Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 -- 2998 2023-07-25 11:13:36 |
2 Reference format revised. Meta information modification 2998 2023-07-26 03:14:22 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Chen, T.; Wang, M.; Su, J.; Li, J. Bio-Swales in Hydrology, Water Quality, and Biodiversity. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/47231 (accessed on 13 June 2024).
Chen T, Wang M, Su J, Li J. Bio-Swales in Hydrology, Water Quality, and Biodiversity. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/47231. Accessed June 13, 2024.
Chen, Tong, Mo Wang, Jin Su, Jianjun Li. "Bio-Swales in Hydrology, Water Quality, and Biodiversity" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/47231 (accessed June 13, 2024).
Chen, T., Wang, M., Su, J., & Li, J. (2023, July 25). Bio-Swales in Hydrology, Water Quality, and Biodiversity. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/47231
Chen, Tong, et al. "Bio-Swales in Hydrology, Water Quality, and Biodiversity." Encyclopedia. Web. 25 July, 2023.
Bio-Swales in Hydrology, Water Quality, and Biodiversity
Edit

Bio-swales have gained significant attention as an effective means of stormwater management in urban areas, reducing the burden on conventional rainwater management systems. Bio-swales have the capacity to mitigate flood risk, reduce nonpoint source pollution, and enhance biodiversity. The performance of bio-swales is influenced by factors such as water quality, vegetation characteristics, substrate heterogeneity, and age, as identified by existing research. Nevertheless, critical knowledge gaps remain that need to be addressed in future research.

bio-swale Bibliometrix hydrology water quality biodiversity

1. Introduction

In recent decades, the urban environment has undergone significant changes in both appearance and function, primarily attributed to the pervasive impact of human activities [1][2][3][4][5]. Urban sprawl, the dispersion of natural resources, and environmental issues such as the proliferation of impermeable surfaces, amplified stormwater runoff, soil modifications, water and air quality deterioration, and pavement hydrology alterations [1][6][7][8][9] are just a few examples of the challenges faced by urban centers. Additionally, climate change and biodiversity loss have made cities more vulnerable to environmental hazards, further exacerbating these challenges [5][10][11].
Indeed, urban regeneration is gaining popularity as a viable approach to mitigating the adverse impacts of human activities in urban environments. By rethinking urban water management and adopting sustainable solutions, urban centers can minimize the detrimental effects of human activities on the environment, enhance environmental quality, and promote sustainable development [3][12][13].
Retrofitting low-impact development (LID) practice is a possible strategy to alleviate the negative impacts of urbanization on the natural environment [4][7][13]. LID represents an innovative approach to stormwater management that aims to control rainfall runoff near its source. Several effective techniques, including rain gardens, permeable pavements, rain barrels, permeable infiltration trenches, bio-swales, and tree box filters, can be employed for rainwater management. The primary principle behind LID is to maintain hydrological conditions similar to those that existed naturally before urban development [6].
LID practices aim to minimize the impact of urbanization on the environment while also improving the functionality of urban landscapes. By employing LID techniques, it is possible to reduce stormwater runoff, improve water quality, and restore the natural hydrological regime of urban areas. Recent studies have also shown that experimental simulations confirm that decentralized coupled LID-GREI systems offer the best performance in terms of trade-offs between the lowest life-cycle economic costs, hydraulic reliability, and technical and operational resilience when compared to the use of grey infrastructure in cities only [14][15][16][17][18]. Further methodological research and refinement are still needed to develop the evaluation framework for sustainable urban drainage systems with a variety of LID risks, but more thorough studies have paved the way for LID practice optimization and retrofitting. Ahiablame et al. [6] conducted a comprehensive investigation into the efficacy of various LID practices, specifically focusing on rain barrels, rain gardens, permeable pavement, green roofs, and swale systems. Their analysis, derived from meticulous field and laboratory studies, evaluated the performance of these practices in terms of hydrology and water quality. Concurrently, Beecham and collaborators undertook a quantitative and qualitative assessment of the performance of extensive and intensive living walls and green roofs. Drawing from a plethora of numerical and experimental investigations, they delineated several optimization methodologies for enhancing plant performance [19]. Further, the review by Kaykhosravi et al. [20] encompassed a survey of 11 distinct models, elaborating on the features and hydrological and hydraulic modeling components that are instrumental in gauging the performance of LID and green infrastructure. Retrofitting LID practices offers a practical solution to the negative consequences of urbanization and offers the potential for the regeneration of degraded urban environments. LID practices encompass three crucial processes: collection, delivery, and cleaning to effectively manage stormwater and improve the natural hydrology of urbanized areas [8]. The collection mechanism mitigates the runoff from storms and enhances waterways in the surrounding environment [5]. The delivery component channels stormwater to other systems that capture and retain precipitation, which can then be directed to a pond and undergo filtering treatment to ensure the availability of clean and potable water [8][21]. The retention of rainwater not only replenishes local water supplies but also restores the aquifers of groundwater. Additionally, the cleaning process filters and purifies rainwater that contains impurities and suspended solids to promote the production of clean and wholesome water [8]. Furthermore, improving water quality and biodiversity are pivotal performance metrics for LID practice. By reducing flow velocities, novel technologies, such as vegetative swales, can effectively absorb suspended particles and metal pollutants [22]. The implementation of LID practice has proven to be effective in managing storm runoff quantity, controlling floods, improving water quality, enhancing natural habitats, reducing construction and maintenance costs, achieving economic and social benefits, and improving community aesthetics and livability [6][23][24][25][26].
Among the simplest and most straightforward LID practices that can replace traditional curb and gutter drainage systems are bio-swales, which are extensively used in urban villages, green spaces, parks, industrial lands, and roads [27]. Bio-swales are garnering increased attention as a key component of LID practice in stormwater management. These shallow, grass-lined, often flat-bottomed channels, also known as vegetated swales, grassed swales, infiltration swales, bio-swales, bio-filters, and filter strips, receive flow laterally through vegetated side slopes and have a multitude of functions. They not only collect and reduce stormwater but also enhance urban amenities, improve stormwater quality, and promote urban biodiversity. Swales are employed to tackle several stormwater management challenges and rely on processes such as infiltration, sedimentation, filtration, and biological processes [6][28][29][30]. Vegetated swales can be implemented in areas with relatively steep longitudinal slopes [31].

