Reconnaissance of Surface-Water Quality and

Possible Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria in the

Turkey Creek Watershed, Northwest Oklahoma,

2002–2003

Scientific Investigations Report 2004–5039

Prepared in cooperation with the

OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
On Cover: Photographs taken by Carol J. Becker, U.S. Geological Survey.
Becker, C.J.—Reconnaissance of Surface-Water Quality and Possible Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria in the Turkey Creek Watershed, Northwest Oklahoma, 2002-2003—

USGS/SIR 2004–5039

Printed on recycled paper
U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Reconnaissance of Surface-Water Quality

and Possible Sources of Nutrients and

Bacteria in the Turkey Creek Watershed,

Northwest Oklahoma, 2002–2003

By Carol J. Becker

Prepared in cooperation with the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality and U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency

Scientific Investigations Report 2004–5039
U.S. Department of the Interior

Gale P. Norton, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Charles G. Groat, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Oklahoma City, OK: 2004

For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services

Box 25286, Denver Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225

For additional information write to:

District Chief

U.S. Geological Survey

202 NW 66 St., Bldg. 7

Oklahoma City, OK 73116

http://ok.water.usgs.gov

For more information about the USGS and its products:

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, it contains copyrighted materials that are noted in the text.

Permission to reproduce those items must be secured from the individual copyright owners.
iii

Contents

Abstract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Purpose and scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Description of study area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Nutrients in the watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Bacteria in the watershed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Surface-water-data collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Nutrient sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Bacterial source tracking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Water quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Nitrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Phosphorus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Possible sources of nutrients and bacteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Nitrogen isotopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Bacterial source tracking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

References cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Figures

Figures 1–3. Maps showing:

1.Surface-waterqualitysamplingsitesonTurkeyCreekintheTurkeyCreekwatershed,northwest

Oklahoma. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

2.LanduseintheTurkeyCreekwatershed,1992. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

3. Siteswhere sourcematerial for bacterialsource trackingwas collected inthe TurkeyCreek

watershed, northwest Oklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

4. Distribution of nutrient concentrations measured in surface-water quality samples during lowflow conditions at sites 1-5 on Turkey Creek, northwest Oklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003. . . . . . . 15

Figures 5–8. Graphs showing:

5.Distributionofnitriteplusnitrateasnitrogen,ammoniaasnitrogen,ammoniaplusorganic

nitrogen as nitrogen concentrations measured in surface-water quality samples

from sites 1-5 on Turkey Creek, northwest Oklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

6.Distributionofconcentrationsoftotalphosphorusinsurface-waterqualitysamples

from sites 1-5 on Turkey Creek, northwest Oklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

7.Distributionofconcentrationsoforthophosphateinsurface-waterqualitysamples

from sites 1-5 on Turkey Creek, northwest Oklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

8. Distribution ofδ15N in nitrate found in common sources of nitrogen and in surface-waterquality samples from sites 1–5 on Turkey Creek, northwest Oklahoma, June 2002 to

June 2003. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
iv

9.BarchartshowingpercentofEscherichiacoliisolatesculturedfromsurface-water-quality

samples from sites 1, 2, 4, and 5 matching ribopatterns ofEscherichia coli from source groups

in Turkey Creek watershed, northwest Oklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Tables

1.LanduseintheTurkeyCreekwatershed,1992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2.Constituentsanalyzed,analyzinglaboratory,laboratorymethod,minimumreportinglevel,and

method references used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3. Date of collection and number ofEscherichia coli isolates cultured from surface-waterquality samples collected at sites 1, 2, 4, and 5 on Turkey Creek for bacterial source tracking

using the RiboPrinter® Microbial Characterization System at the Department of Biological

Sciences, Purdue University Calumet, Hammond, Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

4.NumberofEscherichia coli isolatesculturedfromsourcegroupmaterialcollectedinthe

Turkey Creek watershed for bacterial source tracking using the RiboPrinter® Microbial

Characterization System at the Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University

Calumet, Hammond, Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

5.Measuredwaterpropertiesandconcentrationsofnutrientsandstablenitrogenisotopes

in surface-water-quality samples from sites 1-5 on Turkey Creek, northwest Oklahoma, June

2002 to June 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

6.Acomparisonofmediannutrientconcentrationsmeasuredinsurface-water-qualitysamples

from sites 1-5 on Turkey Creek collected June 2002 to June 2003, to the average median concentrations calculated from water-quality sites in Oklahoma and part of Arkansas (excluding sites in the

Ozark Highland and Ouachita Mountains ecoregions) having similar stream orders and stream

slopes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

7.NumberofEscherichia coli isolatesculturedfromsurface-water-qualitysamplesmatching

source groups collected in the Turkey Creek watershed, northwest Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
v

Conversion Factors and Datum

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F = (1.8 × °C) + 32

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988

(NAVD 88).

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88).

Altitude, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical datum.

Specific conductance is given in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius (μS/cm at

25 ̊C).

Concentrations of chemical constituents in water are given either in milligrams per liter (mg/L) or

micrograms per liter (μg/L).

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2)

Volume

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L)

Flow rate

cubic foot per second (ft3

/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

Mass

ton, short (2,000 lb) 0.9072 metric ton
Reconnaissance of Surface-Water Quality and Possible

Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria in the Turkey Creek

Watershed, Northwest Oklahoma, 2002-2003

By Carol J. Becker

Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency investigated the distribution of

surface-water quality and possible sources of nutrients and

Escherichia coli bacteria to surface water in Turkey Creek,

which flows about 70 miles through mostly rural agricultural

areas in northwest Oklahoma. Results show that discharge on

the main stem of Turkey Creek increased during low-flow conditions from an average of 5.4 cubic feet per second at the upper

most site to 39 cubic feet per second at the lower most site in the

watershed, indicating that Turkey Creek gains water from

ground-water discharge. A portion of the increase in stream discharge may be from discharges of treated effluent from city

sewage lagoons. However, the volume and frequency of discharges are unknown.

Surface-water-quality samples show that specific conductance ranged from 1,180 to 1,740 microsiemens per centimeter

at 25 degrees Celsius during low-flow conditions and in general, decreased downstream with site 1 or site 2 having the largest measurement and site 5 having the lowest. The pH values

were slightly alkaline and ranged from 6.8 to 8.5 with a median

of 8.2. Dissolved oxygen ranged from 9.3 to 15.9 milligrams

per liter in samples collected in the months of November, February, and March and ranged from 5.3 to 13.9 milligrams per

liter in samples collected in the months of June, July, and

August.

Surface-water-quality samples show that the median concentrations of nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen (1.16 milligrams

per liter) and total phosphorus (0.275 milligram per liter) are

larger than the average median concentrations of 0.35 and 0.083

milligram per liter, respectively, calculated from water-quality

sites in Oklahoma and part of Arkansas (excluding sites in the

Ozark Highland and the Ouachita Mountains ecoregions) having similar stream orders and stream slopes. Concentrations of

nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen increased slightly in the winter

months and decreased in the summer months, whereas, concentrations of total phosphorus and orthophosphate as phosphorus

tended to increase during the summer months and decrease in

the winter months. During high-flow conditions total phosphorus increased 7.7 times above the average concentration of

0.261 milligram per liter in low-flow samples. Orthophosphate

concentrations increased 3.5 to 4 times during high-flow conditions.

Almost all low-flow samples showed δ15N values between

4 and 10 parts per thousand, above the range for atmospheric

nitrogen and synthetic fertilizer and below the range for animal

waste. These samples may represent a mixture of nitrate from

these two sources and other sources enriched with δ15N, such as

soils and plants.

