Spatial and Temporal Variabilities of Sediment Delivery Ratio

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Sean A. Woznicki (1)
  A. Pouyan Nejadhashemi (1)
  
• 关键词：Sediment delivery ratio ; Targeting ; Best management practices ; SWAT
• 刊名：Water Resources Management
• 出版年：2013
• 出版时间：May 2013
• 年：2013
• 卷：27
• 期：7
• 页码：2483-2499
• 全文大小：645KB
• 参考文献：1. Arabi M, Govindaraju RS, Hantush MM (2006) Cost-effective allocation of watershed management practices using a genetic algorithm. Water Resour Res 42(10):W10429 CrossRef
  2. Arnold JG, Srinivasan R, Muttiah RS, Williams JR (1998) Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment 鈥?part 1: modeling development. J Am Water Resour Assoc 34(1):73鈥?9 CrossRef
  3. Bilotta GS, Brazier RE, Haygarth PM, Macleod CJA, Butler R, Granger S, Krueger T, Freer J, Quinton J (2008) Rethinking the contribution of drained and undrained grasslands to sediment-related water quality problems. J Environ Qual 37(3):906鈥?14 CrossRef
  4. Boyce RC (1975) Sediment routing with sediment delivery ratios. Present and Prospective Technology for Predicting Sediment Yields and Sources, US Department of Agriculture Publication ARS-S-40: 61鈥?5
  5. de Vente J, Poesen J, Arabkhedri M, Verstraeten G (2007) The sediment delivery problem revisited. Prog Phys Geogr 31(2):155鈥?78 CrossRef
  6. Diodato N, Grauso S (2009) An improved correlation model for sediment delivery ratio assessment. Environ Earth Sci 59(1):223鈥?31 CrossRef
  7. Fraser RH (1999) SEDMOD: a GIS-based delivery model for diffuse source pollutants. Yale University, Diertation
  8. Gassman PW, Reyes MR, Green CH, Arnold JG (2007) The soil and water assessment tool: historical development, applications, and future research directions. Trans ASABE 50(4):1211鈥?250
  9. Giri S, Nejadhashemi AP, Woznicki SA (2012) Evaluation of targeting methods for implementation of best management practices in the Saginaw River watershed. J Env Manag. In Press
  10. Lee G, Lee K (2010) Determining the sediment delivery ratio using the sediment-rating curve and a geographic information system-embedded soil erosion model on a basin scale. J Hydrol Eng 15(10):834鈥?43 CrossRef
  11. Lu H, Moran CJ, Prosser IP (2006a) Modelling sediment delivery ratio over the Murray Darling basin. Environ Model Softw 21(9):1297鈥?308 CrossRef
  12. Lu H, Moran CJ, Sivapalan M (2006b) A theoretical explanation of catchment-scale sediment delivery. Water Resour Res 42(2):W02799 CrossRef
  13. 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. Trans ASABE 50(3):885鈥?00
  14. Neitsch SL, Arnold JG, Kiniry JR, Williams JR (2011) Soil and Water Assessment Tool Theoretical Documentation Version 2009. Texas Water Resources Institute Technical Report No. 406. Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
  15. Norman LM, Guertin DP, Feller M (2008) A coupled model approach to reduce nonpoint-source pollution resulting from predicted urban growth: a case study in the Ambos Nogales watershed. Urban Geogr 29(5):496鈥?16 CrossRef
  16. Ouyang D, Bartholic J, Selegean J (2005) Assessing sediment loading from agricultural croplands in the Great lakes basin. J Amer Sci 1(2):14鈥?1
  17. Park YS, Kim J, Kim NW, Kim SJ, Jeon J, Engel BA, Jang W, Lim KJ (2010) Development of new R, C, and SDR modules for the SATEEC GIS system. Comput Geosci 36(6):726鈥?34 CrossRef
  18. Renfro GW (1975) Use of erosion equations and sediment delivery ratios for predicting sediment yield. Present and Prospective Technology for Predicting Sediment Yields and Sources, US Department of Agriculture Publication ARS-S-40: 33鈥?5
  19. Rodriguez HG, Popp J, Maringanti C, Chaubey I (2011) Selection and placement of best management practices used to reduce water quality degradation in Lincoln lake watershed. Water Resour Res 47:W01507 CrossRef
  20. Srinivasan MS, Gerard-Marchant P, Veith TL, Gburek WJ, Steenhuis TS (2005) Watershed scale modeling of critical source areas of runoff generation and phosphorus transport. J Amer Water Resour Assoc 41(2):361鈥?75 CrossRef
  21. Tripathi MP, Panda RK, Raghuwanshi NS (2003) Identification and prioritization of critical sub-watersheds for soil conservation management using the SWAT model. Biosyst Eng 85(3):365鈥?79 CrossRef
  22. Tuppad P, Douglas-Mankin KR, McVay KA (2010) Strategic targeting of cropland management using watershed modeling. Agric Eng Int CIGR J 12(3):12鈥?4
  23. USDA (1972) National Engineering Handbook. Soil Conservation Service, US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, Section 3
  24. USEPA (2009) National water quality inventory: Report to Congress, 2004 reporting cycle. USEPA Doc. 841-R-08-001. USEPA, Washington, DC
  25. Vanoni VA (1975) Sediment deposition engineering. ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practices, p 54
  26. Walling DE (1983) The sediment delivery problem. J Hydrol 65(1鈥?):209鈥?37 CrossRef
  27. White MJ, Storm DE, Busteed PR, Stoodley SH, Phillips SJ (2009) Evaluating nonpoint source critical source area contributions at the watershed scale. J Environ Qual 38(4):1654鈥?663 CrossRef
  28. Williams JR, Berndt HD (1972) Sediment yield computed with universal equation. J Hydraul Div 98(12):2087鈥?098
  29. Williams JR (1995) The EPIC model. In: Singh VP (ed.) Computer models of watershed hydrology, Water Resources Publications, p 909鈥?000
  30. Woznicki SA, Nejadhashemi AP, Smith CM (2011) Assessing best management practice implementation strategies under climate change scenarios. Trans ASABE 54(1):171鈥?90
  31. Yang W, Sheng C, Voroney P (2005) Spatial targeting of conservation tillage to improve water quality and carbon retention benefits. Can J Agric Econ 53(4):477鈥?00 CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Sean A. Woznicki (1)
  A. Pouyan Nejadhashemi (1)
  
  1. Department of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA
  
• ISSN：1573-1650

文摘

Sediment contribution of specific areas of a watershed is an important consideration, but one that is often overlooked, when developing watershed management plans. Understanding sediment delivery to the watershed outlet is one method for identifying high contribution areas. In this study, a new methodology for calculating individual subbasin sediment delivery ratio (SDR) was developed within the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) for two Michigan watersheds. Subbasins with the greatest SDR had two defining characteristics: high erosion rates and close proximity to the watershed outlet. The impact of best management practice (BMP) implementation (no-tillage and Conservation Reserve Program) on sediment yield reduction at the watershed outlet was compared for two targeting methods (SDR and erosion rate). Identifying SDR of individual subbasins for implementation of BMPs is more effective method for addressing water quality concerns at the watershed outlet than the widely used targeting high risk erosion areas. Watershed SDR was found to be highly variable on a monthly basis, due to changes in sediment yield, which is in turn affected by factors such as precipitation and surface runoff. Finally, watershed SDR calculated using the physically-based SWAT model was compared to four empirically-based areal relationships with SDR. While some area methods reproduced the SWAT-SDR, the variations between areal methods indicate that more detailed physical characteristics should be considered in watershed SDR calculation.