2. Bio-Swales in Hydrology, Water Quality, and Biodiversity

2.2. Regulating Services

Influencing factors

Numerous studies have shown that swales are hydrologically effective at reducing runoff volumes, particularly during small storms [32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40]. Peak runoff rates can be reduced by 4 to 87% and runoff volumes by 15 to 82%. In a seminal study by Fassman [41] conducted in Auckland, New Zealand, the hydraulic performances of bio-swales were meticulously examined over the course of 42 distinct rainfall events. The research revealed a significant decrement in both peak flow and volume for storm events measuring less than 25 mm, underscoring the efficacy of bio-swales in managing stormwater runoff. Abida and Sabourin [42] undertook an empirical investigation in Canada, constructing five vegetated swales to ascertain their infiltration potential. Their findings elucidated a distinct temporal pattern in the infiltration rate. Initially, this rate experienced an exponential decay, but as time progressed, it plateaued, ultimately stabilizing at a constant value. Specifically, after an initial input of 130 mm/hr, a steady infiltration rate of 10 mm/hr was reached within a 20-min timeframe. This research collectively underscored the profound influence of bio-swales on urban hydrology, demonstrating their instrumental role in mitigating stormwater runoff and enhancing infiltration rates. However, the extent of the variation in swale hydrologic performance can be attributed to several factors, such as initial soil moisture conditions [38], soil characteristics [43][44], channel roughness, grass height and density [32][45], infiltration [33][36][38], compaction of the swale bed during construction [46][47], and maintenance [35]. When correctly sized, swales can efficiently transport stormwater runoff from various types of storms, with the most frequent type of storm having a 10-year recurrence interval [48]. The parameters of the rainfall event, including its duration, intensity, and preceding dry days, as well as those of the contributing drainage area, such as surface area, slope, land cover, and drainage mode, all determine the formation of runoff discharging into the bio-swale facility. The facility outflow is formed as a result of the runoff and the direct rainfall across the bio-swale footprint. Overall, swales are an effective tool for reducing runoff volumes and peak runoff rates, but their performance can be influenced by various factors. The appropriate design, sizing, construction, and maintenance are all crucial for achieving the desired hydrologic performance [49].