Results of the bacterial source tracking indicated that the

two source groups having the greatest number of ribopattern

matches with surface-water isolates were the cattle group, 53

isolates or 23.5 percent, and the human group, 41 isolates or

18.2 percent. Fewer surface-water isolates matched the deer and

horse groups, 8.0 percent and 3.5 percent, respectively. About

43 percent or 96 surface-water isolates were not matched to any

source group.

Introduction

Turkey Creek is located in northwest Oklahoma. From the

headwaters in Alfalfa County, Oklahoma, Turkey Creek flows

about 70 miles through mostly rural agricultural areas until it

reaches the Cimarron River (fig. 1). Turkey Creek is one of

many water bodies in Oklahoma, and across the Nation, that is

stressed by an increase in human development, agriculture, and

stricter controls on water quality. Two water-quality issues of

concern for Turkey Creek have been the nutrients—nitrogen

and phosphorus—and coliform bacteria. Elevated concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus compounds were measured by

the Oklahoma Conservation Commission (OCC) during ambient water-quality monitoring at six sites on Turkey Creek and

tributaries from November 1997 to August 1998 (Oklahoma

Conservation Commission, written commun., 2000). Concentrations of nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen, total nitrogen, and

total phosphorus were larger than most other streams in Oklahoma having similar hydrologic characteristics (Haggard and

others, 2003). Densities of fecal and strep coliform bacteria

above the Oklahoma standard of 200 colonies (per 100 milliliters) for primary contact recreation also were frequently measured by the OCC. Fecal coliform and fecal streptococci bacteria are used as indicators of fecal contamination in water and are

monitored for the possible presence of disease-causing pathogens.
2 Reconnaissance of Surface-Water Quality and Possible Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria in the Turkey Creek Watershed,

Northwest Oklahoma, 2002-2003

1

2

3

4

5

Dover

Lahoma

Helena

Drummond

Hennessey

-98 ̊24’ -98 ̊12’ -98 ̊0’ -97 ̊48’

36 ̊60’

36 ̊12’

36 ̊24’

36 ̊36’

0 10 5 Miles

Cimarron River

TurkeyCreek

Clear

Creek

Little Turkey Creek

Buffalo

Creek

0 5 10 Kilometers

Surface-water

sampling site

and number

(table 5)

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data 1:100,000, 1983

Albers Equal Area Conic projection, North American Datum 1983

1

ALFALFA

GARFIELD

MAJOR

KINGFISHER

 Figure 1. Surface-water quality sampling sites on Turkey Creek in the Turkey Creek watershed, northwest Oklahoma.
Introduction 3

There is a need to better understand the sources of nutrients and bacteria as related to land use activities in the Turkey

Creek watershed. As a result, the U.S. Geological Survey in

cooperation with the Oklahoma Department of Environmental

Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency investigated the distribution of surface-water quality and possible

sources of nutrients and Escherichia coli (E. coli) bacteria to

surface water in the Turkey Creek watershed. The objectives of

the study were to investigate 1) the seasonal variations of the

nutrients-nitrogen and phosphorus-in surface water, 2) the contributions of fertilizers to nitrogen in surface water, and 3) the

possible sources of bacteria in surface water to match isolates to

source groups using a microbial source tracking system called

the DuPont Qualicon RiboPrinter® (Dupont Qualicon, 2003).

Purpose and Scope

This report describes the surface-water-quality data collected in the Turkey Creek watershed from June 2002 to June

2003, and the results of stable nitrogen isotopes to determine

possible sources of nutrients and a bacterial source tracking

method used to identify possible sources of E. coli bacteria to

surface water. More than 40 surface-water samples were collected eight times over a 12-month period. The water properties—specific conductance, pH, water temperature, and dissolved oxygen—and stream discharge were measured at five

sites on the main stem of Turkey Creek (fig. 1). Additionally,

nitrite as nitrogen, nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen, ammonia as

nitrogen, ammonia plus organic nitrogen as nitrogen, total

phosphorus, and orthophosphate as phosphorus were analyzed.

The stable nitrogen isotopes 15N and 14N in nitrate nitrogen also

were analyzed to determine the seasonal contributions of fertilizer to nitrogen in surface water. At four of the five sites, surface-water also was collected for the isolation of E. coli bacteria

during three of the eight sampling episodes. A bacterial source

tracking method was then used to identify possible sources by

comparing the relatedness of DNA fragments from ribosomal

genes, referred to as ribopatterns, to E. coli bacteria cultured

from cattle, deer, horses, and effluent from septic tanks and city

wastewater lagoons in the watershed.

Acknowledgments

The author thanks Mike Houts, Oklahoma Department of

Environmental Quality; Steve Hutchins and Yolanda Olivas,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Ada, Oklahoma;

Doug Vandagriff, City of Hennessey; Scott Nolting, City of

Lahoma; Mike Bowers, City of Helena; Ronald Welsh and

Laura Dye, OSU Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory, Stillwater, Oklahoma; Eddie Pryor, and the many residents and livestock owners in the Turkey Creek watershed who graciously

assisted with this project, and Lee Ann Alf, U.S. Geological

Survey.

Description of Study Area

Turkey Creek drains about 376 square miles of rural Oklahoma, starting just north of Helena in Alfalfa County and flowing south to the confluence with the Cimarron River (fig. 1).

The area is situated in the Central Redbed Plains, which is characterized by gently, rolling hills and broad, flat plains (Curtis

and Ham, 1979). Land use in the watershed is primarily agricultural; land use/cover information for 1992 shows that about 76

percent of land in the watershed was used for row crops and

small grains and about 11 percent was used for pasture and hay

(fig. 2 and table 1) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

2000). Wheat and rye are the predominant crops grown in the

area with minor amounts of alfalfa (Keith Bovers, Oklahoma

State University, Agricultural Extension Director, Kingfisher

County, oral commun., 2003). The average annual precipitation

for a 30-year period (1961-90) for the north-central part of the

State ranges from 28 to 32 inches (Johnson and Duchon, 1994).

The total precipitation measured at Lahoma in Garfield County

was 32.4 inches from June 2002 to June 2003 (Oklahoma Climatological Survey, 2004).

Nutrients in the Watershed

Important sources of nutrients in the Turkey Creek watershed are commercial fertilizers, animals including humans, vegetation, soils, and precipitation. The most commonly used nitrogen fertilizers in the watershed are urea, anhydrous ammonia,

and ammonium nitrate. Phosphorus also may be applied in

combination with ammonium nitrate. Commercial fertilizers

are applied to the ground when wheat is planted in September

through October and then again in January through February to

promote seed production (Keith Bovers, Oklahoma State University, Extension Director, Kingfisher County, oral commun.,

2003). The amount of nitrogen applied in commercial fertilizers

is estimated to average between 18.4 to 26.3 tons per square

mile per year (tons/mi2/yr) and phosphorus 1.4 to 3.1

tons/mi2/yr in Alfalfa, Garfield, Kingfisher, and Major counties

(Storm and others, 2000, table 11). Estimates were calculated

using application rates on crop and pastureland and average fertilizer sales in the four counties from 1987 to 1996. Estimates of

the total amount of nitrogen and phosphorus from animal

wastes available to crop and pasture land for Alfalfa, Garfield,

Kingfisher, and Major counties averaged from 0.2 to 0.5

ton/mi2/yr of nitrogen and 0.1 to 0.3 ton/mi2/yr of phosphorus

(Storm and others, 2000, table 14). Nitrogen also occurs naturally in soils from the decomposition of organic material and

from precipitation, which deposits about 1.3 to 1.7 tons/mi2/yr

in the watershed (Mueller and Helsel, 1996). Phosphorus also is

found in phosphorus-containing rocks, fecal waste from ducks

and cattle, fallout from the atmosphere, and tree leaves (U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 1986). Estimates of nutrient

input from human waste in the watershed were unavailable.
4 Reconnaissance of Surface-Water Quality and Possible Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria in the Turkey Creek Watershed,

