER DRAINED AND FLOODED CONDITIONS By JENNIFER A. LEEDS A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2006

PAGE 2

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research was made possible by the South Florida Water Management District through financial, technical and facility support and conducted as part of the Downstream Monitoring and Research Program in the Everglades Division. I would like to acknowledge District staff that provided assistance in the field and nutrient analysis in the water quality lab. In addition, I would like to thank Dr. Mark Clark, Dr. Jana Newman, Dr. Susan Newman and Dr. Samira Daroub for the invaluable support, guidance and contributions they made to this research and thesis. ii

PAGE 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................................................................................ii LIST OF TABLES ...............................................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES ...........................................................................................................vi ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................vii CHAPTER 1 PHOSPHORUS MOVEMENT BETWEEN THE SOIL AND OVERLYING WATER COLUMN IN WETLANDS..........................................................................1 Introduction...................................................................................................................1 Equilibrium Phosphorus Concentration (EPC).............................................................2 Factors Regulating P-sorption......................................................................................4 Phosphorus Flux...........................................................................................................5 Northern Everglades Field Site.....................................................................................7 Need for Research.........................................................................................................9 2 PHOSPHORUS SORPTION AND DESORPTION CAPACITY.............................12 Introduction.................................................................................................................12 Methods......................................................................................................................13 Isotherm calculations..................................................................................................15 Results.........................................................................................................................16 Discussion...................................................................................................................24 3 FLUX OF BIOAVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS..........................................................27 Introduction.................................................................................................................27 Methods......................................................................................................................28 Results.........................................................................................................................32 Discussion...................................................................................................................46 4 CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................51 Phosphorus Isotherms.................................................................................................52 iii

PAGE 4

P-Sorption Factors......................................................................................................54 P-flux..........................................................................................................................55 Conclusion..................................................................................................................56 APPENDIX A P-ADSORPTION RESULTS FROM THE LINEAR, FREUNDLICH AND LANGMUIR ISOTHERM EQUATIONS AT EACH SITE AND P-CONCENTRATION..................................................................................................58 B WATER QUALITY NITROGEN RESULTS FROM INTACT SOIL CORES SAMPLED FROM THE P-FLUX EXPERIMENT...................................................60 LITERATURE CITED......................................................................................................61 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH.............................................................................................65 iv

PAGE 5

LIST OF TABLES Table page 2-1 List of regression (R 2 ) coefficients used to determine which isotherm equation, linear, Freundlich or Langmuir, best fit the P-sorption data....................................20 2-2. P-sorption parameter results for the linear, Freundlich and Langmuir equations for equilibrium phosphorus concentration (EPC)....................................................20 2-3 RWMA soil nutrient concentrations for each site in the RC transect......................24 2-4 Comparison of oxalate extractable Fe and Al content is soils.................................24 3-1 Water Quality standard testing methods according to Clescerl et al. 1999 and the South Florida Water Management District water quality procedures......................31 3-2 Fluxing rates of SRP in mgL -1 /hr for dry soil cores at each transect site.................34 3-3 Percentage of oP and iP fluxing from the soil into the water column over time......45 3-4 Algae TP concentration measurements in mg/kg.....................................................46 v

PAGE 6

LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1-1 Map showing the location of the Rotenberger Wildlife Management Area..............8 2-1 Linear isotherm result for the RC transect A) RC1 site. B) RC2 site C) RC3 site D) RC4 site...............................................................................................................18 2-2 Freundlich and Langmuir isotherms for the RC transectA) RC1 site. B) RC2 site. C) RC3 site. D) RC4 site..................................................................................21 2-3 Oxalate-extractable Al composite samples..............................................................23 2-4 Oxalate-extractable Fe composite samples..............................................................23 3-1 SRP water column concentrations in mg/L at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site. d)RC4 site.................................................................................................................33 3-2 TP water column concentrations in mg/L at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site. d)RC4 site.................................................................................................................35 3-3 TDP water column concentrations in mg/L at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site. d)RC4 site.........................................................................................................37 3-4 NH 4 water column concentrations in mg/L at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site. d)RC4 site.................................................................................................................38 3-5 SRP water column concentrations measured in mg/L at RC1, RC2, RC3 and RC4...........................................................................................................................40 3-6 NH 4 water column concentrations measured in mg/L at RC1, RC2, RC3 and RC4...........................................................................................................................40 3-7 Dissolved organic phosphorus (DOP) water column concentrations in g/L at a)RC1 site b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site d)RC4 site.........................................................41 3-8 Organic phosphorus (oP) water column concentrations in g/L at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site c)RC3 site d)RC4site.............................................................................43 3-9 Particulate phosphorus (PP) water column concentrations in g/L at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site c)RC3 site d)RC4 site............................................................................44 vi

PAGE 7

Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science PHOSPHORUS SORPTION AND FLUX IN NORTHERN EVERGLADES SOIL UNDER DRAINED AND FLOODED CONDITIONS By Jennifer A. Leeds May 2006 Chair: Mark W. Clark Major Department: Soil and Water Science Wetland soils have the potential to function as a phosphorus (P) source or sink depending on antecedent soil conditions, P loading rates, water column P concentrations and characteristics. Hydrology, water quality and soil chemistry are primary factors affecting soil P sorption and desorption. The Rotenberger Wildlife Management Area (RWMA), part of the northern Everglades, has undergone alterations in hydrology resulting in shortened hydroperiods, severe soil oxidation and peat fires. These alterations have subsequently elevated available P concentrations in the soil. In accordance with the Everglades Forever Act (EFA), the South Florida Water Management District began hydropattern restoration in RWMA in July 2001, utilizing discharges from Storm Water Treatment Area 5 (STA-5). As part of the northern Everglades, it is uncertain whether the RWMA soils will act as a source or sink for P. To address this question, P-isotherms were run to determine the equilibrium phosphorus concentration (EPC) of the soil, while soil P-flux differences between drained vs. flooded vii

PAGE 8

soils were assessed using intact soil core microcosms collected from the field. Results show EPC measurements across the marsh ranged from 73.6 gL -1 to 94.5 gL -1 at three of the four sites, with one site measuring 18.8 gL -1 The P-flux in intact soil cores indicated drained soil treatments fluxed significantly higher concentrations of soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP) (110 gL -1 ) versus continuously flooded soil treatments (7 gL -1 ). Water column SRP concentrations of intact soil cores peaked between 8 and 24 hours after re-flooding with ambient marsh water then water column concentrations declined to SRP levels measured in flooded soil cores by 380 hours. Flooded soils, at all sites, released low levels of SRP concentration upon re-flooding within one hour and then appeared to reach equilibrium, as concentration levels remained constant. Additionally, results measured concentrations of oxalate-extractable Fe (1039.5 g/m 3 ) and Al (514.5 g/m 3 ), normalized based on bulk density (0.21 g/cm 3 ), and are significantly higher compared to other Everglades soil, which may be regulating P sorption. EPC measurements suggest P water column concentrations less than 90 gL -1 will result in P-release from most soils in RWMA. Furthermore, this system continues to experience soil dry out and oxidation for several months (February June) during the dry season, which can lead to rapid and elevated flux of SRP upon re-flooding, as compared to continuously flooded soils. These results can be incorporated into adaptive management strategies to modify operations of the system to achieve hydropattern restoration targets while slowing the movement of existing soluble soil P further into the Everglades. viii

PAGE 9

CHAPTER 1 PHOSPHORUS MOVEMENT BETWEEN THE SOIL AND OVERLYING WATER COLUMN IN WETLANDS Introduction Wetland soils can function as a source or sink for phosphorus (P) depending on antecedent soil conditions and interstitial porewater P concentration. Phosphorus flux from soils is an important biogeochemical process occurring in all types of wetlands. Because P cycles within the soil and does not have a significant gaseous phase such as nitrogen (N), P within a wetland can be transferred between soil, water column, flora and fauna, although is not easily released outside of the wetland system (White et al. 2000). For this reason, P movement within a wetland is of major concern in systems such as the Florida Everglades that initially developed under low P concentrations then received high P inflows resulting in increased P loading. Over time, continuous loading of P to soils can shift historically oligotrophic (low nutrient) wetlands, to eutrophic (high nutrient) systems (South Florida Water Management District 1992; Newman et al. 1997). In addition to external P loading, P dynamics and bioavailability can change as a result of altered hydrology, biology or chemistry of a site (Reddy et al. 1998). Due to anthropogenic alterations in hydrology, many areas in the Northern Everglades have severely reduced hydropatterns, leading to excessive drying and oxidation of the soil, thereby raising soil P concentrations and promoting soil loss. Determining environmental conditions regulating P-sorption or flux in the soil, is largely dependant upon the P 1

PAGE 10

2 concentration and composition of P, both the soil and in the water column, influencing the mobilization of soluble P further into the Everglades marsh interior. Equilibrium Phosphorus Concentration (EPC) Phosphorus sorption/desorption studies primarily use P-isotherms to define the equilibrium phosphorus concentration (EPC) of the soil and measure the maximum P-sorptive capacity of a soil. Furthermore, determining the water column P concentration where soil P-sorption and desorption are at equilibrium, EPC, aids in determining when a wetland will act as a source or sink for P. This value, relative to source water P concentrations, or known acceptable water column P concentrations, is an important variable in restoration, and in predicting potential wetland impact and recovery times. For example, in a study by Richardson and Vaithiyanathan (1995) in Water Conservation Area 2A (WCA-2A) conducted along a P-gradient, reported EPC at inflow sites were high in elevated soil P concentrations, and significantly greater than interior marsh EPC and soil P. They concluded the inflow sites have the ability to serve as an internal source for P, even if external P loading was reduced, given the current inflow concentration levels. Additionally, Zhou and Li (2001) showed a positive correlation between EPC and soil P saturation in a study in the southern Everglades. Wetlands, natural or constructed, can be used to treat runoff or wastewater removing nutrients prior to downstream discharge. The P-sorptive capacity of a soil is an important parameter in determining the amount of time, and range of P concentrations, natural wetlands receiving nutrient enriched inflows, or proposed constructed wetlands designed for nutrient removal, will function. In the northern Everglades, and areas north of Lake Okeechobee, reducing enriched runoff from urban and agricultural areas has become a primary focus of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP).

PAGE 11

3 Studies by Nair et al. (1998) and Reddy et al. (1998), established that soils containing enriched P concentrations, such as agricultural soils that are targeted to become Storm Water Treatment Areas (STAs), or enriched Everglades soils found in current inflow areas, may not have the ability to retain sufficient amounts of P for sustained periods of time (~ 10 years or more) due to historic P loading. In fact, these soils could become a potential source of P upon receiving low P water inputs. In addition, this research hypothesized physico-chemical properties of the soil such as aluminum (Al), iron (Fe), magnesium (Mg) and calcium (Ca) content, can contribute to regulating the P-sorption capacity of the soil. However, their effectiveness at retaining P was dependant upon soil P concentrations, as well as aerobic or anaerobic soil conditions (Gale et al. 1994). Similar studies conducted outside of the Everglades support these results (Khalid et al. 1977; Sallade and Sims 1997). In addition to defining EPC, P-isotherms describe the maximum P-sorptive capacity of the soil using the linear, Freundlich and or Langmuir equations (Nair et al. 1998; Pant and Reddy 2001; Zhou and Li 2001). The linear equation is typically applied to low P concentrations, the Freundlich to medium P concentrations and Langmuir to high P concentrations (Zhou and Li 2001). A principal aspect to consider when applying P-isotherms is they are run under laboratory conditions, in which the soil is isolated from other biological factors, such as plants and algae that could affect the sorptive capacity (Gale et al. 1994). Furthermore, the sample processing method for P-isotherms exposes all available soil sorption sites and cannot be directly related to field conditions where a minimal number of sites are exposed. In addition, pore water diffusion rates play a significant role in the exchange of porewater P with the overlying floodwater. Results are

PAGE 12

4 best utilized in conjunction with other soil characteristics specific to field sites such as nutrient content, dominant P-species (organic or inorganic) in the soil and, oxidized or reducing conditions, as well as P-flux experiments. Factors Regulating P-sorption In wetland systems, P-sorption and desorption are influenced by many factors. The physico-chemical properties of a soil, coupled with historic P-loading of a system, can significantly affect P-sorption (Gale et al. 1994; Reddy et al. 1998). Soil chemistry, specifically Fe and Al content, can have a substantial influence on P-sorption as well (Sallade and Sims 1997; Zhou et al. 1997). Additionally, Reddy et al. (1998) found Total Organic Carbon (TOC) significantly reduced P-sorption by forming complexes with Fe and Al. In a report by Richardson (1985) on the P retention capacity of various freshwater wetlands, results suggested the sorption potential of a wetland may be regulated by the extractable Al content of the soil. The Fe and Al concentrations in the soil can sorb P, forming poorly crystalline and amorphous oxide and hydroxide forms (Khalid et al. 1977; Pant and Reddy 2001; Pant et al. 2001). Under aerobic conditions, ferrous iron in the soil oxidizes to form ferric iron, a precipitate which is insoluble, although can increase P-sorption sites (Gale et al. 1994). In systems with high concentrations of Ca in the soil, such as in WCA-2A (Reddy et al. 1991; Richardson and Vaithiyanathan 1995) and Everglades National Park (ENP) (Zhou and Li 2001), P-sorption is typically regulated by calcium carbonate (CaCO 3 ) (Raven and Hossner 1993). Soil chemistry, organic matter, oxidation, as well as the concentration of available cations such as Ca, Mg, Fe and Al, can influence P binding to form inorganic, bioavailable P-species. Phosphorus species such as Ca/Mg-P and Al/Fe-P, which are inorganic P forms,

PAGE 13

5 are regulated by acidic and alkaline soils, as well as aerobic and anaerobic soil conditions influencing P solubility (Pant et al. 2002). Phosphorus Flux Phosphorus flux is typically used to describe the process of soluble P moving from the soil to the overlying water column, under conditions where water column P concentrations are less than soil porewater P concentrations (Reddy et al. 1996). Phosphorus flux studies incorporating intact soil cores have been conducted in the Everglades, on surrounding agricultural lands north of the Everglades near Lake Okeechobee, and in eutrophic lakes in Central Florida, as well as in wetlands and lakes in other parts of the country (Reddy et al. 1996; Fisher and Reddy 2001; Pant and Reddy 2003). External P loading can have a considerable affect on the level of P concentrations fluxing from the soil to the overlying water column. For example, a P flux study in WCA-2A by Fisher and Reddy (2001) using intact soil cores was performed along a P gradient, extending from water inflow structures to approximately 10 km into the marsh interior. Their results indicated soil P flux was greater near inflow points and decreased linearly with distance into the marsh interior, and is directly correlated to the soil P concentration gradient. In addition, agricultural lands which later may be used as constructed wetlands or storm water treatment areas, have the potential to be a nutrient source depending on antecedent P loading of the soil. An initial high P concentration flux can occur when agricultural lands are first flooded. Depending on soil EPC and water column P (Pant and Reddy, 2003), if the EPC of the soil is elevated, the soil could act as a continuous source of P, until an equilibrium is achieved with the overlying water column.

PAGE 14

6 Two types of soil conditions exist in wetlands, aerobic (drained) and anaerobic (flooded), with varying degrees in between depending on hydroperiod. In studies by Pant et al. (2002) and Malecki et al. (2004), P fluxed in significantly higher amounts in re-flooded, aerobic soils than in continuously flooded, anaerobic soils. One reason for these differences in P release is the different form of soil P found under aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Under aerobic conditions, where soils become oxidized, inorganic P species usually form based on existing soil chemistry such as the Fe, Al, Ca or Mg content. In systems with high Fe content, oxidized forms of Fe can adsorb P forming ferric phosphate. Alternatively, in anaerobic conditions where the soil is not oxidized, P-species primarily remain in their reduced, predominately organic state. Typically, organic bound P is an immobilized form and not immediately available for uptake by plants or algae. Therefore, for organic P to become bioavailable, it must first undergo mineralization, which breaks down into non-bioavailable dissolved organic compounds and bioavailable inorganic P. However, anaerobic conditions slow the mineralization process of organic compounds thereby preserving P that is bound to organic particles. The type of P, inorganic or organic, has significant ecological implications. There are three forms of P present in both the soil and water column, dissolved inorganic P (DIP) also known as soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP), dissolved organic P (DOP) and particulate organic P (POP). Soluble reactive phosphorus is readily available for uptake, whereas DOP and POP must be mineralized to an inorganic form prior to becoming bioavailable. The P species, and their relative concentrations in the water column, as well as drained or flooded soil conditions, dictate which species will flux (Eckert et al. 1997; Novak et al. 2004). These relative concentrations and composition in soil and

PAGE 15

7 water, affect the soluble P front at the landscape scale, having significant implications within the Everglades ecosystem. The importance of which, is soluble P (DIP) is bioavailable, a major factor in driving the system to transition at inflow points from an oligotrophic to eutrophic marsh. Northern Everglades Field Site The Rotenberger Wildlife Management Area (RWMA), part of the Northern Florida Everglades, is a 29,120 acre marsh located west of the Miami Canal and north of Water Conservation Area 3A (Figure 1-1). Once part of the historic sawgrass plains receiving continuous overland flow from Lake Okeechobee (McVoy, personal communication), the RWMA became a degraded wetland, cutoff from continuous water inflow, resulting in shortened hydroperiods and extended marsh draw downs. The continuous cycle of short hydroperiods, allowed the soil to undergo severe dry out and oxidation, elevating P levels, which led to soil subsidence (Newman et al 1998). Consequently, perpetually dry soils, and low (<65%) soil moisture content (Wade et al. 1980) often resulted in typical wildfire becoming muck fires. Muck fires can combust organic matter within the soil, thus significantly altering soil chemistry, increasing P-levels and volatilizing N (Newman et al. 1998; Smith et al. 2001). Loss of soil organic matter can change P soil storage pools from organic to inorganic forms (Leeds et al. in progress). The combination of slow, biologically mediated oxidation of organic matter and rapid thermally mediated oxidation of organic matter through muck fires has significantly increased soil P levels, which now average 640 mg/kg. This change in P concentration has resulted in a shift in marsh trophic state from oligotrophic to a eutrophic system. DeBusk et al. (1994) suggested that Everglades soil P concentrations greater than 500 mg/kg are considered enriched. The RWMA soils may contain a lower

PAGE 16

8 organic matter content, due to the history of muck fires, and a higher mineral content, although may still be classified as an enriched system as evidenced by soil TP content and vegetation composition, as a result of severely altered hydrology. Figure 1-1. Map showing the location of the Rotenberger Wildlife Management Area (RWMA) north of Water Conservation Area 3A (WCA-3A) and south of Lake Okeechobee with inflow point (G-410) from Storm Water Treatment Area 5 (STA-5), the study transect RC and relative outflow point (G402-C).

PAGE 17

9 Need for Research The Everglades Forever Act (EFA) recognized the RWMA as part of the historic northern Everglades requiring hydropattern restoration. To achieve this, the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) began constructing Storm Water Treatment Areas (STAs) to improve hydrology and water quality, from urban and agricultural runoff, prior to discharge into downstream areas of the Everglades. In July 2001, STA-5 began discharging into RWMA. However, due to years of P enrichment and hydrologic alterations, it is unknown if soils in the RWMA will serve as a P source or sink, relative to STA-5 floodwater concentrations. Since STA-5 began discharging, water column TP concentrations have averaged 50 70 gL -1 with spikes in concentration entering the marsh as high as 130 gL -1 Because the RWMA is not considered part of the Everglades Protection Area (EPA), inflow TP concentrations are not required to meet the 10 gL -1 P-limit criteria set by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. However, as dictated by the EFA permit for STA-5, discharges are required to be at 50 gL -1 or below, a annual average. Determining the ability of the soil to adsorb P, as well as defining the EPC of the soil, will aid in predicting P-flux and the affect of STA-5 floodwater on RWMA marsh recovery. Existing soil nutrient data shows fairly uniform TP concentrations throughout the RWMA marsh, as well as with depth, therefore it is hypothesized EPC values and P-fluxing concentrations would be spatially homogeneous. However, spatial differences in EPC and P flux across the RWMA needs to be verified to clarify differences between sites and variances in soil P concentrations that may occur from inflow to outflow. Moreover, determining the type of P-species flowing into and out of the marsh, in addition to fluxing out of the soil, is critical information for management of the system.

PAGE 18

10 For example, inorganic P is readily available to plants and microorganisms where as dissolved organic P is not directly available for uptake resulting in less effect on plants within the marsh, but a higher probability of transport downstream. Also, the type of P available in the soil will influence what P species is available to flux (Novak et al. 2004). Finally, the potential of the soil to sorb P, over time, will assist in marsh recovery calculations and establish concentration levels, at which P will be a significant source. As water flows from the RWMA into the central Everglades, high outflow P concentrations have the potential to impact P-loading limits at main pumping structures, specifically the S-8 structure located on the Miami Canal. This structure pumps water into northern WCA-3A, part of the EPA, affecting marsh areas further downstream. Currently, the RWMA soils still experience excessive, dry season soil drying and oxidation despite receiving STA discharges. Therefore, in its current state and operations, and based on soil nutrient data previously collected, the RWMA soils can potentially act as a source of P to downstream areas. The purpose of this study is to determine if the RWMA soils will act as a P source or sink to downstream areas as well as ascertain the potential of the soil to sorb additional P flowing in from STA-5. By establishing the amount of P flux under dry vs. flooded soil conditions, in addition to the amount of P which can be sorbed by the soils, changes to system operations can be evaluated. For instance, if significantly more P fluxes from dry soils than flooded soils, retaining water within the system, by altering inflow and or outflow operations, may suppress significant P-fluxing and allow for biological interactions. Through this adaptive management approach, results from P-flux and P-isotherm experiments will be utilized to evaluate modifications of hydrologic operations to provide

PAGE 19

11 conditions that meet restoration goals. In addition, the P flux research will provide data for the SFWMD recovery model, used in predicting ecological responses of impacted areas of the Everglades to STA effluent, as outlined by the Long Term Plan (LTP) and directed by the EFA.