Climate

Zhou [36] posited that while bio-swales have long been acknowledged for their role in providing localized stormwater transport and controlling the quantity and quality of runoff, their potential contribution to the restoration of predevelopment hydrology, as well as the provision of ecological services in peri-urban areas, is significant. These wet swales play a crucial role in mitigating the impacts of climate change [35]. Catchment hydrology and the water cycle benefit from bio-swales through the restoration of natural hydrological abstractions, such as infiltration and evapotranspiration, which are essential factors in regulating climate. Furthermore, bio-swales are effective in reducing the speed of runoff and are particularly beneficial to streets with traditional curb and gutter layouts. Bio-swales serve as a viable urban facility with which to tackle future weather extremes [50][51], including changes in rainfall intensity and precipitation. When compared to conventional storm sewer systems, bio-swales are superior in minimizing runoff flow volumes and peaks while being better equipped to convey stormwater in open channels [52][53].
The impact of bio-swales on the hydroclimate in winter climates is a subject of concern. Various regression studies, both single and multivariate, have shown that surface temperature, hydraulic loading, and to a lesser extent, snow depth have a significant effect on the reduction in winter peak flow and volume. While in summer, although the underlying soil’s moisture content plays a crucial role in explaining the variation in performance, it has little effect on infiltration during winter [54]. Therefore, bio-swales in cold regions must be designed to carry out two additional tasks: roadside snow storage and meltwater control [55][56][57]. When planning bio-swales for colder climates, it is essential to consider the more demanding conditions to which they are subjected, such as shorter growing seasons, frozen ground, and exposure to road salt [48].
Modeling
In order to effectively design and manage bio-swales, modeling their performance under different conditions is imperative. Planning and design professionals can leverage modeling tools to evaluate the hydrologic and water quality performance of bio-swales and optimize their design, operation, and use to meet desired objectives. However, due to their complexity, dynamic nature, and an incomplete understanding of the physical, chemical, and biological processes occurring within them, bio-swales pose a challenge to model accurately.
Numerical models represent a useful approach for modeling bio-swales by simulating the flow of water and pollutants through the swale using mathematical equations. Such models offer the ability to assess the effectiveness of various design parameters, such as soil type, vegetation type, and swale depth, and can be used to evaluate the impacts of various land use scenarios on stormwater runoff. Additionally, numerical models allow for the assessment of the advantages of bio-swales in improving water quality in terms of pollutant removal rates. On the other hand, physical models replicate the swale and the surrounding environment in a laboratory setting, providing more detailed and accurate data on the performance of bio-swales. However, constructing and operating physical models can be more expensive and time-consuming than numerical models.
In order to model bio-swales accurately, an understanding of the physical, chemical, and biological processes that occur within these systems is essential. Precise knowledge of the flow rate and direction of stormwater runoff within a bio-swale can optimize its design and effectiveness in mitigating the quantity and improving the quality of stormwater runoff. In particular, modeling software must upgrade its stormwater quality components to the same level as water quantity components, as suggested by some researchers [13][58]. This emphasizes the importance of modeling the effectiveness of bio-swales in improving stormwater quality. As urban green infrastructure continues to expand, bio-swale modeling remains a crucial tool. The sophistication and accuracy of modeling tools are expected to increase, enabling the optimization of bio-swales to provide maximum benefits for the environment and society [59].

Water Quality

Influencing factors

The accumulation of pollutants on catchment surfaces during dry weather, which is attributable to dry atmospheric deposition and land-use practices, poses a significant challenge to roadside bio-swales. These pollutants were transported into the bio-swales by various means, such as wind, vehicle-induced turbulence, street sweeping, and snow removal activities. The potential for runoff during wet weather to displace previously accumulated pollutants, coupled with the addition of pollutants to the atmosphere through wet deposition, presents a second source of pollutants for bio-swales [59]. Consequently, two significant sources contribute to the influx of pollutants in bio-swales: (i) the runoff from the contributing drainage area and (ii) atmospheric deposition, both wet and dry, including rain falling directly on the bio-swales facility. During wet weather, some pollutants are carried into the stormwater facilities from nearby contributing drainage areas, while others are splashed or blown into the water [59]. Five primary factors affected the performance of roadside bio-swales, namely, vegetation type, percentage of vegetation cover, treatment length of bio-swales, slope, and soil type [33][37][58][60].