Northwest Oklahoma, 2002-2003

98°15’ 98°

36°

36°15’

36°30’

0 5 10 Miles

0 5 10 K ilometers

Water

R esidential/C ommercial

B are rock

Forested

S hrubland

G rassland

P asture/Hay

F allow

Wetlands

R iver or stream

R ow crops/S mall grains

KINGFISHER

MAJOR

ALFALFA

GARFIELD

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data 1:100,000, 1983

Albers Equal Area Conic projection, North American Datum, 1983

 Figure 2. Land use in the Turkey Creek watershed, 1992 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000).
Methods 5

 Table 1. Land use in the Turkey Creek watershed, 1992, (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

2000)

Land use Percent of land use in

watershed

Water 0.68

Residential/commercial 0.78

Bare rock 0.01

Forested 1.78

Shrubland 0.60

Grassland 9.35

Pasture/hay 10.95

Row crops/small grains 75.63

Urban grasses 0.02

Wetlands 0.19

Bacteria in the Watershed

Possible contributors of bacteria to the watershed are

humans from septic tank effluent, cattle, and effluent from

wastewater lagoons. Additionally, horses, dogs, cats, deer,

waterfowl, and other small mammals are possible sources of

bacteria and nutrients to the watershed. Waterfowl may be a significant source during the fall migration season. About 15,200

people and 9,300 cattle were estimated to reside in the Turkey

Creek watershed. These estimates were calculated from the

2001 census county estimates (U.S. Census Bureau, 2003), the

livestock county estimates for January 1, 2002, (U.S. Department of Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics Service,

2003), and the percentage of county area in the watershed. The

population estimate includes a correctional center in Helena,

which houses about 840 inmates (Oklahoma Department of

Corrections, 2003). Cattle are present throughout the watershed

and have access to Turkey Creek and tributaries in many areas.

There is only one permitted confined animal facility in the

basin, a dairy with about 400 dairy cows located one mile east

of Lahoma.

The towns of Dover, Drummond, Helena, Hennessey, and

Lahoma provide sewage utilities within city limits for residents

and businesses. These towns use primary sewage treatment;

sewage is pumped into one or more lagoons where solids settle

out and the organic material decomposes. Drummond, Hennessey, and Lahoma are permitted by the State to discharge treated

effluent into Turkey Creek, when necessary; whereas, Dover

and Helena are permitted for land application of the sewage solids on alluvial deposits along Turkey Creek (Patrick Rosch,

Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality, oral commun., 1999). Households and businesses outside of city limits

use private septic tank systems for wastewater disposal.

Methods

Surface-water data collection included measurement of

water properties and stream discharge, and water-quality sampling and analysis for nutrients. Nutrient sources were investigated with stable isotope techniques. Bacterial source tracking

was used to identify possible sources of bacteria to surface

water.

Surface-Water-Data Collection

Five surface-water-quality collection sites (sites 1-5) (fig.

1) were chosen on the main stem of Turkey Creek and surfacewater samples were collected eight times between June 2002

and June 2003. Water properties including specific conductance, pH, water temperature and dissolved oxygen, and stream
6 Reconnaissance of Surface-Water Quality and Possible Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria in the Turkey Creek Watershed,

Northwest Oklahoma, 2002-2003

discharge were measured on site according to procedures

described by Wilde and Radtke (1998). Surface-water-quality

samples were analyzed for nutrient compounds in filtered and

unfiltered samples and the stable nitrogen isotopes 15N and 14N

in nitrate nitrogen. Nitrite as nitrogen, nitrite plus nitrate as

nitrogen, ammonia as nitrogen, and orthophosphate as phosphorus, were analyzed in filtered samples. Ammonia plus organic

nitrogen and total phosphorus were analyzed in unfiltered samples. All samples were collected during low-flow conditions

except during high-flow conditions in August 2002 when runoff

occurred during heavy rain. Sampling techniques are described

in Webb, Radtke, and Iwatsubo (2003). Table 2 shows the constituents analyzed in this study, the analyzing laboratory, laboratory method, minimum reporting level, and method references. Water-quality samples were collected and processed as

described in Wilde and others (1999, 2003).

Quality assurance practices were implemented to maintain

consistency with sampling protocols throughout the study and

to assure clean practices. Ten percent of all water samples were

quality-control samples consisting of duplicate samples. One

replicate sample was collected sequentially for nitrogen isotopes and analyzed by the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory in Lakewood, Colorado.

Nutrient Sources

Stable nitrogen isotopes were used to determine possible

seasonal contributions of fertilizer to nitrogen in surface water.

Nitrogen has two stable isotopes, 15N and the more abundant

14N. The δ15N in nitrate in surface-water samples was compared to δ15N in nitrate in common sources of nitrogen (Clark

and Fritz, 1997). The units used to report nitrogen isotopes

ratios in a sample to those of a standard material are expressed

as delta (δ) values in parts per thousand, denoted as permil (‰).

The δ values for nitrogen stable-isotopic ratios discussed in this

report, referred to as δ 15N, are referenced to standard atmospheric nitrogen, referenced to National Bureau of Standards,

NBS-14 nitrogen gas (Fritz and Fontes, 1980, p. 16). Stable-isotopic ratios are computed as follows (Kendall and Caldwell,

1998):

where is the ratio of the heavier, less abundant isotope to

the lighter isotope.

Bacterial Source Tracking

Bacterial source tracking, also referred to as ribotyping,

was performed to identify possible animal sources of E. coli

bacteria to surface water. Bacterial source tracking relies on the

assumption that genetically differentiable strains of E. coli are

truly host specific. This assumption remains under investigation. Accordingly, the results should be characterized as experimental in nature. The ribotyping of ribosomal RNA genes from

E. coli bacteria isolates was performed using the RiboPrinter®

Microbial Characterization System at the Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University Calumet in Hammond,

Indiana, under the direction of Drs. Charles Tseng and Evert

Ting. The method compared the relatedness of DNA fragments

from ribosomal genes in E. coli isolates collected in surfacewater samples to E. coli from five source groups: cattle, deer,

horses, humans, and sewage. A total of 225 E. coli isolates were

cultured from surface-water samples collected at sites 1, 2, 4,

and 5 during August 2002 and February and June 2003 (table 3)

and ribotyped for identification by comparison. At each site,

water was collected in five, sterile 1-liter polypropylene bottles,

filled a minimum of 3 minutes apart. Bottles were filled by facing the bottle into the current and dipping into the stream at 3 to

5 equally spaced locations in the stream cross section. The samples were placed on ice and delivered within 12 hours to the

Oklahoma State University Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory, Stillwater, Oklahoma, for processing. The goal was to isolate five E. coli colonies from each bottle to acquire 25 colonies

per site per sampling episode. There were difficulties in cultivating E. coli from the February samples because of the low

numbers of E. coli present in the water. Bacteria were not enumerated in water samples.

