Evaluation of hydrological parameters and sediment dynamics in the Borçka Dam watershed using the SWAT model

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 25 Sayı: 1, 111 - 127, 15.05.2024

Saim Yıldırımer , Mehmet Özalp

https://doi.org/10.17474/artvinofd.1426951

Cited By: 6

https://izlik.org/JA45LK38EJ

Öz

Various human-originating interventions and/or activities have been playing the major role for substantially impacting natural flow regime, water quality, and sediment transport amounts of running waters (streams, creeks etc.) in a negative way. While many studies using in-field measurements of such impacts have proven these changes, applying modeling methods in order to assess such effects are still improving. This study used the SWAT model to assess annual changes in water regime, quality, and sediment yield for Murgul, Hatila, Fabrika, and Godrahav Creeks based on field measurements. The model estimated the highest annual surface flow at Murgul Creek (2.41 m3/s) and the lowest at Fabrika Creek (0.19 m3/s). Sediment yields were 61855 t/yr at Murgul, 29826 t/yr at Hatila, 3165 t/yr at Fabrika, and 7835 t/yr at Godrahav. The model also provided reliable predictions for most sub-creeks, with R2 values between 0.85 and 0.91 and NSE values between 0.72 and 0.84. For run-off, Hatila, Fabrika, and Godrahav showed high reliability with R2 and NSE values around 0.85 and 0.80, respectively, while Murgul had lower scores (R2: 0.53, NSE: 0.22). Sediment yield was reliable in Hatila and Fabrika with R2 around 0.82, but less so in Godrahav and Murgul, with NSE values showing significant variability. Water quality predictions for NO3 were acceptable across all creeks, with R2 values around 0.82 and varied NSE values, indicating generally reliable outcomes. However, the model predicted less favorable outcomes for Murgul Creek due to significant human-induced alterations. While the SWAT model was generally promising, the study emphasizes the need for detailed, long-term data to improve prediction accuracy.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Water Quality , Streamflow , Sediment Yield , SWAT Model , Watershed

Teşekkür

This article is derived from the research conducted during my doctoral studies at Artvin Çoruh University. I would like to express my gratitude to my advisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mehmet ÖZALP for his guidance, valuable comments, and contributions. Additionally, I am thankful to the Artvin Çoruh University BAP Coordination Unit for their support throughout my thesis work and to all my colleagues who were with me during the research process, especially to Şenol OSMANAOĞLU and Gözde ÖZAY.

Borçka Barajı havzasında hidrolojik parametrelerin ve sediment dinamiklerinin SWAT modeli ile değerlendirilmesi

https://izlik.org/JA45LK38EJ

Öz

İnsan kaynaklı müdahaleler ve/veya faaliyetler akarsuların doğal akış rejimini, su kalitesini ve sediment taşınımını genelde olumsuz etkilemektedir. Bu etkilerin arazi ölçümleriyle kanıtlandığı çalışmalar olmasına rağmen, modelleme yöntemlerinin kullanımı gelişmeye devam etmektedir. Bu çalışma, Murgul, Hatila, Fabrika ve Godrahav Dereleri için yıllık değişiklikleri SWAT modeliyle değerlendirmiştir. Model, Murgul Deresi için en yüksek yüzey akışını (2.41 m3/s), Fabrika Deresi için ise en düşük akışı (0.19 m3/s) tahmin etmiştir. Sediment verimi, Murgul'da 61855 t/yıl, Hatila'da 29826 t/yıl, Fabrika'da 3165 t/yıl, Godrahav'da ise 7835 t/yıl olarak hesaplanmıştır. Model, çoğu alt dere için 0.85 ile 0.91 arasında R2 ve 0.72 ile 0.84 arasında NSE değerleriyle güvenilir tahminler sağlamıştır. Hatila, Fabrika ve Godrahav için yüzey akışı yüksek güvenilirlik göstermişken (R2 ve NSE değerleri yaklaşık 0.85 ve 0.80), Murgul daha düşük değerler almıştır (R2: 0.53, NSE: 0.22). Sediment veriminde Hatila ve Fabrika güvenilirken, Godrahav ve Murgul'da NSE değerleri büyük değişkenlik göstermiştir. NO3 su kalitesi tahminleri tüm dereler için kabul edilebilir olup, R2 değerleri yaklaşık 0.82 ve NSE değerleri değişkenlik göstermiştir. Ancak, Murgul Deresi için model, ciddi insan kaynaklı değişiklikler nedeniyle daha az olumlu tahminlerle sonuçlanmıştır. SWAT modeli genel olarak umut verici sonuçlar vermiş, ancak çalışma daha doğru sonuçlar için detaylı ve uzun vadeli verilere olan ihtiyacı vurgulamıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Su Kalitesi , Dere Akışı , Sediment Verimi , SWAT Model , Havza

Teşekkür

Bu makale, Artvin Çoruh Üniversitesi’ndeki doktora çalışmam sırasında yürüttüğüm araştırmalardan türetilmiştir. Bu süreçte bana rehberlik eden danışmanım Doç. Dr. Mehmet ÖZALP'e, değerli yorumları ve katkıları için teşekkür ederim. Ayrıca, tez çalışmam boyunca bana destek olan Artvin Çoruh Üniversitesi BAP Koordinatörlüğü ve araştırma sürecinde yanımda olan tüm meslektaşlarıma, özellikle Şenol OSMANAOĞLU ve Gözde ÖZAY'a minnettarım.