Research in the area of roadside bio-swales has been relatively limited due to the difficulty of altering the characteristics of soil and slope, which are largely determined by the surrounding environment [61][62]. The effectiveness of bio-swales is heavily influenced by the type of soil and the regulation of water flow into and through it. An experiment conducted in Florida found that dry soils with good drainage and high infiltration rates were associated with the significant removal of total metal, nitrogen, and phosphorus loads in two vegetated filter strips [63]. The slope of a grass swale is another critical factor impacted by the local environment. Steeper slopes result in faster water flow through the swale, significantly reducing the time for water infiltration into the soil. This ultimately lowers the efficiency of the bio-swale, as steeper slopes limit the time required for dislodging suspended particles from the water column. Therefore, to achieve higher infiltration rates, it is necessary to slow down the slope of the bio-swale, allowing water to flow through it for longer periods and, thus, increasing the time available for the infiltration process [37].

The efficiency of a bio-swale is heavily influenced by the length of its treatment, which determines the duration of water storage within the system [32][64]. Yu et al. [37] highlighted that treatment length is the primary factor impacting the performance of bio-swales. A longer treatment length results in increased water retention, which facilitates higher rates of pollutant removal through prolonged plant interaction. Studies have indicated that bio-swales longer than 100 m are particularly effective in removing pollutants from road runoff. Vegetation is another crucial factor that significantly affects bio-swale performance. The choice of plant species can have a profound impact on the treatment outcomes, with flood-proof species being the most effective in roadside ditches. It is critical for plants to maintain adequate biomass density and height in waterlogged environments [65]. A greenhouse study of 20 flood-tolerant plant species revealed that the genera Carex, Melaleuca, and Juncus produced the most significant reductions in pollutant production, while Leucophyta, Microlaena, and Acacia produced the lowest decreases [65]. However, plant selection alone is not sufficient, as the appropriate plant density is also necessary for optimal treatment performance. The monitoring of six roadside bio-swales over two years in central Texas demonstrated that effective solids removal decreased rapidly as vegetation density increased above 90% coverage [60].

Soil pollution

Soil pollution from contaminants is an important concern when it comes to water quality. Urban runoff contains a range of pollutants such as heavy metals, suspended particles, pathogens, and nutrients. In order to manage polluted runoff from various sources, such as roads, highways, parking lots, and roofs, swales have been employed to control the quantity and quality of the runoff [66][67][68]. Swales achieve attenuation of stormwater flow rates and peaks through the absorption of water by the grass-soil medium, thereby leading to two treatment mechanisms: increased settling and filtration through swale soils.
Swales are primarily designed to carry runoff from severe storm events, with runoff from smaller events mostly or completely infiltrating into swale soils [36][43]. By promoting stormwater infiltration in swale channels, incoming pollutants are immobilized in swale channels or soils, thus reducing the conveyed pollution [30][45].
The impact of stormwater runoff pollution on soil chemistry in swales has been extensively studied, revealing the contamination of soils by traffic-derived pollutants like metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Areas with heavy traffic volume or stop-and-go traffic are especially susceptible to increased pollution severity [45]. Although bacteria and pathogens are not typically significant pollutants in highway or road runoff, other stormwater control measures are typically more effective at removing bacteria than bio-swales [48].

Biodiversity

Micro level

The interdependence of plants, soil, and micro-organisms in bio-swales is of paramount importance to their overall effectiveness. Soil and plants work in concert to absorb stormwater, while soil bacteria play a critical role in facilitating the water and nutrient uptake of plants. Furthermore, the involvement of micro-organisms as an extended component of plant phenotype is essential to assist plants in adapting to the frequent drying and wetting cycles inherent in bio-swale soils. This symbiotic relationship can improve plant survival and longevity in these systems [69][70][71].
The inflow of stormwater into bio-swales can result in the accumulation of pollutants and excessive nitrogen levels in the soil, which can have detrimental effects. Nonetheless, recent studies have indicated that bio-swale soils contain significant concentrations of microbial genes that are associated with contaminant degradation, which suggests that microbes may have the ability to ameliorate the harmful effects of these pollutants. Furthermore, the siting of bio-swales and the plant species selected for planting can have a substantial influence on the assembly and function of the artificial ecosystem’s soil microbial communities. Within each bio-swale, bacterial and fungal communities were discovered to be significantly clustered by bio-swale and plant species, indicating that soil microbial composition is subject to microenvironmental controls and that plant composition has an impact on microbial assemblages within bio-swales [72].
Macro level
Biodiversity is an essential component of healthy ecosystems and is critical for maintaining ecological balance and functionality. The adoption of bio-swales could provide numerous benefits to biodiversity from a macro-ecological perspective. In urban areas, the use of bio-swales could reduce nonpoint pollutant sources resulting from decreased rainfall effluence, thus protecting the region’s ecosystems and maintaining water circulation. Furthermore, bio-swales could contribute to the mitigation of climate change impacts by cooling cities and providing green spaces that protect biological diversity and habitats. They could also enhance microclimates, improve the quality of land, water, and the atmosphere, and reduce carbon emissions [73].
Although ecological assessments of bio-swales are relatively sparse, studies found that converting traditional planting strips on urban roads into bioretention swamps enhanced invertebrate communities [74]. Significant parameters in this regard included vegetation structure, such as coverage and number of flowering plants and slope characteristics. This finding indicated the potential for bio-swales to provide additional benefits to biodiversity in urban areas [65].

