24
A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area Ian Yesilonis Richard Pouyat

A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

  • Upload
    zeheb

  • View
    36

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area. Ian Yesilonis Richard Pouyat. Citywide results. P, K, and bulk density differentiated forest from residential soils possibly due to management. Ca and pH differentiated residential grass from other turf grass cover types. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra-

and a sub-urban area

Ian YesilonisRichard Pouyat

Page 2: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

Citywide results

• P, K, and bulk density differentiated forest from residential soils possibly due to management.

• Ca and pH differentiated residential grass from other turf grass cover types.

• Cu, Pb, and Zn were related to automobile sources and not related to TRI sites.

• Heavy metals were not explained by land use/cover at citywide scale.

Page 3: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

Neighborhood scale• Ultra urban inner city neighborhood (WS263)• Suburban neighborhood (Cub Hill)

Page 4: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

Methods

• The 0-5 cm soil samples were taken randomly stratified by an Ecotope land use/cover classification system.

• The soils were digested with a strong acid.

Page 5: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

High residential density watershed

Low residential density watershed

1 km radius

Sampling design

Page 6: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area
Page 7: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area
Page 8: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

• Mostly constructed

Watershed 263 Ecotope map

Page 9: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

ResultsC: ConstructedD: DisturbedOM: Ornamental

Mixed vegetationOP: Ornamental Perennial

Page 10: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

WS 263 is higher in most soil metal and nutrient concentrations for each Ecotope class.

Page 11: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

Automobile by-products

Pb: 22, 120, 1700, 11, 56State average, Eco-SSL:plants, soil invertebrates, avian, and mammalian wildlife Cu: 20, 70, 80, 28, 51

Zn: 39

Page 12: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

Coal by-products

V: 63, (m) 280 Cr: 47.9, (m) Cr III 34, Cr IV 81

Page 13: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

Urban deposition of Calcium?

Lawn nutrients

Is the potassium from the surface geology, ie. Plagioclase feldspars?

Page 14: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

pH series

Increased management of young lawns?

Page 15: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

Opposite of what we expected!

Page 16: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

Conclusions• WS 263 had greater concentrations of Ca,

Zn, Pb, S, Cu, As, and Mn than Cub Hill.– The only metal of concern in WS 263 Pb.

• Cub Hill had greater concentrations of K.

• For the residential soils of Cub Hill Ca and pH were weakly correlated to age of residential development.

Page 17: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

Future Research

• Identify hot spots for accumulation of metals– Community awareness (intervention) – Directing mitigation efforts

• Understand relationship of metals to human exposure– Transport and movement– Source sink relationships

Page 18: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

Acknowledgements

• Thanks to the Cub Hill and WS263 residents who allowed us to take soil samples

• Ben Smith, Abe Kloze, Kate Donovan, and Laura Norris.

• Dave Nowak and Jeff Walton.

• Funding and in-kind support– USFS, BES, CUERE

Page 19: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area
Page 20: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

Cub Hill land use conversion from 1938 to 1996

Page 21: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

1938

Page 22: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

1943

Page 23: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

1953

Page 24: A comparison of soil characteristics of an ultra- and a sub-urban area

1996