A total of 195 E. coli isolates were cultured for ribotyping

from fecal material collected from cattle, deer, and horses, and

effluent from septic tanks and wastewater lagoons within the

Turkey Creek watershed (fig. 3). Effluent from inside septic

tanks was collected at a city ballpark, two businesses, and two

churches. Overall, seven separate samples were collected; two

septic tanks were sampled twice on different occasions. Three

to 10 E. coli isolates were cultured from effluent from each septic tank; a total of 63 human E. coli isolates were ribotyped

(table 4). Twenty-three E. coli isolates were cultured and

ribotyped from untreated sewage collected from wastewater

lagoons used by the towns of Helena, Lahoma, Drummond, and

Hennessey. Sample locations were at the inflow where

untreated sewage enters the lagoons. Zero to five E. coli isolates

were cultured from each sample. E. coli also was cultured from

untreated sewage accessed through a manhole near a middle

school in the watershed. Bacteria from wastewater lagoons and

septic tanks were grouped separately for the ribotyping process,

because there is no assurance that bacteria cultured from sewage effluent is human. An effort was made to collect from public septic tanks receiving waste only from humans and servicing

large numbers of people to ensure diversity of the bacterium.

E. coli bacteria were cultured from 69 cattle—12 dairy and

57 beef. One E. coli colony was isolated from each animal. The

1 1,000

tan

14

15

14

15

15 Χ

⎥

⎥

⎥

⎥

⎥

⎦

⎤

⎢

⎢

⎢

⎢

⎢

⎣

⎡

−

⎟

⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜

⎜

⎝

⎛

⎟

⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜

⎜

⎝

⎛

=

S dard

Sample

N

N

N

N

δ N

Standard

N15

N14--------
Methods 7

Table 2. Constituents analyzed, analyzing laboratory, laboratory method, minimum reporting level, and method references used

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ASF, automated-segmented flow; ID, identification number; m-FC, fecal coliform medium; TTC, triphenyltetrazolium chloride;

 ̊C, degrees Celsius; mg/L, milligrams per liter]

Constituents Analyzing laboratory Laboratory method

Minimum

reporting

level

Method references

(USGS schedule

1697)

(1) Nitrite nitrogen,

(filtered)

(2) Nitrite + nitrate

nitrogen, (filtered)

(3) Ammonia nitrogen, (filtered)

(4) Ammonia nitrogen + organic nitrogen, (unfiltered)

USGS National Water

Quality Laboratory,

Lakewood, Colorado

(1) Colorimetry, ASF,

method ID: I-2540-90

(2) Colorimetry, ASF,

cadmium reduction-diazotization,

method ID: I-2545-90

(3) Colorimetry, ASF,

Salicylate-hypochlorite;

method ID: I-2522-90

(4) Colorimetry, ASF,

microkjeldahl digestion;

method ID: I-4515-91

(1) 0.008 mg/L

(2) 0.060 mg/L

(3) 0.04 mg/L

(4) 0.10 mg/L

(1,2,3) Fishman (1993)

(4) Patton and Truitt

(2000)

(1) Total phosphorus, (unfiltered),

(2) Orthophosphate,

(filtered)

U.S. EPA National

Risk Management

Research Laboratory

Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research

Center

Ada, Oklahoma

Lachat flow injection

analysis method,

10-115-01-1-C

(Total phosphorus),

410-115-01-1-A

(Orthophosphate)

(1) 0.10 mg/L

(2) 0.02 mg/L

(1) Lachat Instruments

(2003a)

(2) Lachat Instruments

(2003b)

Ratio of the stable

nitrogen isotopes in

nitrate nitrogen

15N and 14N

Water Sciences Laboratory, University of

Nebraska, Lincoln,

Nebraska

Steam distillation Bremner and Keeney

(1965)

Gormly and Spalding

(1979)

Kreitler (1975)

E. coliform bacteria

culture and isolation

Oklahoma State University Animal Disease Diagnostic

Laboratory, Stillwater, Oklahoma

Membrane filtration, mFC media, 24 hours at

44.5 ̊C

Swab inoculated Tergitol

7 agar with TTC incubated for 18 hours at 35  ̊C

Clesceri and others

(1998)

Murray and others

(1999)

Bacterial source

tracking

Purdue University

Calumet, Hammond,

Indiana

DuPont Qualicon, The

RiboPrinter® Microbial

Characterization System

Bruce and others (1997)

DuPont Qualicon

(2003)
8 Reconnaissance of Surface-Water Quality and Possible Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria in the Turkey Creek Watershed,

Northwest Oklahoma, 2002-2003

Table 3. Date of collection and number of Escherichia coli isolates cultured from surface-water-quality samples

collected at sites 1, 2, 4, and 5 on Turkey Creek for bacterial source tracking using the RiboPrinter® Microbial

Characterization System (DuPont Qualicon, 2003) at the Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University

Calumet, Hammond, Indiana

Dates Site 1 Site 2 Site 4 Site 5 Number of Escherichia coli

isolates cultured

8-13-02 24 24 25 25 98

2-11-03 10 7 1 9 27

6-24-03 25 25 25 25 100

Total 225 ribotyped

beef cattle were scattered throughout the watershed and a maximum of five fecal samples from separate cattle were collected

at each location. Collection of fecal material from beef cattle

was split into summer and winter in case diet affected the bacteria strain. During the summer, diet consists primarily of green

grass; whereas, during the winter, diet consists of dried grass

and alfalfa pellets. Twenty-six E. coli isolates were cultured

from horses and 14 from deer. A rectal swab was used for

horses; whereas, fecal material was collected for deer. One E.

coli colony was isolated from each horse and a maximum of five

horses were swabbed at each location.

Water Quality

Stream discharge, measured water properties, and surfacewater quality results are listed in table 5. Stream discharge on

the main stem of Turkey Creek increased during low-flow conditions from an average of 5.4 cubic feet per second (ft3/s) at

site 1 to 39 ft3/s at site 5, indicating that Turkey Creek gains

water from ground-water discharge. A portion of the increase in

stream discharge may be from discharges of treated effluent

from city sewage lagoons. However, the volume and frequency

of discharges are unknown. Surface-water-quality samples

show that specific conductance ranged from 1,180 to 1,740

microsiemens per centimeter during low-flow conditions and in

general, decreased downstream with site 1 or site 2 having the

largest measurement and site 5 having the lowest. The pH values were slightly alkaline and ranged from 6.8 to 8.5 with a

median of 8.2. Dissolved oxygen concentrations were larger

during winter when surface-water temperatures were low. Dissolved oxygen ranged from 9.3 to 15.9 milligrams per liter

(mg/L) in samples collected in the months of November, February, and March and ranged from 5.3 to 13.9 mg/L in samples

collected in the months of June, July, and August.

Nitrogen

Analysis of surface-water-quality samples show that

nitrite nitrogen comprises a small portion of the total nitrogen

in all samples, with an average concentration of 0.028 mg/L.