References

  1. Dhakal, K.P.; Chevalier, L.R. Implementing low impact development in urban landscapes: A policy perspective. In World Environmental and Water Resources Congress; Floods, Droughts, and Ecosystems; Webster, V.L., Karvazy, K., Eds.; American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): Reston, VA, USA, 2015; pp. 322–333.
  2. Dillman, K.; Czepkiewicz, M.; Heinonen, J.; Fazeli, R.; Árnadóttir, Á.; Davíðsdóttir, B.; Shafei, E. Decarbonization scenarios for Reykjavik’s passenger transport: The combined efects of behavioural changes and technological developments. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 65, 102614.
  3. McMahon, P.L.; Sorhaindo, C.L.; Barry, W.K. Analysis of low impact development using continuous simulation hydrologic modeling. In International Low Impact Development Conference; Getting in Tune with Green Infrastructure; Hathaway, J., Ed.; American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): Reston, VA, USA, 2018; pp. 110–118.
  4. Sanicola, O.; Lucke, T.; Devine, J. Using permeable pavements to reduce the environmental impacts of urbanisation. Int. J. GEOMATE 2018, 14, 159–166.
  5. Shafique, M.; Kim, R. Retrofitting the low impact development practices into developed urban areas including barriers and potential solution. Open Geosci. 2017, 9, 240–254.
  6. Ahiablame, L.M.; Engel, B.A.; Chaubey, I. Effectiveness of low impact development practices: Literature review and suggestions for future research. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2012, 223, 4253–4273.
  7. Bichai, F.; Ashbolt, N. Public health and water quality management in low-exposure stormwater schemes: A critical review of regulatory frameworks and path forward. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2017, 28, 453–465.
  8. Kim, J.H.; Kim, H.Y.; Demarie, F. Facilitators and barriers of applying low impact development practices in urban development. Water Resour. Manag. 2017, 31, 3795–3808.
  9. He, B.J.; Wang, W.; Sharifi, A.; Liu, X. Progress, knowledge gap and future directions of urban heat mitigation and adaptation research through a bibliometric review of history and evolution. Energy Build. 2023, 287, 112976.
  10. Sharifi, A.; Pathak, M.; Joshi, C.; He, B.J. A systematic review of the health co-benefits of urban climate change adaptation. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 74, 103190.
  11. Wang, M.; Fu, X.; Zhang, D.; Chen, F.; Liu, M.; Zhou, S.Q.; Su, J.; Tan, S.K. Assessing urban flooding risk in response to climate change and urbanization based on shared socio-economic pathways. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 880, 163470.
  12. Qiao, X.J.; Liao, K.H.; Randrup, T.B. Sustainable stormwater management: A qualitative case study of the sponge cities initiative in China. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 53, 101963.
  13. She, L.; Wei, M.; You, X.Y. Multi-objective layout optimization for sponge city by annealing algorithm and its environmental benefts analysis. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 66, 102706.
  14. Wang, M.; Liu, M.; Zhang, D.Q.; Qi, J.D.; Fu, W.C.; Zhang, Y.; Rao, Q.Y.; Bakhshipour, A.E.; Tan, S.K. Assessing and optimizing the hydrological performance of Grey-Green infrastructure systems in response to climate change and non-stationary time series. Water Res. 2023, 232, 119720.
  15. Wang, M.; Liu, M.; Zhang, D.; Zhang, Y.; Su, J.; Zhou, S.Q.; Bakhshipour, A.E.; Tan, S.K. Assessing hydrological performance for optimized integrated grey-green infrastructure in response to climate change based on shared socio-economic pathways. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2023, 91, 104436.
  16. Wang, J.S.; Meng, Q.L.; Zou, Y.; Qi, Q.L.; Tan, K.H.; Santamouris, M.; He, B.J. Performance synergism of pervious pavement on stormwater management and urban heat island mitigation: A review of its benefits, key parameters, and co-benefits approach. Water Res. 2022, 221, 118755.
