United States
             Environmental Protection
             Agency
             Great Lakes National
             Program Office
             536 South Clark Street
             Chicago, Illinois 60605
EPA-905/9-79-005-C
May 1981
Volume III
coa
xvEPA
Maumee River
Pilot Watershed Study
Continued Watershed
Monitoring (1978-80)

-------
                                                  EPA-905/9-79-005-C
                                                  May  1981
   THE  MAUMEE  RIVER BASIN PILOT  WATERSHED  STUDY
                    Volume III
     Continued Watershed Monitoring (1978-80)
                        by


                  Terry J. Logan
              Principal  Investigator
                (Grant R005353 01)

   Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210
Ohio Agricultural  Research and Development Center
               Wooster,  Ohio 44691
                       for
       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                Chicago, Illinois
                 Project Officer
                Ralph Christensen
       Great Lakes National Program Office
       GREAT LAKES NATIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE
  U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, REGION V
              536 SOUTH CLARK STREET
             CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60605

-------
                               DISCLAIMER









This report has been reviewed by the Region V Office, U. S. Environ-




mental Protection Agency and approved for publication.  Approval




does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and




policies of the U.  S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does men-




tion of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or




recommendation for use.

-------
                          ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS




     Work on this project was funded by a grant  from the Great  Lakes




National Program Office,  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Region V,




Chicago, with Mr. Ralph Christensen, Project Officer.




     Special thanks are due to Dr. Tom Oloya for his work on soluble




phosphorus transport, and to Mr. Bob Rettig for  his technical support in




the field.  The support of the staff at the Hoytville Branch of the Ohio




Agricultural Research and Development Center is  also gratefully acknowledged.
                                 iii

-------
                                ABSTRACT




      Monitoring, which was  started  in 1975 as part of  the PLUARG




 Task C  Pilot Watershed Study  in the Maumee River Basin of Ohio, was




 continued  in 1978-1980 on three small watersheds in Defiance County and




 eight plots in Wood  County.   Runoff and tile drainage  were monitored for




 flow, suspended solids, total P, filtered reactive P(FRP), NH3-N and N03-N.




      Runoff and soil loss (4388 kg/ha) continued to be greatest on




 the  poorly drained Paulding soil compared to other sites with spring-




 seeded  crops, but winter wheat on the Paulding site greatly reduced




 runoff  in 1979 and there was no runoff with wheat in 1980.  Wheat in




 1980  on the other two Defiance watersheds did not affect runoff.  No




 till  soybeans on the Blount soil in 1978 reduced erosion to near zero




 (66 kg/ha) compared  to previous years with fall-plowed soybeans where




 sediment yields ranged from 900 to 2500 kg/ha.  Runoff volume with no till,




 however, was not measurably different than with fall plowing and filtered




 reactive P loads with no till were no different than fall-plowed FRP loads.




     Tile drainage had no effect on runoff volume from Hoytville soil,  and




no till contineud to have no effect on soil loss compared to fall plowing




on this soil where soil losses have been low (< 750 kg/ha) throughout the




study.  Phosphate fertilizer broadcast in the fall on the no till and fall-




plowed Hoytville plots every year from 1975-1979 steadily increased total and




FRP concentrations and loads in this period.   FRP loads decreased rapidly in




1980 after fall fertilization was terminated.
                                    iv

-------
                            TABLE OF CONTENTS


                                                                         Page

DISCLAIMER ..............................      *•*

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...........................      ll:L
ABS TRACT
LIST OF TABLES ............................      vi

LIST OF FIGURES ............................      viii
1.  INTRODUCTION
    1 . 1  Study Approach ........................      3
    1.2  Study Methods ........................      3
         1.21  Monitoring Sites in Defiance County
         1.22  Surface Runoff and Tile Drainage
               Measurement - Defiance County Sites
         1.23  Surface Runoff and Tile Drainage
               Measurement - Hoytville Plots
         1.24  Analysis of Watershed and Plot
               Water Samples
2.  RESULTS ..............................     27

    2.1  Precipitation and Flow  (1978-1980) ..............     27
    2.2  Soil and Nutrient. Losses  (1978-1980) .............     29

         2.21  Hammersmith Roselms (111) ...............     29
         2.22  Heisler Blount (401, 402) ...............     31
         2.23  Speiser Paulding  (501, 502) ..............     31
         2.24  The Hoytville Plots (611-681, 612-682) .........     36

     2 . 3   Seasonal  Tr^dj_gJ_Precip_jjatj.on,  Flow and Soil Loss
          (1975-1980)T~. ' .......................     45
     2.4   Crop Yields on Hoytville Tillage  Plots (1975-1980)  .....     50

 3.   DISCUSSION .......................... •  •     52

 4.   LITERATURE CITED .........................     56
                                    v

-------
                                   LIST OF TABLES
Table Number                                                                  Page

      1.   Characteristics of the Defiance County watersheds (111,  401,  501)
          and Hoytville plots monitored in the period 1978-1980	   5

      2.   Summary of crop management  practices on Hoytville plots  (1977-1980).  25

      3.   Precipitation and flow from Defiance watersheds  and Hoytville plots
          (1978-1980)	28

      4.   Concentrations and pollutant loads  from Hammersmith Roselms  (111)
          surface runoff 	  30

      5.   Concentrations and pollutant loads  from Heisler  Blount  (401)  surface
          runoff	32

      6.   Concentrations and pollutant loads  from Heisler  Blount  (402)  tile
          drainage	33

      7.   Concentrations and pollutant loads  from Speiser  Paulding (501)  sur-
          face  runoff	34

      8.   Concentrations and pollutant loads  from Speiser  Paulding (502)  tile
          drainage	35

      9.   Concentrations and pollutant loads  in  runoff from Hoytville plots
          (621, 671).   Plots were no  tilled and  tile  drained.   Mean of  two
          plots	37

     10.   Concentrations and pollutant loads  in  tile  drainage  from Hoytville
          plots (622, 672).   Plots were no tilled  and tile  drained.  Mean of
          two plots	3g

     11.   Concentrations and pollutant loads  in  runoff from Hoytville plots
          (631, 681).   Plots were no  tilled with no tile drainage.  Mean  of
          two plots	39

     12.   Concentrations  and pollutant loads  in runoff from Hoytville plots
          (641, 661).   Plots  were fall plowed and  tile drained.  Mean of  two
          plots	40

     13.   Concentrations  and pollutant loads  in tile drainage  from Hoytville
          plots (642, 662).   Plots were fall  plowed and tile drained.  Mean of
          two plots	41

     14.   Concentrations  and  pollutant loads  in runoff from Hoytville plots
          (611, 651).   Plots were fall plowed with no tile  drainage.  Mean of
          two plots	42

     15.   Changes  in concentration and unit area loads in  runoff of total and
          filtered reactive  phosphate with fertilization of fall-plowed and no
          till  Hoytville soil (1975-1980)	44


                                          vi

-------
16.   Crop yields (bu/acre) on the Hoytville plots for the period 1975-
     1980.  Mean of two plots 	
51
                                    vii

-------
                                    LIST OF FIGURES


                                                                                Page
Figure Number

      1.   Watershed and plot locations  in the Maumer  River Basin.
      2.   Hammersmith Roselms  watershed.   Heavy  line  denotes  the monitored
          area	      7

      3.   Hammersmith Roselms  watershed showing  the sampling  shelter	      8

      4.   Heisler Blount  watershed.   Heavy line  denotes  the monitored area
          and dotted lines are tile	     10

      5.   Heisler Blount  watershed  looking downslope	     11

      6.   Speiser Paulding watershed.   Heavy  line  denotes  the monitored  area
          and dotted  lines are tile	     12

      7.   Speiser Paulding watershed  showing  the sampling  shelter  	     13

      8.   Sediment drop box used  to collect runoff from  Defiance County  water-
          sheds  	     2.5

      9.   System for  monitoring and sampling  surface  runoff at Defiance  County
          watersheds	     16

     10.   Sample containers for runoff  and tile  drainage at Defiance  County
          watersheds	     17

     11.   System for  monitoring and sampling  tile  flow	     20

     12.   Runoff and  tile  drainage plots at OARDC  research station, Hoytville,
          Ohio	     22

     13.   Analytical  scheme for water samples  	     26

     14.   Monthly  precipitation,  flow and  soil loss from Roselms watershed
          (1975-1980)	     46

     15.   Monthly  precipitation,  flow and  soil loss from Blount watershed
          (1975-1980)	     47

     16.   Monthly  precipitation,  flow and  soil loss from Paulding watershed
          (1975-1980)	     48

     17.   Monthly  precipitation,  flow and  soil loss from Hoytville  (621, 622)
          plot (1975-1980).	     49
                                        viii

-------
                                 -1-
1.  INTRODUCTION




     The Maumee River was chosen by PLUARG to be one of four pilot water-




sheds to be studied on the U.  S. side of the Great Lakes drainage basin




as part of Task C - pilot watershed studies.  Since there was already an




ongoing PL-92-500 Sec. 108 demonstration project in Black Creek basin,  an




Indiana tributary to the Maumee, the Task C project was directed to the Ohio




portion of the Maumee to supplement the work being done in Black Creek.