The median concentrations of nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen and

total nitrogen (sum of nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen and ammonia plus organic nitrogen as nitrogen) are larger than the average median concentrations calculated from water-quality sites

in Oklahoma and part of Arkansas (excluding sites in the Ozark

Highland and the Ouachita Mountains ecoregions) having similar stream orders and stream slopes (table 6, figs. 4 and 5)

(Haggard and others, 2003, table 7). The median nitrite plus

nitrate as nitrogen concentration of 1.16 mg/L measured on

Turkey Creek is about 3.3 times larger than the average median

concentration of 0.35 mg/L for streams in Oklahoma described

in table 6. Boxplots on figure 4 illustrate the distribution of

nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen and total nitrogen concentra-
Water Quality 9

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

HORSE SEPTIC TANKS AND

WASTEWATER LAGOONS

CATTLE DEER

Surface-water sampling

sites 1 through 5

Sites where source

material was collected

Figure 3. Sites where source material for bacterial source tracking was collected in the Turkey Creek watershed, northwest

Oklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003.
10 Reconnaissance of Surface-Water Quality and Possible Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria in the Turkey Creek Watershed,

Northwest Oklahoma, 2002-2003

Table 4. Number of Escherichia coli isolates cultured from source group material collected in the Turkey Creek watershed for bacterial source tracking using the RiboPrinter® Microbial Characterization

System (DuPont Qualicon, 2003) at the Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University Calumet,

Hammond, Indiana

Source group material

(number of samples)

Number of Escherichia coli

isolates cultured

Cattle (69) 69

Deer (14) 14

Horse (26) 26

Human/septic tank (7) 63

Sewage (7) 23

Total 195 ribotyped
Table 5. Measured water properties and concentrations of nutrients and stable nitrogen isotopes in surface-water-quality samples from sites 1-5 on TOklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003[Q, Discharge, instantaneous, cubic feet per second; SC, Specific conductance, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; pH, standard units; Temp, Temperature, wateroxygen, milligrams per liter; NO2, Nitrite, filtered, milligrams per liter as nitrogen; NO2+NO3, Nitrite plus nitrate, filtered, milligrams per liter as nitrogen; NH3, Ammonia, filte

gen; NH3+OrgN, Ammonia plus organic nitrogen, unfiltered, milligrams per liter as nitrogen; Total P, Phosphorus, unfiltered, milligrams per liter; Ortho-PO4, Orthophosphate, 

phosphorus; δ 15N, Nitrogen-15/Nitrogen-14 ratio, unfiltered, per mil ; <, Less than; e, Estimated; --, No data; Analytes detected below minimum reporting levels were censored 

Geological Survey; ID, identifier]

Date Q SC pH Temp DO NO2 NO2+NO3 NH3 NH3+OrgN Total P Ortho

Site 1, Turkey Creek near Goltry, USGS site ID 07158540

Jun 3, 2002 0.81 1,510 8 23 7.6 0.012 0.06 0.05 1.3 0.28 0.28 Jul 2, 2002 2 1,580 8 22.8 11.9 <0.008 <0.05 <0.04 1.1 0.27 0.11 Aug 14, 2002 147 228 7.2 19.3 7.5 0.024 0.51 0.05 2.3 1.82 0.53 Nov 12, 2002 7.7 1,680 8.2 10.7 11.3 0.023 1.61 <0.04 0.4 0.17 0.13 Jan 14, 2003 6.3 1,570 7.2 3.5 -- 0.02 1.29 0.13 0.64 <0.1 0.09 Feb 11, 2003 8 1,500 7.5 3.0 13.3 0.028 1.55 0.05 0.59 0.14 0.1 Mar 26, 2003 10 1,520 8.1 11.2 10.8 0.069 1.77 0.14 0.82 0.22 0.19 Jun 24, 2003 3 1,530 8.1 24.4 5.5 <0.008 <0.06 <0.04 1.6 0.42 0.26 

Site 2, Turkey Creek near Lahoma, USGS site ID 07158900

Jun 3, 2002 3.9 1,370 8.4 26.7 9.7 0.054 0.92 <0.04 1.1 0.39 0.44 Jul 2, 2002 2.5 1,740 8.5 24.4 12.8 0.008 0.07 <0.04 0.95 0.27 0.21 Aug 14, 2002 1,200 100 6.8 18.9 6.2 0.028 0.47 0.07 4.3 2.09 1.01 Nov 12, 2002 23 1,730 8.3 11.2 10.3 0.053 1.69 0.16 0.7 0.23 0.26 Jan 14, 2003 16 1,730 8.2 3.9 -- 0.017 1.16 <0.04 0.51 <0.1 0.1 Feb 11, 2003 16 1,630 8 5.3 15.4 0.02 1.16 <0.04 0.46 0.11 0.07 Mar 26, 2003 22 1,450 8.2 13.2 9.4 0.103 1.43 0.26 1.3 0.32 0.26 Jun 24, 2003 7.7 1,260 7.9 23.9 8.1 0.032 0.66 <0.04 1.3 0.58 0.44 
Site 3, Turkey Creek near Waukomis, USGS site ID 07159010 Jun 3, 2002 6.8 1,440 8.4 30.2 10.7 0.029 0.49 0.08 0.73 0.31 0.41 

Jul 2, 2002 8.6 1,590 8.4 26.4 13.9 e 0.004 0.05 <0.04 0.63 0.28 0.23 Aug 13, 2002 1,220 186 7.7 21.8 5.9 0.06 1.09 0.16 5.8 2.31 1.18 Nov 12, 2002 33 1,610 8.4 13.1 10.9 0.024 1.85 e 0.04 0.45 0.19 0.16 Jan 14, 2003 27 1,610 8.3 5.1 -- 0.012 1.42 <0.04 0.37 <0.1 0.08 Feb 11, 2003 32 1,570 8.3 9.5 14.8 0.017 1.27 <0.04 0.52 0.1 0.04 Mar 26 2003 36 1,380 8.3 17.4 9.8 0.072 1.65 0.14 1.1 0.27 0.23 Jun 24, 2003 12 1,370 8.4 31 10 0.01 0.27 <0.04 1 0.41 0.36 

Site 4, Turkey Creek south of Hennessey, USGS site ID 07159060 Jun 4, 2002 10 1,440 8.4 25.4 10 e 0.006 0.07 <0.04 0.77 0.37 0.48 

Jul 3, 2002 14 1,460 8.3 24.5 10.9 <0.008 e 0.04 <0.04 0.54 0.42 0.4 Aug 13, 2002 1,420 467 7.6 23.3 5.3 0.087 1.35 0.14 5.2 2.11 0.87 Nov 13, 2002 45 1,570 8.4 9 11 0.013 1.82 <0.04 0.42 0.22 0.25 Jan 14, 2003 38 1,550 8.3 6.2 -- 0.012 1.57 0.06 0.56 <0.1 0.08 Feb 11, 2003 45 1,660 8.4 6.1 15.9 0.015 1.38 <0.04 0.51 0.1 0.05 Mar 26, 2003 54 1,340 8.2 14 10.3 0.04 1.5 0.07 0.96 0.3 0.23 Jun 24, 2003 20 1,440 8.2 28.7 10 0.01 0.27 <0.04 1.1 0.58 0.42 

Site 5, Turkey Creek lower near Dover, USGS site ID 20030211200 Jun 4, 2002 16 1,270 8.5 25.7 10.9 0.015 0.54 <0.04 0.89 0.27 0.29 

Jul 3, 2002 16 1,280 8.2 24.1 9.6 0.022 0.65 0.08 0.69 0.34 0.24 

Table 5. Measured water properties and concentrations of nutrients and stable nitrogen isotopes in surface-water-quality samples from sites 1-5 on TOklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003 [Q, Discharge, instantaneous, cubic feet per second; SC, Specific conductance, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; pH, standard units; Temp, Temperature, wateroxygen, milligrams per liter; NO2, Nitrite, filtered, milligrams per liter as nitrogen; NO2+NO3, Nitrite plus nitrate, filtered, milligrams per liter as nitrogen; NH3, Ammonia, filte

gen; NH3+OrgN, Ammonia plus organic nitrogen, unfiltered, milligrams per liter as nitrogen; Total P, Phosphorus, unfiltered, milligrams per liter; Ortho-PO4, Orthophosphate, 

phosphorus; δ 15N, Nitrogen-15/Nitrogen-14 ratio, unfiltered, per mil ; <, Less than; e, Estimated; --, No data; Analytes detected below minimum reporting levels were censored 

