Technical Papers
Aug 16, 2016

Impact of Spatial Discretization of Hydrologic Models on Spatial Distribution of Nonpoint Source Pollution Hotspots

Publication: Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 21, Issue 12

Abstract

The soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) was used to investigate the effects of hydrologic response unit (HRU) thresholds (0–20%) on predictions of multiple variables by calibrated and uncalibrated models in a 10.4-km2 urban watershed in the U.S. Mid-Atlantic region. Surface runoff, discharge, sediment yield, and nutrient yield were simulated in stream and on land, and used to spatially identify hotspots for each constituent. SWAT2012 was able to produce accurate discharge and nitrogen estimates that were not sensitive to HRU thresholds. HRU thresholds significantly affected sediment and phosphorus predictions in calibrated and uncalibrated models. Constituent hotspots identified by an uncalibrated model with a 0% HRU threshold were found to be acceptable for the urban watershed under study, except for sediment. Hotspots identified with calibrated models, with HRU thresholds of 5% or less, fit with the identification of on-land sediment and nutrient hotspots. These findings suggest that researchers should carefully consider HRU thresholds when predicting on-land variables of small urban watersheds similar to the watershed in this study when using SWAT.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank USEPA for providing financial support (Grant Number: R835284). This work is part of the research project Sustainable Community Oriented Stormwater Management (S-COSM): A Sensible Strategy for the Chesapeake Bay, which aims to efficiently improve urban stormwater conditions by increasing adoption of best management practices, specifically for targeted hotspots, via community-based participatory research. The authors also thank Stephen Reiling of the DC Department of the Environment for providing water quality data in the Watts Branch watershed.

