Cited by 111

Multiyear water quality performance and mass accumulation of PCBs, mercury, methylmercury, copper, and microplastics in a bioretention rain garden

Gilbreath, Alicia, McKee, Lester, Shimabuku, Ila, Lin, Diana, Werbowski, Larissa M., Zhu, Xia, Grbic, Jelena, Rochman, Chelsea·2019·Journal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment

Abstract

A multiyear water quality performance study of a bioretention rain garden located along a major urban transit corridor east of San Francisco Bay was conducted to assess the efficacy of bioretention rain gardens to remove pollutants. Based on data collected in three years between 2012 and 2017, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and suspended sediment concentrations (SSCs) were reduced (>90%), whereas total mercury (Hg), methylmercury (MeHg), and copper (Cu) were moderately captured (37%, 49%, and 68% concentration reduction, respectively). Anthropogenic microparticles including microplastics were retained by the bioretention rain garden, decreasing in concentration from 1.6 particles/L to 0.16 particles/L. Based on subsampling at 50- and 150-mm intervals in soil cores from two areas of the unit, PCBs, Hg, and MeHg were all present at the highest concentrations in the upper 100 mm in the surface media layers. Based on residential screening concentrations, the surface media layer near the inlet would need to be removed and replaced annually, whereas the rest of the unit would need replacement every 8 years. The results of this study support the use of bioretention in the San Francisco Bay Area as one management option for meeting load reductions required by San Francisco Bay total maximum daily loads, and provide useful data for supporting decisions about media replacement and overall maintenance schedules.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1061/jswbay.0000883

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gilbreath, A., McKee, L., Shimabuku, I., Lin, D., Werbowski, L. M., Zhu, X., Grbic, J., & Rochman, C.
Affiliations
  • Environmental Scientist, Clean Water Program, San Francisco Estuary Institute, 4911 Central Ave., Richmond, CA 94804 (corresponding author).
  • Senior Environmental Scientist, Clean Water Program, San Francisco Estuary Institute, 4911 Central Ave., Richmond, CA 94804.
  • Environmental Analyst, Clean Water Program, San Francisco Estuary Institute, 4911 Central Ave., Richmond, CA 94804.
  • Environmental Scientist, Clean Water Program, San Francisco Estuary Institute, 4911 Central Ave., Richmond, CA 94804.
  • Undergraduate Student, Dept. of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Univ. of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M53 3B2.
  • Graduate Student, Dept. of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Univ. of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M53 3B2.
  • Research Assistant, Dept. of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Univ. of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M53 3B2.
  • Assistant Professor, Dept. of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Univ. of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M53 3B2.
Venue
Journal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment
Published
2019-11
Volume
5
Issue
4
ISSN
2379-6111
Cited by
111
References
2
Language
en

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