The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Field Evaluation of Bioretention Indicator Bacteria Sequestration in Wilmington, North Carolina
Abstract
Although bioretention has been shown to remove or sequester a wide range of pollutants, relatively little study has been performed to evaluate its ability to sequester indicator bacteria. Two adjacent bioretention areas in Wilmington, North Carolina, were studied. The primary difference in the design of the two systems was soil depth. One bioretention cell was constructed with 25 cm of fill soil (Bioretention-S) and one with 60 cm of fill soil (Bioretention-D). The systems performed differently for indicator bacteria on the basis of multiple performance evaluation metrics. Bioretention-D showed concentration reductions of 70% and 89% for E. coli and enterococci, respectively. Effluent concentrations from Bioretention-D compared well to US EPA target values and other studies in literature. Conversely, Bioretention-S showed concentration “reductions” of -119% and -102% for E. coli and enterococci, respectively. Effluent concentrations from Bioretention-S were substantially higher than USEPA target values and other studies in literature. Multiple factors were evaluated to determine the cause of performance differences between the two cells. The 25 cm of fill soil in Bioretention-S exhibited poorer runoff detention, likely because of higher soil water flux and decreased contact time relative to Bioretention-D. These differences seemingly led to diminished indicator bacteria sequestration. The results of this study suggest soil depth and hydraulic loading are important design para…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The increase in TC concentration in the bioretention system was consistent with other studies where coliforms increased from the inlet to the outlet of a bioretention system.
“The increase in TC concentration in the bioretention system was consistent with what other studies have found, where coliforms increased from the inlet to the outlet of a bioretention system”
From Green Infrastructure in Series to Treat Stormwater Runoff from a Highway Overpass (2024) · cites this paper as Hathaway et al. 2011
Possible mechanisms for the TC increase in bioretention include high infiltration rates minimizing contact time or media staying wet for longer periods allowing bacteria to reproduce prior to sampling.
“possibly due to high infiltration rates minimizing contact time (Garbrecht et al. 2009; Hathaway et al. 2011) or media staying wet for longer periods, allowing bacteria to reproduce prior to sampling (Mahmoud et al. 2019).”
From Green Infrastructure in Series to Treat Stormwater Runoff from a Highway Overpass (2024) · cites this paper as Hathaway et al. 2011
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 35
- 10.2166/wh.2006.001 · DOI
- 10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000280 · DOI
- Burton G. A., 2002, Storm water effects handbook: A toolbox for watershed managers, scientists, and engineers
- 10.2166/wh.2006.018b · DOI
- 10.1071/AR9800547 · DOI
- Coyne M. S., 1999, Introduction to soil microbiology
- 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(2009)135:3(109) · DOI
- 10.2175/106143005X94376 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1128/AEM.68.3.1165-1172.2002 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11270-005-8266-8 · DOI
- 10.1080/10643380390814497 · DOI
- Fox G. A., 2008, Earthworms and E. coli, Resour.: Eng. Technol. Sustainable World, 15, 22
- 10.13031/2013.26841 · DOI · Paper page
- Hartel P. G. (2005). “Survival and regrowth of fecal enterococci in desiccated and rewetted sediments.” Proc. 2005 Georgia Water Resources Conf. The Univ. of Georgia Athens GA.
- 10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0000378 · DOI
- 10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000107 · DOI
- 10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000278 · DOI
- 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2006)132:6(600) · DOI
- 10.1081/ESE-200048264 · DOI
- 10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000022 · DOI · Paper page
- Jones S. H. Roseen R. Wildey R. A. Maimes J. Houle J. and Ballestero T. (2008). “Enterococci populations in conventional manufactured and LID storm water treatment systems.” Proc. World Environmental and Water Resources Congress ASCE Reston VA. · DOI
- 10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000040 · DOI
- 10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000026 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2009)14:4(407) · DOI
- 10.13031/2013.23630 · DOI
- 10.2166/wst.2007.752 · DOI
- 10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0000006 · DOI
- Pochon J., 1954, Manuel technique d’analyse microbiologique du sol
- 10.3141/1984-15 · DOI
- 10.13031/2013.23636 · DOI
- 10.2166/wh.2006.0009 · DOI
- 10.2134/jeq1992.00472425002100040011x · DOI
- Teledyne Isco, 2006, Isco open channel flow measurement handbook
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2000). “Low impact development (LID): A literature review.” Rep. No. EPA-841-B-00-005 Office of Water Washington DC.
- 10.2175/106143010X12609736966441 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Green Infrastructure in Series to Treat Stormwater Runoff from a Highway Overpass
Bodus, B., Branca, J., & McDonald, W. (2024) · Journal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment · doi:10.1061/jswbay.sweng-569 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Hathaway, J. M., Hunt, W. F., Graves, A. K., & Wright, J. D.
- Affiliations
- North Carolina State University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Environmental Engineering
- Published
- 2011-12
- Volume
- 137
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1103-1113
- ISSN
- 0733-9372 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-7870
- OpenAlex
- W1987975799
- Cited by
- 54
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 3.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Environmental Engineering (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- North Carolina State University
- Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Stormwater Management Solutions
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Fecal contamination and water quality
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
- Keywords
- bioretention, indicator bacteria, Escherichia coli, Enterococcus, soil depth, fill soil, hydraulic loading rate, soil water flux, contact time, stormwater treatment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