Kaynakça

• Akhavan S, Abedi-Koupai J, Mousavi SF, Afyuni M, Eslamian SS, Abbaspour KC (2010) Application of SWAT model to investigate nitrate leaching in Hamadan–Bahar Watershed, Iran. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 139(4): 675-688.
• Arnold JG, Moriasi DN, Gassman PW, Abbaspour KC, White MJ, Srinivasan R, Santhi C, Harmel RD, van Griensven A, Van Liew MW, Kannan N, Jha MK (2012) SWAT: model use, calibration, and validation. Transactions of the ASABE, 55(4): 1491-1508.
• Arnold JG, Srinivasan R, Muttiah RS, Williams JR (1998) Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment Part I: Model development. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 34(1):73-89.
• Asif Z, Chen Z, Sadiq R, Zhu Y (2023) Climate change impacts on water resources and sustainable water management strategies in North America. Water Resources Management, 37(6-7): 2771-2786.
• Ben Salah NC, Abida H (2016) Runoff and sediment yield modeling using SWAT model: case of Wadi Hatab Basin, Central Tunisia. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 9(11).
• Briak H, Moussadek R, Aboumaria K, Mrabet R (2016) Assessing sediment yield in Kalaya gauged watershed (Northern Morocco) using GIS and SWAT model. International Soil and Water Conservation Research, 4(3): 177-185.
• Brosse M, Benateau S, Gaudard A, Stamm C, Altermatt F (2022) The importance of indirect effects of climate change adaptations on alpine and pre‐alpine freshwater systems. Ecological Solutions and Evidence, 3(1).
• Chen Y-C, Hsu Y-C, Zai EO (2022) Streamflow measurement using mean surface velocity. Water, 14(15).
• Clesceri LS, Greenberg AE, Eaton AD (1999) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater (20th edition). American Public Health Association.
• Cüceloğlu G (2013) Darlık Havzasının model destekli hidrolojik analizi. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İstanbul.
• Dengiz O, İmamoğlu A, Saygin F, Göl C, Ediş S, Doğan A (2014) Soil erosion risk assessment using Icona modelling for Inebolu Watershed. Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 29(2).
• Duru Ü, Arabi M, Wohl EE (2017) Modeling stream flow and sediment yield using the SWAT model: a case study of Ankara River Basin, Turkey. Physical Geography.
• Ediş S (2018) Yarı kurak havzalarda hidrolojik modelleme ile iklim parametrelerinin ve arazi kullanımındaki değişimlerin su kalitesi üzerine etkilerinin analizi: Terme Çayı Havzası Örneği. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi Doktora Tezi, Çankırı.
• Ediş S, Aytaş İ, Özcan AU (2021) ICONA modeli kullanarak toprak erozyon riskinin değerlendirilmesi: Meşeli (Çubuk/Ankara) Havzası Örneği. Anadolu Orman Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(1): 15-22.
• Ediş S, Timur ÖB, Tuttu G, Aytaş İ, Göl C, Özcan AU (2023) Assessing the impact of engineering measures and vegetation restoration on soil erosion: a case study in Osmancık, Türkiye. Sustainability, 15(15).
• Engel B, Storm D, White M, Arnold J, Arabi M (2007) A hydrologic/water quality model application protocol. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 43(5): 1223-1236.
• Erdoğan Yüksel E (2015) Borçka Barajı Yağış Havzası'nda meydana gelen toprak erozyonu ve sediment veriminin WEPP erozyon tahmin modeli ve CBS Teknikleri kullanılarak belirlenmesi. Artvin Çoruh Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Doktora Tezi, Artvin.
• Ertürk A (2012) Managing the effects of the climate change on water resources and watershed ecology. In M. Kumarasamy (Ed.), Studies on Water Management Issues (pp. 259-274). InTech.
• Ezz-Aldeen M, Al-Ansari N, Knutsson S (2013) Application of SWAT model to estimate the sediment load from the left bank of Mosul Dam. Journal of Advanced Science and Engineering Research, 3(1): 47-61.
• Frederick KD, Major DC (1997) Climate change and water resources. Climatic Change, 37(1): 7-23.
• Gassman PW, Reyes MR, Green CH, Arnold JG (2007) The soil and water assessment tool: historical development, applications, and future research directions. Transactions of the ASABE, 50(4): 1211-1250.
• Genç O, Ardıçlıoğlu M, Ağıralioğlu N (2015) Calculation of mean velocity and discharge using water surface velocity in small streams. Flow Measurement and Instrumentation, 41: 115-120.
• Ghoraba SM (2015) Hydrological modeling of the Simly Dam Watershed (Pakistan) using GIS and SWAT model. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 54(3): 583-594.