Geological Survey; ID, identifier] Date Q SC pH Temp DO NO2 NO2+NO3 NH3 NH3+OrgN Total P Ortho
Aug 13, 2002 612 280 7.7 22.4 5.7 0.065 1.16 0.17 4.6 1.75 0.72 Nov 13, 2002 51 1,460 8.5 10.1 11 0.011 2.12 <0.04 0.39 0.22 0.23 Jan 14, 2003 43 1,500 8.3 7 -- 0.016 1.89 <0.04 0.51 <0.1 0.07 Feb 11, 2003 54 1,500 8.4 4 12.2 0.022 1.62 <0.04 0.42 <0.1 0.04 Mar 26, 2003 64 1,240 8.1 12.2 9.3 0.044 1.67 0.07 0.98 0.29 0.23 Jun 24, 2003 31 1,180 8 26.3 7.3 0.011 0.6 <0.04 1.5 0.56 0.35 

Table 5. Measured water properties and concentrations of nutrients and stable nitrogen isotopes in surface-water-quality samples from sites 1-5 on TOklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003[Q, Discharge, instantaneous, cubic feet per second; SC, Specific conductance, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; pH, standard units; Temp, Temperature, wateroxygen, milligrams per liter; NO2, Nitrite, filtered, milligrams per liter as nitrogen; NO2+NO3, Nitrite plus nitrate, filtered, milligrams per liter as nitrogen; NH3, Ammonia, filte

gen; NH3+OrgN, Ammonia plus organic nitrogen, unfiltered, milligrams per liter as nitrogen; Total P, Phosphorus, unfiltered, milligrams per liter; Ortho-PO4, Orthophosphate, 

phosphorus; δ 15N, Nitrogen-15/Nitrogen-14 ratio, unfiltered, per mil ; <, Less than; e, Estimated; --, No data; Analytes detected below minimum reporting levels were censored 

Geological Survey; ID, identifier]

Date Q SC pH Temp DO NO2 NO2+NO3 NH3 NH3+OrgN Total P Ortho
14 Reconnaissance of Surface-Water Quality and Possible Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria in the Turkey Creek Watershed,

Northwest Oklahoma, 2002-2003

Table 6. A comparison of median nutrient concentrations measured in surface-water-quality samples from sites 1-5

on Turkey Creek collected June 2002 to June 2003, to the average median concentrations calculated from waterquality sites in Oklahoma and part of Arkansas (excluding sites in the Ozark Highland and Ouachita Mountains

ecoregions) having similar stream orders and stream slopes. Taken from Haggard and others (2003, table 7)

 [mg/L, milligrams per liter; NA, not available; number in ( ) are number of water-quality sites used for calculation]

Nutrient Turkey Creek median

40 analyses

Oklahoma (and part of Arkansas)

average median 1

1The average median calculated from percentile distributions of median concentrations from water-quality

sites having stream orders 1, 2, 3, and stream slope less than or equal to 17 feet per mile (SS2).

Nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen 1.16 mg/L 0.35 mg/L (127)

Total nitrogen2 (calculated)

2Sum of nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen and ammonia plus organic nitrogen as nitrogen concentrations.

2.02 mg/L 1.06 mg/L (74)

Total phosphorus 0.275 mg/L 0.083 mg/L (133)

Orthophosphate as phosphorus 0.235 mg/L NA
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.6

0.00.10.20.30.4

0.5

0.6

Minimum reporting level is0.1 milligrams per liter

Minimum reporting levelis 0.02 milligrams per liter

0.00.51.01.52.02.5

3.0

SITE 1 SITE 2 SITE 3 SITE 4 SITE 5

0.00.51.01.52.02.5

3.0

Minimum reportinglevel is 0.060milligrams per liter

Nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen Total nitrogen

Totalphosphorus Orthophosphate as phosphorus

E

Interquartile (INT)

TOTAL PHOSPHORUS, IN

MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

NITRITE PLUS NITRATE, IN

MILLIGRAMS PER LITER AS NITROGEN

TOTAL NITROGEN, IN

MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

ORTHOPHOSPHATE, IN MILLIGRAMS

PER LITER AS PHOSPHORUS

SITE 1 SITE 2 SITE 3 SITE 4 SITE 5SITE 1 SITE 2 SITE 3 SITE 4 SITE 5 SITE 1 SITE 2 SITE 3 SITE 4 SITE 5

 Figure 4. Distribution of nutrient concentrations measured in surface-water quality samples during low-flow conditions at sites 1-5 on Turkey CreOklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003. Each box plot was constructed from seven analyses.
JUNE

0

0.1

0.20.3

Jun Jul Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar 

0

1

2

3

45

6

60

12

3

4

5

Ammonia plus organic 

2002 

Date

Nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen

Ammonia as nitrogen

Ammonia plus organic nitrogen as nitrogen

EXPLANATION

NITRITE PLUS NITRATE

NITROGEN, IN MILLIGRAMS

PER LITER AS NITROGEN

AMMONIA NITROGEN, IN

MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

AS NITROGEN

AMMONIA PLUS ORGANIC

NITROGEN, IN MILLIGRAMS

PER LITER AS NITROGEN

JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY 

2002 DATE 

Site 1

Site 2Site 3 Site 5

Site 4

Figure 5. Distribution of nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen, ammonia as nitrogen, ammonia plus organic nitrogen as nitrogen concentrations measure

quality samples from sites 1-5 on Turkey Creek, northwest Oklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003.
Possible Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria 17

tions measured during low-flow conditions at sites 1-5 from

June 2002 to June 2003. Concentrations of nitrite plus nitrate as

nitrogen were slightly larger in the winter samples; November

and December 2002, January, February, and March 2003 (fig.

5). This may be from the lower uptake and use of nitrogen by

vegetation during the winter months. Ammonia plus organic

nitrogen as nitrogen concentrations were about 4 to 5 times

larger during high-flow, possibly from organic material carried

into the creek by runoff (fig. 5). During low-flow conditions,

ammonia as nitrogen was generally less than 0.2 mg/L and

ammonia plus organic nitrogen as nitrogen was less than 1.6

mg/L.

Phosphorus

Analysis of surface-water-quality samples show the

median concentration of total phosphorus is larger than the

average median concentration calculated from water-quality

sites in Oklahoma and part of Arkansas (excluding sites in the

Ozark Highland and the Ouachita Mountains ecoregions) having similar stream orders and stream slopes (table 6, figs. 4 and

5) (Haggard and others, 2003, table 7). Similar to nitrogen, the

median total phosphorus concentration of 0.275 mg/L measured

on Turkey Creek is about 3.3 times larger than the average

median concentration of 0.083 mg/L for streams in Oklahoma

described earlier. The distribution of total phosphorus concentrations on figure 6 shows that during August 2002, total phosphorus concentrations increased 7.7 times (average of sites 1-5,

2.016 mg/L) above the average concentration of 0.261 mg/L in

samples collected during low-flow conditions. During the three

winter months and March, (fig. 6) total phosphorus concentrations were lowest; compared to nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen

concentrations that were largest during this period. Figure 7

shows orthophosphate as phosphorus concentrations increased

3.5 to 4 times during the August 2002 sampling. Plots show

similar trends in orthophosphate as phosphorus concentrations

during the eight sampling episodes, both tended to increase during the summer months and decrease during winter months. A

large fraction of all phosphorus measured in samples during

low-flow conditions was present as orthophosphate as phosphorus. Samples for the analysis of orthophosphate as phosphorus

were filtered with 0.45-micron filters and may have contained

undissolved phosphorus sorbed onto colloidal material that

passed through the filter.

