Premium
Phosphorus Indices: Why We Need to Take Stock of How We Are Doing
Author(s) -
Sharpley Andrew,
Beegle Doug,
Bolster Carl,
Good Laura,
Joern Brad,
Ketterings Quirine,
Lory John,
Mikkelsen Rob,
Osmond Deanna,
Vadas Peter
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
journal of environmental quality
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.888
H-Index - 171
eISSN - 1537-2537
pISSN - 0047-2425
DOI - 10.2134/jeq2012.0040
Subject(s) - soil loss , environmental science , nutrient management , stock (firearms) , index (typography) , phosphorus , water quality , statistics , computer science , environmental resource management , nutrient , mathematics , surface runoff , ecology , chemistry , engineering , mechanical engineering , organic chemistry , world wide web , biology
Many states have invested significant resources to identify components of their Phosphorus (P) Index that reliably estimate the relative risk of P loss and incentivize conservation management. However, differences in management recommendations and manure application guidelines for similar field conditions among state P Indices, coupled with minimal reductions in the extent of P‐impaired surface waters and soil test P (STP) levels, led the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to revise the 590 Nutrient Management Standard. In preparation for this revision, NRCS requested that a review of the scientific underpinnings and accuracy of current P Indices be undertaken. They also sought to standardize the interpretation and management implications of P Indices, including establishment of ratings above which P applications should be curtailed. Although some states have initiated STP thresholds above which no application of P is allowed, STP alone cannot define a site's risk of P loss. Phosphorus Indices are intended to account for all of the major factors leading to P loss. A rigorous evaluation of P Indices is needed to determine if they are directionally and magnitudinally correct. Although use of observed P loss data under various management scenarios is ideal, such data are spatially and temporally limited. Alternatively, the use of a locally validated water quality model that has been shown to provide accurate estimates of P loss may be the most expedient option to conduct Index assessments in the short time required by the newly revised 590 Standard.