Bioavailability of dissolved organic nitrogen and carbon from nine rivers in the eastern United States

143Citations
Citations of this article
163Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Dissolved organic nitrogen (DON) and carbon (DOC) often dominate the dissolved nitrogen and organic carbon fluxes from rivers, yet they are not considered to affect coastal water quality because of their assumed refractory nature. The objective of this study was to quantify DON and DOC bioavailability to bacteria in 9 rivers on the east coast of the United States during a 6 d dark bioassay experiment. Water was collected from the freshwater portion of a forest stream in New Jersey (Forest 17a), and from the Bass (New Jersey), Delaware (New Jersey), Hudson (New York), Altamaha (Georgia), Savannah (Georgia), Pocomoke (Maryland), Choptank (Maryland), and Peconic (New York) Rivers during base-flow conditions. DON concentrations ranged from 1 to 35 μM and comprised 8 to 94 % of the total dissolved nitrogen (TDN) in these rivers. Bioassay results indicate that 23% (±4) of the DON (2 ± 1 μM) was bioavailable in all the rivers except the Bass and Pocomoke, where no DON consumption was measured. Of the TDN consumed by bacteria, DON comprised 43 % (±6), demonstrating that DON is an important nitrogen source for bacteria. In contrast, only 4 % (±1) of DOC (12 ± 3 μM), was bioavailable in the 9 rivers. Percent-wise, 8 times more DON was consumed relative to DOC in 6 of the rivers, demonstrating that DON cycles faster than DOC. Overall, our study demonstrates that DON is an important part of the TDN pool that needs to be incorporated into coastal nitrogen loading budgets because it is bioavailable on the order of days. © Inter-Research 2006.

Author supplied keywords

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wiegner, T. N., Seitzinger, S. P., Glibert, P. M., & Bronk, D. A. (2006). Bioavailability of dissolved organic nitrogen and carbon from nine rivers in the eastern United States. Aquatic Microbial Ecology, 43(3), 277–287. https://doi.org/10.3354/ame043277

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free