References

Abbott, M. B., and Refsgaard, J. C., eds. (1996). Distributed hydrological modeling, Vol. 22, Springer.
Blöschl, G., and Sivapalan, M. (1995). “Scale issues in hydrological modelling: A review.” Hydrol. Processes, 9(3–4), 251–290.
Bracmort, K. S., Arabi, M., Frankenberger, J. R., Engel, B. A., and Arnold, J. G. (2006). “Modeling long-term water quality impact of structural BMPs.” Trans ASABE, 49(2), 367–374.
Brown, D. G., Bian, L., and Walsh, S. J. (1993). “Response of a distributed watershed erosion model to variations in input data aggregation levels.” Comput. Geosci., 19(4), 499–509.
Chaplot, V. (2005). “Impact of DEM mesh size and soil map scale on SWAT runoff, sediment, and NO3-N loads predictions.” J. Hydrol., 312(1), 207–222.
Chaubey, I., Cotter, A. S., Costello, T. A., and Soerens, T. S. (2005). “Effect of DEM data resolution on SWAT output uncertainty.” Hydrol. Processes, 19(3), 621–628.
DC Department of Health. (2003). “Final total maximum daily loads for total suspended solids in watts brach.” 〈http://green.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ddoe/publication/attachments/zfin_tmdl_tss_watts.pdf〉 (Aug. 2013).
Djodjic, F., Montas, H., Shirmohammadi, A., Bergström, L., and Ulén, B. (2002). “A decision support system for phosphorus management at a watershed scale.” J. Environ. Qual., 31(3), 937–945.
Doherty, J. (2005). PEST: Model independent parameter estimation, 5th Ed., Watermark Numerical Computing, Brisbane, Australia.
Dutta, D., and Nakayama, K. (2009). “Effects of spatial grid resolution on river flow and surface inundation simulation by physically based distributed modelling approach.” Hydrol. Processes, 23(4), 534–545.
Emili, L. A., and Greene, R. P. (2013). “Modeling agricultural nonpoint source pollution using a geographic information system approach.” Environ. Manage., 51(1), 70–95.
FitzHugh, T. W., and Mackay, D. S. (2000). “Impacts of input parameter spatial aggregation on an agricultural nonpoint source pollution model.” J. Hydrol., 236(1), 35–53.
Gitau, M. W., Gburek, W. J., and Bishop, P. L. (2008). “Use of the SWAT model to quantify water quality effects of agricultural BMPs at the farm-scale level.” Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Biol. Eng., 51(6), 1925–1936.
Hessel, R. (2005). “Effects of grid cell size and time step length on simulation results of the Limburg soil erosion model (LISEM).” Hydrol. Processes, 19(15), 3037–3049.
Jha, M., Gassman, P. W., Secchi, S., Gu, R., and Arnold, J. (2004). “Effect of watershed subdivision on SWAT flow, sediment, and nutrient predictions.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 40(3), 811–825.
Kalin, L., Govindaraju, R. S., and Hantush, M. M. (2003). “Effect of geomorphologic resolution on modeling of runoff hydrograph and sedimentograph over small watersheds.” J. Hydrol., 276(1), 89–111.
Kalin, L., Govindaraju, R. S., and Hantush, M. M. (2004). “Development and application of a methodology for sediment source identification. I: Modified unit sedimentograph approach.” J. Hydrol. Eng., 184–193.
Kuo, W. L., et al. (1999). “Effect of grid size on runoff and soil moisture for a variable-source-area hydrology model.” Water Resour. Res., 35(11), 3419–3428.
Leisnham, P., et al. (2013). “Watershed diagnostics for improved adoption of management practices: Integrating biophysical and social factors across urban and agricultural landscapes.” ASABE Annual Int. Meeting, American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, St. Joseph, MI.
Liu, R., Zhang, P., Wang, X., Chen, Y., and Shen, Z. (2013). “Assessment of effects of best management practices on agricultural non-point source pollution in Xiangxi River watershed.” Agric. Water Manage., 117, 9–18.
Mamillapalli, S., Srinivasan, R., Arnold, J. G., and Engel, B. A. (1996). “Effect of spatial variability on basin scale modeling.” Proc., 3rd Int. Conf./Workshop on Integrating GIS and Environmental Modeling, National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, Santa Barbara, CA.
Nash, J., and Sutcliffe, J. V. (1970). “River flow forecasting through conceptual models. IA: Discussion of principles.” J. Hydrol., 10(3), 282–290.
Neitsch, S. L., Arnold, J. G., Kiniry, J. R., and Williams, J. R. (2011). Soil and water assessment tool: Theoretical documentation, version 2009, Texas A&M Univ. System, College Station, TX.
Niraula, R., Kalin, L., Wang, R., and Srivastava, P. (2012). “Determining nutrient and sediment critical source areas with SWAT: Effect of lumped calibration.” Trans. ASABE, 55(1), 137–147.
NOAA and NCEI (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and National Centers for Environmental Information). (2014). “Map viewer.” 〈https://gis.ncdc.noaa.gov/maps/ncei/〉 (Aug. 2014).
Panagopoulos, Y., Makropoulos, C., and Mimikou, M. (2012). “Decision support for diffuse pollution management.” Environ. Modell. Software, 30, 57–70.
Pandey, A., Chowdary, V. M., Mal, B. C., and Billib, M. (2009). “Application of the WEPP model for prioritization and evaluation of best management practices in an Indian watershed.” Hydrol. Processes, 23(21), 2997–3005.
Romanowicz, A. A., Vanclooster, M., Rounsevell, M., and La Junesse, I. (2005). “Sensitivity of the SWAT model to the soil and land use data parametrisation: A case study in the Thyle catchment, Belgium.” Ecol. Modell., 187(1), 27–39.
Singh, V. P., and Frevert, D. K., eds. (2010). Watershed models, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Srinivasan, M. S., Gérard-Marchant, P., Veith, T. L., Gburek, W. J., and Steenhuis, T. S. (2005). “Watershed scale modeling of critical source areas of runoff generation and phosphorus transport.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 41(2), 361–377.
USDA and NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). (2014). “Web soil survey.” 〈http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm〉 (Aug. 2014).
U.S. EPA. (2013). “Restoration effects stabilize watts branch and reduce sediment loading.” 〈http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/nps/success319/upload/dc_watts.pdf〉 (Aug. 2013).
USGS. (2014). “National map viewer.” 〈http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/launch/〉.
Vieux, B. E., and Needham, S. (1993). “Nonpoint-pollution model sensitivity to grid-cell size.” J. Water Resour. Plann. Manage., 141–157.
Wang, Y., and Brubaker, K. (2014). “Implementing a nonlinear groundwater module in the soil and water assessment tool (SWAT).” Hydrol. Processes, 28(9), 3388–3403.
Winchell, M., Srinivasan, R., DiLuzio, M., and Arnold, J. (2007). “ArcSWAT interface for SWAT2005.” 〈http://www.geology.wmich.edu/sultan/5350/Labs/ArcSWAT_Documentation.pdf〉 (Aug. 2013).
Zadeh, K. S., Montas, H. J., Shirmohammadi, A., Sadeghzadeh, A., and Gudla, P. R. (2007). “A diagnosis-prescription system for nitrogen management in environment.” J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A, 42(5), 557–565.
Zhang, W., and Montgomery, D. R. (1994). “Digital elevation model grid size, landscape representation, and hydrologic simulations.” Water Resour. Res., 30(4), 1019–1028.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
Volume 21Issue 12December 2016

History

Received: Jan 11, 2015
Accepted: Jul 12, 2016
Published online: Aug 16, 2016
Published in print: Dec 1, 2016
Discussion open until: Jan 16, 2017

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Graduate Student, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 (corresponding author). E-mail: [email protected]
Hubert J. Montas [email protected]
Professor, Dept. of Bio-Engineering, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. E-mail: [email protected]
Kaye L. Brubaker [email protected]
Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. E-mail: [email protected]
Paul T. Leisnham [email protected]
Associate Professor, Dept. of Environmental Science and Technology, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. E-mail: [email protected]
Adel Shirmohammadi [email protected]
Professor, Dept. of Environmental Science and Technology, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. E-mail: [email protected]
Victoria Chanse [email protected]
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Plant Science and Landscape Architecture, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. E-mail: [email protected]
Amanda K. Rockler [email protected]
Agent, Maryland Sea Grant Extension Programs, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. E-mail: [email protected]

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share