Neonicotinoid pesticide and nitrate mixture removal and persistence in floating treatment wetlands.

Mesocosm and microcosm experiments were conducted to explore the applicability of floating treatment wetlands (FTWs), an ecologically based management technology, to remove neonicotinoid insecticides and nitrate from surface water. The mesocosm experiment evaluated three treatments in triplicate over a 21-d period. Floating treatment wetland mesocosms completely removed nitrate-N over the course of the experiment even when neonicotinoid insecticides were present. At the completion of the experiment, 79.6% of imidacloprid and degradation byproducts and 68.3% of thiamethoxam and degradation byproducts were accounted for in the water column. Approximately 3% of imidacloprid and degradation byproducts and 5.0% of thiamethoxam and degradation byproducts were observed in above-surface biomass, while ∼24% of imidacloprid and degradation byproducts, particularly desnitro imidacloprid, and <0.1% of thiamethoxam and degradation byproducts were found in the below surface biomass. Further, 1 yr after the experiments, imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, and degradation byproducts persisted in biomass but at lower concentrations in both the above- and below-surface biomass. Comparing the microbial communities of mature FTWs grown in the presence and absence of neonicotinoids, water column samples had similar low abundances of nitrifying Archaeal and bacterial amoA genes (below detection to 104  ml-1 ) and denitrifying bacterial nirK, nirS, and nosZ genes (below detection to 105  ml-1 ). Follow-up laboratory incubations found the highest denitrification potential activities in FTW plant roots compared with water column samples, and there was no effect of neonicotinoid addition (100 ng L-1 ) on potential denitrification activity. Based on these findings, (a) FTWs remove neonicotinoids from surface water through biomass incorporation, (b) neonicotinoids persist in biomass long-term (>1 yr after exposure), and (c) neonicotinoids do not adversely affect nitrate-N removal via microbial denitrification.

Yard waste compost as a stormwater protection treatment for construction sites.

Runoff water quality improvement from three yard waste compost erosion control treatments were compared with two conventional treatments and an untreated control on plots of 3:1 slope during two growing seasons, using natural events and simulated rainfall. Runoff volume, suspended solids, nutrients, biomass, turf shear strength, and turfgrass color scale were monitored. The most effective compost treatment, a 5-cm thick blown compost blanket, produced 12.7 times less runoff and 9.8 times less sediment load than a straw mat and silt fence treatment. The compost treatments generated eight times more biomass than the straw mat treatments. Root development was significantly better on the compost treatments based on turf shear strength measurements. Tilled-in compost was not as effective as a compost blanket at reducing sediment loss, particularly before the establishment of grass on the plot. The cost of compost treatments was similar to that of straw mat with silt fence treatments.