Clair, Ottawa-Stony, LY2157299 in vitro Raisin, Maumee, Cedar-Portage, Sandusky, Huron-Vermilion, and Cedar Creek

watersheds (#1, 6–11, 24) are dominated by fertilizer; and inputs to the Grand (Ont) and Thames watersheds (#19, 20) are dominated by manure. Just as tributary loads are not evenly distributed among major watersheds, non-point sources within those watersheds vary considerably. To explore this heterogeneity, Bosch et al. (2013) applied calibrated SWAT models (Bosch et al., 2011) of the Huron, Raisin, Maumee, Sandusky, Cuyahoga, and Grand watersheds representing together 53% of the binational Lake Erie basin. These authors simulated subwatershed average annual TP and DRP yields (Fig. 14) for 1998–2005. Their results indicate, for example, that the Maumee River subwatersheds with the highest DRP yield were located sporadically throughout the watershed; whereas, those yielding high TP loads were found primarily in its upper reaches. By contrast, high-yield subwatersheds for both DRP and TP were dispersed throughout the Sandusky River watershed; while subwatersheds in the upper reaches of the Cuyahoga River watershed were the greatest sources of both DRP and TP. Findings such as these led Bosch et al. (2013) to conclude that DRP and

TP flux is not uniformly distributed within the watersheds. For example, 36% of DRP and 41% of TP come from ~ 25% of the agriculturally dominated Maumee River sub-watersheds. Similar disproportionate contributions Nintedanib datasheet of DRP and TP were found for the Sandusky River watershed (33% and 38%, respectively) and Cuyahoga watershed (44% and 39%, respectively). These collective

results suggest that spatial targeting of management actions would be an effective P reduction strategy. However, it is important to note that these loads represent flux to the stream channels at the exit of each subwatershed, not P delivered to the lake. Thus, the maps of important contributing sources of TP and DRP to the lake could be different if flux to the lake were considered. In addition to identifying potential sources of TP and DRP to the Lake Erie ecosystem, ADAMTS5 the EcoFore-Lake Erie program sought to evaluate how land-use practices could influence nutrient inputs that drive hypoxia formation. In the following sections, we review some of the available best management practices (BMPs) and use SWAT modeling to test their effectiveness in influencing nutrient flux. McElmurry et al. (2013) reviewed the effectiveness of the current suite of urban and agricultural BMPs available for managing P loads to Lake Erie. Because of the dominance of agricultural non-point sources, we focus here on agricultural BMPs. The Ohio Lake Erie Phosphorus Task Force also recommended a suite of BMPs for reducing nutrient and sediment exports to Lake Erie (OH-EPA 2010). Source BMPs (Sharpley et al., 2006) are designed to minimize P pollution at its source.