Cited by 114Urban Stormwater Management SolutionsUrban Heat Island MitigationPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts

Performance assessment of a street-drainage bioretention system

Chapman, Cameron, Horner, Richard R.·2010·Water Environment Research

Abstract

Event-based, flow-paced composite sampling was carried out at the inlet and outlet of a street-side bioretention facility in Seattle, Washington, to assess its ability to reduce street runoff quantity and pollutants. Over 2.5 years, 48 to 74% of the incoming runoff was lost to infiltration and evaporation. Outlet pollutant concentrations were significantly lower than those at the inlet for nearly all monitored constituents. In terms of mass, the system retained most of the incoming pollutants. Besides soluble reactive phosphorus (the mass of which possibly increased), dissolved copper was the least effectively retained; at least 58% of dissolved copper (and potentially as much as 79%) was captured by the system. Motor oil was removed most effectively, with 92 to 96% of the incoming motor oil not leaving the system. The results indicate that bioretention systems can achieve a high level of runoff retention and treatment in real-weather conditions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2175/106143009x426112

Cites

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?

  • A bioretention shoulder in Seattle removed 79% copper and 86% zinc.

    “A similar study by monitoring a bioretention shoulder in Seattle, Washington, consisting of washed gravel and a soil mixture, 70% sand and 30% organic compost, removed 79% of copper and 86% zinc [16].”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 21 · Cited by 114

Authors
Chapman, C., & Horner, R. R.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Chapman, Cameron
Venue
Water Environment Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-02
Volume
82
Issue
2
Pages
109-119
ISSN
  • 0043-1303 (ISSN-L)
  • 1061-4303
  • 1554-7531
OpenAlex
W2303610810
Cited by
114
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Water Environment Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Stormwater Management Solutions
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Heat Island Mitigation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Keywords
bioretention, road drainage, stormwater runoff, pollutant removal, infiltration, evaporation, soluble reactive phosphorus, copper, engine oil, urban stormwater treatment
MeSH terms
Copper, Environmental Monitoring, Petroleum, Phosphorus, Washington, Water Movements, Water Pollutants, Water Purification

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