PAGE 20

CHAPTER 2 PHOSPHORUS SORPTION AND DESORPTION CAPACITY Introduction Soil in many parts of the Everglades, has become P enriched due to years of over drainage and oxidation, or as a result of high P inflows from urban and agricultural runoff. The ability of these soils to retain P and not become an internal source is an important factor in Everglades restoration. The water column P concentration level at which no P-sorption/desorption occurs is defined as the equilibrium phosphorus concentration (EPC) (Richardson and Vaithiyanathan 1995; Nair et al. 1998; Pant et al. 2001). Ascertaining the EPC of the soil can be accomplished through the use of P-isotherms run under laboratory conditions from samples collected at desired field locations. To define the maximum P-sorptive capacity of the soil, isotherms are performed utilizing various solution P concentrations, based on site specific soil P data. Results can be used to determine whether a soil will flux P into the overlying water column based on P concentrations of inflow water. Phosphorus retention in the soil is affected by several factors such as historic P loading, existing P levels of the soil and incoming water column P concentration levels. In addition, several biological factors, algae and macrophytes, uptake P from the water column and soil, respectively (Bostrom et al 1988; Gale et al 1994). The ability of the soil to release sorbed P or retain P, is dependent upon antecedent soil conditions, soil chemistry and, P adsorption capacity of the soil (Zhou and Li 2001), all of which directly effects ecosystem restoration. For example, if water column P levels from inflows are reduced below EPC levels, P will desorb from soil and flux into the water column. 12

PAGE 21

13 Soil chemistry primarily affects the solubility of P and influences P-sorption. In studies by Khalid et al. (1977), Richardson (1985) and Sallade and Sims (1997), aluminum (Al) and iron (Fe) content in the soil significantly affected P solubility. Furthermore, oxidation of the soil, promoted by prolonged marsh draw downs, affects the types of Fe (ferrous to ferric) available to bond with P. Under oxidative conditions, soils containing high Fe content can regulate P-sorption (Reddy et al. 1998). These inorganic crystalline forms of Fe-P can become soluble upon flooding versus organic forms, thereby releasing inorganic bioavailable P (Patrick and Khalid 1974; Pant et al. 2002). Specifically, high Al/Fe content in the soil can affect inorganic phosphorus (iP) species formation. High concentrations of Al and Fe oxides will bond with P forming inorganic Fe-P and Al-P bound compounds (Sallade and Sims 1997). Generally wetland soils assimilate iP in greater concentrations than organic P (oP) (Pant and Reddy 2001) and depending on soil chemistry, hydrology and biological factors, can store iP more readily than oP. In addition, P storage pools in the soil can affect P-sorption and solubility, based on predominately inorganic or organic forms. Ascertaining P species (bioavailable) retained or released from the soil is ecologically important to wetlands with respect to eutrophication. Depending on P-species in the water column, antecedent soil conditions and oxidation, oP or iP can be released. The objectives of this study were to 1) establish the EPC of the soil spatially from inflow point across the marsh to outflow and 2) measure the maximum P-sorptive capacity of the soil when exposed to low P and high P treatments. Methods Phosphorus isotherms were run on composite soil samples, collected from the RWMA along an existing representative transect (RC) of soil, vegetation and hydrologic conditions,

PAGE 22

14 located in the northern portion of the marsh, to determine the EPC of the soil and maximum P adsorptive capacity of the soil. The 0-2 cm depth was collected being the most reactive soil layer with the overlying water column, based on current soil nutrient data, containing the highest P concentration. Three replicates of the top 0-2 cm layer of soil were combined into one composite sample per site, representing each of the four sites (RC-1, RC-2, RC-3, RC-4). The RC transect runs from west to east, the direction of water flow, with RC-1 located near the western side (inflow) of the RWMA adjacent to the inflow structure (G-410 pump), and RC-4 located near the eastern side (outflow), adjacent to the outflow structure (G-402 C, a gated box culvert). Each sample was collected using a 2 cm deep, 10.16 cm diameter wide coring ring. Prior to field sampling all plant material was removed. Samples were then placed in plastic bags, stored in a cooler on ice and transported back to the lab. All soil was spread out in a thin layer on individual trays and air dried at room temperature (25.5 C), for approximately five weeks. Prior to drying the soil, all plant material and small stones were removed. Then, the soil trays were covered with screen to prevent contamination and, as seedlings emerged from the soil, they were removed. Once dry, the soil was ground, passed through two sieve sizes (2 mm and 0.88 mm), then ground and sieved again. Any remaining material which could not pass through the sieves was discarded. Initially six P concentrations plus a control (0 control, 10, 30, 50, 100, 500 and 1000 gL -1 ) were used to produce P-isotherm curves for each site, to determine the EPC and the potential maximum P-sorptive capacity of the soil. Therefore, each site consisted of seven treatments, with three replicates per treatment, for a total of 84 initial samples along the RC transect. Three grams of soil were weighed and placed into 50 ml centrifuge tubes then

PAGE 23

15 spiked with 50 mM KCL solution. Each spike contained one of the seven P concentrations prepared from 1000 ppm standard stock solution, derived from dissolving 1.0985 g of potassium dihydrogen phosphate (KH 2 PO 4 ) into 100 ml of D.I. water, contained in a 250 mL class A volumetric flask, then diluting with D.I. to the mark and mixing. Two sub-stock solutions, 5 mgL -1 and 50 mgL -1 were prepared from an original 1000 mgL -1 solution to spike each of the seven treatment concentrations. The KCL-P solution treatments were prepared by measuring out 1.863 g of KCL dissolved into 200 ml of D.I. water within a 500 ml class A volumetric flask, spiked with the appropriate P sub-stock solution, then filled to the mark with D.I. and mixed, yielding a total of 500 ml each of 0 (control no P additions), 10, 30, 50, 100, 500 and 1000 gL -1 P-treatment solutions. Centrifuge tubes were then placed on a shaker table set at 180 rpm for 24 hours, to ensure complete mixing of soil and solution. After shaking, tubes were centrifuged for 15 minutes at 22 C at 4000 rpm, and approximately 5 8 ml of the supernatant was extracted using a transfer pipette. The supernatant was then filtered through a 0.45 m filter. Each sample was measured for soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP) by the SFWMD Water Quality lab using standard methods (SM4500PF, Clescerl et al 1999) and SFWMD methods (SFWMD 3080.1 Rev. 2.2). Ground soils used for P isotherms were sub-sampled and submitted to DB Environmental Labs, Rockledge, Florida for analysis of oxalate extractable Iron (Fe) and Aluminum (Al) analysis using standard methods EPA 236.1 and EPA 202.1, respectively. Isotherm calculations Phosphorus sorption data was calculated and fit using the linear, Freundlich and Langmuir isotherm equations (Reddy et al. 1998; Zhou and Li 2001). The linear equation was used to fit low P concentration results, while the Freundlich equation fit low to medium

PAGE 24

16 P concentrations, and the Langmuir equation is applied to high P concentrations (Zhou et al. 1997). Linear isotherm: S = KC S o S = the amount of P sorbed in the solid phase, g g -1 K = P-sorption coefficient C = P concentration in solution after 24-h equilibration gL -1 S o = constant, amount of originally adsorbed P In addition, the equilibrium phosphorus concentration (EPC), which is defined as the concentration of P in a solution when neither sorption or desorption is occurring, is equal to C when S = 0 (Pant et al. 2002). Therefore the EPC was calculated from regression statistics data as the intercept (point at which a line intersects the y-x-axis) divided by the x-variable. Freundlich isotherm: S = K f C n K f = constant n < 1 S as above Langmuir isotherm: C/S = 1/(bS max ) + C/S max S max = P sorption maximum g g -1 b = a constant related to bonding energy C/S = as defined earlier Results All three isotherm equations (linear, Freundlich and Langmuir) were applied to the initial P-sorption results measured from each site. For each site, P-sorption data remained linear (Figure. 2-1 a-d), with no inflection point indicating the P-concentration in which the maximum P sorptive capacity of the soil was reached. Therefore, the linear isotherm

PAGE 25

17 equation best describes the low P-concentrations of all sites, supported by high regression (R 2 ) coefficients (Table 2-1). Additionally, EPC of the soil for each site was calculated and results reported in Table 2-2. Sites RC1 (inflow) and RC4 (outflow) had similar EPC measurements of 94.5 and 93.2 gL -1 respectively. The RC3 site, which is in the marsh interior, was lower at 73.6 gL -1 though not significantly. Conversely, the RC2 site was significantly lower (P = 0.05) than all other sites measuring 18.8 gL -1 To ascertain the potential maximum P-sorptive capacity of the RWMA soils, additional P-isotherms of 2000, 5000 and 10,000 gL -1 were run and the data added to the initial results. The Freundlich and Langmuir equations were then applied to determine the best fit according to R 2 values (Table 2-1). While both equations fit well, according to R 2 values, the Freundlich equation is a better fit for the higher P-concentrations (Figure 2-2 a-d). P-sorption parameters measured from each treatment concentration at each site are reported in Table 2-2. The isotherm inflection points indicate the P-concentration at which the soil is reaching its maximum sorptive capacity. Because inflection points (line begins to curve) on each graph for each site is not well defined, estimates of the P-sorptive capacity of the soil is approximated as: RC1 ~ 40-60 ug g -1 RC2 ~ 40-60 ug g -1 RC3 ~ 40-60 ug g -1 RC4 ~ 40-60 ug g -1

PAGE 26

18 -202468100204060801001201Equilibrium P Conc (g/L)P sorbed (g/g) 40 EPC A RC1 -202468101205101520253035Equilibrium P Conc. (g/L)P Sorbed (g/g) EPC B RC2 Figure 2-1 Linear isotherm result for the RC transect depicting the equilibrium phosphorus concentration (EPC) on the x-axis and the amount of P-sorbed on the y-axis. The line is the best fit for all values which shows EPC is actually a range of values. A) RC1 site. B) RC2 site C) RC3 site D) RC4 site.

PAGE 27

19 -20246810020406080100120140Equilibrium P Conc. (g/L)P Sorbed (g/g) EPC C RC3 -20246810020406080100120140160180200Equilibrium P Conc. (g/L)P Sorbed (g/g) EPC D RC4 Figure 2-1. Continued. Current soil nutrient concentrations for each site are reported in Table 2-3. All P-isotherm Pconcentration measurement data used to calculate each isotherm equation and associated plot

PAGE 28

20 Table 2-1. List of regression (R2) coefficients used to determine which isotherm equation, linear, Freundlich or Langmuir, best fit the P-sorption data. Linear,R 2 Freundlich,R 2 Langmuir,R 2 RC1 0.930 0.990 0.880 RC2 0.900 0.980 0.830 RC3 0.980 0.990 0.980 RC4 0.920 0.980 0.840 Table 2-2. P-sorption parameter results for the linear, Freundlich and Langmuir equations for equilibrium phosphorus concentration (EPC), K f a constant in the Freundlich equation, C n measure of P concentration in solution after 24 hours, Smax the P sorption maximum and b a constant in the Langmuir equation. Linear Freundlich Langmuir EPC, gL -1 K f C n S max ug g -1 b RC1 94.5 0.469 0.858 397.7 0.0007 RC2 18.8 1.49 0.853 268.4 0.0041 RC3 73.6 0.506 0.78 206.4 0.0009 RC4 93.2 0.201 0.848 189.5 0.0006 concentration measurement data used to calculate each isotherm equation and associated plot data is listed in Appendix 2-1. Results of oxalate-extractable Al (Figure 2-3) and oxalate-extractable Fe (Figure 2-4) were variable with no apparent spatial trends, therefore results are combined. The isotherm soils were composite samples collected from the field and not replicates. Due to the single measurement per site, statistical differences between sites could not be established, and are used to characterize soil chemistry. Concentrations of Fe and Al were high compared to other Everglades marsh areas. The average Fe content for the RC transect in RWMA is 4950 275 mg/kg compared to Fe content in WCA2A at 344 37 mg/kg (SFWMD, Everglades Threshold data) and Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge (LNWR) of 339 57 mg/kg (SFWMD, Everglades Threshold data). Average Al content is 2450 515 mg/kg for the RC transect in RWMA, 248 13 mg/kg in WCA2A (SFWMD, Everglades Threshold data) and

PAGE 29

21 -200204060801001200100200300400500600700Equilibrium P Conc (g/L)P Sorbed (g/g) data Freundlich Langmuir A RC1 -20020406080100120020406080100120140160180200Equilibrium P Conc (g/L)P Sorbed (g/g) data Freundlich LangmuirB RC2 Figure 2-2 Freundlich and Langmuir isotherms for the RC transect depicting which equation best describes the P-sorption maximum. A) RC1 site. B) RC2 site. C) RC3 site. D) RC4 site.

PAGE 30

22 -20020406080100120020040060080010001200Equilibrium P Conc (g/L)P Sorbed (g/g) data Freundlich LangmuirC RC3 -20020406080100120020040060080010001200140016001800Equilibrium P Conc (g/L)P Sorbed (g/g) data Freundlich LangmuirD RC4 Figure 2-2. Continued.

PAGE 31

23 05001000150020002500300035004000RC1RC2RC3RC4siteOx-Al (mg/kg ) Figure 2-3. Oxalate-extractable Al composite samples collected at the sites along the RC transect and therefore are not replicates so error bars are not shown. 0100020003000400050006000RC1RC2RC3RC4siteOx-Fe (mg/kg ) Figure 2-4. Oxalate-extractable Fe composite samples collected at sites along the RC transect and therefore are not replicates so error bars are not shown. In LNWR, 353 51 mg/kg (SFWMD, Everglades Threshold data). For comparison purposes, the results were corrected for bulk density and compared to soil from LNWR and WCA-2A (Table 2-4).

PAGE 32

24 Table 2-3. RWMA soil nutrient concentrations for each site in the RC transect. Data collected by the SFWMD, Downstream Monitoring and Research Program. TP, mg/kg TN, mg/kg TC, mg/kg Bulk Density % Ash RC1 741 53 34066 2140 465333 9135 0.16 0.015 16.46 2.22 RC2 740 79 33000 643 454333 2333 0.16 0.012 17.1 0.58 RC3 547 44 33300 1007 449666 5696 0.20 0.015 20.96 0.86 RC4 694 18 32000 557 468666 1764 0.17 0.003 14.63 0.26 Table 2-4. Comparison of oxalate extractable Fe and Al content is soils, corrected for bulk density, from the RWMA, LNWR and WCA-2A. Data reported for LNWR and WCA-2A from the SFWMD, Everglades Threshold Program. Bulk density, g/cm 3 Ox-Fe, g/m 3 Ox-Al, g/m 3 RWMA 0.21 1039.5 514.5 LNWR 0.06 20.34 21.18 WCA-2A 0.068 23.39 16.86 Discussion The inflow (RC1) and outflow (RC4) sites had similar EPC values, as did the RC3 site, while the RC2 site was significantly lower from the other three sites. Topographic elevations indicate the RWMA resembles a saucer, with the western and eastern edges of the marsh higher in elevation than the interior, suggesting the two outer sites (RC1, RC4) are drier and oxidize for longer periods of time than the interior sites (RC2, RC3). While soil TP data (~ 640 mg/kg) of the top 2 cm of soil is consistent throughout the RWMA (SFWMD, Downstream Monitoring and Research Program), hydrology may have a significant influence on soil conditions with increased oxidation (Leeds et al. in progress). Although the difference in EPC value at RC2 was unexpected, this site as well as the RC3 site, is slightly lower in elevation equating to a longer hydroperiod. Additionally, the RC2 site is closer to the STA-5 inflow point from than the other interior site, RC-3, and maybe be affecting by increased water levels due to exposure to inflows. Therefore, the soils do not dry out and oxidize as frequently, suppressing the formation of soluble P. The EPC

PAGE 33

25 results of all transect sites reveals the heterogeneity of the soil composition. One hypothesis for these results is, while the RC-2 site has a greater ability to sorb P, sites closer to the inflow receiving water lower in P concentration than the soil, will flux P into the water column. The fluxed soluble P is transported downstream to lower EPC sites, where P-sorption will occur, thereby increasing the soil P concentrations. Over time the localized P-flux and sorption cycle may eventually reach equilibrium. However, ecological impacts could be significant if equalization is due to, high P inflows and continued oxidation and reduced hydroperiods. In comparing the RWMA P-isotherm data to other Everglades areas, EPC is correlated with P-enrichment of the soil (Richardson and Vayithianythan 1995; Zhou et al. 1997). In WCA-2A, Richardson and Vayithianythan (1995), using both the linear and Langmuir models, showed a linear decrease in EPC, from enriched to un-enriched soil EPC values along an existing P gradient. Additionally, they had reported higher EPC values at inflow, which contains an approximate soil TP concentration of 1500 mg/kg (SFWMD, Everglades Marsh Ecology Program) versus the RWMA TP soil concentrations at 640 mg/kg. Alternatively, they predicted maximum P-sorptive capacity to be ~ 700 mg/kg, where as I estimated the RWMA maximum P-sorptive capacity closer to 40 60 mg/kg, based on the amount of P sorbed at 80 gL -1 In WCA2A and other areas of the Everglades, P-sorption is controlled by calcium (Ca) and may have a higher sorption potential than Fe as it is not influenced by redox. Furthermore, the difference between these two studies could be the higher TP soil enrichment in WCA-2A which, increases P-sorption, or could be due to a difference in available cations in the soil. When RWMA isotherm results are compared to un-enriched ( 650 mg/kg) southern Everglades soil (Zhou and Li, 2001) where EPC values

PAGE 34

26 (0.002 0.010 gml -1 ), maximum P-sorptive capacity ranges from 1780 2575 g g -1 and soil TP concentrations are low, the RWMA soil had a much lower maximum P-sorptive capacity, 40 60 g g -1 When corrected for bulk density, the Fe and Al content in the RWMA soil is high compared to other Everglades marsh areas regardless of TP content. While both Fe and Al concentrations are elevated, the Fe content is higher than Al concentrations, suggesting Fe could be the primary regulator of P sorption and Al a secondary regulator (Zhou et al 1997; Pant et al. 2002), as there are more available cations for P to bind to. Similar studies by Reddy et al. 1998 and Nair et al. 1998, reported P retention was strongly correlated to Fe and Al content present in the soil. Furthermore, Khalid 1977, stated under reduced conditions, Fe and Al were primary factors in P retention in flooded soils, and anaerobic conditions will increase P solubility (Gale et al. 1994). Therefore, soils that are highly enriched, such as in WCA-2A, are not able to sorb as much P from the water column, possibly because they have reached a P-saturation point. These soils have the potential to act as an internal source of P, if inflow water to the marsh is low (below EPC). In marsh areas similar to the RWMA, where EPC is variable and max P-sorptive capacity is less than highly enriched areas, the potential exists to contain soluble P, partially due to the availability of Fe and Al cations without negatively affecting marsh areas downstream. In addition, soil chemistry conditions, in particular the high Fe and Al content, which may be regulating P adsorption, are influenced in the RWMA by hydrology. Restoring or adjusting the hydrology to prevent conditions conducive to oxidation and muck fires is a critical component to RWMA restoration.

PAGE 35

CHAPTER 3 FLUX OF BIOAVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS Introduction Wetland soils that have undergone nutrient enrichment can become internal sources of Phosphorus (P) and Nitrogen (N) thus affecting restoration goals. Additionally, hydrologic conditions can exhibit a significant affect on the flux rate of these nutrients when hydroperiods are severely altered (shortened), resulting in elevated water column concentrations (Olila et al. 1997; Pant and Reddy 2001). Furthermore, the inorganic or bioavailable P and N species present, plays a major role in contributing to the eutrophication of a wetland (Moore et al. 1991). Flux of P and N is dependant upon antecedent soil conditions as well as, the various P storage pools in the soil, and P concentrations in the overlying water column. Nitrogen can be lost to the system through volatilization (Reddy et al. 1996), whereas P accumulates in the soil, often resulting in a long-term mass increase in total P. If long-term P immobilization processes are altered, or if antecedent soil conditions are anthropogenically enriched, marsh areas that once provided a P sink can become a source of P, especially when receiving inflow containing low P concentrations. The internal loading potential of these enriched or hydrologically altered soils can perpetuate eutrophication and prolong marsh recovery efforts (Pant and Reddy 2003). The Florida Everglades has undergone anthropogenic alterations to hydrology and water quality for over 50 years. Changes in hydrology have extensively reduced hydroperiods, particularly in areas of the marsh cutoff from continuous water inflows, 27

PAGE 36

28 resulting in extended periods of dry out. Urban and agricultural runoff containing high P concentrations have artificially elevated soil P concentrations in downstream areas of the Everglades. When soil dries out for prolonged periods, moisture level is reduced, resulting in aerobic conditions and increased rates of organic matter decomposition. In addition, when soil moisture content reaches 65% (on a mass basis) and less, organic soil becomes susceptible to burning (Wade et al. 1980). During organic soil burning (muck or peat fires), P soil storage pools can shift from predominately organic to inorganic forms (Smith et al. 2001; Newman et al. 2001), becoming available to flux out of the soil upon re-flooding. The RWMA has been cutoff from overland flow for over 50 years, which drastically altered the hydrology in this system. As a result, hydroperiods were reduced to an average of three months and, during the remaining nine months, drained soil conditions predominated. Prolonged marsh draw downs severely oxidized the soil, leading to subsidence and muck fires. As a consequence of this altered hydrologic cycle, soil P concentrations became elevated (Newman et al. 1998). In July 2001, the SFWMD began utilizing STA-5 discharges to increase the hydroperiod in RWMA, in accordance with hydropattern restoration as directed by the Everglades Forever Act (EFA). The effect of re-flooding of these drained soils on P-fluxing, and the movement of soluble P to downstream areas, was unknown. Therefore, the objectives of this study were 1) determine the difference in P and N flux in dry versus continuously flooded soils and 2) quantify differences in flux spatially. Methods Soil P concentrations, bulk density measurements and vegetation compositions, do not vary significantly across the RWMA, therefore one representative transect (RC) was

PAGE 37

29 chosen for the intact soil core P-flux study to characterize the soils throughout the marsh. Four sites (RC-1, RC-2, RC-3 and RC-4) compose one transect running west to east with the first, western most site RC-1, located adjacent to the inflow structure (G-410 pump) and the eastern most site, RC-4, located adjacent to the outflow structure (G-402C gated box culvert). The study was conducted during the dry season (December to May) for the Everglades, hence air temperatures and day/night hours were identical to the required environmental conditions. To alleviate the problem of soil within the intact soil core tube pulling away from the side wall during drying and artificially increasing the surface area in which the water column interacts, initial drying and flooding treatments were performed in five gallon soil bucket cores. A standard five gallon bucket with the bottom removed was used as an initial soil coring device. Two five gallon soil bucket cores were collected from each site for dry and flooded treatments. Prior to inserting the bucket into the soil, all vegetation was cleared then, a knife was used to severe all roots, minimizing soil compaction. Cores were taken to a depth of 0/30 cm, then transferred to a treatment bucket, by sliding the intact core out of the bottom of the soil core bucket and into a treatment bucket. All soil cores were transferred to a SFWMD research facility located in West Palm Beach, Fl and placed in enclosures to prevent incoming rain. Prior to treatment, any remaining vegetation or algae was removed. One soil treatment bucket from each site was continuously flooded with ambient marsh water, and maintained at an approximate flooding depth of 5 cm, while the other experienced 45 days of dry down. Seedlings were removed as they emerged during the treatment period. During a pilot coring study it was concluded that three, 10 cm diameter soil cores could be collected from each bucket core. Therefore, at day 45 which is an average

PAGE 38

30 duration of draw down for this area of the Everglades, three replicates for each treatment, dry and continuously flooded, were cored for a total of six intact soil cores per site and an experiment total of 24 soil cores. The plastic coring tubes were placed on the soil surface and any remaining root material was severed with a knife to minimize soil compaction. The intact soil cores were removed, capped on the bottom and sealed to contain the core and treatment. The coring tubes were then randomly placed on a table, within an open enclosure containing a clear plastic roof to prevent rainwater from entering, but allowing for full sunlight. Air temperature conditions at the time (February/March) of the study ranged from daytime highs of 18.3 25.5 C, and nighttime lows of 7.2 18.3 C. Ambient marsh water, collected from the RWMA marsh interior, was used to flood each soil core tube from the top down in an effort to simulate the flooding processes in the field, to a depth of 30 cm. No additional water was added to the tubes after the initial flooding. Finally, all coring tubes were wrapped in aluminum foil to retard algal growth with the top of each core left uncovered. Water quality samples were extracted from each soil core tube with a syringe inserted into the water column, and filtered as specified by lab analyte requirements, with a 0.45 m filter, then placed on ice prior to submittal to the SFWMD Water Quality Lab. Samples were analyzed for total phosphorus (TP), total dissolved phosphorus (TDP), soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP), total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), total dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen (TDKN), nitrate/nitrite (NOx) and ammonium (NH 4 ) at time zero, day 7 and day 21 according to standard (Clescerl et al. 1999) and SFWMD methods (Table 3-1). In addition SRP and NH 4 were analyzed at 1hour, 4hrs, 8hrs, 18hrs, 24hrs and days 2, 4 and 14.