     The objectives of PLUARG were to determine the effects of prevailing




land use practices on pollution entering the Great Lakes.  Specifically,




the PLUARG Task C objectives were to answer the following questions:




     1.  From what sources and from what causes (under what conditions,




         management practices) are pollutants contributed to surface  and




         ground water?




     2.  What is the extent of pollutant contributions and what are the




         unit area loadings by season from a given land use or practice




         to surface or ground water?




     3.  To what degree are pollutants transmitted from sources to




         boundary waters?




     4.  Are remedial measures required?  What are they and how effective




         might they be?




     5.  Were deficiencies in technology identified?  If so, what is




         recommended?




     The Maumee River Basin is primarily agricultural in land use,  and  the




intensive crop production in the Basin accounts for most of the sediment




and a major part of the nitrogen and phosphorus delivered to Lake Erie




(Corps of Engineers, 1975;  Sonzogni et^ a_l,  1978).   Because of the importance




of agriculture as a source of pollutants in the Maumee Basin, it was  decided

-------
                                  -2-
 to place emphasis  in the  Task C  project  on  soil and nutrient  loss  from




 small agricultural watersheds and  on  specialized  studies  on sediment




 transport.




      Specific  objectives  of  this study were:




      1.   To  determine the effects  of  land use practices on the loss of




          sediment  and associated chemicals  from representative small




          agricultural watersheds in the  Basin and to compare  these




          data  with downstream reference  samples.




      2.   To  study  and determine  the physical, chemical, and mineralogical




          properties  of major  soils in the Basin and relate these data




          to  their  susceptibility to erosion and fluvial transport.




      3.   To  determine the physical, chemical, and mineralogical properties




          of  suspended  sediments  and bottom sediments in order to identify




          fluvial transport mechanisms and to evaluate  equilibrium




          stabilities  of minerals in suspended and bottom sediments.




     4.  To determine  phosphate  sorption-desorption and precipitation




          interactions with sediment characteristics and concentration




         levels.




     5.  To determine heavy metals leaving small agricultural watersheds




         as contrasted to downstream reference sources.




     The results  of this study (1975-1977)  have been published previously




(Logan and Stiefel, 1979;  Logan,  1979) and the reader  should  consult them




for more complete details of the  study results.   This  report  presents  the




results of the continued monitoring of three of the Defiance  County water-




sheds and the Hoytville plots for the  period 1978-1980.

-------
                                   -3-
    1.1  Study Approach




     The basic approach of this study was to measure the generation of




sediment and nutrients from intensively cultivated cropland under prevailing




management practices.  The study investigated the differences in pollutant




generation on several of the major soils of the Maumee Basin and determined




the effects of season and soil characterist'ics on sediment and nutrient




generation.  Pollutant transport by tile drainage was also studied because




of the extensive use of underground tile for drainage in the Basin.




    1.2  Study Methods




     Five sites were chosen in Defiance County on four major soils of




the Basin (Figure 1 and Table 1) ranging from 0.6 to 3.2 hectares in the




area.  Surface runoff was monitored at all.sites and tile drainage on the




Paulding and Blount sites.  A continuous-flow monitoring system and




integrated sampler were used  so that all events were monitored and sampled.




The sampling period was from January, 1978 - May 1980.  Rainfall was




monitored at each site.  At the OARDC branch research station in Wood County,




eight plots (0.04 ha) on Hoytville soil were subjected to a number of




different tillage treatments, and runoff and tile drainage were monitored.




    1.21  Monitoring Sites in Defiance County




     Five small agronomic sites were chosen in Defiance County to monitor




soil and nutrient loss under prevailing crop management practices.  The




sites represent four of the more important series in the Basin:  Paulding,




Blount, Roselms and Lenawee (similar to Latty).  The sites were selected




with the following criteria:




     1.  Topography was typical for that series




     2.  The watershed was dominated by a single series

-------
  The Maumee River Basin
   Water samples
   Watersheds
1 — Hammersmith Roselms
2 — Crites  Roselms
3 — Lenewee
4 — Blount
5 — Paulding
6 — Hoytville Plots
•fc— Continuous mass
     transport stations
          10   15  20   25
MICHIGAN
	•	
OHIO
 ir~i    *
       Figure 1.  Watershed and plot locations in  the Maumee River Basin.

-------
Table 1.  Characteristics of the Defiance County watersheds (111, 401,  501) and Hoytville plots monitored in the  period
          1978-1980.
Site
Code
111
501
502
611-681
612-682
401
402
Dominant
Soil Series
Roselms
Paulding
Paulding
Hoytville
Hoytville
Blount
Blount
Soil Taxonomy
Aerie Ochraqualf
Typic Haplaquept
Typic Haplaquept
Mollic Ochraqualf
Mollic Ochraqualf
Aerie Ochraqualf
Aerie Ochraqualf
Physiographic
Region
Lake Plain
Lake Plain
Lake Plain
Lake Plain
Lake Plain
Till Plain
Till Plain
Parent
Material
Lacustrine Clays
Lacustrine Clays
Lacustrine Clays
Clay Till
Clay Till
Clay Loam Till
Clay Loam Till
Slope Drainage
(%) Area
(ha)
3-16 3.2
1 1.0
0.1
< 1 0.04
0.04
3-4 0.9
0.9
Drainage Systems
Monitored
Surface Runoff
Surface Runoff
Subsurface Tile
Surface Runoff
Subsurface Tile
Surface Runoff
Subsurface Tile





i
Y1

-------
                                    -6-
      3.   The watershed _could be defined hydrologically




      4.   There were no septic  tank or livestock waste discharges within




          the watershed




      5.   Cooperation  from the  landowner was available




      6.   Site was accessible from the road, had adequate flow outlet,




          and electrical service could be brought to the site.




      Using  these criteria, a large number of sites were examined and five




were  selected.  These were described in detail by Logan and Stiefel  (1979)




in  their  report on the 1975-77 monitoring period.  In the 1978-80 period




reported  here, only the Hammersmith Roselms (111), Heisler Blount (401, 402)




and Speiser Paulding  (501, 502) watersheds and the Hoytville plots  (60X)




were  monitored.  A detailed description of the properties of the watershed




soils has been previously given by Logan (1979).




      Table 1 summarizes the site characteristics and Figure 1 identifies




their location.  A more detailed description of each site is given next.




A 3-digit code was used to identify the sites and for identification of




samples from each site:




     First digit:   1-6 identifies the primary site




      Second digit:   0-8 identifies the sub-site within the primary site




     Third digit:   1 refers to surface runoff and 2 to tile drainage, which




                   were monitored separately.




     Hammersmith Roselms (111);  This site  is located in the central area




of Defiance County and in the lake plain.   The soil and plot map is  given




in Figure 2, and the area is  shown in Figure 3.   The drainage area is 3.2 ha




(8.0 acres)  and is composed of  Roselms on most of the area with Broughton




on the steep slopes.   The watershed  has  a well-defined drainageway (Figure 3),

-------
                                -7-
   Hammersmith Roselms (10X)
   Location: Noble township, T4N, R48, Sec. 6, NW*/4
            Abandoned Road
          BvB - Broughton scl
         BvC2 - Broughton scl
         BwDa - Broughton Clay
            Pa - Paulding Clay
                       RsA - Roselms scl
                       RsB - Roselms scl
                     RsB2 - Roselms scl
Figure  2.
Layout  of Hammersmith Roselms watershed.
the monitored area).
1 inch = 165 feet
(Heavy line denotes

-------
                                  -8-
              ^^^^^&^^^^*^j^v^^
A:     Sampling shelter.  Front  end  is  open to  allow runoff to enter the
       sediment drop box.

B, C:  Component plots on different  slope positions, showing the V-shaped
       flumes.

Figure 3.  Hammersmith Roselms watershed showing the sampling shelter.

-------
and the monitoring system is placed at the point where the drainageway exits




the watershed.  Slopes vary from 1-3% on the more level part of the water-




shed to as high as 15 % where the landscape breaks into the drainageway.




     Heisler Blount (401, 402):   This site is located in the northwest




corner of Defiance County and is in the till plain region of the Maumee




River Basin.  The soil and plot map is given in Figure 4 and the watershed




is illustrated in Figure 5.  The area is bermed on the upslope perimeter




and on the lower side to channel the flow toward the flume.  The upper




part of the site is Blount loam while the lower end is Mermill loam, which




represents the unconsolidated soil eroded from the top of the slope and




deposited downslope.  The surface drainage area (401) is 0.8 ha (2.1 acres).




A previously installed tile system was also monitored (402), and the drainage




area has been estimated to be between 2 and 4 acres.  The tile drainage




pattern shown in the plot diagram (dotted lines) (Figure 4) is only




speculative.




     Speiser Paulding  (501, 502):  This site is located in the southcentral




area of Defiance County in the lake plain region.  The soil and plot map is




given in Figure 6 and the area is illustrated in Figure 7.  The major part




of the plot is occupied by Paulding-Roselms clay, a series which has all the




characteristics of a typical Paulding clay but whose clay content is minimal




for Paulding.  About a third of the plot is Paulding clay itself.  The surface-




drained area  (501) is 0.9 ha (2.5 acres) and was defined by throwing up a berm.