  17. Wang, M.; Jiang, Z.; Zhang, D.Q.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, M.; Rao, Q.; Li, J.; Tan, S.K. Optimization of integrating life cycle cost and systematic resilience for grey-green stormwater infrastructure. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2023, 90, 104379.
  18. Wang, M.; Zhang, Y.; Bakhshipour, A.E.; Liu, M.; Rao, Q.Y.; Lu, Z.M. Designing coupled LID–GREI urban drainage systems: Resilience assessment and decision-making framework. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 834, 155267.
  19. Beecham, S.; Razzaghmanesh, M.; Bustami, R.; Ward, J. The role of green roofs and livingwalls as WSUD approaches in a dry climate. In Approaches to Water Sensitive Urban Design; Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2019; pp. 409–430.
  20. Kaykhosravi, S.; Khan, U.T.; Jadidi, A. A comprehensive review of low impact development models for research, conceptual, preliminary and detailed design applications. Water 2018, 10, 1541.
  21. Trenouth, W.R.; Vander Linden, W.K. Canadian low impact development retrofit approaches: A 21st-century stormwater management paradigm. In International Low Impact Development Conference 2018: Getting in Tune with Green Infrastructure; American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): Nashville, TN, USA, 2018; pp. 193–202.
  22. Leroy, M.C.; Marcotte, S.; Legras, M.; Moncond’huy, V.; Le Derf, F.; Portet-Koltalo, F. Infuence of the vegetative cover on the fate of trace metals in retention systems simulating roadside infltration swales. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 580, 482–490.
  23. Ahiablame, L.; Shakya, R. Modeling flood reduction effects of low impact development at a watershed scale. J. Environ. Manag. 2016, 171, 81–91.
  24. Coffman, L.S.; France, R.L. (Eds.) Handbook of Water Sensitive Planning and Design; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2002; pp. 97–124.
  25. US Environmental Protection Agency. Low Impact Development (LID): A Literature Review; US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water and Low Impact Development Center: Washington, DC, USA, 2000.
  26. Su, J.; Wang, M.; Razi, M.A.M.; Dom, N.M.; Sulaiman, N.; Tan, L.-W. A Bibliometric Review of Nature-Based Solutions on Urban Stormwater Management. Sustainability 2023, 15, 7281.
  27. Wu, J.; Chen, Y.; Yang, R.; Zhao, Y. Exploring the optimal cost-benefit solution for a low impact development layout by zoning, as well as considering the inundation duration and inundation depth. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4990.
  28. Kirby, J.T.; Durrans, S.R.; Pitt, R.; Johnson, P.D. Hydraulic resistance in grass swales designed for small flow conveyance. J. Hydraul. Eng. 2005, 131, 65–68.
  29. Charlesworth, S.M.; Nnadi, E.; Oyelola, O.; Bennett, J.; Warwick, F.; Jackson, R.; Lawson, D. Laboratory based experiment to assess the use of green and food based compost to improve water quality in sustainable drainage (SUDS) device such as swale. Sci. Total Environ. 2012, 424, 337–343.
  30. Stagge, J.H.; Davis, A.P.; Jamil, E.; Kim, H. Performance of grass swales for improving water quality from highway runoff. Water Res. 2012, 46, 6731–6742.
  31. Sarukkalige, R.; Priddle, S.; Gamage, D. Evaluation of the impacts of the land use on storm water quality: Case study from Western Australia. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Dev. 2012, 3, 20–26.
  32. Deletic, A.; Fletcher, T.D. Performance of grass filters used for stormwater treatment—A field and modelling study. J. Hydrol. 2006, 317, 261–275.
  33. Lucke, T.; Mohamed, M.A.K.; Tindale, N. Pollutant removal and Hydraulic reduction performance of field grassed swales during runoff simulation experiments. Water 2014, 6, 1887–1904.
  34. Rushton, B.T. Low-impact parking lot design reduces runoff and pollutant loads. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 2001, 127, 172–179.