PAGE 39

31 Table 3-1. Water Quality standard testing methods according to Clescerl et al. 1999 and the South Florida Water Management District water quality procedures. Water Quality Parameter Standard Methods, Clescerl et al. 1999 SFWMD, water quality procedures SRP,(Orthophosphate, OPO 4 ) SM4500 PF SFWMD 3080.1, Rev. 2.2 Total Phosphate, TP SM4500 PF SFWMD 3100.1, Rev. 3.0 Total Dissolved Phosphate, TDP SM4500 PF SFWMD 3100.1, Rev. 3.0 Ammonium, NH 4 SM4500 NH 3 H SFWMD 3060.4, Rev. 1.0 Nitrate/Nitrite, NOx SM4500 NO 3 F SFWMD 3060.4, Rev. 1.0 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, TKN EPA 351.2 SFWMD 3070.1, Rev. 2.0 Total Dissolved Kjeldahl Nitrogen, TDKN EPA 351.2 SFWMD 3070.1, Rev. 2.0 From the water quality results, the different forms of phosphorus P species present in the water was calculated, then compared with field water quality data for similar concentration percentages and P availability for algae and plants. The dissolved organic phosphorus (DOP) concentration that fluxed into the overlying water column was calculated by subtracting OPO 4 from TDP. In addition, the organic phosphorus (oP) concentration present in the water column was calculated by subtracting SRP from TP. Finally water column particulate phosphorus (PP) was calculated as TDP subtracted from TP. Algal growth occurred in the dry soil core tubes after approximately 168 hours as a floating mat, which gradually became thicker until conclusion of the experiment, at which time the majority of the mat sank to the soil surface. The remaining floating mat was skimmed off the top of the water, the soil core dropped out of the bottom of the tube, and the remaining algae attached to the tube wall, scraped and added to the sample. No soil was included in the algae samples, which were sent to DB Environmental Labs, Rockledge, Florida for TP analysis.

PAGE 40

32 Water quality data from the intact soil cores was analyzed using SAS Jump version 5, SAS Institute Inc., Cary NC. A two-way, repeated measures ANOVA was run, to determine significant differences for each analyte, temporally and spatially and treatment, drained and flooded. A significance level of () 0.05 was used for all analyses. Fluxing rates were calculated based on steepest curve at time 1, 4 and 8 hours. Results Drained versus continuously flooded soils were compared for significant differences in flux for all water quality parameters, at each site along the RC transect. The dry soils exhibited higher flux concentrations across all sites and analytes compared to flooded soils. In dry soil, SRP flux was significantly higher (P<0.05) than flooded soils at all sites (Figure 3-1 a,b,c,d). At the RC1 (inflow) and RC4 (outflow) sites, dry soil SRP concentrations were greater than the internal marsh sites RC2 and RC3. Additionally, time 0 results of dry and flooded soils were similar until the one hour time mark, at which point concentrations between the two treatments were significantly different until the 168 to 212 hour time mark. The exception is RC3 which peaked at four hours, then water column P concentrations declined at the eight hour time mark to initial P concentration levels at time 0 which, is also similar to flooded water column P concentrations. Final concentrations measured at time 380 for the RC1 dry soils were significantly lower (P = 0.03) than the beginning time 0 concentrations. Fluxing rates, based on steepest curve, were greatest at the RC4 and RC1 sites respectively, than RC2

PAGE 41

33 a00.050.10.150.20.25050100150200time, hoursSRP, mg/ L RC1-D RC1-F b00.050.10.150.20.25050100150200time, hoursSRP, mg/ L RC2-D RC2-F c00.010.020.030.040.050.06050100150200time, hoursSRP, mg/ L RC3-D RC3-F Figure 3-1 SRP water column concentrations in mg/L measured in dry vs. flooded soil core tube treatments at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site. d)RC4 site. All scales are the same with the exception of (c) the RC3 site, which was re-scaled to display the slope of the initial flux.

PAGE 42

34 d00.050.10.150.20.25050100150200time, hoursSRP, mg/ L RC4-D RC4-F Figure 3-1. Continued. and RC3 (Table 3-2). Flooded RC1 soils exhibited no significant changes in SRP concentrations measured in the water column throughout the experiment. Total phosphorus (TP) measurements for dry and flooded soils at time 0 were not significantly different, however final concentrations at time 380 hours were significantly different for all sites (Figure 3-2 a,b,c,d). Total phosphorus trends for concentrations were different between dry and flooded soil cores, as dry soil TP concentrations increased with time and flooded TP concentrations decreased with time. Total dissolved phosphorus (TDP) exhibited a similar trend at all sites for both dry and flooded soils, with the highest concentration measurements at time168 hours then decreasing in concentration levels at time 380 to time 0 concentration levels (Figure 3-3 a,b,c,d). Table 3-2. Fluxing rates of SRP in mgL -1 /hr for dry soil cores at each transect site based on steepest curve for time 1, 4 and 8 hours. time, hours RC1-D, mgL -1 /hr RC2-D, mgL -1 /hr RC3-D, mgL -1 /hr RC4-D, mgL -1 /hr 1 0.090 0.076 0.053 0.106 4 0.056 0.043 0.022 0.057 8 0.052 0.033 0.013 0.046

PAGE 43

35 For all sites Ammonium (NH 4 ) fluxed out of the dry soil treatments at significantly greater concentrations (P<0.05) than the continuously flooded soil from the 4-8 hour time to 168 and 212 hour measurements (Figure 3-4 a,b,c,d). Additionally, final concentrations measured at time 380 returned to similar concentrations measured at time 0. All flooded soils released a small amount NH 4 into the water column within the first eight hours then concentrations appeared to reach equilibrium between the soil and overlying water NH 4 concentrations at the final time of 380 hours. The RC1 inflow site dry soil treatment NH 4 concentrations were significantly less (P < 0.05) than the RC2, a00.050.10.150.20.250100200300400time,hrsTP, mg/ L RC1-D RC1-F b00.10.20.30100200300400time,hrsTP, mg/ L RC2-D RC2-F Figure 3-2 TP water column concentrations in mg/L measured in dry vs. flooded soil core tube treatments at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site. d)RC4 site.

PAGE 44

36 c00.050.10.150.20.250100200300400time,hrsTP, mg/ L RC3-D RC3-F d00.050.10.150.20.250100200300400time,hrsTP, mg/ L RC4-D RC4-F Figure 3-2. Continued.

PAGE 45

37 a00.050.10100200300400time, hrsTDP, mg/ L RC1-D RC1-F b00.050.10100200300400time, hrsTDP, mg/ L RC2-D RC2-F c00.050.10100200300400time,hrsTDP, mg/ L RC3-D RC3-F d00.050.10100200300400time, hrsTDP, mg/ L RC4-D RC4-F Figure 3-3. TDP water column concentrations in mg/L measured in dry vs. flooded soil core tube treatments at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site. d)RC4 site.

PAGE 46

38 a012345050100150200time, hoursNH4, mg/ L RC1-D RC1-F b012345050100150200time, hoursNH4, mg/ L RC2-D RC2-F Figure 3-4 NH 4 water column concentrations in mg/L measured in dry vs. flooded soil core tube treatments at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site. d)RC4 site.

PAGE 47

39 c012345050100150200time, hoursNH4, mg/ L RC3-D RC3-F d012345050100150200time, hoursNH4, mg/ L RC4-D RC4-F Figure 3-4. Continued. RC3 and RC4 sites. The additional nitrogen parameters measured in the water quality samples, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN), Total Dissolved Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TDKN) and Nitrite/Nitrate (NO X ) results are listed in Appendix 3-1. Finally, for each parameter and soil treatment, results of all drained treatments and flooded treatments were compared between sites, within the transect, for significant differences in concentration. Significantly higher concentrations of SRP (P < 0.05) occurred during peak flux (time 1 hr to time 8 hr) in the drained soils between RC1 and RC4 (inflow and outflow sites respectively) versus RC2 and RC3 (interior transect sites)

PAGE 48

40 (Figure 3-5). However, there were no significant differences between sites in dry or flooded soils, for TP or TDP and SRP. Conversely, results in dry soils for NH 4 at the RC1 site had significantly (P < 0.05) lower concentrations (P < 0.05) compared to RC2, 3 and 4 (Figure 3-6). However, there were no significant differences between sites in either dry or flooded soils for TKN, TDKN and NOx as well as NH 4 for flooded soil. 00.050.10.150.20.25050100150200time, hoursSRP, mg/ L RC1-D RC2-D RC3-D RC4-D Figure 3-5. SRP water column concentrations measured in mg/L in drained soil core treatments all sites RC1, RC2, RC3 and RC4. The RC1 and RC4 sites fluxed at higher rates and greater concentrations of SRP than the interior marsh sites, RC2 and RC3. 0123450100200300400time, hoursNH4, mg/ L RC1-D RC2-D RC3-D RC4-D Figure 3-6. NH 4 water column concentrations measured in mg/L in drained soil core treatments all sites RC1, RC2, RC3 and RC4.

PAGE 49

41 Dissolved organic phosphorus, which fluxed from the soil into the overlying water column, exhibited a similar increase in concentration with time in the flooded soils (Figure 3-7 a,b,c,d). Flooded soil water column DOP measured at the RC1 site was significantly (P=0.05) higher than the dry soil treatment. Drained soil DOP concentrations in the water column remained constant throughout the experiment. Alternatively, water column oP (Figure 3-8) and PP (Figure 3-9) concentrations within drained soil significantly (P=0.05) increased over time, while flooded soil water column oP and PP concentrations steadily decreased over time. When calculating percentages of oP and iP fluxing concentrations from the soil to the water column spatially and temporally (Table 3-3), two separate patterns emerge. At time 0, in both dry and flooded soil cores, the percentage of oP fluxing from the soil measured in the water column samples was greater than iP. Over the course of the study this trend remained, becoming significant (P = 0.05) at time 168 and 380 hours, with a majority of the P measured in the a05001000150020000100200300400time, hrsDOP, ug/ L RC1-D RC1-F Figure 3-7 Dissolved organic phosphorus (DOP) water column concentrations in g/L, calculated in dry vs. flooded soil core treatments for a)RC1 site b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site d)RC4 site.

PAGE 50

42 b05001000150020000100200300400time, hrsDOP, ug/ L RC2-D RC2-F c05001000150020000100200300400time, hrsDOP, ug/ L RC3-D RC3-F d05001000150020000100200300400time, hrsDOP, ug/ L RC4-D RC4-F Figure 3-7. Continued.

PAGE 51

43 a00.050.10.150.20100200300400time, hrsoP, ug/ L RC1-D RC1-F b00.050.10.150.20100200300400time,hrsoP, ug/ L RC2-D RC2-F c00.050.10.150.20100200300400time, hrsoP, ug/ L RC3-D RC3-F d00.050.10.150.20100200300400time, hrsoP, ug/ L RC4-D RC4-F Figure 3-8 Organic phosphorus (oP) water column concentrations in g/L, calculated in dry vs. flooded soil core treatments for a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site d)RC4site.

PAGE 52

44 a00.060.120.180100200300400time, hrsPP, ug/ L RC1-D RC1-F b00.060.120.180100200300400time, hrsPP, ug/ L RC2-D RC2-F c00.060.120.180100200300400time, hrsPP, ug/ L RC3-D RC3-F d00.060.120.180100200300400time, hrsPP, ug/ L RC4-D RC4-F Figure 3-9 Particulate phosphorus (PP) water column concentrations in g/L, calculated in dry vs. flooded soil core treatments for a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site d)RC4 site.

PAGE 53

45 water column as organic. Inorganic P percentages decreased over time in dry soil cores and either remained the same in flooded cores or increased, though not significantly. Algae began growing in the drained soil treatment core tubes at time 168 (~1 week) and continued through out the remainder of the experiment, while no algae was present in the continuously flooded treatment core tubes. The algae samples that were sent off for TP analysis, exhibited sufficient variability among replicates and between cores, so results were not significantly different (Table 3-4), and therefore were combined into one average concentration. The average algal TP tissue concentration from the soil core tubes (1183 195 mg/kg) were compared to average algal TP tissue concentrations reported at RWMA field sites (999 100 mg/kg), representing an average of samples collected prior to and after STA-5 discharges. The differences in TP concentrations from the field sites versus the soil cores were not significant. Table 3-3. Percentage of oP and iP fluxing from the soil into the water column over time Time 0 hours RC1-D RC1-F RC2-D RC2-F RC3-D RC3-F RC4-D RC4-F %oP 48.13 79.63 56.98 85.06 80.14 86.73 72.18 70.00 %iP 51.87 20.37 43.02 14.94 19.86 13.27 27.82 30.00 Time 168 hours RC1-D RC1-F RC2-D RC2-F RC3-D RC3-F RC4-D RC4-F %oP 89.11 85.44 87.48 85.29 86.96 81.54 76.22 67.80 %iP 10.89 14.56 12.52 14.71 13.04 18.46 23.78 32.20 Time 380 hours RC1-D RC1-F RC2-D RC2-F RC3-D RC3-F RC4-D RC4-F %oP 90.12 76.47 90.71 75.76 93.22 54.76 90.51 60.00 %iP 9.88 23.53 9.29 24.24 6.78 45.24 9.49 40.00

PAGE 54

46 Table 3-4. Algae TP concentration measurements in mg/kg collected from drained soil core tubes at the conclusion of the study. Site TP, mg/kg RC1 1116.3 157.8 RC2 1230 101.4 RC3 1015.6 207.3 RC4 1370 316.6 Discussion In the RWMA two primary soil conditions exist, drained and flooded. Although hydropattern restoration has been implemented (July 2001), hydroperiods had not been of sufficient length to prevent the soil from drying in the outer and northern portions of the marsh, therefore extended dry soil conditions continued to exist at the end of the wet season, and throughout the dry season. Soil oxidation continued to occur during these dry times, altering the soil chemistry. As soil oxidizes, the Fe-P forms are soluble upon re-flooding (Pant et al. 2002) especially when high Fe concentrations are present (Gunnars and Blomqvist 1997) in the soil such as the RWMA soils. Additionally, upon re-flooding, iP species (SRP) will flux from the soil to the overlying water column. Those species of P that are now soluble, and bioavailable, can be transported further downstream to areas of the marsh containing lower soil P, resulting in sorption, thereby moving the soluble P front further downstream into previously un-impacted areas. While Al-P is not soluble upon re-flooding, the high concentrations of Al ions are available to bind with P. Results from the RWMA intact soil core experiment suggest that, drained soil conditions significantly increase the flux of SRP, TP and TDP to the water column compared to continuously flooded soils. Total phosphorus of drained soils, both inorganic and organic forms, began at time 0 with similar concentration levels. Despite

PAGE 55

47 some transect sites having different flux patterns, each drained soil core had significantly increased P concentrations at the final sample time compared to the flooded soil. In fact, the flooded soils appeared to release released very little phosphorus into the water column and quickly reaching an equilibrium. For all sites, the drained soil cores, with the exception of the RC3 site which is subject to slightly longer hydroperiods, fluxed significant concentrations of bioavailable P (SRP) into the water column. In the initial hour of the study, the RC1 and RC4 sites had higher flux rates compared to the RC2 and RC3 sites, suggesting the soils may experience longer drying and oxidation, as the sites are located near the edge of the marsh based on the difference in elevation reported on the RWMA 2005 topographic survey and measured water depths at each site. However, by the final sample event, drained soil water P concentrations were similar to those measured in the flooded soils. One explanation for the decrease in bioavailable P concentrations in the drained treatment soil cores could be from the algal growth, which began approximately one week after re-flooding. By the conclusion of the study, all drained soil cores contained substantial amounts of filamentous green algae. However, there was no algal growth in the continuously flooded soil cores. Algae uptakes P directly from the water column, which appeared to influence the SRP concentrations measured in the water quality samples, after peaking at day 8 when the algae first appeared. Analysis of the P concentration of the algae tissue samples were representative of P concentrations measured at the RC transect sites and indicative of high nutrient soils. Under field conditions, soluble P fluxing from the soil into the water column may be taken up by the algae, prior to low P soil areas adsorbing the P into the soil. Similar results by Newman et al. 2004, reported a

PAGE 56

48 rapid uptake of P by periphyton prior to soil adsorption. At the conclusion of the P flux study, SRP levels in dry soil cores were similar to flooded soils. Calculations of the iP and oP percentages that fluxed showed a greater percentage of oP fluxed out of the soil throughout the study. However, when comparing drained vs. flooded percentages over time, flooded oP is initially higher then decreases over time, with increasing percentages of iP measured in the water column. The opposite trend was observed in the dry soil treatments, in which initial iP percentages measured in the water column were higher then decreased over time, until oP percentages were significantly greater at the conclusion of the study. P-fractionation data in the 0-2 cm layer collected by the SFWMD Downstream Monitoring and Research Program shows an equal amount of P in the soil is stored as organic P and inorganic P (Leeds et al. in progress). However in drained soils, such as those present in the drained soil core treatment, there may be a certain amount of mineralization occurring. A majority of the P is stored in the soil in inorganic forms, possibly explaining the large flux in SRP as more forms of iP are available to flux. In addition, water entering the RWMA from STA-5 is approximately 44 % oP and 56 % iP (SFWMD, Downstream Monitoring and Research Program Water Quality data). This P fractionation characteristic of inflow water may be providing an iP source to bond with the potentially available Fe and Al content in the soil although, this was not specifically addressed by this study. Results by Eckert et al. (1997) and Novak et al. (2004) reported the soil in these studies that were high in iP (Fe-P and Al-P), will flux high concentrations of iP species when water column P is less than soil porewater P. Spatially, P flux in the intact soil cores in both the drained and flooded treatments was fairly uniform in concentration across the transect, with the exception of the RC3

PAGE 57

49 site, which is located in the interior of the marsh. The RC3 site experiences a longer hydroperiod, possibly due to its location near the center of the marsh, and lower elevation, (RWMA Topographic elevation survey 2004, SFWMD) relative to the other transect sites. According to previous fires mapped by the FFWCC and SFWMD, the RC3 site has not experienced the frequent muck fires compared to other transect sites, therefore soil conditions may have been more stable, relative to sites experiencing shorter hydroperiods and more frequent fire disturbance. However, soil TP concentrations are similar to the other transect sites, suggesting hydrology may be the driving factor in soil conditions. Nitrogen flux trends were similar to P flux results. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen and TDKN concentrations were significantly higher in water samples collected at the final time in drained soils compared to flooded soil, which maintained a relatively constant concentration. Furthermore, bioavailable N in the form of NH 4 showed significantly greater initial flux in dry soils, although by the end of the study, water column concentrations were similar to the flooded water samples. The RC1 site, near the inflow point, fluxed the lowest concentration of NH 4 relative to other sites across the transect. This is maybe due to the vegetation composition of the site taking up the available N, where sawgrass and cattail in this area are very tall and dense when compared to sites with lower soil nutrient concentrations (Miao and Sklar 1998). Moreover, this site has experienced a higher frequency of muck fires, resulting in an increased volatilization of NH 4 in the soil (Smith and Newman 2001). Also, RC1 under goes longer periods of oxidation, due to the slight increase in elevation (RWMA Topographic elevation survey

PAGE 58

50 2004, SFWMD) when compared to the other sites, allowing the soil to dry for longer periods of time. Intact soil cores are routinely used to quantify approximate P fluxing in the field without conducting in situ measurements which may not be feasible due to transportation, sampling and budget constraints. Though the soil cores contain a small surface area, no continuous water flow or plants, they give a good indication of the potential flux rate occurring in the field at the soil water column interface. In addition, sampling can be conducted at predetermined time intervals, capturing initial flux upon re-flooding of the soil versus the logistics of timing re-flooding in the field. Furthermore, flux data can be incorporated in calculating marsh recovery and determining the affects altered hydrology has on the potential of soluble P movement further into the marsh interior.

PAGE 59

CHAPTER 4 CONCLUSIONS The Rotenberger Wildlife Management Area, part of the northern Everglades, can be monitored for phosphorus (P) inflow and outflow concentrations, as well as controlled hydrologically at inflow point, by a point source discharge pump, and outflow through weir structures. Therefore, determining the potential of P to flux from the soil to the overlying water column, thus moving P further downstream in the RWMA and Everglades system, is a critical factor in determining the operations of the system. For example, results from the P-isotherm experiment suggest water column P concentrations below 90 gL -1 may cause P to flux out of the soil. In addition, the intact soil core study indicates antecedent drained soil conditions upon re-flooding, will potentially flux significantly greater concentrations of P to the water column, versus soil that is continuously flooded. Based on this, I recommend adjusting hydrologic operations of the outflow structures, to retain water in the system upon re-flooding. This provides conditions to increase the hydroperiod, thus reducing the potential for over draining and oxidation of the soil and suppress the flux of soluble, inorganic P into the water column. Furthermore, maintenance of flooded soils allows for significantly lower concentrations of inorganic P flux based on calculated iP and oP percentages in the drained and flooded water column samples, thereby reducing the potential for RWMA soils to be a source of soluble P to downstream Everglades marshes. 51

PAGE 60

52 Phosphorus Isotherms The P-isotherms, conducted on RWMA soil, displayed some spatial variability in EPC and P-sorption, not evident in soil TP concentrations. RWMA soils ability to sorb P is much less when compared to the max P sorption of soil along the P-gradient in WCA-2A (Richardson and Vaythianythan 1995) despite using similar methods analytical methods. In addition, the systems are different with respect to historic P-loading. WCA-2A became enriched due to high P inflows instead of altered hydrology, oxidation, and muck fires, which were responsible for elevating P concentrations in RWMA soils. This difference may explain the isolated transect site in this study, where EPC results were lower than other transect sites. For example, the high nutrient inflows in WCA-2A were fairly uniform versus RWMA where geographic location of muck fires and topographic variability of soils that dry and oxidize are primary factors. Consequently, P-sorption is uniquely dependant upon soil characteristics representative of each system, as well as historic P-loading. Several studies support this conclusion (Reddy et al. 1998; Nair et al. 1998; Pant et al 2002) suggesting Fe and Al are primary regulators of P-retention when elevated concentrations are measured. In the RWMA, Fe and Al concentrations are high compared to other Northern Everglades marshes such as, the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge and Water Conservation Area 2A, and may be regulating P-retention in RWMA, although this was not specifically addressed in this study. Similar P-retention regulation, related to Ca levels, has been documented in WCA-2A soil (Richardson and Vayithianythan 1995) and from soil located in Everglades National Park (Zhou and Li 2001) suggesting soil chemistry composition should be included in determining the soils ability for P-sorption.