This soil is normally surface-drained by using shallow field ditches, and




in this instance, the ditches were used to carry surface runoff to the




sampler.  Three tile drains were installed 12.7 m apart and 1 m deep.

-------
                                 -10-
         Heisler Blount (40X)
         Location: Farmer township, T5N. R2E, Sec. 19, NW*/4
               BnA - Blount loam
               BnB - Blount loam
               GIB - Glynwood loam
Md - Mermill loam
Pm - Pewamo silty clay loam
                                                    1 inch = 165 feet
Figure  4.  Layout of Heisler Blount  watershed (Heavy line denotes the
          monitored area and dotted lines are tile.)

-------
                                  -11-
Figure 5.  Heisler Blount watershed looking downslope.

-------
                               -12-
                  Speiser Paulding (SOX)
                  Location: Delaware township,
                  T4N, R3E, Sec. 15. SWV4
                   Pa - Paulding clay
                 RsA - Paulding - Roselms clay
                                          1 inch = 165 feet
Figure 6.  Layout  of  Speiser Paulding watershed (heavy line denotes
          monitored  area and dotted lines are tile.)

-------
                                  -13-
Figure 7.  Speiser Paulding watershed showing the sampling shelter.

-------
                                   -14-
 The  central  tile,  55.7  m (220  feet),  was monitored with  a  drainage  area  of




 0.09 ha  (0.23 acres).




     1-22   Surface Runoff and Tile Drainage Measurement - Defiance County Sites




      Surface Runoff:  It was decided  early in the development of this




 research  that sophisticated instrumentation of the sites in Defiance




 County was not feasible or warranted.  A number of physical restraints




 guided the selection of monitoring devices:  both small and large events




 must be monitored; equipment would have to be automatic because events




 on small  areas are very rapid and the sites had to be serviced by a single




 technician;  it was important to be able to operate in the winter because




 much of the  runoff occurs in the initial storms after thawing in the early




 spring; there was a general lack of hydraulic head at all sites.  The




 system that was developed had the following basic principle:  the runoff was




 channeled over a drop structure and a known fraction of the flow was inter-




 cepted.  The intercepted flow was then passed over a Coshocton wheel, which




 intercepted another fraction.   This water then discharged into a sump.  A




 sump pump of known discharge rate (gallons per minute) was activated when




water in the sump reached a given level.  The pump was connected to a timer,




which recorded time of pumping.  The water was pumped up into a container




 from which a sample could be taken.   By knowing the fraction of total




runoff intercepted and the pump rate and time of pumping, total runoff in




a given interval was calculated.   The sample taken from the pump discharge




represented runoff for that interval.   Samples were taken after each event.




     A diagram of the equipment used is given in Figures 8, 9 and 10.




Figure 8 shows a standard SCS  concrete drop-box,  which is used to carry




runoff from surface drains to  the stream or drainage ditch without causing

-------
                                    -15-
                                              •fry^f ^ * t^sm .
                                               ""'"•*'/^kjl
               V
Figure 8.   Sediment drop box used to  collect runoff from Defiance County
            watersheds.

-------
                                 -16-
  A:  Variable  slit  flume which diverts  fraction of runoff into Goshocton
      wheel  (B).

  C:  Sump collects  discharge  from Coshocton wheel; discharge is then
      pumped into sample container (Figure  13).
Figure 9.  System for monitoring and sampling  surface  runoff  at Defiance
           County watersheds.

-------
                                 -17-
    A:  Sump for collecting runoff.  Contains sump pump which discharges into
        sample container (B).

    C:  Sample container for tile drainage.
Figure 10.  Sample containers for runoff and tile drainage at  Defiance
            County watersheds.

-------
                                  -18-
undue erosion of the bank.  A similar structure was used at all five




sites in Defiance County.  The perimeter of the box was levelled so that




flow would be uniform around it.  A flume with adjustable vertical slit




(Figure 9) was bolted to the front rim of the drop-box.  The runoff from




the slit fell over a Coshocton wheel (Figure 9) and then from the Coshocton




wheel into a sump which was bolted to the floor of the drop-box (Figure 9).




The runoff was pumped by a "Haynes Demon Drainer" submersible pump.  This




particular model was used because it would pump to near dryness and this




prevented an accumulation of sediment in the sump.  Recovery of sediment




was tested in the laboratory during the development and calibration of this




equipment and was found to be acceptable.  The pump was activated by




electrodes set to turn on when approximately 0.1 inch of runoff was recieved,




The pump could also be activated manually.  The pump was connected to a




timer, which could either accumulate pumping time or be reset between events,




The runoff was pumped into a 20-gallon plastic garbage can with a fitted




lid (Figure 10).  After each event, a subsample (usually 1 gallon) was




taken from the container by a faucet at the bottom after thorough mixing.




The remaining sample was discarded.  The entire system was housed in a




shed open only at the front, where the drop-box faced the field.  The




equipment was winterized by the use of heat lamps directed onto the




Coshocton wheel and mounted in the sump and garbage lids.   Heating tape




was used for all pipes.   Even during the extremely low temperatures of




1977,  the system never failed to operate during winter events.




     Tile drainage.  In all cases, a single tile line was monitored,




except for the Blount site (402),  where a small tile system was monitored




by intercepting the main at the point where it discharged into  the drainage

-------
                                  -19-
ditch.  The tile was usually at a depth of 1 meter,  and a specially




constructed fiberglas sump was set into the ground in the same sampling




shelter used for surface runoff.   The sump (Figure 11)  intercepted the




tile and collected all discharge.  As in the case of surface runoff,  a




calibrated sump pump was used to pump the water out of  the sump.   A




timer was used as before to measure pumping time, and the pump was activated




at a given water level by electrode;  it could also be activated manually.




An orifice inserted into the discharge pipe from the pump delivered a sample




of the water to a 20-gallon plastic garbage can, where  it was subsampled




as described previously.  This sample was considered to be representative




of the tile flow for a given time interval, since all of the flow was




sampled.  The amount of sample taken by the orifice was adjusted by a valve.




     Sampling Handling and Processing - All sites in Defiance County were




serviced by a technician every 48 hours or sooner if significant precipitation




occurred.  A 1-gallon subsample of the sample in the garbage can was taken




after thorough mixing and the remainder discarded.  Sumps were pumped dry




manually after subsampling, time of pumping was recorded and rainfall at the




site was measured from a manual rain gauge.  Samples were stored in a




refrigerator at 4° C at field headquarters until they could be transported




to the laboratory at Columbus.  Samples usually reached the laboratory within




7 days or less.  Additional measurements taken in the field included depth




of snow cover, depth to frozen soil and all pertinent details on




field operations (times of planting,  plowing, harvesting, rates of fertili-




zation, etc.) .




     Cropping Practices - The following cropping practices were employed by




the cooperating farmers on the Defiance County watersheds in 1978-1980:

-------
                                  -20-
     B:
Fiberglas sump which intersects field tile.   Contains submersible
sump pump with flow-activating electrodes.

Sampling valve which diverts portion of sump pump discharge into
sample container.
Figure 11.  System for monitoring and sampling tile flow.

-------
                                  -21-
     Hammersmith Roselms (111) - Fall chisel every year.  In 1978 and 1979




soybeans was the crop.  In fall of 1979 wheat was planted.  Grassed water-




way was established in fall of 1979.




     Heisler Blount (401, 402) - In 1978, no till soybeans were grown.




Residue cover was good because of a heavy weed infestation in the previous




year which was killed with paraquat prior to no till soybeans.  In fall of




1978, the watershed was chisel plowed and soybeans grown in 1979.  In fall




of 1979, the watersehd was planted to wheat.




     Speiser Paulding (501, 502) - Fall molboard plowed every year.  Oats




were grown in 1978, followed by wheat in 1979 and 1980.  The oat crop was




fertilized with 33 kgN/ha and 15 kgP/ha just after seeding.




    1.23  Surface Runoff and Tile Drainage Measurement — Hoytville Plots




     In 1974, a research facility was constructed at the NW Branch, Ohio




Agricultural Research and Development Center (OARDC), located at Hoytville




in Wood County (Figure 1), to study the loss of soil and nutrients by




runoff and tile drainage.  Eight plots, each 30.5 m (100 ft) x 12.1 m (40 ft),




were laid out, four in a block,  with a sampling house in the center (Figure




12).  Each plot was trenched to a depth of four feet and heavy plastic




sheeting was placed against the plot wall; the soil was then backfilled




to hold the plastic in place.  Earth berms (15-30 cm high) were raised on




the sides of the plots and seeded with fescue.  The backs of the plots were




left open to allow passage of equipment; a berm was then formed after each




operation to enclose  the plot.  A concrete gutter was built on the other




end of the plots with a 10 cm (4 inch) diameter drain to collect runoff.




The drain was connected by 10 cm (4 inch) plastic pipe  (placed at 90 cm depth)




to the sampling house.  A 10 cm (4 inch) perforated corrugated plastic tile

-------
                                -22-
Figure 12.   Runoff and tile drainage plots at OARDC Research Station,
            Hoytville, Ohio.