• Gölpınar MS (2017) Yüzey akışların SWAT Modeli ile belirlenmesi: Akarsu Sulama Birliği Sahası Örneği. Çukurova Üniversitesi Doktora Tezi, Adana.
• Gull S, Ma A, Dar AM (2017) Prediction of stream flow and sediment yield of Lolab Watershed using SWAT model. Hydrology: Current Research, 8(1).
• Güngör Ö, Göncü S (2013) Application of the soil and water assessment tool model on the Lower Porsuk Stream Watershed. Hydrological Processes, 27(3): 453-466.
• Gupta HV, Sorooshian S, Yapo PO (1999) Status of automatic calibration for hydrologic models: Comparison with multilevel expert calibration. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 4(2): 135-143.
• Güzel Ç (2010) Application of SWAT Model in a Watershed in Turkey. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İstanbul.
• Kheirinejad S, Bozorg-Haddad O, Singh VP, Loaiciga HA (2022) The effect of reducing per capita water and energy uses on renewable water resources in the water, food, and energy nexus. Sci Rep, 12(1): 7582.
• Kukrer S, Mutlu E (2019) Assessment of surface water quality using water quality index and multivariate statistical analyses in Sarayduzu Dam Lake, Turkey. Environ Monit Assess, 191(2): 71.
• Loucks DP (2000) Sustainable water resources management. Water International, 25(1): 3-10.
• Marahatta S, Aryal D, Devkota LP, Bhattarai U, Shrestha D (2021) Application of SWAT in hydrological simulation of complex mountainous river basin (Part II: Climate Change Impact Assessment). Water, 13(11).
• Meaurio M, Zabaleta A, Uriarte JA, Srinivasan R, Antigüedad I (2015) Evaluation of SWAT models performance to simulate streamflow spatial origin. The case of a small forested watershed. Journal of Hydrology, 525: 326-334.
• Megdal S, Eden S, Shamir E (2017) Water governance, stakeholder engagement, and sustainable water resources management. Water, 9(3).
• MGM (2018) Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı Meteoroloji Genel Müdürlüğü, resmi istatistikler.
• Moriasi DN, Arnold JG, Van Liew MW, Bingner RL, Harmel RD, Veith TL (2007) Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Transactions of the ASABE, 50(3): 885-900.
• Neitsch SL, Arnold JG, Kiniry JR, Williams JR (2011) Soil and water assessment tool theoretical documentation version 2009.
• Oeurng C, Sauvage S, Sánchez-Pérez J-M (2011) Assessment of hydrology, sediment and particulate organic carbon yield in a large agricultural catchment using the SWAT model. Journal of Hydrology, 401(3-4): 145-153.
• Özcan Z (2016) Evaluation of the best management practices to control agricultural diffuse pollution in Lake Mogan Watershed with SWAT Model. Ortadoğu Teknik Üniversitesi Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara.
• Şahin B (2016) Küresel bir sorun: Su kıtlığı ve sanal su ticareti. Hitit Üniversitesi Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Çorum.
• Santhi C, Kannan N, Arnold JG, Di Luzio M (2008) Spatial calibration and temporal validation of flow for regional scale hydrologic modeling1. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 44(4): 829-846.
• Schilling J, Hertig E, Tramblay Y, Scheffran J (2020) Climate change vulnerability, water resources and social implications in North Africa. Regional Environmental Change, 20(1).
• Singh P, Gupta A, Singh M (2014) Hydrological inferences from watershed analysis for water resource management using remote sensing and GIS techniques. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science, 17(2): 111-121.
• Strauch M, Bernhofer C, Koide S, Volk M, Lorz C, Makeschin F (2012) Using precipitation data ensemble for uncertainty analysis in SWAT streamflow simulation. Journal of Hydrology, 414-415: 413-424.
• Thodsen H, Farkas C, Chormanski J, Trolle D, Blicher-Mathiesen G, Grant R, Engebretsen A, Kardel I, Andersen H (2017) Modelling nutrient load changes from fertilizer application scenarios in six catchments around the Baltic Sea. Agriculture, 7(5): 41.
• USGS (2020) Global water distribution. Retrieved May 4 from Verma S, Verma RK, Singh A, Naik NS (2012) Web-based GIS and desktop open source GIS software: An emerging innovative approach for water resources management. Advances in Computer Science, Engineering & Applications, Berlin, Heidelberg.
• Winchell M, Srinivasan R, Di Luzio J, Arnold J (2010) ArcSWAT interface for SWAT2009 user's guide.
• WWAP (2015) The United Nations World Water Development Report 2015: Water for a Sustainable World. UNESCO.