PAGE 61

53 Phosphorus isotherms are applied to define soil characteristics of constructed wetlands and in proposed constructed wetlands sites, to determine the soils suitability to remove P. Two questions typically addressed are 1) will the soil act as a source or sink? and 2) how much P can be retained and for how long? Furthermore, P-retention can be influenced by the biological component present, as vegetation and the algal community will uptake P from the soil and water column respectively. Studies by Gale et al. (1994), Nair et al. (1998) and Reddy et al. (1998) used P-isotherms to address these questions, concluding the EPC of the soil can predict water column concentrations in which soil will uptake or flux P. An example of utilizing such data in the management of a system is in the RWMA. Water inflow and outflow to the marsh is regulated by pumping structures (inflow) and gated weirs (outflow). Therefore, upon determination that inflow TP may cause a significant flux of P, resulting in impacts to downstream areas, outflow water can be retained by adjusting the stage schedule controlling the outflow structures. The data collected during this study from the P-isotherms and P-fluxing experiments can aid in answering these questions. There are limitations to using isotherm results and their applicability to field conditions. P-isotherms are run under controlled laboratory conditions, eliminating much of the inherent variability present in field conditions that would affect P-sorption or flux i.e., the influence of the microbial and algal community, plants and changes in soil conditions (aerobic and anaerobic). The soil used in the RWMA isotherm study was dried, representing aerobic conditions only, in addition to being shaken for 24 hours thus exposing all available bonding sites. Under field conditions, P would only interact with the exposed soil layer and the zone of porewater diffusion. A study by Schlichting and

PAGE 62

54 Leinweber (2002) on the effect of drying soil, prior to a sequential P fractionation scheme compared to fresh, moist soil, reported a significant variability between the two pre-treatment methods on the P fractionation results. Additionally, the linear, Langmuir and Freundlich equations were initially developed for use with mineral soils rather than organic soils, which may explain some of the discrepancy between the EPC and P-sorption results. Consequently, isotherm data should be incorporated with other soil data (nutrient concentrations and soil chemistry) to predict P-sorption or flux when characterizing the wetland. P-Sorption Factors Iron (Fe) and Aluminum (Al) content in RWMA soils, when corrected for bulk density and compared to other systems in the northern Everglades, Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge and Water Conservation Area 2, are significantly higher, and may be a significant factor regulating P-sorption in this system. Additionally, the RWMA has experienced severely altered hydrology resulting in draw downs leading to soil oxidation. Iron in the soil, when oxidized, forms iron oxide which is available for sorption reactions with P in the soil. More importantly, Fe-P, a soluble inorganic P, upon re-flooding of the soil is released into the water column and may be available for uptake. Although Ca can also regulate P-sorption, as was determined in WCA-2A and in Everglades National Park, both marsh areas contain higher concentrations of Ca versus Fe and Al. In support of the role of Fe and Al in P sorption, results from Gale et al. (1994), Nair et al. (1998) and Reddy et al. (1998) in soil studies outside of the Everglades, concluded increased concentrations of Al and Fe are directly correlated with P-sorption. Moreover, each found soils with elevated concentrations of Fe will oxidize upon soil drying conditions, then upon re-flooding, form soluble forms of P. Similar results were

PAGE 63

55 reported in two studies conducted (Khalid et al. 1977; Pant et al. 2001) in marshes outside of Florida. Additionally, the RWMA has experienced severe and widespread muck fires that may have been a factor in concentrating Fe in the soil. At the conclusion of the intact soil core study, Fe stains were present on the sides of the cores, and during soil cores collection in the field, oxidized rhizospheres were present. While Al is available to bond with P, Fe has the greater potential to interact with P. P-flux As evidenced by the results in the intact soil cores, marsh hydrology can have a significant influence on the P-flux rate. The concentration and duration of P fluxing out of impacted soils, despite receiving low P water, creates conditions conducive to maintaining a eutrophic system until equilibrium is reached. Results from this study showed bioavailable P (SRP) fluxed in significantly higher concentrations in dry soil versus flooded soils, at each site throughout the transect. Therefore maintaining flooded soils, through retention, would be desirable to minimize large fluxes of inorganic P concentrations into the water column. The hydrology in RWMA prior to receiving STA-5 discharges was severely altered, allowing for extensive soil oxidation, soil loss and muck fires due to low soil moisture content, all of which contributed to elevated soil P-concentrations. On a smaller scale within the marsh, the outer edges are higher in elevation by approximately 15 cm compared to the marsh interior. The differences in elevation allow water to pool in the interior and dry out for longer periods of time on the edges. The differential in soil drying is reflected in the P-flux results at the RC1 and RC4 sites that are adjacent to the outer edges. In dry soil treatments, the outer edge marsh sites (RC1, RC4) fluxed significantly higher concentrations of SRP when compared to sites located closer to the

PAGE 64

56 interior (RC2, RC3). Alternatively, when all sites are continuously flooded, SRP measurements showed an initial, small concentration increase, and then reached equilibrium for the remainder of the experiment. Percentages of iP and oP in the water column of drained and flooded soil cores flux upon initial re-flooding were varied. In the drained soil cores over time, iP percentages decreased while oP percentages increased until the conclusion of the study. However, in flooded soil cores, iP percentages and oP percentages remained relatively constant over time with insignificant increases and decreases in composition. Organic P percentages did not significantly change between dry and flooded treatment cores over time, but when oP and iP percentages are compared for each treatment at all sites, the measured water column TP contains a greater percentage of oP. One explanation for the difference in iP versus oP percentages in the water column over time in the drained soil treatment cores would be the algal uptake of iP, which did not occur in the flooded soil core treatments. The same scenario is likely occurring in the natural system after drained and oxidized soils are re-flooded. There is an initial flux of iP into the water column that is assimilated by algal blooms. However the oP is not taken up and therefore over time, a greater percentage of the water column TP is organic. While many studies have addressed the affects of iP to the system ecologically, little is known how oP will impact the marsh. Conclusion While P may be fluxing out of the soil near inflow sites, it is potentially undergoing sorption in sites located further towards the interior of the marsh, as evident by EPC results, as well as being affected by algal and plant uptake. The outflow sites, upon re-flooding of drained soil, are a potential source of P to downstream areas. For example, RC1 near the inflow has an EPC approximately 94.5 gL-1. Based on water quality data

PAGE 65

57 recorded at the G-410 inflow pumping structure, P will flux from the soil near the inflow sites. In contrast the RC2 site, which is downstream of RC1 and measured an EPC of 18.8 gL1, will potentially sorb P. When allowed to dry out, soil from all sites have the potential to release bioavailable P for seven to ten days, allowing soluble P to travel further downstream and, in the case of RC 4, out of RWMA through the outflow structures into downstream Central Everglades areas. However, over time, if dry soils become continuously flooded, P-flux is reduced and P release shifts from inorganic P to organic forms that are not readily available, and must be mineralized to become bioavailable. Therefore, in a marsh system such as the RWMA, where water inflow and outflow is controlled by pumps and gated weir structures respectively, modifying the operations of the system to retain water for longer periods of time, is a viable option to, minimize drained and oxidizing conditions which would otherwise advance the soluble P front. Finally, there are many important factors such as hydrology, historic P-loading, soil chemistry and a biological component, influencing P-sorption and flux, all of which must be taken into account when applying adaptive management strategies to a natural system. In this study each of these factors, in addition to the data collected from the P-isotherms and P-fluxing experiments, suggests RWMA in its current state of operation has the potential to act as a source of P. Therefore, utilizing the data from this study and the factors outlined above, in conjunction with an adaptive management approach, can allow for flexible operations of the system improving hydrology, providing conditions to inhibit P-fluxing and retain soluble P, thus preventing impacts to downstream areas.

PAGE 66

APPENDIX A P-ADSORPTION RESULTS FROM THE LINEAR, FREUNDLICH AND LANGMUIR ISOTHERM EQUATIONS AT EACH SITE AND P-CONCENTRATION. Linear Freundlich Langmuir C,g/L S,g/g S+So C/(S+So) RC1 0 88.4 4.7 -0.88 22.3 4.0 10 88.8 3.5 -0.79 22.4 4.0 30 90.0 6.3 -0.60 22.6 4.0 50 95.3 4.8 -0.45 22.7 4.2 100 102.0 6.9 -0.02 23.2 4.4 500 110.0 1.0 3.90 27.1 4.1 1000 127.3 6.7 8.73 31.9 4.0 2000 187 5.6 18.13 41.3 4.5 5000 333 3.1 46.67 69.9 4.8 10000 626 25.0 93.74 116.9 5.4 RC2 0 18.7 0.7 -0.19 17.5 1.1 10 20.4 0.2 -0.10 17.6 1.2 30 18.9 0.6 0.11 17.8 1.1 50 18.8 1.9 0.31 18.0 1.0 100 20.5 1.5 0.79 18.5 1.1 500 21.5 2.1 4.78 22.5 1.0 1000 29.4 1.0 9.71 27.4 1.1 2000 36.1 0.3 19.64 37.3 1.0 5000 80.1 2.3 49.20 66.9 1.2 10000 182.0 2.0 98.18 115.9 1.6 RC3 0 67.6 1.3 -0.68 13.5 5.0 10 69.3 0.6 -0.59 13.6 5.1 30 71.7 1.7 -0.42 13.8 5.2 50 76.2 3.9 -0.26 13.9 5.5 100 75.1 1.7 0.25 14.4 5.2 500 94.6 2.6 4.05 18.3 5.2 1000 118.7 3.1 8.81 23.0 5.2 2000 197.7 2.5 18.02 32.2 6.1 5000 421.3 6.1 45.79 60.0 7.0 10000 1002.7 4.6 89.97 104.2 9.6 58

PAGE 67

59 RC4 0 83.2 4.2 -0.83 8.3 10.0 10 98.1 17.4 -0.88 8.3 11.8 30 77.2 10.2 -0.47 8.7 8.9 50 99.5 30.2 -0.49 8.7 11.5 100 92.4 3.8 0.08 9.2 10.0 500 121.4 30.9 3.79 13.0 9.4 1000 176.3 3.1 8.24 17.4 10.1 2000 258.3 5.5 17.42 26.6 9.7 5000 644.0 9.2 43.56 52.7 12.2 10000 1607.7 32.7 83.92 93.1 17.3

PAGE 68

APPENDIX B WATER QUALITY NITROGEN RESULTS FROM INTACT SOIL CORES SAMPLED FROM THE P-FLUX EXPERIMENT. TKN, mg/L Time, hours RC1-D RC2-D RC3-D RC4-D 0 2.15 0.08 2.93 0.38 8.34 0.38 4.16 1.8 168 4.18 0.19 3.64 0.32 2.86 0.02 3.05 0.28 380 5.81 0.90 6.07 0.31 5.09 0.31 6.09 1.09 RC1-F RC2-F RC3-F RC4-F 0 2.94 0.63 3.37 0.32 3.61 0.11 2.48 0.15 168 2.57 0.15 2.78 0.31 2.36 0.03 2.63 0.02 380 3.2 .014 3.95 0.53 2.74 0.02 3.03 0.02 TDKN, mg/L Time, hours RC1-D RC2-D RC3-D RC4-D 0 2.07 0.07 2.37 0.20 2.51 0.43 2.32 0.30 168 3.68 0.14 6.78 0.49 5.73 0.11 5.86 0.38 380 4.40 0.25 5.07 0.07 3.26 0.74 4.61 0.24 RC1-F RC2-F RC3-F RC4-F 0 1.85 0.03 1.81 0.01 1.79 0.003 1.82 0.02 168 2.67 0.15 2.84 0.27 2.47 0.03 2.75 0.01 380 3.17 0.12 3.67 0.29 2.68 0.03 3.07 0.004 NOx, mg/L Time, hours RC1-D RC2-D RC3-D RC4-D 0 1.52 0.4 1.73 0.32 2.40 1.13 2.80 1.60 168 0.04 0.02 0.009 0.02 0.077 0.02 0.018 0.004 380 0.005 0.001 0.008 0.002 0.007 0.005 0.005 0.003 RC1-F RC2-F RC3-F RC4-F 0 0.02 0.003 0.014 0.002 0.016 0.003 0.076 0.01 168 0.007 0 0.018 0.008 0.014 0.004 0.009 0.001 380 0.004 0 0.005 0.001 0.0007 0.002 0.002 0.001 60

PAGE 69

LITERATURE CITED Bostrom, B., J. M. Andersen, S. Fleischer and M. Jansson. 1988. Exchange of phosphorus across the soil-water interface. Hydrobiologia 170:229-244. Clescerl, L., A. E. Greenberg and A. D. Eaton. 1999. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. American Public Health Association, 20 th edition, pp. 1329, Cincinnati, OH. DeBusk, W. F., K. R. Reddy, M. S. Koch and Y. Wang. 1994. Spatial distribution of soil nutrients in a Northern Everglades Marsh: Water Conservation Area 2A. Soil Science Society American Journal 58:543-552. Eckert, W., A. Nishri and R. Parparova. 1997. Factors regulating the flux of phosphate at the soil-water interface of a subtropical calcareous lake: A simulation study with intact soil cores. Water, Air and Soil Pollution 99:401-409. Fisher, M. M., and K. R. Reddy. 2001. Phosphorus flux from wetland soils affected by long-term nutrient loading. Journal of Environmental Quality 30:261-271. Gale, P.M., K.R. Reddy and D.A. Graetz. 1994. Phosphorus retention by wetland soils used for treated wastewater disposal. Journal of Environmental Quality 23:370-377. Gunnars, A. and S. Blomqvist. 1997. Phosphate exchange across the soil-water interface when shifting from anoxic to oxic conditions an experimental comparison of freshwater and brackish-marine systems. Biogeochemistry 37:203-226. Khalid, R.A., W.H. Patrick, Jr. and R.D. DeLaune. 1977. Phosphorus sorption characteristics of flooded soil. American Journal of the Soil Science Society 41:305-310. Leeds, J.A., P. B. Garrett and J. Majer-Newman. 2005. Assessing impacts of hydropattern restoration in an over-drained wetland on soil nutrients, vegetation and fire. In progress. Malecki, L. M., J. R. White and K. R. Reddy. 2004. Nitrogen and phosphorus flux rates from soil in the lower St. Johns River Estuary. Journal of Environmental Quality 33:1545-1555. 61

PAGE 70

62 Miao, S. L. and F. H. Sklar. 1998. Biomass and nutrient allocation of sawgrass and cattail along a nutrient gradient in the Florida Everglades. Wetlands Ecology and Management 5:245-263. Moore, P.A. Jr., Reddy, K.R., Graetz, D.A. 1991. Phosphorus geochemistry in the soil-water column of a hypereutrophic lake. Journal of Environmental Quality 20:869-875. Nair, V. D., D. A. Graetz and K. R. Reddy. 1998. Dairy manure influences on phosphorus retention capacity of spodosols. Journal of Environmental Quality 27:522-527. Newman, S., K. R. Reddy, W. F. DeBusk, Y. Wang, G. Shih and M. M. Fisher. 1997. Spatial distribution of soil nutrients in a Northern Everglades Marsh: Water Conservation Area 1. Soil Science Society of America Journal 61:1275-1283. Newman, S., J. Schuette, J. B. Grace, K. Rutchey, T. Fontaine, K. R. Reddy and M. Petrucha. 1998. Factors influencing cattail abundance in the northern Everglades. Aquatic Botany 60:265-280. Newman, S., P. V. McCormick, S. L. Miao, J. A. Laing, W. C. Kennedy and M. B. ODell. 2004. The effect of phosphorus enrichment on the nutrient status of a northern Everglades slough. Wetlands Ecology and Management 12:63-79. Novak, J. M., K. C. Stone, A. A. Szogi, D. W. Watts and M. H. Johnson. 2004. Dissolved phosphorus retention and release from a coastal plain in-stream wetland. Journal of Environmental Quality 33:394-401. Olila, O.G., Reddy, K.R., Stites, D.L. 1997. Influence of draining on soil phosphorus forms and distribution in a constructed wetland. Ecological Engineering 9:157-169. Pant, H. K. and K. R. Reddy. 2001A. Hydrologic influence on stability of organic phosphorus in wetland detritus. Journal of Environmental Quality 30:668-674. Pant, H. K. and K. R. Reddy. 2001B. Phosphorus sorption characteristics of estuarine soils under different redox conditions. Journal of Environmental Quality 30:1474-1480. Pant, H. K., K. R. Reddy and E. Lemon. 2001. Phosphorus retention capacity of root bed media of sub-surface flow constructed wetlands. Ecological Engineering 17:345-355. Pant, H. K., V. D. Nair, K. R. Reddy, D. A. Graetz and R. R. Villapando. 2002. Influence of flooding on phosphorus mobility in manure-impacted soil. Journal of Environmental Quality 31:1399-1405.

PAGE 71

63 Pant, H. K., K. R. Reddy and R. M. Spechler. 2002. Phosphorus retention in soils from a prospective constructed wetland site: Environmental implications. Soil Science 167:607-615. Pant, H. K. and K. R. Reddy. 2003. Potential internal loading of phosphorus in a wetland constructed in agricultural land. Water Research 37:965-972. Patrick, W.H., Jr. and R.A. Khalid. 1974. Phosphate release and sorption by soils and soils: Effect of aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Science (Washington, DC) 186:53-55 Raven, K. P. and L. R. Hossner. 1993. Phosphorus desorption quantity-intensity relationships in soils. Soil Science Society American Journal 57:1501-1508. Reddy, K. R., W. F. DeBusk, Y. Wang, R. DeLaune and M. Koch. 1991. Physico-chemical properties of soils in the Water Conservation Area 2 of the Everglades, Final Report, South Florida Water Management District. Reddy, K.R. M.M. Fisher and D. Ivanoff. 1996. Resuspension and diffusive flux of nitrogen and phosphorus in a hypereutrophic lake. Journal of Environmental. Quality 25:363-371. Reddy, K. R., G. A. OConner and P. M. Gale. 1998. Phosphorus desorption capacities of wetland soils and stream soils impacted by dairy effluent. Journal of Environmental Quality 27:1-10. Reddy, K. R., G. A. OConner and P. M. Gale. 1998. Phosphorus sorption capacities of wetland soils and stream soils impacted by dairy effluent. Journal of Environmental Quality 27:438-447. Reddy, K. R., Y. Wang, W. F. DeBusk, M. M. Fisher and S. Newman. 1998. Forms of Soil phosphorus in selected hydrologic units of the Florida Everglades. American Journal of the Soil Science Society 62:1134-1147. Richardson, C. J. 1985. Mechanisms controlling phosphorus retention capacity in freshwater wetlands. Science 228:1424-1427. Richardson, C. J. and P. Vaithiyanathan. 1995. Phosphorus sorption characteristics of Everglades soils along a eutrophication gradient. Soil Science Society American Journal 59:1782-1788. Sallade, Y.E. and J.T. Sims. 1997. Phosphorus transformations in the soils of Delawares agricultural drainage ways: I. Phosphorus forms and sorption. J. Environ. Qual. 26:1571-1579. SASJump, version 5. 2002. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.

PAGE 72

64 Schlichting A. and P. Leinweber. 2002. Effects of pretreatment on sequentially-extracted phosphorus fractions from peat soil. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal., 33:1617-1627. Smith, S. M., S. Newman, P. B. Garrett and J. A. Leeds. 2001. Differential effects of surface and peat fire on soil constituents in a degraded wetland of the northern Florida Everglades. Journal of Environmental Quality 30:1998-2005. South Florida Water Management District. 1992. Surface water improvement and management plan for the Everglades: Supporting information document. SFWMD, West Palm Beach, Fl. Wade, D., J. Ewel and R. Hofstetter. 1980. Fire in South Florida Ecosystems. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service General Technical Report SE-17, p. 125, Southeast Forest Experimental Station Asheville, North Carolina. White, J. S., S. E. Bayley and P. J. Curtis. 2000. Soil storage of phosphorus in a northern prairie wetland receiving municipal and agro-industrial wastewater. Ecological Engineering 14:127-138. Zhou, M., R.D. Rhue and W.G. Harris. 1997. Phosphorus sorption characteristics of Bh and Bt horizons from sandy coastal plain soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 61:1364-1369. Zhou, M. and Y. Li. 2001. Phosphorus-sorption characteristics of calcareous soils and limestone from the Southern Everglades and adjacent farmlands. Soil Science Society American Journal 65:1404-1412.

PAGE 73

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH I received my B.S. in biology from San Diego State University in June of 1997, where I worked as an undergraduate research assistant in the Pacific Estuarine Research Lab on tidal wetland restoration projects. In July of 1997, I began working at the South Florida Water Management District as an Environmental Scientist on Everglades restoration projects and wetland assessments. I completed the University of Floridas graduate certification in environmental policy and management in spring 2003, and then was accepted into the Soil and Water Science Departments distance education program for a masters in environmental science in which I will graduate spring 2006. 65


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0013561/00001

Material Information

Title: Phosphorus Sorption and Flux in Northern Everglades Soil under Drained and Flooded Conditions
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0013561:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0013561/00001

Material Information

Title: Phosphorus Sorption and Flux in Northern Everglades Soil under Drained and Flooded Conditions
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0013561:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text












PHOSPHORUS SORPTION AND FLUX IN NORTHERN EVERGLADES SOIL
UNDER DRAINED AND FLOODED CONDITIONS
















By

JENNIFER A. LEEDS


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2006















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This research was made possible by the South Florida Water Management District

through financial, technical and facility support and conducted as part of the Downstream

Monitoring and Research Program in the Everglades Division. I would like to

acknowledge District staff that provided assistance in the field and nutrient analysis in the

water quality lab. In addition, I would like to thank Dr. Mark Clark, Dr. Jana Newman,

Dr. Susan Newman and Dr. Samira Daroub for the invaluable support, guidance and

contributions they made to this research and thesis.
