  35. Sañudo-Fontaneda, L.A.; Roces-García, J.; Coupe, S.J.; Barrios-Crespo, E.; Rey-Mahía, C.; Álvarez-Rabanal, F.P.; Lashford, C. Descriptive Analysis of the Performance of a Vegetated Swale through Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring: A Case Study from Coventry, UK. Water 2020, 12, 2781.
  36. Shafique, M.; Kim, R.; Kyung-Ho, K. Evaluating the capability of grass swale for the rainfall runoff reduction from an urban parking lot, Seoul, Korea. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 537.
  37. Yu, L.S.; Kuo, J.-T.; Fassman, A.E.; Pan, H. Field test of grassed-swale performance in removing runoff pollution. J. Water Resour. Manag. 2001, 127, 168–171.
  38. Rujner, H.; Leonhardt, G.; Marsalek, J.; Perttu, A.-M.; Viklander, M. The effects of initial soil moisture conditions on swale flow hydrographs. Hydrol. Process 2018, 32, 644–654.
  39. Knight, E.M.P.; Hunt, W.F.; Winston, R.J. Side-by-side evaluation of four level spreader–vegetated filter strips and a swale in eastern North Carolina. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2013, 68, 60–72.
  40. Winston, R.J.; Powell, J.T.; Hunt, W.F. Retrofitting a grass swale with rock check dams: Hydrologic impacts. Urban Water J. 2018, 16, 404–411.
  41. Rujner, H.; Leonhardt, G.; Perttu, A.M.; Marsalek, J.; Viklander, M. Advancing green infrastructure design: Field evaluation of grassed urban drainage swales. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Planning and Technologies for Sustainable Management of Water in the City, Lyon, France, 28 June–1 July 2016; GRAIE: Lyon, France, 2016.
  42. Fassman, E.A. Monitoring of a series of swales within a stormwater treatment train. In Proceedings of the 33rd IAHR World Congress, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 9–14 August 2009; pp. 7024–7031.
  43. Davis, A.P.; Stagge, J.H.; Jamil, E.; Kim, H. Hydraulic performance of grass swales for managing highway runoff. Water Res. 2012, 46, 6775–6786.
  44. Abida, H.; Sabourin, J.F. Grass swale-perforated pipe systems for stormwater management. J. Irrigat. Drain. Eng. 2006, 132, 55–63.
  45. Backstrom, M. Sediment transport in grassed swales during simulated runoff events. Water Sci. Technol. 2002, 45, 41–49.
  46. Gregory, J.H.; Dukes, M.D.; Jones, P.H.; Miller, G.L. Effect of urban soil compaction on infiltration rate. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2006, 61, 117–124.
  47. Pitt, R.; Chen, S.; Clark, S.E.; Swenson, J.; Ong, C.K. Compaction’s impacts on urban storm-water infiltration. J. Irrigat. Drain. Eng. 2008, 134, 652–658.
  48. Ekka, S.A.; Rujner, H.; Leonhardt, G.; Blecken, G.-T.; Viklander, M.; Hunt, W.F. Next generation swale design for stormwater runoff treatment: A comprehensive approach. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 279, 111756.
  49. Deletic, A. Sediment Behaviour in Overland Flow Over Grassed Areas. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK, 2000.
  50. Zhou, Q.Q. A review of sustainable urban drainage systems considering the climate change and urbanization impacts. Water 2014, 6, 976–992.
  51. Waters, D.; Watt, W.E.; Marsalek, J.; Anderson, B.C. Adaptation of a storm drainage system to accommodate increased rainfall resulting from climate change. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2003, 46, 755–770.
  52. Berggren, K. Urban Stormwater Systems in Future Climates—Assessment and Management of Hydraulic Overloading. Ph.D. Thesis, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden, 2014.
  53. Gavric, S.; Leonhardt, G.; Osterlund, H.; Marsalek, J.; Viklander, M. Metal enrichment of soils in three urban drainage grass swales used for seasonal snow storage. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 760, 144136.
  54. Zaqout, T.; Andradottir, H.O. Hydrologic performance of grass swales in cold maritime climates: Impacts of frost, rain-on-snow and snow cover on flow and volume reduction. J. Hydrol. 2021, 597, 126159.
