Sediment Delivery Estimates in Water Quality Models Altered by Resolution and Source of Topographic Data

被引:29
作者
Beeson, Peter C. [1 ]
Sadeghi, Ali M. [1 ]
Lang, Megan W. [2 ]
Tomer, Mark D. [3 ]
Daughtry, Craig S. T. [1 ]
机构
[1] USDA ARS, Hydrol & Remote Sensing Lab, Beltsville, MD 20705 USA
[2] USDA ARS, No Res Stn, Beltsville, MD 20705 USA
[3] USDA ARS, Natl Lab Agr & Environm, Ames, IA 50011 USA
关键词
SOIL LOSS; MAP SCALE; OUTPUT; LEVEL; LOADS; FIELD; LIDAR;
D O I
10.2134/jeq2012.0148
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Moderate-resolution (30-m) digital elevation models (DEMs) are normally used to estimate slope for the parameterization of non-point source, process-based water quality models. These models, such as the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), use the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) and Modified USLE to estimate sediment loss. The slope length and steepness factor, a critical parameter in USLE, significantly affects sediment loss estimates. Depending on slope range, a twofold difference in slope estimation potentially results in as little as 50% change or as much as 250% change in the LS factor and subsequent sediment estimation. Recently, the availability of much finer-resolution (similar to 3 m) DEMs derived from Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data has increased. However, the use of these data may not always be appropriate because slope values derived from fine spatial resolution DEMs are usually significantly higher than slopes derived from coarser DEMs. This increased slope results in considerable variability in modeled sediment output. This paper addresses the implications of parameterizing models using slope values calculated from DEMs with different spatial resolutions (90, 30, 10, and 3 m) and sources. Overall, we observed over a 2.5-fold increase in slope when using a 3-m instead of a 90-m DEM, which increased modeled soil loss using the USLE calculation by 130%. Care should be taken when using LiDAR-derived DEMs to parameterize water quality models because doing so can result in significantly higher slopes, which considerably alter modeled sediment loss.
引用
收藏
页码:26 / 36
页数:11
相关论文
共 45 条
[31]   Selection and placement of best management practices used to reduce water quality degradation in Lincoln Lake watershed [J].
Rodriguez, Hector German ;
Popp, Jennie ;
Maringanti, Chetan ;
Chaubey, Indrajeet .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 2011, 47
[32]  
Runkel R.L., 2004, LOAD ESTIMATOR LOADE, DOI 10.3133/tm4A5
[33]   Rating curve estimation of nutrient loads in Iowa rivers [J].
Stenback, Greg A. ;
Crumpton, William G. ;
Schilling, Keith E. ;
Helmers, Matthew J. .
JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY, 2011, 396 (1-2) :158-169
[34]  
Stewart GR, 2006, T ASABE, V49, P357, DOI 10.13031/2013.20410
[35]   Resolution Sensitivity of a Compound Terrain Derivative as Computed from LiDAR-Based Elevation Data [J].
Straumann, Ralph K. ;
Purves, Ross S. .
EUROPEAN INFORMATION SOCIETY: LEADING THE WAY WITH GEO-INFORMATION, 2007, :87-109
[36]   Do soil surveys and terrain analyses identify similar priority sites for conservation? [J].
Tomer, MD ;
James, DE .
SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, 2004, 68 (06) :1905-1915
[37]  
Tomer MD, 2003, J SOIL WATER CONSERV, V58, P198
[38]  
Trochim W.M. K., 2007, RES METHODS KNOWLEDG, V3rd, P99
[39]   DEM aggregation for watershed modeling [J].
Wang, MH ;
Hjelmfelt, AT ;
Garbrecht, J .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION, 2000, 36 (03) :579-584
[40]   Airborne laser scanning - an introduction and overview [J].
Wehr, A ;
Lohr, U .
ISPRS JOURNAL OF PHOTOGRAMMETRY AND REMOTE SENSING, 1999, 54 (2-3) :68-82