TABLE OF CONTENTS



A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S ......... .................................................................................... ii

LIST OF TABLES .............. ........ ....................... ............... ........... .. v

LIST OF FIGURES ......... ....... .................... .......... ....... ............ vi

ABSTRACT .............. ..................... .......... .............. vii

CHAPTER

1 PHOSPHORUS MOVEMENT BETWEEN THE SOIL AND OVERLYING
W ATER COLUM N IN W ETLAND S ................................... ....................................1

Introduction ............... ........................ ............................... ...............
Equilibrium Phosphorus Concentration (EPC)................................... ............... 2
Factors Regulating P-sorption .............................................................................4
P hosphorus F lux ................................................ ......................... 5
N northern E verglades Field Site............................................................ ............... 7
N eed for R research .................................................. .. ....... ................ .9

2 PHOSPHORUS SORPTION AND DESORPTION CAPACITY ..................... 12

In tro d u ctio n ...................................... ................................................ 12
M eth o d s .............................................................................. 13
Isotherm calculation s ................................................................ ............. .... 15
R e su lts ...................................... .................................................... 1 6
D iscu ssio n ...................................... ................................................. 2 4

3 FLUX OF BIOAVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS........................................................27

In tro d u ctio n ............ ..... .... ..... ................. ................ ................ 2 7
M eth o d s ..............................................................................2 8
R esu lts ......... ...... ........... ...................................... ............................32
D iscu ssion ......... ....... ......... ..................................... ............................ 4 6

4 C O N C L U SIO N S ..................... .... .......................... .. .... ........ .... ......... ..5 1

Phosphorus Isotherm s ......................... .......... .............. ............... 52









P -Sorption F actors .............................................. .. .... .... ......... .. .... .. 54
P -flu x ................................................................5 5
C conclusion ...................................................................................................... ....... 56

APPENDIX

A P-ADSORPTION RESULTS FROM THE LINEAR, FREUNDLICH AND
LANGMUIR ISOTHERM EQUATIONS AT EACH SITE AND P-
C O N C E N TR A T IO N ...................................................................... .....................58

B WATER QUALITY NITROGEN RESULTS FROM INTACT SOIL CORES
SAMPLED FROM THE P-FLUX EXPERIMENT. ............. ............... 60

L IT E R A T U R E C IT E D ............................................................................ ....................6 1

B IO G R A PH IC A L SK E TCH ..................................................................... ..................65
















LIST OF TABLES


Tablege

2-1 List of regression (R2) coefficients used to determine which isotherm equation,
linear, Freundlich or Langmuir, best fit the P-sorption data. ..................................20

2-2. P-sorption parameter results for the linear, Freundlich and Langmuir equations
for equilibrium phosphorus concentration (EPC). ................................................20

2-3 RWMA soil nutrient concentrations for each site in the RC transect .....................24

2-4 Comparison of oxalate extractable Fe and Al content is soils ..............................24

3-1 Water Quality standard testing methods according to Clescerl et al. 1999 and the
South Florida Water Management District water quality procedures....................31

3-2 Fluxing rates of SRP in mgL-1/hr for dry soil cores at each transect site.................34

3-3 Percentage of oP and iP fluxing from the soil into the water column over time......45

3-4 Algae TP concentration measurements in mg/kg................. ............................46















LIST OF FIGURES


Figurege

1-1 Map showing the location of the Rotenberger Wildlife Management Area .............8

2-1 Linear isotherm result for the RC transect A) RC1 site. B) RC2 site C) RC3 site
D ) R C 4 site............ ................................................................ ......... 18

2-2 Freundlich and Langmuir isotherms for the RC transectA) RC1 site. B) RC2
site. C) R C3 site. D ) R C4 site. ............................................................................ 21

2-3 Oxalate-extractable Al composite samples. .................................. .................23

2-4 Oxalate-extractable Fe composite samples. .................................. .................23

3-1 SRP water column concentrations in mg/L at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site.
d )R C 4 site ..........................................................................3 3

3-2 TP water column concentrations in mg/L at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site.
d)R C 4 site ............... ................................................. ..... ........... 35

3-3 TDP water column concentrations in mg/L at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3
site. d)R C 4 site. ........................................................................37

3-4 NH4 water column concentrations in mg/L at a)RC 1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site.
d)R C 4 site ............... ................................................ ..... ........... 38

3-5 SRP water column concentrations measured in mg/L at RC 1, RC2, RC3 and
R C 4 ............................................................................ 4 0

3-6 NH4 water column concentrations measured in mg/L at RC 1, RC2, RC3 and
R C 4 ............................................................................ 4 0

3-7 Dissolved organic phosphorus (DOP) water column concentrations in tg/L at
a)RC1 site b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site d)RC4 site. .............................. ......... ...... .41

3-8 Organic phosphorus (oP) water column concentrations in tg/L at a)RC1 site.
b)RC2 site c)RC3 site d)RC4site. ........................................ ........................ 43

3-9 Particulate phosphorus (PP) water column concentrations in tg/L at a)RC 1 site.
b)RC2 site c)RC3 site d)RC4 site. ........................................ ....................... 44















Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science

PHOSPHORUS SORPTION AND FLUX IN NORTHERN EVERGLADES SOIL
UNDER DRAINED AND FLOODED CONDITIONS

By

Jennifer A. Leeds

May 2006

Chair: Mark W. Clark
Major Department: Soil and Water Science

Wetland soils have the potential to function as a phosphorus (P) source or sink

depending on antecedent soil conditions, P loading rates, water column P concentrations

and characteristics. Hydrology, water quality and soil chemistry are primary factors

affecting soil P sorption and desorption. The Rotenberger Wildlife Management Area

(RWMA), part of the northern Everglades, has undergone alterations in hydrology

resulting in shortened hydroperiods, severe soil oxidation and peat fires. These

alterations have subsequently elevated available P concentrations in the soil. In

accordance with the Everglades Forever Act (EFA), the South Florida Water

Management District began hydropattern restoration in RWMA in July 2001, utilizing

discharges from Storm Water Treatment Area 5 (STA-5). As part of the northern

Everglades, it is uncertain whether the RWMA soils will act as a source or sink for P. To

address this question, P-isotherms were run to determine the equilibrium phosphorus

concentration (EPC) of the soil, while soil P-flux differences between drained vs. flooded









soils were assessed using intact soil core microcosms collected from the field. Results

show EPC measurements across the marsh ranged from 73.6 utgL-1 to 94.5 utgL-1 at three

of the four sites, with one site measuring 18.8 tgL-1. The P-flux in intact soil cores

indicated drained soil treatments fluxed significantly higher concentrations of soluble

reactive phosphorus (SRP) (110 [tgL-1) versus continuously flooded soil treatments (7

[tgL-1). Water column SRP concentrations of intact soil cores peaked between 8 and 24

hours after re-flooding with ambient marsh water then water column concentrations

declined to SRP levels measured in flooded soil cores by 380 hours. Flooded soils, at all

sites, released low levels of SRP concentration upon re-flooding within one hour and then

appeared to reach equilibrium, as concentration levels remained constant. Additionally,

results measured concentrations of oxalate-extractable Fe (1039.5 g/m3) and Al (514.5

g/m3), normalized based on bulk density (0.21 g/cm3), and are significantly higher

compared to other Everglades soil, which may be regulating P sorption. EPC

measurements suggest P water column concentrations less than 90 utgL-1 will result in P-

release from most soils in RWMA. Furthermore, this system continues to experience soil

dry out and oxidation for several months (February June) during the dry season, which

can lead to rapid and elevated flux of SRP upon re-flooding, as compared to continuously

flooded soils. These results can be incorporated into adaptive management strategies to

modify operations of the system to achieve hydropattern restoration targets while slowing

the movement of existing soluble soil P further into the Everglades.














CHAPTER 1
PHOSPHORUS MOVEMENT BETWEEN THE SOIL AND OVERLYING WATER
COLUMN IN WETLANDS

Introduction

Wetland soils can function as a source or sink for phosphorus (P) depending on

antecedent soil conditions and interstitial porewater P concentration. Phosphorus flux

from soils is an important biogeochemical process occurring in all types of wetlands.

Because P cycles within the soil and does not have a significant gaseous phase such as

nitrogen (N), P within a wetland can be transferred between soil, water column, flora and

fauna, although is not easily released outside of the wetland system (White et al. 2000).

For this reason, P movement within a wetland is of major concern in systems such as the

Florida Everglades that initially developed under low P concentrations then received high

P inflows resulting in increased P loading. Over time, continuous loading of P to soils

can shift historically oligotrophic (low nutrient) wetlands, to eutrophic (high nutrient)

systems (South Florida Water Management District 1992; Newman et al. 1997). In

addition to external P loading, P dynamics and bioavailability can change as a result of

altered hydrology, biology or chemistry of a site (Reddy et al. 1998). Due to

anthropogenic alterations in hydrology, many areas in the Northern Everglades have

severely reduced hydropatterns, leading to excessive drying and oxidation of the soil,

thereby raising soil P concentrations and promoting soil loss. Determining environmental

conditions regulating P-sorption or flux in the soil, is largely dependant upon the P









concentration and composition of P, both the soil and in the water column, influencing

the mobilization of soluble P further into the Everglades marsh interior.

Equilibrium Phosphorus Concentration (EPC)

Phosphorus sorption/desorption studies primarily use P-isotherms to define the

equilibrium phosphorus concentration (EPC) of the soil and measure the maximum P-

sorptive capacity of a soil. Furthermore, determining the water column P concentration

where soil P-sorption and desorption are at equilibrium, EPC, aids in determining when a

wetland will act as a source or sink for P. This value, relative to source water P

concentrations, or known acceptable water column P concentrations, is an important

variable in restoration, and in predicting potential wetland impact and recovery times.

For example, in a study by Richardson and Vaithiyanathan (1995) in Water Conservation

Area 2A (WCA-2A) conducted along a P-gradient, reported EPC at inflow sites were

high in elevated soil P concentrations, and significantly greater than interior marsh EPC

and soil P. They concluded the inflow sites have the ability to serve as an internal source

for P, even if external P loading was reduced, given the current inflow concentration

levels. Additionally, Zhou and Li (2001) showed a positive correlation between EPC and

soil P saturation in a study in the southern Everglades.

Wetlands, natural or constructed, can be used to treat runoff or wastewater

removing nutrients prior to downstream discharge. The P-sorptive capacity of a soil is an

important parameter in determining the amount of time, and range of P concentrations,

natural wetlands receiving nutrient enriched inflows, or proposed constructed wetlands

designed for nutrient removal, will function. In the northern Everglades, and areas north

of Lake Okeechobee, reducing enriched runoff from urban and agricultural areas has

become a primary focus of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP).









Studies by Nair et al. (1998) and Reddy et al. (1998), established that soils containing

enriched P concentrations, such as agricultural soils that are targeted to become Storm

Water Treatment Areas (STAs), or enriched Everglades soils found in current inflow

areas, may not have the ability to retain sufficient amounts of P for sustained periods of

time (- 10 years or more) due to historic P loading. In fact, these soils could become a

potential source of P upon receiving low P water inputs. In addition, this research

hypothesized physico-chemical properties of the soil such as aluminum (Al), iron (Fe),

magnesium (Mg) and calcium (Ca) content, can contribute to regulating the P-sorption

capacity of the soil. However, their effectiveness at retaining P was dependant upon soil

P concentrations, as well as aerobic or anaerobic soil conditions (Gale et al. 1994).

Similar studies conducted outside of the Everglades support these results (Khalid et al.

1977; Sallade and Sims 1997).

In addition to defining EPC, P-isotherms describe the maximum P-sorptive

capacity of the soil using the linear, Freundlich and or Langmuir equations (Nair et al.

1998; Pant and Reddy 2001; Zhou and Li 2001). The linear equation is typically applied

to low P concentrations, the Freundlich to medium P concentrations and Langmuir to

high P concentrations (Zhou and Li 2001). A principal aspect to consider when applying

P-isotherms is they are run under laboratory conditions, in which the soil is isolated from

other biological factors, such as plants and algae that could affect the sorptive capacity

(Gale et al. 1994). Furthermore, the sample processing method for P-isotherms exposes

all available soil sorption sites and cannot be directly related to field conditions where a

minimal number of sites are exposed. In addition, pore water diffusion rates play a

significant role in the exchange of porewater P with the overlying floodwater. Results are









best utilized in conjunction with other soil characteristics specific to field sites such as

nutrient content, dominant P-species (organic or inorganic) in the soil and, oxidized or

reducing conditions, as well as P-flux experiments.

Factors Regulating P-sorption

In wetland systems, P-sorption and desorption are influenced by many factors. The

physico-chemical properties of a soil, coupled with historic P-loading of a system, can

significantly affect P-sorption (Gale et al. 1994; Reddy et al. 1998). Soil chemistry,

specifically Fe and Al content, can have a substantial influence on P-sorption as well

(Sallade and Sims 1997; Zhou et al. 1997). Additionally, Reddy et al. (1998) found Total

Organic Carbon (TOC) significantly reduced P-sorption by forming complexes with Fe

and Al. In a report by Richardson (1985) on the P retention capacity of various

freshwater wetlands, results suggested the sorption potential of a wetland may be

regulated by the extractable Al content of the soil. The Fe and Al concentrations in the

soil can sorb P, forming poorly crystalline and amorphous oxide and hydroxide forms

(Khalid et al. 1977; Pant and Reddy 2001; Pant et al. 2001). Under aerobic conditions,

ferrous iron in the soil oxidizes to form ferric iron, a precipitate which is insoluble,

although can increase P-sorption sites (Gale et al. 1994). In systems with high

concentrations of Ca in the soil, such as in WCA-2A (Reddy et al. 1991; Richardson and

Vaithiyanathan 1995) and Everglades National Park (ENP) (Zhou and Li 2001), P-

sorption is typically regulated by calcium carbonate (CaCO3) (Raven and Hossner 1993).

Soil chemistry, organic matter, oxidation, as well as the concentration of available cations

such as Ca, Mg, Fe and Al, can influence P binding to form inorganic, bioavailable P-

species. Phosphorus species such as Ca/Mg-P and Al/Fe-P, which are inorganic P forms,









are regulated by acidic and alkaline soils, as well as aerobic and anaerobic soil conditions

influencing P solubility (Pant et al. 2002).

Phosphorus Flux

Phosphorus flux is typically used to describe the process of soluble P moving from

the soil to the overlying water column, under conditions where water column P

concentrations are less than soil porewater P concentrations (Reddy et al. 1996).

Phosphorus flux studies incorporating intact soil cores have been conducted in the

Everglades, on surrounding agricultural lands north of the Everglades near Lake

Okeechobee, and in eutrophic lakes in Central Florida, as well as in wetlands and lakes in

other parts of the country (Reddy et al. 1996; Fisher and Reddy 2001; Pant and Reddy

2003).

External P loading can have a considerable affect on the level of P concentrations

fluxing from the soil to the overlying water column. For example, a P flux study in

WCA-2A by Fisher and Reddy (2001) using intact soil cores was performed along a P

gradient, extending from water inflow structures to approximately 10 km into the marsh

interior. Their results indicated soil P flux was greater near inflow points and decreased

linearly with distance into the marsh interior, and is directly correlated to the soil P

concentration gradient. In addition, agricultural lands which later may be used as

constructed wetlands or storm water treatment areas, have the potential to be a nutrient

source depending on antecedent P loading of the soil. An initial high P concentration

flux can occur when agricultural lands are first flooded. Depending on soil EPC and

water column P (Pant and Reddy, 2003), if the EPC of the soil is elevated, the soil could

act as a continuous source of P, until an equilibrium is achieved with the overlying water

column.









Two types of soil conditions exist in wetlands, aerobic (drained) and anaerobic

(flooded), with varying degrees in between depending on hydroperiod. In studies by Pant

et al. (2002) and Malecki et al. (2004), P fluxed in significantly higher amounts in re-

flooded, aerobic soils than in continuously flooded, anaerobic soils. One reason for these

differences in P release is the different form of soil P found under aerobic and anaerobic

conditions. Under aerobic conditions, where soils become oxidized, inorganic P species

usually form based on existing soil chemistry such as the Fe, Al, Ca or Mg content. In

systems with high Fe content, oxidized forms of Fe can adsorb P forming ferric

phosphate. Alternatively, in anaerobic conditions where the soil is not oxidized, P-

species primarily remain in their reduced, predominately organic state. Typically, organic

bound P is an immobilized form and not immediately available for uptake by plants or

algae. Therefore, for organic P to become bioavailable, it must first undergo

mineralization, which breaks down into non-bioavailable dissolved organic compounds

and bioavailable inorganic P. However, anaerobic conditions slow the mineralization

process of organic compounds thereby preserving P that is bound to organic particles.

The type ofP, inorganic or organic, has significant ecological implications. There

are three forms of P present in both the soil and water column, dissolved inorganic P

(DIP) also known as soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP), dissolved organic P (DOP) and

particulate organic P (POP). Soluble reactive phosphorus is readily available for uptake,

whereas DOP and POP must be mineralized to an inorganic form prior to becoming

bioavailable. The P species, and their relative concentrations in the water column, as

well as drained or flooded soil conditions, dictate which species will flux (Eckert et al.

1997; Novak et al. 2004). These relative concentrations and composition in soil and









water, affect the soluble P front at the landscape scale, having significant implications

within the Everglades ecosystem. The importance of which, is soluble P (DIP) is

bioavailable, a major factor in driving the system to transition at inflow points from an

oligotrophic to eutrophic marsh.

Northern Everglades Field Site

The Rotenberger Wildlife Management Area (RWMA), part of the Northern

Florida Everglades, is a 29,120 acre marsh located west of the Miami Canal and north of

Water Conservation Area 3A (Figure 1-1). Once part of the historic sawgrass plains

receiving continuous overland flow from Lake Okeechobee (McVoy, personal

communication), the RWMA became a degraded wetland, cutoff from continuous water

inflow, resulting in shortened hydroperiods and extended marsh draw downs. The

continuous cycle of short hydroperiods, allowed the soil to undergo severe dry out and

oxidation, elevating P levels, which led to soil subsidence (Newman et al 1998).

Consequently, perpetually dry soils, and low (<65%) soil moisture content (Wade et al.

1980) often resulted in typical wildfire becoming muck fires. Muck fires can combust

organic matter within the soil, thus significantly altering soil chemistry, increasing P-

levels and volatilizing N (Newman et al. 1998; Smith et al. 2001). Loss of soil organic

matter can change P soil storage pools from organic to inorganic forms (Leeds et al. in

progress). The combination of slow, biologically mediated oxidation of organic matter

and rapid thermally mediated oxidation of organic matter through muck fires has

significantly increased soil P levels, which now average 640 mg/kg. This change in P

concentration has resulted in a shift in marsh trophic state from oligotrophic to a

eutrophic system. DeBusk et al. (1994) suggested that Everglades soil P concentrations

greater than 500 mg/kg are considered enriched. The RWMA soils may contain a lower









organic matter content, due to the history of muck fires, and a higher mineral content,

although may still be classified as an enriched system as evidenced by soil TP content

and vegetation composition, as a result of severely altered hydrology.


Figure 1-1. Map showing the location of the Rotenberger Wildlife Management Area
(RWMA) north of Water Conservation Area 3A (WCA-3A) and south of
Lake Okeechobee with inflow point (G-410) from Storm Water Treatment
Area 5 (STA-5), the study transect RC and relative outflow point (G402-C).









Need for Research

The Everglades Forever Act (EFA) recognized the RWMA as part of the historic

northern Everglades requiring hydropattern restoration. To achieve this, the South

Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) began constructing Storm Water

Treatment Areas (STAs) to improve hydrology and water quality, from urban and

agricultural runoff, prior to discharge into downstream areas of the Everglades. In July

2001, STA-5 began discharging into RWMA. However, due to years of P enrichment

and hydrologic alterations, it is unknown if soils in the RWMA will serve as a P source or

sink, relative to STA-5 floodwater concentrations. Since STA-5 began discharging,

water column TP concentrations have averaged 50 70 ggL-1, with spikes in

concentration entering the marsh as high as 130 ggL-1. Because the RWMA is not

considered part of the Everglades Protection Area (EPA), inflow TP concentrations are

not required to meet the 10 ggL-1 P-limit criteria set by the Florida Department of

Environmental Protection. However, as dictated by the EFA permit for STA-5,

discharges are required to be at 50 ggL-1 or below, a annual average. Determining the

ability of the soil to adsorb P, as well as defining the EPC of the soil, will aid in

predicting P-flux and the affect of STA-5 floodwater on RWMA marsh recovery.

Existing soil nutrient data shows fairly uniform TP concentrations throughout the

RWMA marsh, as well as with depth, therefore it is hypothesized EPC values and P-

fluxing concentrations would be spatially homogeneous. However, spatial differences in

EPC and P flux across the RWMA needs to be verified to clarify differences between

sites and variances in soil P concentrations that may occur from inflow to outflow.

Moreover, determining the type of P-species flowing into and out of the marsh, in

addition to fluxing out of the soil, is critical information for management of the system.









For example, inorganic P is readily available to plants and microorganisms where as

dissolved organic P is not directly available for uptake resulting in less effect on plants

within the marsh, but a higher probability of transport downstream. Also, the type of P

available in the soil will influence what P species is available to flux (Novak et al. 2004).

Finally, the potential of the soil to sorb P, over time, will assist in marsh recovery

calculations and establish concentration levels, at which P will be a significant source.

As water flows from the RWMA into the central Everglades, high outflow P

concentrations have the potential to impact P-loading limits at main pumping structures,

specifically the S-8 structure located on the Miami Canal. This structure pumps water

into northern WCA-3A, part of the EPA, affecting marsh areas further downstream.

Currently, the RWMA soils still experience excessive, dry season soil drying and

oxidation despite receiving STA discharges. Therefore, in its current state and

operations, and based on soil nutrient data previously collected, the RWMA soils can

potentially act as a source of P to downstream areas. The purpose of this study is to

determine if the RWMA soils will act as a P source or sink to downstream areas as well

as ascertain the potential of the soil to sorb additional P flowing in from STA-5.

By establishing the amount of P flux under dry vs. flooded soil conditions, in

addition to the amount of P which can be sorbed by the soils, changes to system

operations can be evaluated. For instance, if significantly more P fluxes from dry soils

than flooded soils, retaining water within the system, by altering inflow and or outflow

operations, may suppress significant P-fluxing and allow for biological interactions.

Through this adaptive management approach, results from P-flux and P-isotherm

experiments will be utilized to evaluate modifications of hydrologic operations to provide






11


conditions that meet restoration goals. In addition, the P flux research will provide data

for the SFWMD recovery model, used in predicting ecological responses of impacted

areas of the Everglades to STA effluent, as outlined by the Long Term Plan (LTP) and

directed by the EFA.














CHAPTER 2
PHOSPHORUS SORPTION AND DESORPTION CAPACITY

Introduction

Soil in many parts of the Everglades, has become P enriched due to years of over

drainage and oxidation, or as a result of high P inflows from urban and agricultural runoff.

The ability of these soils to retain P and not become an internal source is an important factor

in Everglades restoration. The water column P concentration level at which no P-

sorption/desorption occurs is defined as the equilibrium phosphorus concentration (EPC)

(Richardson and Vaithiyanathan 1995; Nair et al. 1998; Pant et al. 2001). Ascertaining the

EPC of the soil can be accomplished through the use of P-isotherms run under laboratory

conditions from samples collected at desired field locations. To define the maximum P-

sorptive capacity of the soil, isotherms are performed utilizing various solution P

concentrations, based on site specific soil P data. Results can be used to determine whether a

soil will flux P into the overlying water column based on P concentrations of inflow water.

Phosphorus retention in the soil is affected by several factors such as historic P loading,

existing P levels of the soil and incoming water column P concentration levels. In addition,

several biological factors, algae and macrophytes, uptake P from the water column and soil,

respectively (Bostrom et al 1988; Gale et al 1994). The ability of the soil to release sorbed

P or retain P, is dependent upon antecedent soil conditions, soil chemistry and, P adsorption

capacity of the soil (Zhou and Li 2001), all of which directly effects ecosystem restoration.

