Evaluation of the APEX Model to Simulate Runoff Quality from Agricultural Fields in the Southern Region of the United States.

The Agricultural Policy Environmental eXtender (APEX) model has been widely applied to assess phosphorus (P) loss in runoff water and has been proposed as a model to support practical decisions regarding agricultural P management, as well as a model to evaluate tools such as the P Index. The aim of this study is to evaluate the performance of APEX to simulate P losses from agricultural systems to determine its potential use for refinement or replacement of the P Index in the southern region of the United States. Uncalibrated and calibrated APEX model predictions were compared against measured water quality data from row crop fields in North Carolina and Mississippi and pasture fields in Arkansas and Georgia. Calibrated models satisfactorily predicted event-based surface runoff volumes at all sites (Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency [NSE] > 0.47, |percent bias [PBIAS]| < 34) except Arkansas (NSE < 0.11, |PBIAS| < 50) but did not satisfactory simulate sediment, dissolved P, or total P losses in runoff water. The APEX model tended to underestimate dissolved and total P losses from fields where manure was surface applied. The model also overestimated sediments and total P loads during irrigation events. We conclude that the capability of APEX to predict sediment and P losses is limited, and consequently so is the potential for using APEX to make P management recommendations to improve P Indices in the southern United States.

Southern Phosphorus Indices, Water Quality Data, and Modeling (APEX, APLE, and TBET) Results: A Comparison.

Phosphorus (P) Indices in the southern United States frequently produce different recommendations for similar conditions. We compared risk ratings from 12 southern states (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas) using data collected from benchmark sites in the South (Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Texas). Phosphorus Index ratings were developed using both measured erosion losses from each benchmark site and Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation 2 predictions; mostly, there was no difference in P Index outcome. The derived loss ratings were then compared with measured P loads at the benchmark sites by using equivalent USDA-NRCS P Index ratings and three water quality models (Annual P Loss Estimator [APLE], Agricultural Policy Environmental eXtender [APEX], and Texas Best Management Practice Evaluation Tool [TBET]). Phosphorus indices were finally compared against each other using USDA-NRCS loss ratings model estimate correspondence with USDA-NRCS loss ratings. Correspondence was 61% for APEX, 48% for APLE, and 52% for TBET, with overall P index correspondence at 55%. Additive P Indices (Alabama and Texas) had the lowest USDA-NRCS loss rating correspondence (31%), while the multiplicative (Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee) and component (Georgia, Kentucky, and North Carolina) indices had similar USDA-NRCS loss rating correspondence-60 and 64%, respectively. Analysis using Kendall's modified Tau suggested that correlations between measured and calculated P-loss ratings were similar or better for most P Indices than the models.