-------
                                   -23-
was installed in the center of each plot at a depth of 90 cm.  The tiles




were also connected by 10 cm  (4 inch) solid pipe to the  sampling  house.




Additional field tile was placed outside the plot area to keep water other




than that intercepted by the  plots from entering the area.  The hydraulic




conductivity of the soil (Hoytville clay) was low enough to prevent any




significant water movement between plots.  The area between the plots and




 sampling house was seeded with fescue to prevent erosion.




     The sampling procedure used was similar to that used to measure tile




drainage on the Defiance County sites.  Fiberglas sumps intercepted the




flow from the surface runoff  and tile drain lines.  Sump pumps  (Hydromatic




submersible pump) and timers  were used to measure flow as described pre-




viously, and water was sampled as before by placing an orifice in the dis-




charge line from the sump pump.  The sampled water was collected in 1-gallon




or 5-gallon plastic bottles housed in a refrigerated (4° C) compartment




so that the samples were refrigerated immediately.  Samples were returned




to the laboratory at Columbus within 1 week or less.  Samplers were serviced




daily and sumps were pumped dry between events.  Precipitation records were




kept by the personnel at the  research station which has a 20-year weather




record.




     The facility was completed early in 1975,  and some flow and sediment




monitoring was initiated in April 1975;  water quality sampling was begun in




May 1975.   The previous fall,  the plots  were fall plowed and left bare until




planting in May 1975.   The area had been in sod for at least 10 years prior




to construction of the plots and had received no fertilizer during that period.




In May 1975,  soybeans were planted and all plots were treated the same




through November 1975 to measure variability among the plots.   From 1976-1977,

-------
                                  -24-
soybeans were grown with varying tillage treatments ranging from fall




moldboard plow to no till (Logan and Stiefel, 1979).  In November 1977,




the tillage treatments were consolidated into fall moldboard plowing and




no till, with the previous no till and fall plowing plots continued, and the




intermediate tillage plots no tilled or fall plowed.  One half of the plots




had their tile drainage pump systems disconnected to give four tile drained




and four non-tile drained plots.  The plots and their treatments were:




     Plots                       Tillage                   Drainage




    641, 661                    Fall plow                Tile drained




    642, 662




    651, 611                        "                    Not tile drained




    621, 671                    No till                  Tile drained




    622, 672




    631, 681                        "                    Not tile drained




     Crop management practices in 1977-1980 are given in Table 2.  In 1978




and 1979 corn was grown and then soybeans again in 1980.




    1.24  Analysis of Watershed and Plot Water Samples




     As soon as samples were received in the laboratory, the 1-gallon poly-




ethylene bottles were shaken thoroughly and a 250 ml sample was placed in




another bottle and refrigerated (Figure 13).  A 100-ml aliquot of the




unfiltered sample was filtered through a preweighed 1.0 um Nucleopore




membrane filter.  The sediment and filter were oven-dried, reweighed, and




sediment concentration calculated.  The filtered solution was refrigerated




until further analysis.  Tests showed that a 1.0 um filter was effective




in retaining fine clay.  The filtered sample was routinely analyzed for:




(NO,, + N02), NH-j, and filtered reactive-P.  The unfiltered sample was




analyzed for total P.  Methods of analysis were discussed in detail by




Logan and Steifel (1979).

-------
                                  -25-

Table 2.   Summary of crop management practices on Hoytville plots (1977-1980)

                                   1977
1.  Tillage -



2.  Fertilization -



1. Fertilization -

2.  Tillage -

3.  Planting -

4.  Pesticides -



5.  Harvest -

6. Fertilization -

7.  Tillage -



1.  Tillage -

2. Fertilization -



3.  Pesticides -



4.  Planting -

5.  Harvest -

6.  Fertilization -

7.  Tillage -
Half of the plots  (1, 4, 5 and 6) were moldboard
plowed November 7.  The other plots  (2, 3, 7 and 8)
were in no till.

19 kgP/ha was broadcast October 5.
               1978


180 kgN/ha as urea broadcast April 14.

Plowed plots were  field cultivated twice April 28.

DeKalb XL 64 corn  planted in 30 inch rows April 28.

1 kg/ha Furadan (AI) with planter;   2 kg/ha Atrazine,
2 kg/ha Lasso and  2 kg/ha Roundup  (no till only) April
29.

October 5.

86 kgP/ha broadcast October 30.

Fall moldboard plowed (plots 1, 4, 5 and 6) October 31.

               1979

Plowed plots were  field cultivated twice April 23.

179 kgN/ha as anhydrous NH3 injected April 27.  Also
112 kg/ha of 6-24-24 was applied through the planter
April 23.

17 kg/ha Counter applied at planting;  2 kg/ha
Atrazine, 2 kg/ha Lasso and 1.5 kg/ha Roundup (no till
only) applied May  1.

Landmark C747X corn planted in 30 inch rows April 23.

October 24

30 kgP/ha broadcast December 13.

Fall moldboard plowed (plots 1, 4, 5 and 6) December 14,
1.  Tillage -

2.  Planting -

3.  Fertilization

4.  Pesticides -
Plowed plots were field cultivated twice May 2.

Williams soybeans planted in 30 inch rows May 2.

112 kg/ha 6-24-24 was applied through the planter May 2,

2 kg/ha Dual 6E, 3 kg/ha Amiben and 1.5 kg/ha Roundup
(no till only) applied May 3.

-------
               SAMPLER
1 gallon
unfiltered
water
        100 ml
        unfiltered
        sample
                     Sediment
                     concentration
          1.0 ym
          Nucleopore
          filter
                                                                                   Total P
                                             100 ml
                                             filtered water
                           Filtered
                           reactive P
      NH/.-N
N03-N
Figure 13.  Analytical scheme for water  samples.

-------
                                  -27-
2.  RESULTS




    2.1  Precipitation and Flow (1978-1980)




     Table 3 gives annual precipitation and flow (surface runoff and tile




drainage) for the Defiance watersheds and Hoytville plots.  The 1980 data




is through May only.  Precipitation was lower in 1978 than in 1979, and this




is reflected in the flows for these years.  Surface runoff was very high on




the Roselms site (111) in 1979, but there is no explanation for this increase.




However, this is the most precipitation received on this site since




monitoring began in 1975.




     Runoff and tile flows on the Blount site (401, 402) in 1978-1980 were




similar to these monitored in 1975-77.  In 1978, no till soybeans were




grown on this site as compared to fall-plowed soybeans in previous years




and again in 1979.  No till appeared to have no effect on runoff and tile




drainage flows.  The wheat crop in 1980 also appeared to have little effect




on drainage flows.




     Surface runoff was very high on Paulding soil (501, 502) in 1978 and




tile flow very  low.   This was similar to the results of the 1975-77




monitoring, although the 1978 surface runoff was higher than in previous




years.  The crop in 1978 was spring seeded oats, and since much of the




runoff occurs in late winter and early spring (Logan and Stiefel, 1979),




the oats crop would have had about the same effect on surface soil condi-




tions as the soybean crops grown in previous years.  In 1979 and 1980,




winter wheat was grown on the Paudling watershed and this dramatically




decreased surface runoff to 4.2 cm in 1979.  In 1980 there was no runoff




through May when monitoring stopped.  There was also a slight increase in




tile flow in 1979-1980 compared to previous years.  It would appear that

-------
                                -28-
Table 3.   Precipitation and flow from Defiance watersheds  and
          Hoytville plots (1978-1980).
1978
Flow Ppt
111
401
402
501
502
641/661t
642/662
611/651
621/671
622/672
631/681
23.5
13.8
12.2
52.1
3.7
19.9
38.9
28.4
25.1
22.5
29.1
70.9
67.5
67.5
61.6
61.6
65.8
65.8
65.8
65.8
65.8
65.8
1979
Flow Ppt
71.5 87.6
17.0
9.7
4.2
13.7
23.5
51.9'
26.0
30.2
32.4
25.5
83.1
83.1
89.8
89.8
98.7
98.7
98.7
98.7
98.7
98.7
1980*
Flow Ppt
27.7
9.7
6.4
0.0
8.5
6.3
16.8
6.8
3.5
16.5
7.8
31.4
32.4
32.4
28.2
28.2
28.6
28.6
28.6
28.6
28.6
28.6
    * Through May 31.

    t Mean of duplicate plots.

-------
                                  -29-
this large of a decrease in surface runoff must be due to increased moisture




removal with the fall-seeded wheat crop in addition to any increased




infiltration capacity that the increased vegetative cover might have




provided in the winter-spring runoff period.




     In 1978-1980, half of the Hoytville plots were tile drained, while




the other half had only surface drainage.  There were no significant




differences in surface runoff as a result of tile drainage, with either no




till or fall plowing.  There were also no significant differences in either




surface runoff or tile flow between no till and fall plowing.