For example, if water column P levels from inflows are reduced below EPC levels, P will

desorb from soil and flux into the water column.









Soil chemistry primarily affects the solubility of P and influences P-sorption. In

studies by Khalid et al. (1977), Richardson (1985) and Sallade and Sims (1997), aluminum

(Al) and iron (Fe) content in the soil significantly affected P solubility. Furthermore,

oxidation of the soil, promoted by prolonged marsh draw downs, affects the types of Fe

(ferrous to ferric) available to bond with P. Under oxidative conditions, soils containing high

Fe content can regulate P-sorption (Reddy et al. 1998). These inorganic crystalline forms of

Fe-P can become soluble upon flooding versus organic forms, thereby releasing inorganic

bioavailable P (Patrick and Khalid 1974; Pant et al. 2002). Specifically, high Al/Fe content in

the soil can affect inorganic phosphorus (iP) species formation. High concentrations of Al

and Fe oxides will bond with P forming inorganic Fe-P and Al-P bound compounds (Sallade

and Sims 1997).

Generally wetland soils assimilate iP in greater concentrations than organic P (oP)

(Pant and Reddy 2001) and depending on soil chemistry, hydrology and biological factors,

can store iP more readily than oP. In addition, P storage pools in the soil can affect P-

sorption and solubility, based on predominately inorganic or organic forms. Ascertaining P

species (bioavailable) retained or released from the soil is ecologically important to wetlands

with respect to eutrophication. Depending on P-species in the water column, antecedent soil

conditions and oxidation, oP or iP can be released.

The objectives of this study were to 1) establish the EPC of the soil spatially from

inflow point across the marsh to outflow and 2) measure the maximum P-sorptive capacity of

the soil when exposed to low P and high P treatments.

Methods

Phosphorus isotherms were run on composite soil samples, collected from the RWMA

along an existing representative transect (RC) of soil, vegetation and hydrologic conditions,









located in the northern portion of the marsh, to determine the EPC of the soil and maximum

P adsorptive capacity of the soil. The 0-2 cm depth was collected being the most reactive

soil layer with the overlying water column, based on current soil nutrient data, containing the

highest P concentration. Three replicates of the top 0-2 cm layer of soil were combined into

one composite sample per site, representing each of the four sites (RC-1, RC-2, RC-3, RC-4).

The RC transect runs from west to east, the direction of water flow, with RC-1 located near

the western side (inflow) of the RWMA adjacent to the inflow structure (G-410 pump), and

RC-4 located near the eastern side (outflow), adjacent to the outflow structure (G-402 C, a

gated box culvert).

Each sample was collected using a 2 cm deep, 10.16 cm diameter wide coring ring.

Prior to field sampling all plant material was removed. Samples were then placed in plastic

bags, stored in a cooler on ice and transported back to the lab. All soil was spread out in a

thin layer on individual trays and air dried at room temperature (25.50 C), for approximately

five weeks. Prior to drying the soil, all plant material and small stones were removed. Then,

the soil trays were covered with screen to prevent contamination and, as seedlings emerged

from the soil, they were removed. Once dry, the soil was ground, passed through two sieve

sizes (2 mm and 0.88 mm), then ground and sieved again. Any remaining material which

could not pass through the sieves was discarded.

Initially six P concentrations plus a control (0 control, 10, 30, 50, 100, 500 and 1000

[tgL-1) were used to produce P-isotherm curves for each site, to determine the EPC and the

potential maximum P-sorptive capacity of the soil. Therefore, each site consisted of seven

treatments, with three replicates per treatment, for a total of 84 initial samples along the RC

transect. Three grams of soil were weighed and placed into 50 ml centrifuge tubes then









spiked with 50 mM KCL solution. Each spike contained one of the seven P concentrations

prepared from 1000 ppm standard stock solution, derived from dissolving 1.0985 g of

potassium dihydrogen phosphate (KH2PO4) into 100 ml of D.I. water, contained in a 250 mL

class A volumetric flask, then diluting with D.I. to the mark and mixing. Two sub-stock

solutions, 5 mgL-1 and 50 mgL1, were prepared from an original 1000 mgL1 solution to

spike each of the seven treatment concentrations. The KCL-P solution treatments were

prepared by measuring out 1.863 g of KCL dissolved into 200 ml of D.I. water within a 500

ml class A volumetric flask, spiked with the appropriate P sub-stock solution, then filled to

the mark with D.I. and mixed, yielding a total of 500 ml each of 0 (control no P additions),

10, 30, 50, 100, 500 and 1000 tgL1 P-treatment solutions. Centrifuge tubes were then

placed on a shaker table set at 180 rpm for 24 hours, to ensure complete mixing of soil and

solution. After shaking, tubes were centrifuged for 15 minutes at 22 C at 4000 rpm, and

approximately 5 8 ml of the supernatant was extracted using a transfer pipette. The

supernatant was then filtered through a 0.45 [tm filter. Each sample was measured for

soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP) by the SFWMD Water Quality lab using standard

methods (SM4500PF, Clescerl et al 1999) and SFWMD methods (SFWMD 3080.1 Rev.

2.2).

Ground soils used for P isotherms were sub-sampled and submitted to DB

Environmental Labs, Rockledge, Florida for analysis of oxalate extractable Iron (Fe) and

Aluminum (Al) analysis using standard methods EPA 236.1 and EPA 202.1, respectively.

Isotherm calculations

Phosphorus sorption data was calculated and fit using the linear, Freundlich and

Langmuir isotherm equations (Reddy et al. 1998; Zhou and Li 2001). The linear equation

was used to fit low P concentration results, while the Freundlich equation fit low to medium









P concentrations, and the Langmuir equation is applied to high P concentrations (Zhou et al.

1997).

Linear isotherm: S = KC So

S = the amount ofP sorbed in the solid phase, [tg g-1

K = P-sorption coefficient

C = P concentration in solution after 24-h equilibration [agL-1

So = constant, amount of originally adsorbed P

In addition, the equilibrium phosphorus concentration (EPC), which is defined as the

concentration of P in a solution when neither sorption or desorption is occurring, is equal to

C when S = 0 (Pant et al. 2002). Therefore the EPC was calculated from regression statistics

data as the intercept (point at which a line intersects the y-x-axis) divided by the x-variable.

Freundlich isotherm: S = KCn

Kf= constant

n
S as above

Langmuir isotherm: C/S = 1/(bSmax) + C/Smax

Smax = P sorption maximum atg g -1

b = a constant related to bonding energy

C/S = as defined earlier

Results

All three isotherm equations (linear, Freundlich and Langmuir) were applied to the

initial P-sorption results measured from each site. For each site, P-sorption data remained

linear (Figure. 2-1 a-d), with no inflection point indicating the P-concentration in which the

maximum P sorptive capacity of the soil was reached. Therefore, the linear isotherm









equation best describes the low P-concentrations of all sites, supported by high regression

(R2) coefficients (Table 2-1). Additionally, EPC of the soil for each site was calculated and

results reported in Table 2-2. Sites RC1 (inflow) and RC4 (outflow) had similar EPC

measurements of 94.5 and 93.2 tgL-1 respectively. The RC3 site, which is in the marsh

interior, was lower at 73.6 tgL1, though not significantly. Conversely, the RC2 site was

significantly lower (P = 0.05) than all other sites measuring 18.8 ugL1.

To ascertain the potential maximum P-sorptive capacity of the RWMA soils, additional

P-isotherms of 2000, 5000 and 10,000 [tgL-1 were run and the data added to the initial results.

The Freundlich and Langmuir equations were then applied to determine the best fit according

to R2 values (Table 2-1). While both equations fit well, according to R2 values, the

Freundlich equation is a better fit for the higher P-concentrations (Figure 2-2 a-d). P-

sorption parameters measured from each treatment concentration at each site are reported in

Table 2-2. The isotherm inflection points indicate the P-concentration at which the soil is

reaching its maximum sorptive capacity. Because inflection points (line begins to curve) on

each graph for each site is not well defined, estimates of the P-sorptive capacity of the soil is

approximated as: RC1 40-60 ug g-l, RC2 40-60 ug g-l, RC3 ~ 40-60 ug g-l, RC4 ~ 40-60

u -1
ug g .












10


A-RC1
8


6-
4/





2-
6 /



0 *
2

EPC
0 /
2 ---------------------------------



-2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Equilibrium P Cone (pig/L)



12

B RC2
10


8-


0 6-


1 4-


0





-2
EPC






0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Equilibrium P Conc. (pg/L)

Figure 2-1 Linear isotherm result for the RC transect depicting the equilibrium phosphorus
concentration (EPC) on the x-axis and the amount of P-sorbed on the y-axis. The
line is the best fit for all values which shows EPC is actually a range of values.
A) RC1 site. B) RC2 site C) RC3 site D) RC4 site.








19



10

C-RC3
8-



6-



/ 4

n/

2-



0
EPC


20 40 60 80 100 120 140

-2
Equilibrium P Conc. (iLg/L)



10

D RC4

8-



6



4



2
o *






0
20 40 60 80./ 1t0 120 140 160 180 200

-2
Equilibrium P Conc. (iLg/L)



Figure 2-1. Continued.


Current soil nutrient concentrations for each site are reported in Table 2-3. All P-isotherm P-


concentration measurement data used to calculate each isotherm equation and associated plot











Table 2-1. List of regression (R2) coefficients used to determine which isotherm equation,
linear, Freundlich or Langmuir, best fit the P-sorption data.
Linear,R2 Freundlich,R2 Langmuir,R2
RC1 0.930 0.990 0.880
RC2 0.900 0.980 0.830
RC3 0.980 0.990 0.980
RC4 0.920 0.980 0.840

Table 2-2. P-sorption parameter results for the linear, Freundlich and Langmuir equations for
equilibrium phosphorus concentration (EPC), Kf- a constant in the Freundlich
equation, Cn measure of P concentration in solution after 24 hours, Smax the P
sorption maximum and b a constant in the Langmuir equation.
Linear Freundlich Langmuir
EPC, [tgL-1 Kf Cn Smax u 1 b
RC1 94.5 0.469 0.858 397.7 0.0007
RC2 18.8 1.49 0.853 268.4 0.0041
RC3 73.6 0.506 0.78 206.4 0.0009
RC4 93.2 0.201 0.848 189.5 0.0006

concentration measurement data used to calculate each isotherm equation and associated plot

data is listed in Appendix 2-1.

Results of oxalate-extractable Al (Figure 2-3) and oxalate-extractable Fe (Figure 2-4)

were variable with no apparent spatial trends, therefore results are combined. The isotherm

soils were composite samples collected from the field and not replicates. Due to the single

measurement per site, statistical differences between sites could not be established, and are

used to characterize soil chemistry. Concentrations of Fe and Al were high compared to

other Everglades marsh areas. The average Fe content for the RC transect in RWMA is 4950

275 mg/kg compared to Fe content in WCA2A at 344 37 mg/kg (SFWMD, Everglades

Threshold data) and Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge (LNWR) of 339 57 mg/kg

(SFWMD, Everglades Threshold data). Average Al content is 2450 + 515 mg/kg for the RC

transect in RWMA, 248 13 mg/kg in WCA2A (SFWMD, Everglades Threshold data) and














A RC1


* data
Freundlich
Langmuir


100 200 300 400 500 600 71


Equilibrium P Cone (pg/L)


B RC2


* data
Freundlich
Langmuir


Equilibrium P Cone (pg/L)


Figure 2-2 Freundlich and Langmuir isotherms for the RC transect depicting which equation
best describes the P-sorption maximum. A) RC1 site. B) RC2 site. C) RC3 site.
D) RC4 site.


100


80


S60


S40


20


0


-20












120

C- RC3
100 da
Fr
La
80



) 60



cn 40



20



0 -
200

-20





120

D- RC4
100 da
Fr
La
80



0 60



uc 40



20 -




200

-20


Figure 2-2. Continued.


ta
eundlich
ngmuir


Equilibrium P Cone (pg/L)


ta
eundlich
ngmuir


400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1E


Equilibrium P Cone (pg/L)











4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0


RC1


RC2


RC3


RC4


Figure 2-3. Oxalate-extractable Al composite samples collected at the sites along the RC
transect and therefore are not replicates so error bars are not shown.


6000

5000

q 4000
-
3000

S2000
0
1000


0 -I


RC1


RC2


RC3


RC4


site


Figure 2-4. Oxalate-extractable Fe composite samples collected at sites along the RC transect
and therefore are not replicates so error bars are not shown.

In LNWR, 353 + 51 mg/kg (SFWMD, Everglades Threshold data). For comparison

purposes, the results were corrected for bulk density and compared to soil from LNWR and


WCA-2A (Table 2-4).









Table 2-3. RWMA soil nutrient concentrations for each site in the RC transect. Data
collected by the SFWMD, Downstream Monitoring and Research Program.
TP,
mg/kg TN, mg/kg TC, mg/kg Bulk Density % Ash
RC1 741 53 34066 2140 465333 9135 0.16 0.015 16.46 2.22
RC2 740 79 33000 643 454333 2333 0.16 0.012 17.1 0.58
RC3 547 44 33300 1007 449666 5696 0.20 0.015 20.96 0.86
RC4 694 18 32000 557 468666 1764 0.17 0.003 14.63 0.26

Table 2-4. Comparison of oxalate extractable Fe and Al content is soils, corrected for bulk
density, from the RWMA, LNWR and WCA-2A. Data reported for LNWR and
WCA-2A from the SFWMD, Everglades Threshold Program.
Bulk density, Ox-Fe, Ox-Al,
g/cm3 g/m3 g/m3
RWMA 0.21 1039.5 514.5
LNWR 0.06 20.34 21.18
WCA-2A 0.068 23.39 16.86

Discussion

The inflow (RC 1) and outflow (RC4) sites had similar EPC values, as did the RC3 site,

while the RC2 site was significantly lower from the other three sites. Topographic elevations

indicate the RWMA resembles a saucer, with the western and eastern edges of the marsh

higher in elevation than the interior, suggesting the two outer sites (RC1, RC4) are drier and

oxidize for longer periods of time than the interior sites (RC2, RC3). While soil TP data (~

640 mg/kg) of the top 2 cm of soil is consistent throughout the RWMA (SFWMD,

Downstream Monitoring and Research Program), hydrology may have a significant influence

on soil conditions with increased oxidation (Leeds et al. in progress).

Although the difference in EPC value at RC2 was unexpected, this site as well as the

RC3 site, is slightly lower in elevation equating to a longer hydroperiod. Additionally, the

RC2 site is closer to the STA-5 inflow point from than the other interior site, RC-3, and

maybe be affecting by increased water levels due to exposure to inflows. Therefore, the soils

do not dry out and oxidize as frequently, suppressing the formation of soluble P. The EPC









results of all transect sites reveals the heterogeneity of the soil composition. One hypothesis

for these results is, while the RC-2 site has a greater ability to sorb P, sites closer to the

inflow receiving water lower in P concentration than the soil, will flux P into the water

column. The fluxed soluble P is transported downstream to lower EPC sites, where P-

sorption will occur, thereby increasing the soil P concentrations. Over time the localized P-

flux and sorption cycle may eventually reach equilibrium. However, ecological impacts

could be significant if equalization is due to, high P inflows and continued oxidation and

reduced hydroperiods.

In comparing the RWMA P-isotherm data to other Everglades areas, EPC is correlated

with P-enrichment of the soil (Richardson and Vayithianythan 1995; Zhou et al. 1997). In

WCA-2A, Richardson and Vayithianythan (1995), using both the linear and Langmuir

models, showed a linear decrease in EPC, from enriched to un-enriched soil EPC values

along an existing P gradient. Additionally, they had reported higher EPC values at inflow,

which contains an approximate soil TP concentration of 1500 mg/kg (SFWMD, Everglades

Marsh Ecology Program) versus the RWMA TP soil concentrations at 640 mg/kg.

Alternatively, they predicted maximum P-sorptive capacity to be 700 mg/kg, where as I

estimated the RWMA maximum P-sorptive capacity closer to 40 60 mg/kg, based on the

amount of P sorbed at 80 tgL-1. In WCA2A and other areas of the Everglades, P-sorption is

controlled by calcium (Ca) and may have a higher sorption potential than Fe as it is not

influenced by redox. Furthermore, the difference between these two studies could be the

higher TP soil enrichment in WCA-2A which, increases P-sorption, or could be due to a

difference in available cations in the soil. When RWMA isotherm results are compared to

un-enriched (< 650 mg/kg) southern Everglades soil (Zhou and Li, 2001) where EPC values









(0.002 0.010 tgml 1), maximum P-sorptive capacity ranges from 1780 2575 tg g-1 and

soil TP concentrations are low, the RWMA soil had a much lower maximum P-sorptive

capacity, 40 60 tg g1.

When corrected for bulk density, the Fe and Al content in the RWMA soil is high

compared to other Everglades marsh areas regardless of TP content. While both Fe and Al

concentrations are elevated, the Fe content is higher than Al concentrations, suggesting Fe

could be the primary regulator of P sorption and Al a secondary regulator (Zhou et al 1997;

Pant et al. 2002), as there are more available cations for P to bind to. Similar studies by

Reddy et al. 1998 and Nair et al. 1998, reported P retention was strongly correlated to Fe and

Al content present in the soil. Furthermore, Khalid 1977, stated under reduced conditions, Fe

and Al were primary factors in P retention in flooded soils, and anaerobic conditions will

increase P solubility (Gale et al. 1994).

Therefore, soils that are highly enriched, such as in WCA-2A, are not able to sorb as

much P from the water column, possibly because they have reached a P-saturation point.

These soils have the potential to act as an internal source of P, if inflow water to the marsh is

low (below EPC). In marsh areas similar to the RWMA, where EPC is variable and max P-

sorptive capacity is less than highly enriched areas, the potential exists to contain soluble P,

partially due to the availability of Fe and Al cations without negatively affecting marsh areas

downstream. In addition, soil chemistry conditions, in particular the high Fe and Al content,

which may be regulating P adsorption, are influenced in the RWMA by hydrology.

Restoring or adjusting the hydrology to prevent conditions conducive to oxidation and muck

fires is a critical component to RWMA restoration.














CHAPTER 3
FLUX OF BIOAVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS

Introduction

Wetland soils that have undergone nutrient enrichment can become internal sources

of Phosphorus (P) and Nitrogen (N) thus affecting restoration goals. Additionally,

hydrologic conditions can exhibit a significant affect on the flux rate of these nutrients

when hydroperiods are severely altered (shortened), resulting in elevated water column

concentrations (Olila et al. 1997; Pant and Reddy 2001). Furthermore, the inorganic or

bioavailable P and N species present, plays a major role in contributing to the

eutrophication of a wetland (Moore et al. 1991). Flux of P and N is dependant upon

antecedent soil conditions as well as, the various P storage pools in the soil, and P

concentrations in the overlying water column. Nitrogen can be lost to the system through

volatilization (Reddy et al. 1996), whereas P accumulates in the soil, often resulting in a

long-term mass increase in total P. If long-term P immobilization processes are altered,

or if antecedent soil conditions are anthropogenically enriched, marsh areas that once

provided a P sink can become a source of P, especially when receiving inflow containing

low P concentrations. The internal loading potential of these enriched or hydrologically

altered soils can perpetuate eutrophication and prolong marsh recovery efforts (Pant and

Reddy 2003).

The Florida Everglades has undergone anthropogenic alterations to hydrology and

water quality for over 50 years. Changes in hydrology have extensively reduced

hydroperiods, particularly in areas of the marsh cutoff from continuous water inflows,









resulting in extended periods of dry out. Urban and agricultural runoff containing high P

concentrations have artificially elevated soil P concentrations in downstream areas of the

Everglades. When soil dries out for prolonged periods, moisture level is reduced,

resulting in aerobic conditions and increased rates of organic matter decomposition. In

addition, when soil moisture content reaches 65% (on a mass basis) and less, organic soil

becomes susceptible to burning (Wade et al. 1980). During organic soil burning (muck

or peat fires), P soil storage pools can shift from predominately organic to inorganic

forms (Smith et al. 2001; Newman et al. 2001), becoming available to flux out of the soil

upon re-flooding.

The RWMA has been cutoff from overland flow for over 50 years, which

drastically altered the hydrology in this system. As a result, hydroperiods were reduced

to an average of three months and, during the remaining nine months, drained soil

conditions predominated. Prolonged marsh draw downs severely oxidized the soil,

leading to subsidence and muck fires. As a consequence of this altered hydrologic cycle,

soil P concentrations became elevated (Newman et al. 1998).

In July 2001, the SFWMD began utilizing STA-5 discharges to increase the

hydroperiod in RWMA, in accordance with hydropattern restoration as directed by the

Everglades Forever Act (EFA). The effect of re-flooding of these drained soils on P-

fluxing, and the movement of soluble P to downstream areas, was unknown. Therefore,

the objectives of this study were 1) determine the difference in P and N flux in dry versus

continuously flooded soils and 2) quantify differences in flux spatially.

Methods

Soil P concentrations, bulk density measurements and vegetation compositions, do

not vary significantly across the RWMA, therefore one representative transect (RC) was









chosen for the intact soil core P-flux study to characterize the soils throughout the marsh.

Four sites (RC-1, RC-2, RC-3 and RC-4) compose one transect running west to east with

the first, western most site RC-1, located adjacent to the inflow structure (G-410 pump)

and the eastern most site, RC-4, located adjacent to the outflow structure (G-402C gated

box culvert). The study was conducted during the dry season (December to May) for the

Everglades, hence air temperatures and day/night hours were identical to the required

environmental conditions. To alleviate the problem of soil within the intact soil core tube

pulling away from the side wall during drying and artificially increasing the surface area

in which the water column interacts, initial drying and flooding treatments were

performed in five gallon soil bucket cores. A standard five gallon bucket with the bottom

removed was used as an initial soil coring device. Two five gallon soil bucket cores were

collected from each site for dry and flooded treatments. Prior to inserting the bucket into

the soil, all vegetation was cleared then, a knife was used to severe all roots, minimizing

soil compaction. Cores were taken to a depth of 0-20/30 cm, then transferred to a

treatment bucket, by sliding the intact core out of the bottom of the soil core bucket and

into a treatment bucket. All soil cores were transferred to a SFWMD research facility

located in West Palm Beach, Fl and placed in enclosures to prevent incoming rain. Prior

to treatment, any remaining vegetation or algae was removed. One soil treatment bucket

from each site was continuously flooded with ambient marsh water, and maintained at an

approximate flooding depth of 5 cm, while the other experienced 45 days of dry down.

Seedlings were removed as they emerged during the treatment period.

During a pilot coring study it was concluded that three, 10 cm diameter soil cores

could be collected from each bucket core. Therefore, at day 45 which is an average









duration of draw down for this area of the Everglades, three replicates for each treatment,

dry and continuously flooded, were cored for a total of six intact soil cores per site and an

experiment total of 24 soil cores. The plastic coring tubes were placed on the soil surface

and any remaining root material was severed with a knife to minimize soil compaction.