Possible Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria

Nitrogen Isotopes

Values of δ15N measured in surface-water samples and in

common sources of nitrate are shown on figure 8. The minimum

concentration of nitrate nitrogen as nitrogen required for the

analysis of nitrogen isotopes was 0.3 mg/L. As a result, nitrogen

isotopes were not measured in all samples from June and July

2002 and June 2003. Almost all samples collected during lowflow conditions show δ15N values between 4 and 10 parts per

thousand, above the range for atmospheric nitrogen and synthetic fertilizer and below the range for animal waste (Clark and

Fritz, 1997). These samples may represent a mixture of nitrate

from these two sources and other sources enriched with δ15N,

such as soils and plants. The sample from site 3, June 2002, is

depleted in δ15N and is within the range encompassing synthetic fertilizer, plants, or atmospheric nitrogen (Clark and

Fritz, 1997). The high-flow samples from August 2002, taken

after a large precipitation event, are depleted in δ15N and may

include a large amount of nitrate derived from the atmosphere

or synthetic fertilizer.

Bacterial Source Tracking

Results of the bacterial source tracking indicated that the

two source groups having the greatest number of ribopattern

matches with surface-water isolates were the cattle group, 53

isolates or 23.5 percent and the human group, 41 isolates or 18.2

percent. Fewer surface-water isolates matched the deer and

horse groups, 8.0 percent and 3.5 percent, respectively. About

43 percent or 96 surface-water isolates were not matched to any

source group (table 7 and fig. 9). The distribution of isolates

matching source groups was relatively similar from site to site.

An exception occurred at site 1, where a greater number of isolates matched the deer group than at the other three sites. Eight

of the 14 deer fecal samples were collected upstream from site

1 and might have increased the probability of a match occurring.

Summary

The U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency investigated the distribution of

surface-water quality and possible sources of nutrients and E.

coli bacteria to surface water in the Turkey Creek watershed.

Turkey Creek drains about 376 square miles of rural Oklahoma,

starting just north of Helena in Alfalfa County and flowing

south to the confluence with the Cimarron River. Land use in

the Turkey Creek watershed is primarily agricultural; land

use/cover information for 1992 shows that about 76 percent of

land in the watershed was used for row crops and small grains

and about 11 percent was used for pasture and hay. Important

sources of nutrients in the Turkey Creek watershed are commercial fertilizers, animals including humans, vegetation, soils, and

precipitation. Possible contributors of bacteria to the watershed

are humans from septic tank effluent, cattle, and effluent from

wastewater lagoons. Additionally, horses, dogs, cats, deer,

waterfowl, and other small mammals are possible sources of

bacteria and nutrients in the watershed.
00.5 1.5 2.5 2002 

2.0 1.0 Site 1 Site 2 Site 4 Site 5 00.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 BA Site 3 EXPLANATION

TOTAL PHOSPHORUS, IN

MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

TOTAL PHOSPHORUS, IN

MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY 

High-flow samples

Low-flow conditions only

DATE

 Figure 6. Distribution of concentrations of total phosphorus in surface-water quality samples from sites 1-5 on Turkey Creek, northwest Oklahoma2003. Plot A shows concentrations of all samples, plot B shows concentrations of samples collected during low-flow conditions only.
0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Site 1Site 2Site 3

Site 4Site 5

High flow samples

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

A

B

High-flow samples

Low-flow conditions only

ORTHOPHOSPATE, IN MILLIGRAMS

PER LITER AS PHOSPHORUS

ORTHPHOSPHATE, IN MILLIGRAMS

PER LITER AS PHOSPHORUS

JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MA

2002 DATE 

EXPLANATION

 Figure 7. Distribution of concentrations of orthophosphate in surface-water quality samples from sites 1-5 on Turkey Creek, northwest Oklahom

2003. Plot A shows concentrations of all samples, plot B shows concentrations of samples collected during low-flow conditions only.
Figure 8. Distribution of δ15N in nitrate found in common sources of nitrogen and in surface-water-quality samples from sites 1–5 on Turkey Cre

Oklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003. Values of δ15N in nitrate found in common sources of nitrogen taken from Clark and Fritz (1997).
Summary 21

Table 7. Number of Escherichia coli isolates cultured from surface-water-quality samples matching source groups collected in

the Turkey Creek watershed, northwest Oklahoma. Matching results are based on an identification pattern comparison of

greater than or equal to 95 percent

Source group Site 1 Site 2 Site 4 Site 5 Total

percentages

Cattle 8 15 15 15 23.5

Deer 11 5 0 2 8.0

Horse 3 1 1 3 3.5

Human/septic tank 11 7 10 13 18.2

Wastewater lagoons 2 4 0 3 4.0

Unidentified 24 24 25 23 42.7
22 Reconnaissance of Surface-Water Quality and Possible Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria in the Turkey Creek Watershed,

Northwest Oklahoma, 2002-2003

Cattle

Deer

Horse

Septic tank / human

Sewage

Unidentified

24 24

25

23

2

4

3

11

7 10

13

3 1

1 3

11

5

2

8

15 15 15

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1245

SURFACE-WATER SAMPLE SITES

PERCENT

Numbers on chart

represent number of

isolates

EXPLANATION

Source groups

Escherichia coli

 Figure 9. Percent of Escherichia coli isolates cultured from surface-water-quality samples from sites 1, 2, 4,

and 5 matching ribopatterns of Escherichia coli from source groups in Turkey Creek watershed, northwest

Oklahoma, June 2002 to June 2003. Bacterial source tracking was performed using the RiboPrinter® Microbial

Characterization System (DuPont Qualicon, 2003) at the Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University

Calumet, Hammond, Indiana.
References Cited 23

Five surface-water-quality collection sites (sites 1-5) were

chosen on the main stem of Turkey Creek and surface-water

samples were collected eight times between June 2002 and June

2003. Surface-water-quality samples were analyzed for nutrient

compounds in filtered and unfiltered samples and the stable

nitrogen isotopes 15N and 14N in nitrate nitrogen. Bacterial

source tracking, also referred to as ribotyping, was performed to

identify possible animal sources of E. coli bacteria to surface

water. A total of 225 E. coli isolates were cultured from surfacewater samples collected at sites 1, 2, 4, and 5 during August

2002 and February and June 2003 and ribotyped for identification by comparison. A total of 195 E. coli isolates were cultured

for ribotyping from fecal material collected from cattle, deer,

and horses, and effluent from septic tanks and wastewater

lagoons within the Turkey Creek watershed.

Results show that stream discharge on the main stem of

Turkey Creek increased during low-flow conditions from an

average of 5.4 cubic feet per second at site 1 to 39 cubic feet per

second at site 5 in the watershed, indicating that Turkey Creek

gains water from ground-water discharge. A portion of the

increase in stream discharge may be from discharges of treated

effluent from city sewage lagoons. However, the volume and

frequency of discharges are unknown. Surface-water-quality

samples show that specific conductance ranged from 1,180 to

1,740 microsiemens per centimeter during low-flow conditions

and in general, decreased downstream with site 1 or site 2 having the largest measurement and site 5 having the lowest. The

pH values were slightly alkaline and ranged from 6.8 to 8.5 with

a median of 8.2. Dissolved oxygen ranged from 9.3 to 15.9

mg/L in samples collected in the months of November, February, and March and ranged from 5.3 to 13.9 mg/L in samples

collected in the months of June, July, and August.