    2.2  Soil and Nutrient Losses (1978-1980




    2.21  Hammersmith Roselms (111)




     Table 4 gives the mean annual soil and nutrient losses  for  this site




for 1978-80.  This soil is on moderate to steep slopes (2-15%) and is high




in clay.  In 1975-77, soil loss varied from 1284 to 3714 kg/ha.  Loss in




1978 was similar to this, but 1979 and 1980 losses were higher, especially




the 1980 soil loss which was only for the period January-May.  In fall




1978, an attempt was made to establish a grassed waterway in the natural




draw which drains this watershed  (Figure 3).  The fescue stand was only




partly established by spring of 1979, and was reseeded in fall 1979 and




again in spring 1980.  In addition, wheat was seeded on this watershed in




fall 1979 and the wheat was seeded across the waterway to increase




vegetative cover.  By winter 1979, there was an adequate stand of




wheat and fescue in the waterway.  However, neither the grassed waterway




nor the wheat crop had any effect on soil loss; in fact soil loss increased




in 1979-80.

-------
Table 4.  Concentrations and pollutant loads from Hammersmith Roselms (111) surface runoff.
Sediment
                        1978
                                         1979
                                                                                             1980
                 Concentration  (ug/ml)    Load    Concentration  (ug/ml)   Load     Concentration   (ug/ml)   Load




                 High      Low    FWM*     (kg/ha)   High     Low     FWM*   (kg/ha)   High     Low     FWM*    (kg/ha)
'3741
16     6t,7
                          1595    5100
                                  0
                                                                   75-5
4801    5133
                                                                             868
                                                                            2375     5848
Filtered
reactive-F
Total-P

(Nitrate
+ nitrite) -N
Ammonia-N

0.
2.


2.
0.

47
15


3
6

0.
0.


1.
0.

02
00


1
0

0.09
1.37


2.0
0.2

0.
2.


4.
<0.

18
86


3
1

0.15
2.05


12.0
1.0

0.
0.


0.
0.

00
16


0
0

0.
0.


1.
0.

02
41


2
1

0.
2.


7.
0.

09 0.95 0.04 0.35 0.86
59 — — — — u,
o

2 13.3 3.3 5.4 13.3
1 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.2
*Flow weighted mean concentration  (FWM)

-------
                                   -31-
      Nitrogen and phosphorus  losses  were similar  to  those in 1975-77  and




 were quite low.   This  watershed  has  been in  soybeans and  wheat  for the six




 years of  the study and has  received  no  nitrogen fertilizer in this period




 and very  little  P and  K.




     2.22  Heisler Blount (401,  402)




      Mean annual soil  and nutrient losses in surface runoff (401)  and tile




 drainage  (402) are given in Tables 5 and 6,  respectively.   Soil losses in




 1975-1977 varied from  890-3400 kg/ha.   In 1978, no till soybeans were grown




 in  a mixture of  soybean and killed quackgrass  sod  (surface residue was




 > 50%).   No  till reduced soil  loss to 66 kg/ha, essentially zero at the




 level of  detection of  this  study.  As discussed previously,  this reduction




 was  not a result of runoff  volume, which was not greatly  different than




 previous  or  subsequent  years,  but was due to the greater  protection of the




 soil surface by  the residue cover.   In  1975-77, total P loads varied  from




 1.14 to 2.33 kg/ha, and in  1978  this was  reduced to  0.37  kg/ha  as  sediment




 load was  reduced.   However, filtered reactive P (FRP) loads were unchanged




 with no till.  Loads ranged'from 0.02-0.08 kg/ha in  1975-1977 when the water-




 shed was  plowed,  and was 0.08  kg/ha with  no till in  1978.




     2.23   Speiser  Paulding  (501, 502)




      Nutrient and  sediment  losses for 1978-1980 are  given  in Tables 7  and  8.




 In the period 1975-1977 this watershed had the highest soil loss of all




 sites studied and  ranged from  3849 to 4576 kg/ha/yr.   Soil was  fall plowed




 and  soybeans were  grown in these three years, and the high soil  loss was




attributed to the high clay content and poor structure of this  soil together




with  the lack of subsurface drainage (Logan and Stiefel,  1979).   As previously




discussed, oats were grown in 1978 followed by wheat  in 1979 and 1980.




Table 3 showed that runoff volume in 1978 was similar to previous years, but

-------
    Table 5.  Concentrations and pollutant loads from Heisler Blount (401) surface runoff.







                       1978                              1979                               1980




                Concentration   (ug/ml)   Load    Concentration  (ug/ml)   Load     Concentration   (ug/ral)    Load




                High     Low    FWM*    (kg/ha)  High     Low     FWM*    (kg/ha)   High     Low      FWM*    (kg/ha)
Sediment
                95        0     53         66    1184      48      390      515     1365     511     1265    1092
Filtered
reactive-P
Total-P


(Nitrate
+ nitrite) -N
Ammonia-N
0.13
0.37


4.8
0.9
0.04
0.16


0.9
0.0
0.07
0.30


2.2
0.5
0.08
0.37


2,7
0.1
0.07
0.51


8.0
0.0
0.
0.


2,
0.
00
26


3
0
0.03
0.31


5.0
0.0
0
0


7
0
.04 0.72 0.04 0.49 0.43
.47


.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

i
UJ
M


*Flow weighted mean concentration  (FWM)

-------
 Table 6..  Concentrations and pollutant loads  from Heisler Blount (402)  tile drainage.
                       1978
1979
1980
Concentration (ug/ml)

Sediment
Filtered
react ive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite) -N
Ammonia-N
High
66
0.28
0.79 .
35.8
0.9
Low FWM*
0 34
0.01 0.09
0.10 0.30
0.0 8.3
0.0 0.2
Load
(kg/ha)
37
0.10
0.32
8.9
0.2
Concentration (ug/ml)
High
222
0.20
0.56
27.0
0.6
Low FWM*
0 131
0.00 0.08
0.00 0.27
0.9 13.9
0.0 0.6
Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load
(kg/ha) High Low FWM* (kg/ha)
112 197 0 73 41
0.07 0.14 0.02 0.07 0.04
0.23
11.9 18.0 1.7 13.7 7.7
<0.1 0.8 0.0 0.4 0.1





u>
w

*Flow weighted mean concentration  (FWM)

-------
 Table 7. Concentrations and pollutant loads  from  Speiser Pauldlng  (501)  surface  runoff.
                       1978
                                         1979
                                                                                             1980
Sediment


Filtered

reactlve-P


Total-P


(Nitrate

+ nitrite)-N


Ammonia—N
                Concentration   (ug/ml)   Load    Concentration   (ug/ml)   Load      Concentration  (ug/ml)   Load


                High     Low    FWM*    (kg/ha)  High     Low     FWM*    (kg/ha)    High     Low     FWM*   (kg/ha)
2519      0     946        4388   1733       381      1204




0.97     0.02   0.57       2.65   0.10



6.35..    0.31   3.35      15.50   1.89




2.3      0.0    0.6        2.6    0.0        0.0      0.0



1.5      0.0    0.1        0.7    0.0        0.0      0.0
0.00    0.03



0.92    1.49
453




0.01



0.56




0.0



0.0
                                                              i
                                                             o
                                                             £
*Flow weighted mean concentration  (FWM)

tThere was no flow in 1980.

-------
Table 8.  Concentrations and pollutant loads from Speiser Paulding (502) tile drainage.
                        1978
1979
1980
Concentration (ug/ml)

Sediment
Filtered
reactive-P
Tbtal-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite) -N
Ammonia-N
High
847
1.31
1.63
27.8
1.5
Low FWM*
0 289
0.03 0.18
0.11 0.47
1.3 5.6
0.0 0.6
Load Concentration (ug/ml)
(kg/ha) High
94 510
0.06 0.08
0.15 1.33
1.8 23.8
<0.1 0.0
Low
0
0.00
0.00
0.6
0.0
FWM*
133
0.03
0.24
13.0
0.0
Load Concentration (ug/ml) Load
(kg/ha) High Low FWM* (kg/ha)
163 247 0 138 104
0.03 0.15 0.01 0.06 0.04
0.29
15.9 14.0 3.0 8.6 6.5
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0





i
u
v

 *Flow weighted mean concentration  (FWM)

-------
                                  -36-
was drastically reduced in 1979 and stopped completely in 1980 (through




May when sampling was terminated).  These reductions were in spite of near




normal precipitation.  The reduced runoff greatly reduced soil and nutrient




loss in 1979.  The very high total P load in 1978 was associated with events




in March and April and were, therefore, not affected by the fertilizer




application in May after the oats were planted.   Total P loads were also




high in 1976 (A.02 kg/ha) and 1977 (6.89 kg/ha)  and these may reflect the




higher P content of clay-sized soil particles compared to coarser particles.




    2.24  The Hoytville Plots (611-681. 612-682)




     In the first three years of this study, surface runoff and tile




drainage were monitored on the eight plots with varying degrees of tillage




ranging from fall moldboard plowing to no till.   The 1975-1977 data showed




that surface runoff volume was much lower than tile flows on this Hoytville




soil, and as a consequence, soil loss never exceeded 750 kg/ha/yr.  Tillage




had no effect on soil loss at these low levels.   In 1978, the treatments




on the plots were changed.  The tillage treatments were reduced to two:  fall




moldboard plow and no till, and on half of the plots the tile drainage was




stopped and surface runoff was the only means of drainage.  The results are



summarized in Tables 9-14.