  55. Backstrom, M. Grassed swales for stormwater pollution control during rain and snowmelt. Water Sci. Technol. 2003, 48, 123–132.
  56. Semadeni-Davies, A.; Hernebring, C.; Svensson, G.; Gustafsson, L.G. The impacts of climate change and urbanisation on drainage in Helsingborg, Sweden: Suburban stormwater. J. Hydrol. 2008, 350, 114–125.
  57. Viklander, M. Urban snow deposits—Pathways of pollutants. Sci. Total Environ. 1996, 189, 379–384.
  58. Boger, A.R.; Ahiablame, L.; Mosase, E.; Beck, D. Effectiveness of roadside vegetated filter strips and swales at treating roadway runoff: A tutorial review. Environ. Sci. Water Res. Technol. 2018, 4, 478–486.
  59. Gavric, S.; Leonhardt, G.; Marsalek, J.; Viklander, M. Processes improving urban stormwater quality in grass swales and filter strips: A review of research findings. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 669, 431–447.
  60. Jensen, M.B. Hydrological conditions for contaminant leaching through highway swales. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2004, 158, 169–180.
  61. Elliott, A.H.; Trowsdale, S.A. A review of models for low impact urban stormwater drainage. Environ. Model. Softw. 2007, 22, 394–405.
  62. Li, M.-H.; Barrett, M.E.; Rammohan, P.; Olivera, F.; Landphair, H.C. Documenting stormwater quality on Texas highways and adjacent vegetated roadsides. J. Environ. Eng. 2008, 134, 48–59.
  63. Yousef, Y.; Hvitved-Jacobsen, T.; Wanielista, M.; Harper, H. Removal of contaminants in highway runoff flowing through swales. Sci. Total Environ. 1987, 59, 391–399.
  64. Barrett, M.; Lantin, A.; Austrheim-Smith, S. Storm water pollutant removal in roadside vegetated buffer strips. Transp. Res. Rec. 2004, 1890, 129–140.
  65. Read, J.; Wevill, T.; Fletcher, T.; Deletic, A. Variation among plant species in pollutant removal from stormwater in biofiltration systems. Water Res. 2008, 42, 893–902.
  66. Bäckström, M.; Viklander, M.; Malmqvist, P.-A. Transport of Stormwater Pollutants through a Roadside Grassed Swale. J. Urban Water 2006, 3, 55–67.
  67. Fardel, A.; Peyneau, P.-E.; Béchet, B.; Lakel, A.; Rodriguez, F. Analysis of swale factors implicated in pollutant removal efficiency using a swale database. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 1287–1302.
  68. Rommel, S.H.; Ebert, V.; Huber, M.; Drewes, J.E.; Helmreich, B. Spatial distribution of zinc in the topsoil of four vegetated in filtration swales treating zinc roof runoff. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 672, 806–814.
  69. Xiao, Q.F.; McPherson, E.G. Performance of engineered soil and trees in a parking lot bioswale. Urban Water J. 2011, 8, 241–253.
  70. Auge, R.M. Water relations, drought and vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis. Mycorrhiza 2001, 11, 3–42.
  71. van der Heijden, M.G.A.; Bardgett, R.D.; van Straalen, N.M. The unseen majority: Soil microbes as drivers of plant diversity and productivity in terrestrial ecosystems. Ecol. Lett. 2008, 11, 296–310.
  72. Gill, A.S.; Lee, A.; McGuire, K.L. Phylogenetic and functional diversity of total (DNA) and expressed (RNA) bacterial communities in urban green infrastructure bioswale soils. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2017, 83, 15.
  73. Monberg, R.J.; Howe, A.G.; Ravn, H.P.; Jensen, M.B. Exploring structural habitat heterogeneity in sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) for urban biodiversity support. Urban Ecosyst. 2018, 21, 1159–1170.
  74. Kazemi, F.; Beecham, S.; Gibbs, J. Streetscape biodiversity and the role of bioretention swales in an Australian urban environment. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2011, 101, 139–148.
More
Information
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register : , , ,
View Times: 193
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 26 Jul 2023
1000/1000
Video Production Service