The intact soil cores were removed, capped on the bottom and sealed to contain the core

and treatment. The coring tubes were then randomly placed on a table, within an open

enclosure containing a clear plastic roof to prevent rainwater from entering, but allowing

for full sunlight. Air temperature conditions at the time (February/March) of the study

ranged from daytime highs of 18.3 25.50 C, and nighttime lows of 7.2 18.3 C.

Ambient marsh water, collected from the RWMA marsh interior, was used to flood each

soil core tube from the top down in an effort to simulate the flooding processes in the

field, to a depth of 30 cm. No additional water was added to the tubes after the initial

flooding. Finally, all coring tubes were wrapped in aluminum foil to retard algal growth

with the top of each core left uncovered.

Water quality samples were extracted from each soil core tube with a syringe

inserted into the water column, and filtered as specified by lab analyte requirements, with

a 0.45 [tm filter, then placed on ice prior to submittal to the SFWMD Water Quality Lab.

Samples were analyzed for total phosphorus (TP), total dissolved phosphorus (TDP),

soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP), total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), total dissolved

Kjeldahl nitrogen (TDKN), nitrate/nitrite (NOx) and ammonium (NH4) at time zero, day

7 and day 21 according to standard (Clescerl et al. 1999) and SFWMD methods (Table 3-

1). In addition SRP and NF4 were analyzed at Ihour, 4hrs, 8hrs, 18hrs, 24hrs and days 2,

4 and 14.









Table 3-1. Water Quality standard testing methods according to Clescerl et al. 1999 and
the South Florida Water Management District water quality procedures.
Standard Methods, SFWMD, water quality
Water Quality Parameter Clescerl et al. 1999 procedures
SRP,(Orthophosphate, OPO4) SM4500 PF SFWMD 3080.1, Rev. 2.2
Total Phosphate, TP SM4500 PF SFWMD 3100.1, Rev. 3.0
Total Dissolved Phosphate, TDP SM4500 PF SFWMD 3100.1, Rev. 3.0
Ammonium, NH4 SM4500 NH3H SFWMD 3060.4, Rev. 1.0
Nitrate/Nitrite, NOx SM4500 NO3F SFWMD 3060.4, Rev. 1.0
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, TKN EPA 351.2 SFWMD 3070.1, Rev. 2.0
Total Dissolved Kjeldahl Nitrogen,
TDKN EPA 351.2 SFWMD 3070.1, Rev. 2.0

From the water quality results, the different forms of phosphorus P species present

in the water was calculated, then compared with field water quality data for similar

concentration percentages and P availability for algae and plants. The dissolved organic

phosphorus (DOP) concentration that fluxed into the overlying water column was

calculated by subtracting OPO4 from TDP. In addition, the organic phosphorus (oP)

concentration present in the water column was calculated by subtracting SRP from TP.

Finally water column particulate phosphorus (PP) was calculated as TDP subtracted from

TP.

Algal growth occurred in the dry soil core tubes after approximately 168 hours as a

floating mat, which gradually became thicker until conclusion of the experiment, at

which time the majority of the mat sank to the soil surface. The remaining floating mat

was skimmed off the top of the water, the soil core dropped out of the bottom of the tube,

and the remaining algae attached to the tube wall, scraped and added to the sample. No

soil was included in the algae samples, which were sent to DB Environmental Labs,

Rockledge, Florida for TP analysis.









Water quality data from the intact soil cores was analyzed using SAS JumpTM

version 5, SAS Institute Inc., Cary NC. A two-way, repeated measures ANOVA was run,

to determine significant differences for each analyte, temporally and spatially and

treatment, drained and flooded. A significance level of (a) 0.05 was used for all analyses.

Fluxing rates were calculated based on steepest curve at time 1, 4 and 8 hours.

Results

Drained versus continuously flooded soils were compared for significant

differences in flux for all water quality parameters, at each site along the RC transect.

The dry soils exhibited higher flux concentrations across all sites and analytes compared

to flooded soils. In dry soil, SRP flux was significantly higher (P<0.05) than flooded soils

at all sites (Figure 3-1 a,b,c,d). At the RC1 (inflow) and RC4 (outflow) sites, dry soil

SRP concentrations were greater than the internal marsh sites RC2 and RC3.

Additionally, time 0 results of dry and flooded soils were similar until the one hour time

mark, at which point concentrations between the two treatments were significantly

different until the 168 to 212 hour time mark. The exception is RC3 which peaked at

four hours, then water column P concentrations declined at the eight hour time mark to

initial P concentration levels at time 0 which, is also similar to flooded water column P

concentrations. Final concentrations measured at time 380 for the RC1 dry soils were

significantly lower (P = 0.03) than the beginning time 0 concentrations. Fluxing rates,

based on steepest curve, were greatest at the RC4 and RC1 sites respectively, than RC2












0.25

0.2 + RC1-D

0.15 RC -F

0.1 -

0.05


0 50 100 150 200

time, hours

b
0.25

0.2 RC2-D

0.15 -a- RC2-F

0.1

0.05


0 50 100 150 200

time, hours

c
0.06
0.05 --- RC3-D
0.04
0.04 RC3-F
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
0 50 100 150 200

time, hours

Figure 3-1 SRP water column concentrations in mg/L measured in dry vs. flooded soil
core tube treatments at a)RC 1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site. d)RC4 site. All
scales are the same with the exception of (c) the RC3 site, which was re-
scaled to display the slope of the initial flux.










d
0.25

0.2 -- RC4-D
0.15 -- RC4-F

0.1
0.05
0 ,3------1,4 ------ n

0 50 100 150 200

time, hours


Figure 3-1. Continued.

and RC3 (Table 3-2). Flooded RC1 soils exhibited no significant changes in SRP

concentrations measured in the water column throughout the experiment. Total

phosphorus (TP) measurements for dry and flooded soils at time 0 were not significantly

different, however final concentrations at time 380 hours were significantly different for

all sites (Figure 3-2 a,b,c,d). Total phosphorus trends for concentrations were different

between dry and flooded soil cores, as dry soil TP concentrations increased with time and

flooded TP concentrations decreased with time. Total dissolved phosphorus (TDP)

exhibited a similar trend at all sites for both dry and flooded soils, with the highest

concentration measurements at timel68 hours then decreasing in concentration levels at

time 380 to time 0 concentration levels (Figure 3-3 a,b,c,d).

Table 3-2. Fluxing rates of SRP in mgL^-/hr for dry soil cores at each transect site based
on steepest curve for time 1, 4 and 8 hours.
time, RC1-D, RC2-D, RC3-D, RC4-D,
hours mgL1 /hr mgL^-/hr mgL^/hr mgL^-/hr
1 0.090 0.076 0.053 0.106
4 0.056 0.043 0.022 0.057
8 0.052 0.033 0.013 0.046









For all sites Ammonium (NH4) fluxed out of the dry soil treatments at significantly

greater concentrations (P<0.05) than the continuously flooded soil from the 4-8 hour time

to 168 and 212 hour measurements (Figure 3-4 a,b,c,d). Additionally, final

concentrations measured at time 380 returned to similar concentrations measured at time

0. All flooded soils released a small amount NH4 into the water column within the first

eight hours then concentrations appeared to reach equilibrium between the soil and

overlying water NH4 concentrations at the final time of 380 hours. The RC1 inflow site

dry soil treatment NH4 concentrations were significantly less (P < 0.05) than the RC2,


a -.-RC1-D
0.25 -- RC -F
0.2
S0.15 -
0.1
H 0.05

0 100 200 300 400
time,hrs

b RC2-D
0.3 --- RC2-F

o 0.2 -

0.1

0
0 100 200 300 400
time,hrs

Figure 3-2 TP water column concentrations in mg/L measured in dry vs. flooded soil core
tube treatments at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site. d)RC4 site.












0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0


0 100 200 300
time,hrs


0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0


-- RC3-D
-a- RC3-F


400


-- RC4-D
- RC4-F


400


Figure 3-2. Continued.


0 100 200 300
time,hrs










-*RC1-D
-- RC -F


0 100 200 300


- RC2-D
-- RC2-F


0 100 200 300


time, hrs


--RC3-D
-oRC3-F


0 100 200 300


time,hrs


-- RC4-D
--RC4-F


0 100 200 300


400


time, hrs

Figure 3-3. TDP water column concentrations in mg/L measured in dry vs. flooded soil
core tube treatments at a)RC 1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site. d)RC4 site.


0.1

0.05

0


time, hrs


400


0.1

0.05

0


0.1


0.05


0.1

0.05


0












-*RC1-D
o-- RC1-F


200


time, hours


0 50 100 150


200


time, hours


Figure 3-4 NH4 water column concentrations in mg/L measured in dry vs. flooded soil
core tube treatments at a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site. d)RC4 site.


n n -n-










c

5 RC3-D
4 -- RC3-F



2

1-

0-
0 n n n -
0 50 100 150 200

time, hours

d
5
RC4-D
4
S-a- RC4-F


2 -

1
0 -- n n n 1 3 -
0 50 100 150 200

time, hours

Figure 3-4. Continued.

RC3 and RC4 sites. The additional nitrogen parameters measured in the water

quality samples, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN), Total Dissolved Kjeldahl Nitrogen

(TDKN) and Nitrite/Nitrate (NOx) results are listed in Appendix 3-1.

Finally, for each parameter and soil treatment, results of all drained treatments and

flooded treatments were compared between sites, within the transect, for significant

differences in concentration. Significantly higher concentrations of SRP (P < 0.05)

occurred during peak flux (time 1 hr to time 8 hr) in the drained soils between RC1 and

RC4 (inflow and outflow sites respectively) versus RC2 and RC3 (interior transect sites)









(Figure 3-5). However, there were no significant differences between sites in dry or

flooded soils, for TP or TDP and SRP. Conversely, results in dry soils for NH4, at the

RC1 site had significantly (P < 0.05) lower concentrations (P < 0.05) compared to RC2, 3

and 4 (Figure 3-6). However, there were no significant differences between sites in either

dry or flooded soils for TKN, TDKN and NOx as well as NH4 for flooded soil.


0.25

0.2 --RC1-D
--o- RC2-D
0.15 -
RC3-D
0.1 ---- RC4-D

0.05

0
0 50 100 150 200

time, hours

Figure 3-5. SRP water column concentrations measured in mg/L in drained soil core
treatments all sites RC1, RC2, RC3 and RC4. The RC1 and RC4 sites fluxed
at higher rates and greater concentrations of SRP than the interior marsh sites,
RC2 and RC3.


5
4 RC1-D
-- RC2-D
3-
S-- RC3-D
2 RC4-D

1

0
0 100 200 300 400

time, hours

Figure 3-6. NH4 water column concentrations measured in mg/L in drained soil core
treatments all sites RC1, RC2, RC3 and RC4.









Dissolved organic phosphorus, which fluxed from the soil into the overlying water

column, exhibited a similar increase in concentration with time in the flooded soils

(Figure 3-7 a,b,c,d). Flooded soil water column DOP measured at the RC1 site was

significantly (P=0.05) higher than the dry soil treatment. Drained soil DOP

concentrations in the water column remained constant throughout the experiment.

Alternatively, water column oP (Figure 3-8) and PP (Figure 3-9) concentrations within

drained soil significantly (P=0.05) increased over time, while flooded soil water column

oP and PP concentrations steadily decreased over time. When calculating percentages of

oP and iP fluxing concentrations from the soil to the water column spatially and

temporally (Table 3-3), two separate patterns emerge. At time 0, in both dry and flooded

soil cores, the percentage of oP fluxing from the soil measured in the water column

samples was greater than iP. Over the course of the study this trend remained, becoming

significant (P = 0.05) at time 168 and 380 hours, with a majority of the P measured in the


a 2000 RC1-D
1-o-RC1-F
W 1500 -

a 1000
500


0 100 200 300 400
time, hrs

Figure 3-7 Dissolved organic phosphorus (DOP) water column concentrations in ig/L,
calculated in dry vs. flooded soil core treatments for a)RC1 site b)RC2 site.
c)RC3 site d)RC4 site.










b + RC2-D
2000 RC2-F
S1500
1000
O
500
0
0 100 200 300 400
time, hrs


c RC3-D
2000
2000 RC3-F
1500 -
S1000 -
500
0
0 100 200 300 400
time, hrs


d RC4-D
2000 RC4-F
1500 -
1000
S500-
0
0 100 200 300 400
time, hrs


Figure 3-7. Continued.










a RC1-D
0.2 --RC-F
4 0.15
S0.1
S0.05
0
0 100 200 300 400
time, hrs


0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0


0 100 200 30(
time,hrs


0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0


0 100 200 30
time, hrs


-- RC2-D
-- RC2-F
--_4





0 400



-*- RC3-D
-RC3-F






3 400


-.RC4-D
-o-RC4-F


0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0


0 100


200 300
time, hrs


Figure 3-8 Organic phosphorus (oP) water column concentrations in ig/L, calculated in
dry vs. flooded soil core treatments for a)RC1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site
d)RC4site.







44



- RC1-D
-- RC1-F


0 0.06 1


0 100 200 300 4C


)0


time, hrs


-- RC2-D
-a- RC2-F


0 100


200 300


time, hrs


- RC3-D
- RC3-F


c
0.18

c 0.12

P 0.06
0


0 100


200 300


time, hrs


- RC4-D
-- RC4-F


0 100


200 300

time, hrs


Figure 3-9 Particulate phosphorus (PP) water column concentrations in tg/L, calculated
in dry vs. flooded soil core treatments for a)RC 1 site. b)RC2 site. c)RC3 site
d)RC4 site.


0.18
t7 ( 1I


b
0.18

c 0.12

P 0.06

0


0.18

0.12
0.06









water column as organic. Inorganic P percentages decreased over time in dry soil cores

and either remained the same in flooded cores or increased, though not significantly.

Algae began growing in the drained soil treatment core tubes at time 168 (-1 week)

and continued through out the remainder of the experiment, while no algae was present in

the continuously flooded treatment core tubes. The algae samples that were sent off for

TP analysis, exhibited sufficient variability among replicates and between cores, so

results were not significantly different (Table 3-4), and therefore were combined into one

average concentration. The average algal TP tissue concentration from the soil core tubes

(1183 195 mg/kg) were compared to average algal TP tissue concentrations reported at

RWMA field sites (999 + 100 mg/kg), representing an average of samples collected prior

to and after STA-5 discharges. The differences in TP concentrations from the field sites

versus the soil cores were not significant.

Table 3-3. Percentage of oP and iP fluxing from the soil into the water column over time
Time 0 hours
RC1-D RC1-F RC2-D RC2-F RC3-D RC3-F RC4-D RC4-F
%oP 48.13 79.63 56.98 85.06 80.14 86.73 72.18 70.00
%iP 51.87 20.37 43.02 14.94 19.86 13.27 27.82 30.00
Time 168 hours
RC1-D RC1-F RC2-D RC2-F RC3-D RC3-F RC4-D RC4-F
%oP 89.11 85.44 87.48 85.29 86.96 81.54 76.22 67.80
%iP 10.89 14.56 12.52 14.71 13.04 18.46 23.78 32.20
Time 380 hours
RC1-D RC1-F RC2-D RC2-F RC3-D RC3-F RC4-D RC4-F
%oP 90.12 76.47 90.71 75.76 93.22 54.76 90.51 60.00
%iP 9.88 23.53 9.29 24.24 6.78 45.24 9.49 40.00









Table 3-4. Algae TP concentration measurements in mg/kg collected from drained soil
core tubes at the conclusion of the study.
Site TP, mg/kg
RC1 1116.3 157.8
RC2 1230 101.4
RC3 1015.6 207.3
RC4 1370 316.6

Discussion

In the RWMA two primary soil conditions exist, drained and flooded. Although

hydropattern restoration has been implemented (July 2001), hydroperiods had not been of

sufficient length to prevent the soil from drying in the outer and northern portions of the

marsh, therefore extended dry soil conditions continued to exist at the end of the wet

season, and throughout the dry season. Soil oxidation continued to occur during these

dry times, altering the soil chemistry.

As soil oxidizes, the Fe-P forms are soluble upon re-flooding (Pant et al. 2002)

especially when high Fe concentrations are present (Gunnars and Blomqvist 1997) in the

soil such as the RWMA soils. Additionally, upon re-flooding, iP species (SRP) will flux

from the soil to the overlying water column. Those species of P that are now soluble, and

bioavailable, can be transported further downstream to areas of the marsh containing

lower soil P, resulting in sorption, thereby moving the soluble P front further downstream

into previously un-impacted areas. While Al-P is not soluble upon re-flooding, the high

concentrations of Al ions are available to bind with P.

Results from the RWMA intact soil core experiment suggest that, drained soil

conditions significantly increase the flux of SRP, TP and TDP to the water column

compared to continuously flooded soils. Total phosphorus of drained soils, both

inorganic and organic forms, began at time 0 with similar concentration levels. Despite









some transect sites having different flux patterns, each drained soil core had significantly

increased P concentrations at the final sample time compared to the flooded soil. In fact,

the flooded soils appeared to release released very little phosphorus into the water

column and quickly reaching an equilibrium.

For all sites, the drained soil cores, with the exception of the RC3 site which is

subject to slightly longer hydroperiods, fluxed significant concentrations of bioavailable

P (SRP) into the water column. In the initial hour of the study, the RC1 and RC4 sites

had higher flux rates compared to the RC2 and RC3 sites, suggesting the soils may

experience longer drying and oxidation, as the sites are located near the edge of the marsh

based on the difference in elevation reported on the RWMA 2005 topographic survey and

measured water depths at each site. However, by the final sample event, drained soil

water P concentrations were similar to those measured in the flooded soils. One

explanation for the decrease in bioavailable P concentrations in the drained treatment soil

cores could be from the algal growth, which began approximately one week after re-

flooding. By the conclusion of the study, all drained soil cores contained substantial

amounts of filamentous green algae. However, there was no algal growth in the

continuously flooded soil cores. Algae uptakes P directly from the water column, which

appeared to influence the SRP concentrations measured in the water quality samples,

after peaking at day 8 when the algae first appeared. Analysis of the P concentration of

the algae tissue samples were representative of P concentrations measured at the RC

transect sites and indicative of high nutrient soils. Under field conditions, soluble P

fluxing from the soil into the water column may be taken up by the algae, prior to low P

soil areas adsorbing the P into the soil. Similar results by Newman et al. 2004, reported a









rapid uptake of P by periphyton prior to soil adsorption. At the conclusion of the P flux

study, SRP levels in dry soil cores were similar to flooded soils.

Calculations of the iP and oP percentages that fluxed showed a greater percentage

of oP fluxed out of the soil throughout the study. However, when comparing drained vs.

flooded percentages over time, flooded oP is initially higher then decreases over time,

with increasing percentages of iP measured in the water column. The opposite trend was

observed in the dry soil treatments, in which initial iP percentages measured in the water

column were higher then decreased over time, until oP percentages were significantly

greater at the conclusion of the study. P-fractionation data in the 0-2 cm layer collected

by the SFWMD Downstream Monitoring and Research Program shows an equal amount

of P in the soil is stored as organic P and inorganic P (Leeds et al. in progress). However

in drained soils, such as those present in the drained soil core treatment, there may be a

certain amount of mineralization occurring. A majority of the P is stored in the soil in

inorganic forms, possibly explaining the large flux in SRP as more forms of iP are

available to flux. In addition, water entering the RWMA from STA-5 is approximately

44 % oP and 56 % iP (SFWMD, Downstream Monitoring and Research Program Water

Quality data). This P fractionation characteristic of inflow water may be providing an iP

source to bond with the potentially available Fe and Al content in the soil although, this

was not specifically addressed by this study. Results by Eckert et al. (1997) and Novak et

al. (2004) reported the soil in these studies that were high in iP (Fe-P and Al-P), will flux

high concentrations of iP species when water column P is less than soil porewater P.

Spatially, P flux in the intact soil cores in both the drained and flooded treatments

was fairly uniform in concentration across the transect, with the exception of the RC3









site, which is located in the interior of the marsh. The RC3 site experiences a longer

hydroperiod, possibly due to its location near the center of the marsh, and lower

elevation, (RWMA Topographic elevation survey 2004, SFWMD) relative to the other

transect sites. According to previous fires mapped by the FFWCC and SFWMD, the

RC3 site has not experienced the frequent muck fires compared to other transect sites,

therefore soil conditions may have been more stable, relative to sites experiencing shorter

hydroperiods and more frequent fire disturbance. However, soil TP concentrations are

similar to the other transect sites, suggesting hydrology may be the driving factor in soil

conditions.

Nitrogen flux trends were similar to P flux results. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen and

TDKN concentrations were significantly higher in water samples collected at the final

time in drained soils compared to flooded soil, which maintained a relatively constant

concentration. Furthermore, bioavailable N in the form of NH4, showed significantly

greater initial flux in dry soils, although by the end of the study, water column

concentrations were similar to the flooded water samples. The RC1 site, near the inflow

point, fluxed the lowest concentration ofNH4 relative to other sites across the transect.

This is maybe due to the vegetation composition of the site taking up the available N,

where sawgrass and cattail in this area are very tall and dense when compared to sites

with lower soil nutrient concentrations (Miao and Sklar 1998). Moreover, this site has

experienced a higher frequency of muck fires, resulting in an increased volatilization of

NH4 in the soil (Smith and Newman 2001). Also, RC1 under goes longer periods of

oxidation, due to the slight increase in elevation (RWMA Topographic elevation survey









2004, SFWMD) when compared to the other sites, allowing the soil to dry for longer

periods of time.

Intact soil cores are routinely used to quantify approximate P fluxing in the field

without conducting in situ measurements which may not be feasible due to transportation,

sampling and budget constraints. Though the soil cores contain a small surface area, no

continuous water flow or plants, they give a good indication of the potential flux rate

occurring in the field at the soil water column interface. In addition, sampling can be

conducted at predetermined time intervals, capturing initial flux upon re-flooding of the

soil versus the logistics of timing re-flooding in the field. Furthermore, flux data can be

incorporated in calculating marsh recovery and determining the affects altered hydrology

has on the potential of soluble P movement further into the marsh interior.














CHAPTER 4
CONCLUSIONS

The Rotenberger Wildlife Management Area, part of the northern Everglades, can

be monitored for phosphorus (P) inflow and outflow concentrations, as well as controlled

hydrologically at inflow point, by a point source discharge pump, and outflow through

weir structures. Therefore, determining the potential of P to flux from the soil to the

overlying water column, thus moving P further downstream in the RWMA and

Everglades system, is a critical factor in determining the operations of the system. For

example, results from the P-isotherm experiment suggest water column P concentrations

below 90 pgL'1 may cause P to flux out of the soil. In addition, the intact soil core study

indicates antecedent drained soil conditions upon re-flooding, will potentially flux

significantly greater concentrations ofP to the water column, versus soil that is

continuously flooded. Based on this, I recommend adjusting hydrologic operations of the

outflow structures, to retain water in the system upon re-flooding. This provides

conditions to increase the hydroperiod, thus reducing the potential for over draining and

oxidation of the soil and suppress the flux of soluble, inorganic P into the water column.