     In 1978-1980, tile drainage had no effect on surface runoff volume,




as has already been shown (Table 3), and Tables 9, 11, 12 and 14 show that




soil loss remained very low (< 300 kg/ha/yr), regardless of drainage or




tillage.




     In 1975-1977, soybeans were grown and no nitrogen fertilizer was added.




In this period, N03~N in runoff was < 5 kg/ha and < 21 kg/ha in tile




drainage.  NH^-N loads were generally < 1 kg/ha.  In 1978 and 1979, corn

-------
 Table 9.   Concentrations and pollutant loads in runoff from Hoytville plots (621, 671).  Plots were
            no  tilled  and tile drained.  Mean of two plots.


                        1978                               1979                               198Q

                 Concentration   (ug/ml)   Load    Concentration  (ug/ml)    Load     Concentration  (ug/ml)   Load

                 High     Low   FWM*     (kg/ha)  High      Low     FWM*   (kg/ha)   High     Low     FWM*   (kg/ha)
Sediment
2927
0
57
                                           94    1647
0
45
101
                                                                    111
                                                                            48
15
Filtered
reactive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite) -N
Anmonia-N

1.87
5.45_
31.9
6.5

0.00
0.00
0.0
0.0

0.48
0.78
2.9
0.1

1.37
1.87
8.1
0.1

5
7
12
2

.02
.09
.7
.0

0.01
0.11
0.0
0.0

1.79
2.28
1.9
0.5

4
5
4
0

.76 2.24 0.07 1.00 0.30
e 92 	 	 	 	
.6 4.8 0.0 1.8 0.5
.9 0.6 0.0 <0.1 <0.1



i
u>
i

*Flow weighted mean concentration (FWM)

-------
 Table 10.  Concentrations and pollutant  loads in tile drainage from Hoytville plots (622, 672).  Plots were no
           tilled and tile drained.  Mean  of- two plots.
                       1978                              1979

                Concentration  (ug/ml)   Load    Concentration  (ug/ml)   Load

                High     Low    FWM*    (kg/ha)  High     Low     FWM*    (kg/ha)
                                                                            1980

                                                                   Concentration  (ug/ml)   Load

                                                                   High     Low     FWM*    (kg/ha)
Sediment
126
                                           18     377
                                            0
                                                                    12
35
                                                                    45
                                                                                             0
Filtered
reactive-P
T6tal-P


(Nitrate
-1- nitrite) -N
Amraonia-N
1
1


37
2
.04
.68 ..


.1
.0
0.00
0.00


0.0
0.0
0.10
0.22


10.5
0.1
0.21
0.47


21.9
0.1
1.23
1.63


21.2
1.4
0.00
0.00


0.0
0.0
0.19
0.25


4.7
0.4
0.52
0.72

•-
13.4
0.1
0.42 0.00 0.05 0.07
__ — — — — ~


5.3 0.0 2.5 3.7
1.9 0.0 0.2 0.1


i
u>
. oo
I

*Flow weighted mean concentration  (FWM)

-------
Table 11. Concentrations and pollutant  loads  in  runoff  from Hoytville plots  (631, 681).  Plots were no tilled with
          no tile drainage.   Mean of  two plots-*


                         1978                              1979                                1980

                  Concentration   (ug/ml)   Load    Concentration   (ug/ml)   Load     Concentration  (ug/ml)    Load

                  High     Low    FWM*    (kg/ha)  High     Low     FWM*    (kg/ha)   High      Low    FWM*   (kg/ha)


  Sediment         1373       0      29         55     1877      0      118       164     6467      0      267     72
Filtered
react ive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite)-N

Ammonia— N

1.74
4.46
21.9

6.5

0.04
0.05
0.0

0.0

0.57
0.83
2.1

0.2

1.79
2.38
5.9

0.4

5.38
7.34
15.1

4.1

0.01
0.00
0.0

0.0

0.95
1.48
2.3

0.6

3.
4.
4.

0.

01 2.34
30
3 6.2
-
7 1.6

0.01 0.35 0.29
—
0.0 1.3 0.8
"X
0.0 0.1 <0.1



1
1


  *Flow weighted mean concentration (FWM)

-------
Table 12.  Concentrations and pollutant loads  In runoff  from Hoytvllle plots  (641,  661).  Plots were
           fall plowed and tile drainedf" Mean of two  plots.


                       1978                              1979                               1980

                Concentration  (ug/ml)   Load    Concentration  (ug/ml)   Load     Concentration   (ug/ml)   Load

                High     Low    FWM*     (kg/ha)  High     Low     FWtf*    (kg/ha)   High     Low     FWM*    (kg/ha)
Sediment        1303
78       135     1246       0        54      111      838      0       91       37
Filtered
reactlve-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nltrlte)-N
Annnonla—N
0.98
4.6J
19.0
3.6
0.02
0.00
0.0
0.0
0.25
0.62
3.2
0.1
0.44
1.11
5.8
0.2
1.84
3.20
13.6
1.4
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.0
0.28
0.67
3.4
0.4
0.
1.
7.
0.
59 0.52
39
2 7.2
4 1.4
0.00 0.15
__ — .
0.0 2.1
0.0 <0.1
0.07
— —
1.2
<0.1
*Flow weighted mean concentration (FWM)

-------
 Table  13.   Concentrations  and  pollutant loads In tile drainage from Hoytville plots (642, 662).  Plots were fall
            plowed  and  tile drained.  Mean of two plots.


                        1978                               1979                               198Q

                 Concentration   (ug/tnl)   Load     Concentration  (ug/ml)   Load     Concentration   (ug/ml)   Load

                 High     Low    FWM*     (kg/ha)   High     Low     FWM*   (kg/ha)   High     Low     FWM*    (kg/ha)
Sediment
100
16
77
                                                                    15
72
123
0
                                                                                     11
17
Filtered
reactive-P
Tbtal-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite)-N
Ammonia-N

1.12
3.30.

20.9
7.9

0.00
0.00

0.0
0.0

0.16
0.28

8.2
0.2

0.57
1.39

27.1
0.6

0.46
0.42

20.0
1.0

0.00 0.12
0.00 0.15

0.0 3.9
0.0 <0.1

0.49 0.34 0.00 0.07 0.10
0.62
i
17.1 5,9 0.0 2.5 3.9 7
<0.1 1.9 0.0 0.2 0.1
*Flow weighted mean concentration (FWM)

-------
Sediment
                                                         1979
                Hlgh
1443
                                 63
                                           153   2274
                                            0
                                                                   122
                                                            307
                                                                                     997
                                                                              0
                                                                                                      37
Filtered
reactive-P
Total-P
(Nitrate
+ nitrite) -N
Ammonia-N
1,
3
26
5
.87
• 15 ..
.4
.6
0.00
0.02
0.0
0.0
0.20
0.46
4.6
0.1
0.50
1.09
10.6
0.2
2.31
4.25
13.3
0.9
0.00
0.00
0.0
0.0
0
0
3
<0
.25
.61
.6
'l
0.55
1.40
8.6

1.05 u.uu v.j.v

8.7 0.0 1.7
1.6 0.0 <0.1
.L • \S ~
 *Flow weighted mean concentration (FWM)
 23



0.06
                                                                                                              LI
                                                                                                       fO
                                                                                                       I

-------
                                  -43-
was grown with nitrogen fertilizer (anhydrous NH-) applications of 180 kgN/ha.



In these two years NO-j-N loads in runoff were < 11 kg/ha and ranged from



13-27 kgN/ha in tile drainage.  This indicates small but not significant



increases in nitrate losses with fertilized corn as compared to nonfertilized



soybeans.  In 1980, soybeans were again grown and N03~N loads decreased



slightly.
                                       \


     Total phosphorus loads have increased steadily since 1975 with increased



fertilization of these plots.  Table 15 gives concentrations and losses of



total and filtered reactive P in runoff from fall-plowed and no till plots



since 1975.  Also given are the P fertilizer applications during that period,



and the increase in Bray PI extractable P which is a measure of crop-



available phosphate.  Flow weighted mean (FWM) concentrations of filtered



reactive P (FRP) remained steady from 1975-1979 and decreased in 1980 after



fall application of P fertilizer was stopped on the fall-plowed plots, while



unit area loads increased through 1979 and then decreased in 1980.  Total



P showed the same trend.  Bray extractable P increased from 18 yg/g in



1975 prior to P fertilizer application to 47 yg/g in 1979.



