English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Two different in situ spectrophotometers are compared that were used in thefield to determine nitrate-nitrogen (NO3-N) concentrations attwo distinct spring discharge sites. One sensor was a double wavelengthspectrophotometer (DWS) and the other a multiple wavelengthspectrophotometer (MWS). The objective of the study was to review thehardware options, determine ease of calibration, accuracy, influence ofadditional substances and to assess positive and negative aspects of the twosensors as well as troubleshooting and trade-offs. Both sensors aresufficient to monitor highly time-resolved NO3-N concentrationsin emergent groundwater. However, the chosen path length of the sensors hada significant influence on the sensitivity and the range of detectableNO3-N. The accuracy of the calculated NO3-N concentrationsof the sensors can be affected if the content of additional substances suchas turbidity, organic matter, nitrite or hydrogen carbonate significantlyvaries after the sensors have been calibrated to a particular water matrix.The MWS offers more possibilities for calibration and error detection butrequires more expertise compared with the DWS

Technical Note: Field experiences using UV/VIS sensors for high-resolution monitoring of nitrate in groundwater