Furthermore, maintenance of flooded soils allows for significantly lower concentrations

of inorganic P flux based on calculated iP and oP percentages in the drained and flooded

water column samples, thereby reducing the potential for RWMA soils to be a source of

soluble P to downstream Everglades marshes.









Phosphorus Isotherms

The P-isotherms, conducted on RWMA soil, displayed some spatial variability in

EPC and P-sorption, not evident in soil TP concentrations. RWMA soils ability to sorb P

is much less when compared to the max P sorption of soil along the P-gradient in WCA-

2A (Richardson and Vaythianythan 1995) despite using similar methods analytical

methods. In addition, the systems are different with respect to historic P-loading. WCA-

2A became enriched due to high P inflows instead of altered hydrology, oxidation, and

muck fires, which were responsible for elevating P concentrations in RWMA soils. This

difference may explain the isolated transect site in this study, where EPC results were

lower than other transect sites. For example, the high nutrient inflows in WCA-2A were

fairly uniform versus RWMA where geographic location of muck fires and topographic

variability of soils that dry and oxidize are primary factors. Consequently, P-sorption is

uniquely dependant upon soil characteristics representative of each system, as well as

historic P-loading. Several studies support this conclusion (Reddy et al. 1998; Nair et al.

1998; Pant et al 2002) suggesting Fe and Al are primary regulators of P-retention when

elevated concentrations are measured. In the RWMA, Fe and Al concentrations are high

compared to other Northern Everglades marshes such as, the Loxahatchee National

Wildlife Refuge and Water Conservation Area 2A, and may be regulating P-retention in

RWMA, although this was not specifically addressed in this study. Similar P-retention

regulation, related to Ca levels, has been documented in WCA-2A soil (Richardson and

Vayithianythan 1995) and from soil located in Everglades National Park (Zhou and Li

2001) suggesting soil chemistry composition should be included in determining the soils

ability for P-sorption.









Phosphorus isotherms are applied to define soil characteristics of constructed

wetlands and in proposed constructed wetlands sites, to determine the soils suitability to

remove P. Two questions typically addressed are 1) will the soil act as a source or sink?

and 2) how much P can be retained and for how long? Furthermore, P-retention can be

influenced by the biological component present, as vegetation and the algal community

will uptake P from the soil and water column respectively. Studies by Gale et al. (1994),

Nair et al. (1998) and Reddy et al. (1998) used P-isotherms to address these questions,

concluding the EPC of the soil can predict water column concentrations in which soil will

uptake or flux P. An example of utilizing such data in the management of a system is in

the RWMA. Water inflow and outflow to the marsh is regulated by pumping structures

(inflow) and gated weirs (outflow). Therefore, upon determination that inflow TP may

cause a significant flux of P, resulting in impacts to downstream areas, outflow water can

be retained by adjusting the stage schedule controlling the outflow structures. The data

collected during this study from the P-isotherms and P-fluxing experiments can aid in

answering these questions.

There are limitations to using isotherm results and their applicability to field

conditions. P-isotherms are run under controlled laboratory conditions, eliminating much

of the inherent variability present in field conditions that would affect P-sorption or flux

i.e., the influence of the microbial and algal community, plants and changes in soil

conditions (aerobic and anaerobic). The soil used in the RWMA isotherm study was

dried, representing aerobic conditions only, in addition to being shaken for 24 hours thus

exposing all available bonding sites. Under field conditions, P would only interact with

the exposed soil layer and the zone of porewater diffusion. A study by Schlichting and









Leinweber (2002) on the effect of drying soil, prior to a sequential P fractionation scheme

compared to fresh, moist soil, reported a significant variability between the two pre-

treatment methods on the P fractionation results. Additionally, the linear, Langmuir and

Freundlich equations were initially developed for use with mineral soils rather than

organic soils, which may explain some of the discrepancy between the EPC and P-

sorption results. Consequently, isotherm data should be incorporated with other soil data

(nutrient concentrations and soil chemistry) to predict P-sorption or flux when

characterizing the wetland.

P-Sorption Factors

Iron (Fe) and Aluminum (Al) content in RWMA soils, when corrected for bulk

density and compared to other systems in the northern Everglades, Loxahatchee National

Wildlife Refuge and Water Conservation Area 2, are significantly higher, and may be a

significant factor regulating P-sorption in this system. Additionally, the RWMA has

experienced severely altered hydrology resulting in draw downs leading to soil oxidation.

Iron in the soil, when oxidized, forms iron oxide which is available for sorption reactions

with P in the soil. More importantly, Fe-P, a soluble inorganic P, upon re-flooding of the

soil is released into the water column and may be available for uptake. Although Ca can

also regulate P-sorption, as was determined in WCA-2A and in Everglades National Park,

both marsh areas contain higher concentrations of Ca versus Fe and Al.

In support of the role of Fe and Al in P sorption, results from Gale et al. (1994),

Nair et al. (1998) and Reddy et al. (1998) in soil studies outside of the Everglades,

concluded increased concentrations of Al and Fe are directly correlated with P-sorption.

Moreover, each found soils with elevated concentrations of Fe will oxidize upon soil

drying conditions, then upon re-flooding, form soluble forms of P. Similar results were









reported in two studies conducted (Khalid et al. 1977; Pant et al. 2001) in marshes

outside of Florida. Additionally, the RWMA has experienced severe and widespread

muck fires that may have been a factor in concentrating Fe in the soil. At the conclusion

of the intact soil core study, Fe stains were present on the sides of the cores, and during

soil cores collection in the field, oxidized rhizospheres were present. While Al is

available to bond with P, Fe has the greater potential to interact with P.

P-flux

As evidenced by the results in the intact soil cores, marsh hydrology can have a

significant influence on the P-flux rate. The concentration and duration of P fluxing out

of impacted soils, despite receiving low P water, creates conditions conducive to

maintaining a eutrophic system until equilibrium is reached. Results from this study

showed bioavailable P (SRP) fluxed in significantly higher concentrations in dry soil

versus flooded soils, at each site throughout the transect. Therefore maintaining flooded

soils, through retention, would be desirable to minimize large fluxes of inorganic P

concentrations into the water column.

The hydrology in RWMA prior to receiving STA-5 discharges was severely

altered, allowing for extensive soil oxidation, soil loss and muck fires due to low soil

moisture content, all of which contributed to elevated soil P-concentrations. On a smaller

scale within the marsh, the outer edges are higher in elevation by approximately 15 cm

compared to the marsh interior. The differences in elevation allow water to pool in the

interior and dry out for longer periods of time on the edges. The differential in soil

drying is reflected in the P-flux results at the RC 1 and RC4 sites that are adjacent to the

outer edges. In dry soil treatments, the outer edge marsh sites (RC1, RC4) fluxed

significantly higher concentrations of SRP when compared to sites located closer to the









interior (RC2, RC3). Alternatively, when all sites are continuously flooded, SRP

measurements showed an initial, small concentration increase, and then reached

equilibrium for the remainder of the experiment.

Percentages of iP and oP in the water column of drained and flooded soil cores flux

upon initial re-flooding were varied. In the drained soil cores over time, iP percentages

decreased while oP percentages increased until the conclusion of the study. However, in

flooded soil cores, iP percentages and oP percentages remained relatively constant over

time with insignificant increases and decreases in composition. Organic P percentages

did not significantly change between dry and flooded treatment cores over time, but when

oP and iP percentages are compared for each treatment at all sites, the measured water

column TP contains a greater percentage of oP. One explanation for the difference in iP

versus oP percentages in the water column over time in the drained soil treatment cores

would be the algal uptake of iP, which did not occur in the flooded soil core treatments.

The same scenario is likely occurring in the natural system after drained and oxidized

soils are re-flooded. There is an initial flux of iP into the water column that is assimilated

by algal blooms. However the oP is not taken up and therefore over time, a greater

percentage of the water column TP is organic. While many studies have addressed the

affects of iP to the system ecologically, little is known how oP will impact the marsh.

Conclusion

While P may be fluxing out of the soil near inflow sites, it is potentially undergoing

sorption in sites located further towards the interior of the marsh, as evident by EPC

results, as well as being affected by algal and plant uptake. The outflow sites, upon re-

flooding of drained soil, are a potential source of P to downstream areas. For example,

RC1 near the inflow has an EPC approximately 94.5 [gL-1. Based on water quality data









recorded at the G-410 inflow pumping structure, P will flux from the soil near the inflow

sites. In contrast the RC2 site, which is downstream ofRC1 and measured an EPC of

18.8 [gL1, will potentially sorb P. When allowed to dry out, soil from all sites have the

potential to release bioavailable P for seven to ten days, allowing soluble P to travel

further downstream and, in the case of RC 4, out of RWMA through the outflow

structures into downstream Central Everglades areas. However, over time, if dry soils

become continuously flooded, P-flux is reduced and P release shifts from inorganic P to

organic forms that are not readily available, and must be mineralized to become

bioavailable. Therefore, in a marsh system such as the RWMA, where water inflow and

outflow is controlled by pumps and gated weir structures respectively, modifying the

operations of the system to retain water for longer periods of time, is a viable option to,

minimize drained and oxidizing conditions which would otherwise advance the soluble P

front. Finally, there are many important factors such as hydrology, historic P-loading,

soil chemistry and a biological component, influencing P-sorption and flux, all of which

must be taken into account when applying adaptive management strategies to a natural

system. In this study each of these factors, in addition to the data collected from the P-

isotherms and P-fluxing experiments, suggests RWMA in its current state of operation

has the potential to act as a source of P. Therefore, utilizing the data from this study and

the factors outlined above, in conjunction with an adaptive management approach, can

allow for flexible operations of the system improving hydrology, providing conditions to

inhibit P-fluxing and retain soluble P, thus preventing impacts to downstream areas.















APPENDIX A
P-ADSORPTION RESULTS FROM THE LINEAR, FREUNDLICH AND LANGMUIR
ISOTHERM EQUATIONS AT EACH SITE AND P-CONCENTRATION.


Linear Freundlich Langmuir
C,ig/L S,[tg/g S+So C/(S+So)
RC1
0 88.4 + 4.7 -0.88 22.3 4.0
10 88.8 + 3.5 -0.79 22.4 4.0
30 90.0 + 6.3 -0.60 22.6 4.0
50 95.3 + 4.8 -0.45 22.7 4.2
100 102.0 + 6.9 -0.02 23.2 4.4
500 110.0 1.0 3.90 27.1 4.1
1000 127.3 + 6.7 8.73 31.9 4.0
2000 187 5.6 18.13 41.3 4.5
5000 333 3.1 46.67 69.9 4.8
10000 626 25.0 93.74 116.9 5.4

RC2
0 18.7 0.7 -0.19 17.5 1.1
10 20.4 0.2 -0.10 17.6 1.2
30 18.9 0.6 0.11 17.8 1.1
50 18.8 1.9 0.31 18.0 1.0
100 20.5 +1.5 0.79 18.5 1.1
500 21.5 + 2.1 4.78 22.5 1.0
1000 29.4 + 1.0 9.71 27.4 1.1
2000 36.1 + 0.3 19.64 37.3 1.0
5000 80.1 + 2.3 49.20 66.9 1.2
10000 182.0 2.0 98.18 115.9 1.6


RC3
0
10
30
50
100
500
1000
2000
5000
10000


67.6 1.3
69.3 + 0.6
71.7 1.7
76.2 + 3.9
75.1 1.7
94.6 + 2.6
118.7 3.1
197.7 + 2.5
421.3 + 6.1
1002.7 + 4.6


-0.68
-0.59
-0.42
-0.26
0.25
4.05
8.81
18.02
45.79
89.97


13.5
13.6
13.8
13.9
14.4
18.3
23.0
32.2
60.0
104.2






59



RC4
0 83.2 + 4.2 -0.83 8.3 10.0
10 98.1 17.4 -0.88 8.3 11.8
30 77.2+ 10.2 -0.47 8.7 8.9
50 99.5 30.2 -0.49 8.7 11.5
100 92.4 + 3.8 0.08 9.2 10.0
500 121.4 + 30.9 3.79 13.0 9.4
1000 176.3 3.1 8.24 17.4 10.1
2000 258.3 + 5.5 17.42 26.6 9.7
5000 644.0 + 9.2 43.56 52.7 12.2
1607.7
10000 32.7 83.92 93.1 17.3















APPENDIX B
WATER QUALITY NITROGEN RESULTS FROM INTACT SOIL CORES
SAMPLED FROM THE P-FLUX EXPERIMENT.

TKN, mg/L
Time,
hours RC1-D RC2-D RC3-D RC4-D
0 2.15 0.08 2.93 0.38 8.34 0.38 4.161.8
168 4.18 0.19 3.64 0.32 2.86 0.02 3.05 0.28
380 5.81 0.90 6.07 0.31 5.09 0.31 6.09 + 1.09
RC1-F RC2-F RC3-F RC4-F
0 2.94 0.63 3.37 0.32 3.61 0.11 2.48 0.15
168 2.57 0.15 2.78 0.31 2.36 0.03 2.63 0.02
380 3.2 + .014 3.95 + 0.53 2.74 + 0.02 3.03 + 0.02
TDKN, mg/L
Time,
hours RC1-D RC2-D RC3-D RC4-D
0 2.07 + 0.07 2.37 + 0.20 2.51 + 0.43 2.32 0.30
168 3.68 0.14 6.78 0.49 5.73 0.11 5.86 0.38
380 4.40 + 0.25 5.07 + 0.07 3.26 + 0.74 4.61 0.24
RC1-F RC2-F RC3-F RC4-F
0 1.85 + 0.03 1.81 + 0.01 1.79 + 0.003 1.82 + 0.02
168 2.67 0.15 2.84 0.27 2.47 0.03 2.75 0.01
380 3.17 0.12 3.67 0.29 2.68 0.03 3.07 0.004
NOx, mg/L
Time,
hours RC1-D RC2-D RC3-D RC4-D
0 1.52 0.4 1.73 +0.32 2.40+ 1.13 2.80 1.60
168 0.04 + 0.02 0.009 + 0.02 0.077 + 0.02 0.018 + 0.004
380 0.005 + 0.001 0.008 + 0.002 0.007 + 0.005 0.005 0.003
RC1-F RC2-F RC3-F RC4-F
0 0.02 + 0.003 0.014 + 0.002 0.016 + 0.003 0.076 + 0.01
168 0.007 + 0 0.018 + 0.008 0.014 + 0.004 0.009 + 0.001
380 0.004 + 0 0.005 + 0.001 0.0007 0.002 0.002 + 0.001
















LITERATURE CITED


Bostrom, B., J. M. Andersen, S. Fleischer and M. Jansson. 1988. Exchange of
phosphorus across the soil-water interface. Hydrobiologia 170:229-244.

Clescerl, L., A. E. Greenberg and A. D. Eaton. 1999. Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater. American Public Health Association, 20th
edition, pp. 1329, Cincinnati, OH.

DeBusk, W. F., K. R. Reddy, M. S. Koch and Y. Wang. 1994. Spatial distribution of
soil nutrients in a Northern Everglades Marsh: Water Conservation Area 2A. Soil
Science Society American Journal 58:543-552.

Eckert, W., A. Nishri and R. Parparova. 1997. Factors regulating the flux of phosphate
at the soil-water interface of a subtropical calcareous lake: A simulation study with
intact soil cores. Water, Air and Soil Pollution 99:401-409.

Fisher, M. M., and K. R. Reddy. 2001. Phosphorus flux from wetland soils affected by
long-term nutrient loading. Journal of Environmental Quality 30:261-271.

Gale, P.M., K.R. Reddy and D.A. Graetz. 1994. Phosphorus retention by wetland soils
used for treated wastewater disposal. Journal of Environmental Quality 23:370-
377.

Gunnars, A. and S. Blomqvist. 1997. Phosphate exchange across the soil-water interface
when shifting from anoxic to oxic conditions an experimental comparison of
freshwater and brackish-marine systems. Biogeochemistry 37:203-226.

Khalid, R.A., W.H. Patrick, Jr. and R.D. DeLaune. 1977. Phosphorus sorption
characteristics of flooded soil. American Journal of the Soil Science Society
41:305-310.

Leeds, J.A., P. B. Garrett and J. Majer-Newman. 2005. Assessing impacts of
hydropattern restoration in an over-drained wetland on soil nutrients, vegetation
and fire. In progress.

Malecki, L. M., J. R. White and K. R. Reddy. 2004. Nitrogen and phosphorus flux rates
from soil in the lower St. Johns River Estuary. Journal of Environmental Quality
33:1545-1555.









Miao, S. L. and F. H. Sklar. 1998. Biomass and nutrient allocation of sawgrass and
cattail along a nutrient gradient in the Florida Everglades. Wetlands Ecology and
Management 5:245-263.

Moore, P.A. Jr., Reddy, K.R., Graetz, D.A. 1991. Phosphorus geochemistry in the soil-
water column of a hypereutrophic lake. Journal of Environmental Quality 20:869-
875.

Nair, V. D., D. A. Graetz and K. R. Reddy. 1998. Dairy manure influences on
phosphorus retention capacity of spodosols. Journal of Environmental Quality
27:522-527.

Newman, S., K. R. Reddy, W. F. DeBusk, Y. Wang, G. Shih and M. M. Fisher. 1997.
Spatial distribution of soil nutrients in a Northern Everglades Marsh: Water
Conservation Area 1. Soil Science Society of America Journal 61:1275-1283.

Newman, S., J. Schuette, J. B. Grace, K. Rutchey, T. Fontaine, K. R. Reddy and M.
Petrucha. 1998. Factors influencing cattail abundance in the northern Everglades.
Aquatic Botany 60:265-280.

Newman, S., P. V. McCormick, S. L. Miao, J. A. Laing, W. C. Kennedy and M. B.
O'Dell. 2004. The effect of phosphorus enrichment on the nutrient status of a
northern Everglades slough. Wetlands Ecology and Management 12:63-79.

Novak, J. M., K. C. Stone, A. A. Szogi, D. W. Watts and M. H. Johnson. 2004.
Dissolved phosphorus retention and release from a coastal plain in-stream wetland.
Journal of Environmental Quality 33:394-401.

Olila, O.G., Reddy, K.R., Stites, D.L. 1997. Influence of draining on soil phosphorus
forms and distribution in a constructed wetland. Ecological Engineering 9:157-
169.

Pant, H. K. and K. R. Reddy. 2001A. Hydrologic influence on stability of organic
phosphorus in wetland detritus. Journal of Environmental Quality 30:668-674.

Pant, H. K. and K. R. Reddy. 2001B. Phosphorus sorption characteristics of estuarine
soils under different redox conditions. Journal of Environmental Quality 30:1474-
1480.

Pant, H. K., K. R. Reddy and E. Lemon. 2001. Phosphorus retention capacity of root
bed media of sub-surface flow constructed wetlands. Ecological Engineering
17:345-355.

Pant, H. K., V. D. Nair, K. R. Reddy, D. A. Graetz and R. R. Villapando. 2002.
Influence of flooding on phosphorus mobility in manure-impacted soil. Journal of
Environmental Quality 31:1399-1405.









Pant, H. K., K. R. Reddy and R. M. Spechler. 2002. Phosphorus retention in soils from a
prospective constructed wetland site: Environmental implications. Soil Science
167:607-615.

Pant, H. K. and K. R. Reddy. 2003. Potential internal loading of phosphorus in a
wetland constructed in agricultural land. Water Research 37:965-972.

Patrick, W.H., Jr. and R.A. Khalid. 1974. Phosphate release and sorption by soils and
soils: Effect of aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Science (Washington, DC)
186:53-55

Raven, K. P. and L. R. Hossner. 1993. Phosphorus desorption quantity-intensity
relationships in soils. Soil Science Society American Journal 57:1501-1508.

Reddy, K. R., W. F. DeBusk, Y. Wang, R. DeLaune and M. Koch. 1991. Physico-
chemical properties of soils in the Water Conservation Area 2 of the Everglades,
Final Report, South Florida Water Management District.

Reddy, K.R. M.M. Fisher and D. Ivanoff. 1996. Resuspension and diffusive flux of
nitrogen and phosphorus in a hypereutrophic lake. Journal of Environmental.
Quality 25:363-371.

Reddy, K. R., G. A. O'Conner and P. M. Gale. 1998. Phosphorus desorption capacities
of wetland soils and stream soils impacted by dairy effluent. Journal of
Environmental Quality 27:1-10.

Reddy, K. R., G. A. O'Conner and P. M. Gale. 1998. Phosphorus sorption capacities of
wetland soils and stream soils impacted by dairy effluent. Journal of
Environmental Quality 27:438-447.

Reddy, K. R., Y. Wang, W. F. DeBusk, M. M. Fisher and S. Newman. 1998. Forms of
Soil phosphorus in selected hydrologic units of the Florida Everglades. American
Journal of the Soil Science Society 62:1134-1147.

Richardson, C. J. 1985. Mechanisms controlling phosphorus retention capacity in
freshwater wetlands. Science 228:1424-1427.

Richardson, C. J. and P. Vaithiyanathan. 1995. Phosphorus sorption characteristics of
Everglades soils along a eutrophication gradient. Soil Science Society American
Journal 59:1782-1788.

Sallade, Y.E. and J.T. Sims. 1997. Phosphorus transformations in the soils of
Delaware's agricultural drainage ways: I. Phosphorus forms and sorption. J.
Environ. Qual. 26:1571-1579.


SASJump, version 5. 2002. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.









Schlichting A. and P. Leinweber. 2002. Effects of pretreatment on sequentially-
extracted phosphorus fractions from peat soil. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal.,
33:1617-1627.

Smith, S. M., S. Newman, P. B. Garrett and J. A. Leeds. 2001. Differential effects of
surface and peat fire on soil constituents in a degraded wetland of the northern
Florida Everglades. Journal of Environmental Quality 30:1998-2005.

South Florida Water Management District. 1992. Surface water improvement and
management plan for the Everglades: Supporting information document. SFWMD,
West Palm Beach, Fl.

Wade, D., J. Ewel and R. Hofstetter. 1980. Fire in South Florida Ecosystems. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service General Technical Report SE-17, p. 125,
Southeast Forest Experimental Station Asheville, North Carolina.

White, J. S., S. E. Bayley and P. J. Curtis. 2000. Soil storage of phosphorus in a
northern prairie wetland receiving municipal and agro-industrial wastewater.
Ecological Engineering 14:127-138.

Zhou, M., R.D. Rhue and W.G. Harris. 1997. Phosphorus sorption characteristics of Bh
and Bt horizons from sandy coastal plain soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 61:1364-
1369.

Zhou, M. and Y. Li. 2001. Phosphorus-sorption characteristics of calcareous soils and
limestone from the Southern Everglades and adjacent farmlands. Soil Science
Society American Journal 65:1404-1412.















BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

I received my B.S. in biology from San Diego State University in June of 1997,

where I worked as an undergraduate research assistant in the Pacific Estuarine Research

Lab on tidal wetland restoration projects. In July of 1997, I began working at the South

Florida Water Management District as an Environmental Scientist on Everglades

restoration projects and wetland assessments. I completed the University of Florida's

graduate certification in environmental policy and management in spring 2003, and then

was accepted into the Soil and Water Science Department's distance education program

for a master's in environmental science in which I will graduate spring 2006.