     On the no till plots, concentrations and loads of total P and FRP



increased dramatically from 1975 to 1979.  FRP then decreased rapidly in



1980 after fall P fertilizer applications were terminated.   The higher losses



of soluble and total P are due to the accumulation of fall  broadcast fertilizer



at the surface.  This is indicated by the increase in Bray  PI extractable



P in the surface 5 cm of soil frbm 18 yg/g in 1975 prior to P fertlization



to 168 yg/g in 1979.  Oloya and Logan (1980) have shown a very high corre-



lation (r2 > 0.98), on this Hoytville soil, between Bray PI extractable P and



P that can desorb into water.  They also  showed that a large fraction of the



desorbable P was desorbed instantaneously, and this fraction may represent

-------
 Table 15.  Changes  In concentration and unit area loads in runoff of total and filtered reactive phosphate with fertilization of fall-plowed
            and  no till Hoytvllle soil  (1975-1980).
Filtered Reactive P
Tear

1975*
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980

1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
P Fertilizer Applied (kg/ha)
Spring F«U

-
12
12
-
12
12

-
12
12
-
12
12

34
34
19
86
30
-

34
34
19
86
30
-
Concentration (ug/ml) Runoff Load
High Low FWM* (kg/ha/yr)

3.92
0.78
2.18
1.87
2,31
1.0$

3.92
1.79
4.33
1.87
5.38
2.34

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

0.00
Q.OO
0.04
0.00
0.01
0.01

0.31
0.25
0.29
0.23
0.27
0.12

0.31
0.37
0.82
0.53
1.37
0.67
Fall Plow
0.01
0.13
0.30
0.47
0.57
0.07
Ho Till
0.01
0.22
0.94
1.58
3.89
0.29
Total P
Bray Pit
Concentration (ug/ml) Runoff Load extractable P
High Low FWM* (kg/h«/yr) (jig/g)

5.85
2.95
9.18
4.61
4.25
__

3.96
1.81
10.70
5.45
7.34
—

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
—

0.00
0.00
0.10
0.00
0.00
—

0.57
0.43
0.82
0.54
0.64
—

1.03
0.54
1.46
0.81
1.88
__

0.10 18.1
0.22
0.84
1.09
1.40 46.6
—

0.26 18. 1
0.34
1.56
2.13
5.11 168.0
-_
* Flow weighted mean concentration (FWM).
t Sampled from the 0-5 cm depth.
$ Plot area was In sod prior to 1975.

-------
                                  -45-
unreacted fertilizer P, soluble reaction products of soil and fertilizer,




and P in solution in soil pores.  The 1980 FRP data show that this effect




of fertilization on dissolved P losses may diminish rapidly after P




fertilizer is no longer broadcast.




    2.3  Seasonal Trends of Precipitation, Flow and Soil Loss (1975-1980)




     Figures 14-17 give precipitation, flow and soil loss by month for the




period 1975-1980 for the Roselms (111), Blount (401, 402) and Paulding




(501, 502) watersheds and for one of the Hoytville plots (621, 622).   On




the Roselms watershed, greatest runoff and soil loss were in the period




February-April.  Runoff was minimal in the summer months and soil loss was




low even when monthly precipitation was high.




     On the Blount watershed (401, 402), total flow (runoff and tile drainage)




was highest in February-April also, and soil loss generally corresponded to




runoff volume.  In 1978 with no till, soil loss was greatly reduced although




runoff and tile flow volumes were similar to other years.  There was very




little runoff or soil loss in the summer or early fall months.




     Runoff continued to be highest in the early spring on the Paulding




watershed (501) as it was on the other watersheds.  With the exception of




September 1975, summer runoff was low as was soil loss even though summer




rainfall was often as high as in spring months.  In 1979 and 1980 with wheat




crops, runoff was low or absent while tile flow was somewhat higher than




in other years.




     Runoff and tile drainage (621, 622) were also higher in the spring on




the Hoytville plot.  On this soil, tile flow was often higher than surface




runoff and soil losses were quite low.  Unlike the Defiance watersheds, tile




flow was common, although low, in the summer and fall months.

-------
u
2
4
6
c
° 8
p
.2 10
o
w
^ 12
14
16
-
-
-

-

.


-
-
-












-«**
20

ie
16

14
12
"E
o
— 10
?
o
^ 8

6


4
2
0
*-











^
s
IS,
s ^







































































1





1











-














K
S 5? M
• mfl
(\MJJAS
0
N
P"^^














5;

c
5





















K,
1













1
|








1
1


























f\.





























"1




























SsnalT-'
D J F M A M
J J A S
0
1





























N D J
rr
1






































<0



t\l
5 «vl
IT









S
J\J.

F M A M
— It




























—IL






























J"J~T
I

•



























M





































$
1
A M




























<0

8







F







n§

















//
M A "~
Figure 14.  Monthly precipitation,  flow and soil loss from Roselms watershed (1975-1980),

-------
o
o
'§.
o
v
a
0

Z

4


6


8

10

12


14

16


14


12


10

8


6

4

2


0
                          O
                          o
           Illlllllllimil
                                            r
                                                                                            >O
                                                                                            V>
                                                                                         r
                                                                                                                          4h
                                                                                                         BLOUNT SOIL

                                                                                                             [ Surface runoff
                                                                                                              Tile flow
                                                                                                              Precipitation
  A M J  J  A  SONDJFMAMJJASON 0 J  F  M A  M

        1975                    1976                1977
                                                               J F M A M J  JA50NDJFMAMJJ A  S 0  N- D
                                                                         1978
                                                                                                  1979
                                                                                                                    1980
    Figure 15.   Monthly precipitation,  flow and soil loss from  Blount  watershed (1975-1980).

-------
c
o
o
•I
E
o
0
2
4
8
10
12
14
16
22

20

IB
16


14
12
10

e

6


4


2

_
-
-

-





-
I
'







^
••

_

-



-
TJ-


_

-
<
\
•2"
<*
\O
^ 0
A M J J A
1975
s



<0
Q «•




*-*
"""I'D
_



S 0 M D
1
1
1
1















Ou 5
K) t\l


•^
<§






J F




























































1



















































TT



























1976











1











^ 5
ft 5:













— i



if!
53













S
>c





1977






























1









^ _




















g
c
IT
















mm


!
1

















i™























































































1978

1




























1


























1

'
1




PAUL
Ii • • i'h
1





.DING SOIL
H Surface runoff
Tile flow
••• Precipitation







Ol
O
ir>
1 1

N.
i **
II mn
[JIJIII HI
J^IH
lllj|l| ^^^Jll
"» illllllL ill











fc *
* •»
imnHHH
oil HI 1111
1 ^ III Illlllll
bill III M
1979 1980
                                                                                                                      oo
     Figure 16.  Monthly precipitation, flow and soil loss from Paulding watershed  (1975-1980),

-------
0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0
                                                                                                                   HOYTVILLE SOIL
                                                                                                                       Surface runoff
                                                                                                                       Tile flow
                                                                                                                       Precipitation
         1975
                    NDJFMAMJJASOND
                                 1976
  JASON
1977
M J J A SONDJFMAMJJASON 0  J F M A M
  1978                     '979               I98°
                                                                                                                                       VO
                                                                                                                                       I
Figure 17.  Monthly precipitation, flow and soil  loss  from Hoytville  (621,  622)  plot  (1975-1980).

-------
                                  -50-
     2.4  Crop Yields on Hoytville Tillage Plots (1975-1980)




     Table 16 presents crop yields for the six years of the  study.   In the




first three years, soybeans were grown on the plots with different tillage




practices.  There were no yield differences between any of the tillage




treatments in any of the three years.  The yields obtained each year




were representative of yields for that year in that area.   The large




variation in yield between 1975 and the other two years is due to the more




favorable rainfall distribution of that year.  Bone et_ al^ (1977) reported




lower soybean yields on Hoytville soil with no till compared to minimum




tillage  (plow plant) or conventional tillage (fall moldboard plow).   How-




ever, soybeans always followed corn in their study and the large amount of




crop residue provided by the previous corn crop may have contributed to the




yield reduction with no till by keeping the soil wetter and cooler in the




spring.   In the study reported here, soybeans followed soybeans, and there




is very  little residue from a soybean crop.  This may explain why no till




yields were as good as other tillage treatments.




     In  1978 and  1979, corn was grown with fall moldboard plow and no till




tillage  treatments, and half of the  plots had no tile drainage.  In  1978,




there were no  significant  differences in  corn yields due  to differences




in tillage or  drainage.  These  data  confirm  the  findings  of Bone et  al




 (1977)  that no till corn yields are  not  significantly  different  than




yields  with  fall plowing when  corn follows  soybeans.   They  also  showed




 that tile drainage did not affect yields  of  corn following  soybeans.




      In 1979,  corn yields  were generally  high because  of  a  favorable growing




 season.   No  till  yields were  generally  lower than fall plowing.   These




 differences were not  statistically  significant because there  were only two

-------
 Table 16 .
                       -51-


Crop yields (bu/acre) on the Hoytville plots for the period
1975-1980.  Mean of two plots.


1975
1976
1977
Mean

Fall Plow
59.7
38.1
41. 4
46. A
1975-1977
Fall Chisel
58.8
35.7
42.1
45.5
Soybeans

Fall Disk* No Till Mean
59.0 60.2
36.1 36.1
46.2 43.0
47.1 46.4
59.4
36.5
43.2
46.4
1978-1979 Corn


1978
1979
Fall
Tile drained
133.5
183.9
Plow
No tile
131.9
174.3
No Till
Tile drained
131.9
119.0

No tile
134.5
152.2
1980 Soybeans
Fall Plow


Tile drained
51.0
No tile
48.4
No Till
Tile drained
37.8

No tile
35.3
*In 1975 and 1976, a 15 cm strip was rototilled for the seedbed.  In 1977,
 these plots were disked once.

