Effect of soil spatial aggregation caused by the calculation unit division on runoff and sediment load simulation in the SWAT model

被引:4
作者
Xiao, Juan [1 ]
Wang, Yao [1 ]
Sun, Jinxing [1 ]
Xie, Shuishi [2 ]
Huang, Yan [1 ]
Wan, Zhiwei [1 ]
Meng, Lihong [1 ]
Li, Xiujuan [1 ]
Zhong, Keyuan [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Gannan Normal Univ, Sch Geog & Environm Engn, Ganzhou 341000, Jiangxi, Peoples R China
[2] Hydrol & Water Resources Monitoring Ctr Upstream G, Ganzhou 341000, Jiangxi, Peoples R China
[3] Gannan Normal Univ, Sch Geog & Environm Engn, Shiyuan South Rd, Ganzhou 341000, Jiangxi, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT); Soil; Spatial aggregation; Runoff; Sediment load; WATERSHED SUBDIVISION; AREA;
D O I
10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.130345
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Distributed hydrological model divides watersheds into distinct calculation units to simulate hydrological processes. Within the model, different calculation unit division schemes induce input elements, such as soil and land use, to certain degrees of generalization, thus affecting the simulation result. Analyzing the effect of the calculation unit division on the simulation result is an important methodology to reduce uncertainty and improve the simulation accuracy of the model. Previous researchers have focused on the comprehensive effect of underlying surface generalization (such as soil, land use, and terrain generalization) caused by the calculation unit division on the simulation results, while it did not separate the effect of the generalization of the individual input factor on the simulation result. In this paper, the Dongjiang headwater region in southern China was selected as the study area. The single type of land use and slope were input into the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model to fix the effects of land use and terrain caused by calculation unit division on the simulation results. Eleven calculation unit division schemes were used to analyze the impact of soil spatial aggregation on runoff and sediment load simulations. The calculation unit division schemes included 11 sub-watershed division schemes and their hydrological response unit (HRU) thresholds were set at 8 %. The drainage area thresholds of the 11 sub-watershed division schemes were 30 ha, 60 ha, 120 ha, 240 ha, 480 ha, 1000 ha, 1600 ha, 2200 ha, 2800 ha, 3400 ha and 4000 ha. The results demonstrated that the soil spatial distribution showed an obvious aggregation with an increase in the drainage area threshold in the SWAT model. Of these, the Krasnozem soil type which covers the largest area in the watershed, increased significantly with an increase in the drainage area threshold. However, the areas of all the other soil types decreased significantly. The Lioth soil type covers the smallest area in the watershed decreased and even disappeared when the threshold in the SWAT model was greater than 1000 ha. Furthermore, soil spatial aggregation caused a significant increase in the annual runoff and sediment load (P < 0.05), with the sediment load (Re = 29.78 %) increasing at a greater rate compared to runoff (Re = 1.74 %). Increased soil aggregation significantly increased the sediment loads in the maximum 1-day, the continuous maximum 5-day, the continuous maximum 7-day, and the sediment load in flood processes (P < 0.001). Refining the calculation unit division scheme will cause a significant increase in the number of calculation units. Due to the computer processing power limitations, we cannot further refine the calculation unit division scheme. Based on our current operational calculation unit division scheme, we did not identify the optimal division scheme in the study region. These results can provide reference information for future research into hydrological model uncertainty and can improve the SWAT model simulation accuracy.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]  
Ahn Seungseop, 2008, [JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE INTERNATIONAL, 한국환경과학회지], V17, P239
[2]  
Ajmal M., 2016, Water
[3]   Role of watershed subdivision on modeling the effectiveness of best management practices with SWAT [J].
Arabi, M ;
Govindaraju, RS ;
Hantush, MM ;
Engel, BA .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION, 2006, 42 (02) :513-528
[4]  
Arnold JG, 2012, T ASABE, V55, P1491
[5]  
Bingner RL, 1997, T ASAE, V40, P1329, DOI 10.13031/2013.21391
[6]   ESTIMATION OF RUNOFF, PEAK DISCHARGE AND SEDIMENT LOAD AT THE EVENT SCALE IN A MEDIUM-SIZE MEDITERRANEAN WATERSHED USING THE ANNAGNPS MODEL [J].
Bisantino, T. ;
Bingner, R. ;
Chouaib, W. ;
Gentile, F. ;
Liuzzi, G. Trisorio .
LAND DEGRADATION & DEVELOPMENT, 2015, 26 (04) :340-355
[7]   An evaluation of the impact of model structure on hydrological modelling uncertainty for streamflow simulation [J].
Butts, MB ;
Payne, JT ;
Kristensen, M ;
Madsen, H .
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2004, 298 (1-4) :242-266
[8]   The limits of watershed delineation: implications of different DEMs, DEM resolutions, and area threshold values [J].
Datta, Srijon ;
Karmakar, Shyamal ;
Mezbahuddin, Symon ;
Hossain, Mohammad Mozaffar ;
Chaudhary, B. S. ;
Hoque, Md Enamul ;
Al Mamun, M. M. Abdullah ;
Baul, Tarit Kumar .
HYDROLOGY RESEARCH, 2022, 53 (08) :1047-1062
[9]   Inclusion of Modified Snow Melting and Flood Processes in the SWAT Model [J].
Duan, Yongchao ;
Liu, Tie ;
Meng, Fanhao ;
Luo, Min ;
Frankl, Amaury ;
De Maeyer, Philippe ;
Bao, Anming ;
Kurban, Alishir ;
Feng, Xianwei .
WATER, 2018, 10 (12)
[10]   Impacts of input parameter spatial aggregation on an agricultural nonpoint source pollution model [J].
FitzHugh, TW ;
Mackay, DS .
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2000, 236 (1-2) :35-53