Analysis of surface-water-quality samples show that the

median concentrations of nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen (1.16

mg/L) and total phosphorus (0.275 mg/L) are larger than the

average median concentrations of 0.35 mg/L and 0.083 mg/L,

respectively, calculated from water-quality sites in Oklahoma

and part of Arkansas (excluding sites in the Ozark Highland and

the Ouachita Mountains ecoregions) having similar stream

orders and stream slopes. Concentrations of total phosphorus

and orthophosphate as phosphorus tended to increase during the

summer months and decrease in the winter months, whereas,

concentrations of nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen increased

slightly during the winter months and decreased in the summer

months. During high-flow conditions total phosphorus

increased 7.7 times above the average concentration of 0.261

mg/L in samples collected during low-flow conditions. Orthophosphate concentrations increased 3.5 to 4 times during highflow conditions.

Almost all samples collected during low-flow conditions

showed δ15N values between 4 and 10 parts per thousand,

above the range for atmospheric nitrogen and synthetic fertilizer and below the range for animal waste. These samples may

represent a mixture of nitrate from these two sources and other

sources enriched with δ15N, such as soils and plants.

Results of the bacterial source tracking indicated that the

two source groups having the greatest number of ribopattern

matches with surface-water isolates were the cattle group, 53

isolates or 23.5 percent and the human group, 41 isolates or 18.2

percent. Fewer surface-water isolates matched the deer and

horse groups, 8.0 percent and 3.5 percent, respectively. About

43 percent or 96 surface-water isolates were not matched to any

source group.

References Cited

Bremner, J.M. and Keeney, D.R., 1965, Steam distillation

method for the determination of ammonium, nitrate, and

nitrite: Analytica Chimica Acta, v. 32 p. 485-495.

Bruce, J.L., Cole, E.M., and Wilson, R.A., 1997, Automated

ribotyping, a standardized method for monitoring current and

emerging populations of Escherichia coli, in 33rd Joint Conference U.S. Cooperative Medical Science program cholera

and related diarrheal diseases, December 3-5, 1997, St.

Petersburg, Fla.

Clark, I.D. and Fritz, Peter, 1997, Environmental isotopes in

hydrogeology: New York, Lewis Publishers, 328 p.

Clesceri, L.S., Greenberg, A. E., and Eaton, A.D., eds., 1998,

Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, (20th ed.): American Public Health Association, 1,325 p.

Curtis, N. M. Jr., and Ham, W. E., 1979, Geomorphic provinces

of Oklahoma, in Johnson, K. S., and others, Geology and

earth resources of Oklahoma, an atlas of maps and cross sections: Oklahoma Geological Survey, Educational Publication

1, 8 p.

DuPont Qualicon, 2003, RiboPrinter Microbial Characterization System, accessed October 20, 2003, at: http://www.qualicon.com/riboprinter.html

Fishman, M.J., ed., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory–Determination of inorganic and organic constituents in water and fluvial sediments, [Method ID: I-2545-90]: U.S. Geological

Survey Open-File Report 93-125, 217 p.

Fritz, Peter, and Fontes, J.C., 1980, Introduction, in Fritz, Peter,

and Fontes, J.C., eds., Handbook of environmental isotope

geochemistry, v. 1, The terrestrial environment, A: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Elsevier Publishing Co., p. 1-19.

Gormly, J.R., and Spalding, R.F., 1979, Sources and concentrations of nitrate-nitrogen in ground water of the Central Platte

region, Nebraska: Ground Water, v. 17, no. 3, p. 291-301.

Haggard, B.E., Masoner, J.R., and Becker, C. J., 2003, Percentile distributions of median nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen,

total nitrogen, and total phosphorus concentrations in Oklahoma streams, 1973-2001: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 03-4084, 24 p.

Johnson, H.L., and Duchon, C.E., 1995, Atlas of Oklahoma climate: Norman Oklahoma, University of Oklahoma Press, 32

p.
24 Reconnaissance of Surface-Water Quality and Possible Sources of Nutrients and Bacteria in the Turkey Creek Watershed,

Northwest Oklahoma, 2002-2003

Kendall, Carol, and Caldwell, E.A., 1998, Fundamentals of isotope geochemistry, chapter 2 in Kendall, Carol, and McDonnell, J.J., eds., Isotope tracers in catchment hydrology:

Amsterdam, Elsevier Science B.V., p. 519-576.

Kreitler, C.W., 1975, Determining the source of nitrate in

ground water by nitrogen isotopes studies: Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas at Austin, Report of

Investigations, No. 83, 57 p.

Lachat Instruments, 2003a, Method 10-115-01-1-C: Total

phosphorus in Kjeldahl digests, accessed on October 20,

2003, at: http://www.lachatinstruments.com/applications/method.asp?Mid=10-115-01-1-C

——2003b, Method 10-115-01-1-A: Orthophosphate in waters,

accessed on October 20, 2003, at: http://www.lachatinstruments.com/applications/method.asp?Mid=10-115-01-1-A

Mueller, D.K., and Helsel, D.R., 1996, Nutrients in the Nation's

waters–Too much of a good thing?: U.S. Geological Survey

Circular 1136, accessed November 28, 2003, at:

http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/circ-1136

Murray, P.R., Baron, E.J., Pfaller, M.A., Tenover, F.C., and

Yolken, R. H., eds., 1999, Manual of clinical microbiology,

(7th ed.): American Society for Microbiology, 1,773 p.

Oklahoma Climatological Survey, 2004, The Oklahoma Mesonet, monthly summaries accessed on January 13, 2004, at:

http://climate.ocs.ou.edu/monthly_summary.html

Oklahoma Department of Corrections, 2003, Weekly count:

accessed December 25, 2003, at:

http://www.doc.state.ok.us/Counts/weekly_count_sheet.htm

Patton, C.J., and Truitt, E.P., 2000, Methods of analysis by the

U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory–

Determination of ammonium plus organic nitrogen by a

Kjeldahl digestion method and an automated photometric

finish that includes digest cleanup by gas diffusion, [Method

ID: I-4515-91]: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report

00-170, 31 p., accessed January 4, 2002, at:

http://nwql.usgs.gov/Public/pubs/OFR00-170/OFR00-

170.html

Storm, D. E., Gade, D.G., Tejral, R. J., Smolen, M. D., Kenkel,

Phil, and Gregory, M. S., 2000, Estimating watershed level

nonpoint source loading for the State of Oklahoma, Final

report to EPA, Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering

Department, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Okla.

416 p.

U.S. Census Bureau, 2003, State and county quick facts,

accessed December 1, 2003, at: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/40000.html

U.S. Department of Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics

Service, 2003, Oklahoma livestock county estimates, issued

June 19, 2002, accessed November 2, 2003, at:

http://www.nass.usda.gov/ok/lvstk02.htm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986, Quality criteria

for water--1986: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

report EPA 440/5-86-001 [variously paged].

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000, National land

cover data set, Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium, accessed September 5, 2001, at:

http://www.epa.gov/mrlc/nlcd.html

Webb, W.E., Radtke, D.B., and Iwatsubo, R.T., eds., 1999, Surface-water sampling: Collection methods at flowing-water

and still-water sites: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of

Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A4, section

4.1, p. 23-24, accessed January 4, 2002, at:

http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/chapter4/html/4.1_contents.html

Wilde, F.D. Radtke, D.B., Gibs, Jacob, and Iwatsubo, R.T.,

eds., 1999, Methods for the collection of water samples: U.S.

Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A4, [variously paged], accessed January 4, 2002, at: http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/chapter4/html/Ch4_contents.html

——2003, Methods for the processing of water samples: U.S.

Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A5, (version 2), accessed January 4,

2002, at: http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/chapter5_V2/html/Ch5_contents.html

Wilde, F.D. and Radtke, D.B., eds., 1998, National field manual

for the collection of water-quality data: U.S. Geological

Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book

9, chap. A6, [variously paged], accessed January 4, 2002, at:

http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/Chapter6/Ch6_contents.html