-------
                                  -52-
plots in each treatment.   Also,  since the plots were established in 1975,




there has been some subsidence on several of the no till plots which




reduced surface runoff and caused some temporary ponding.  This probably




overshadowed any effect of tile drainage on corn yields.  Bone et al (1977)




found that no till corn following corn gave lower yields than fall plowing,




and although the data reported here for 1979 show no significant differences




due to tillage, the trend is to lower yields with no till.




     In 1980, soybeans were grown and the results show that no till yields




were significantly lower than with fall plowing, a finding also reported




by Bone e_t al^  (1977) for soybeans following corn.  Tile drainage had no




significant  effect on yields.




     The yield results from the Hoytville plots and  the  study  of Bone et al




 (1977) indicate that no till corn and  soybean  yields were  the  same  as those




with fall plowing when soybeans was  the  previous crop,  but no  till  corn and




soybean yields are reduced when corn is  the previous crop.  This yield




reduction has  been attributed to the colder and wetter  soil  conditions




provided  in  the spring with  the  large amount of  residue remaining after




harvest  of a corn  crop.




 3.   DISCUSSION




     Logan  and Stiefel (1979)  reported on the  first three years of this




 study  (1975-1977).   They  found  that soil losses form Maumee River Basin




 soils, although not  excessive in terms of soil productivity effects, were




 among the highest  in the  Great Lakes Basin.  They showed that the internal




 drainage and structural stability of these soils were important in deter-




 mining their susceptibility to .erosion and sediment transport.  The soils




 of the Maumee Basin are all poorly-drained and fine-textured, and Logan and

-------
                                  -53-
Stiefel (1979) found that those soils which could be effectively tile

drained (Hoytville and Lenawee) had little runoff and low soil loss.   A

soil of similar slope (< 2%) and texture, Paulding clay,  had poor internal

drainage and structure and produced low tile drainage volumes  and had the

highest soil loss of the soils that were monitored in the study.  Conser-

vation tillage and no till were compared to fall moldboard plowing on the

Hoytville soil but soil loss was so low on this soil that reduced tillage

had no effect on erosion.

     Logan and Stiefel (1979) also showed that, in the 1975-1977 period, most

runoff occurred in the period February-May during spring thaw and spring

rains.  Occasional summer storms did not produce as much runoff or soil loss

as precipitation in the early spring.  This was attributed to the greater

water saturation of the soils in the spring months.  A conclusion of this

finding was that soil protection was most needed in the period after crop

harvest in the fall and crop canopy development the following spring and

summer.

     Watershed and plot monitoring (Logan and Stiefel, 1979) also showed

that unit area loads of total and filtered reactive phosphate were high compared

to other watersheds in the Great Lakes Basin, and this was attributed to the

high clay content of the soils in the Maumee Basin, the youthful nature

of the soils  (^ 8,000 years), and the intensive cultivation and fertilization

of the area (Logan, 1979).
                                 i
     The results of the present  study confirm  some  of  the previous findings

and also provide new information about soil and nutrient losses from Maumee

Basin agricultural soils.

-------
                                  -54-
     Runoff continued to be highest in the early spring  months.   Soil  loss

continued to be highest on the Paulding soil with spring-seeded  crops,  but

fall-seeded wheat greatly reduced runoff in 1979 and there was no runoff  with

wheat in 1980.  The effect of the wheat crop appeared to be related to drying

of the soil and increased water storage and infiltration capacity rather  than

increased soil protection by the winter cover since runoff volume and  not

just soil loss were drastically reduced.

     No till soybeans in 1978 dramatically reduced soil  loss on  the Blount

soil without measurably changing runoff volume.  Residue cover of the

previous soybean crop was enhanced by a heavy infestation of quackgrass which

was killed with herbicide prior to no till planting in 1978.  Wheat in 1980

had no effect on runoff on Blount or Roselms soils, in contrast  to the

runoff reduction on Paulding soil.  It should be noted,  however, that the

greatest reduction on Paulding occurred in the second year of wheat,

indicating that the effect might be cumulative.

     Results from the Hoytville plots showed that tile drainage had no

measurable effect on surface runoff volume.  This finding  is not clear at

this time.  Perhaps tile drainage capacity is not adequate  in the  early

spring months when most runoff occurs, or perhaps the effect of  tile

drainage on surface runoff does not develop  for  several  years.

     Phosphate  fertilizer broadcast on  the Hoytville plots in the  fall in

1975-1979  steadily increased  flow weighted mean  concentrations  and annual
                                •
loads of total  P and filtered  reactive  P  in  that period.   Concentrations

and  loads  of  FRP decreased rapidly  in 1980  after fall fertilization was

terminated.   Concentration and load increases  were  greatest on  the no till

plots because broadcast  fertilizer  remained  at the  surface where it was

-------
                                   -55-
most susceptible to washoff in dissolved form or attached to soil particles.




Oloya and Logan (1980) found a high correlation between Bray PI extractable P




of this soil and P that could be desorbed into water.  In the period 1975-




1979, Bray PI of the 0-5 cm depth was increased from 18 to 168 yg/g soil,




while the same amount of fertilizer applied to the plowed soil prior to




plowing in the fall only increased Bray extractable P to 47 yg/g.  This




suggests that, if no till is to be used to control phosphorus losses from




agricultural land (especially dissolved), then fertilizer management is




also required.  This would entail keeping available P levels in the soil




no higher than needed for optimum crop production and also would involve




methods to place the fertilizer into the soil rather than on the surface.

-------
                                  -56-
4.  LITERATURE CITED




1.  Bone, S. W.,  D. M. Van Doren and G.  B.  Triplett.   1977.   Tillage  research




    in Ohio.  A guide to the selection of profitable  tillage systems.   Coopera-




    tive Extension Service.  The Ohio State University.   Bull.  620.   12 pp.




2.  Corps of Engineers.  1975.  Lake Erie Wastewater  Management Study.




    Preliminary Feasibility Report.  Volume 1.   Buffalo  District,  Buffalo,




    N.Y.




3.  Logan, T. J.  1979.  The Maumee River Basin Pilot Watershed Study.   Vol.




    2.   Sediment, phosphates and heavy metal transport.   USEPA Region V.




    Great Lakes National Program Office.  EPA-905/9-79-005-B.  132 pp.




A.  Logan, T. J. and R. C. Stiefel.  1979.  The Maumee River Basin Pilot




    Watershed  Study.  Vol. 1.  Watershed characteristics and pollutant




    loadings.  USEPA Region V.  Great Lakes National Program Office.




    EPA-905/9-78-005-A.  135  pp.




5.  Oloya,  T.  0. and  T. J. Logan.   1980.  Phosphate desorption from  soils and




    sediments  with varying levels  of extractable phosphate.  J. Environ.




    Qual.  9:526-531.




6.  Sonzogni,  W. C.,  T. J. Monteith, W.  N.  Bach and V.  G. Hughes.  1978.




    U.S. Great Lakes  Tributary  Loadings.   PLUARG Task D.  Great Lakes




    Basin Commission,  Ann  Arbor, Michigan.

-------
                                    TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                             (Plcasr reaJ lmuructn>ns or the rr\rn< bc/ort
 1 REPORT NO
   EPA-905/9-79-005-C
              3 RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION'NO.
   ITLE AND SUBTITLE
   The Maumee River Basin Pilot  Watershed Study
                                                             6 REPORT DATE

                                                                 May 1981
                                                             6 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7 AUTHORiS)
   Terry  J.  Logan
              e PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
                  Volume III
9 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
   Ohio State University, Columbus,  Ohio 43210
   Ohio Agricultural Research and  Development Center
   Wooster,  Ohio 44691
              10 PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
              11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                  Grant R00535301
 12 SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
   U. S.  Environmental Protection  Agency
   Great  Lakes National Program  Office
   536 South Clark Street, Room  958
   Chicago,  Illinois 60605
              13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                  Monitoring   1978-1980	
              14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                  Great Lakes  National Program
                  Office, U.S.  EPA, Region V
15 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
   Ralph G.  Christensen
   Project Officer
16. ABSTRACT                                      	—	
   The Maumee  River was chosen by PLUARG to be one of four  pilot watersheds to  be
   studied on  the U.S.  side of the Great Lakes drainage basin as part of Task C-
   pilot watershed studies.

   This report represents the results  of the continued monitoring of three of the
   Defiance County watersheds and the  Hoytville plots for the period 1978-1980.
                                 KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                               b.IDENTIFIERS-OPEN ENDED TERMS
                                                                           c. COSATI Field Group
   Watershed
   Monitored
   Soil erosion
   Tile drainage
   Surface run off
   Cropping
                FEME
   Document is available through the National
   Technical Information Service, Springfield
   VA  22161
                                               19 SECURITY CLASS (THii Reporij
20 SECURITY CLASS (Ttii: page/

  Unclassified
                            21 NC. OF PAGES
                               56
22 PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
  US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1984—756-957/442

-------