A comparison study of DRASTIC methods with various objective methods for groundwater vulnerability assessment

被引:151
|
作者
Khosravi, Khabat [1 ]
Sartaj, Majid [2 ]
Tsai, Frank T-C [3 ]
Singh, Vijay P. [4 ,5 ]
Kazakis, Nerantzis [6 ]
Melesse, Assefa M. [7 ]
Prakash, Indra [8 ]
Bui, Dieu Tien [9 ]
Binh Thai Pham [10 ,11 ]
机构
[1] Sari Agr Sci & Nat Resources Univ, Fac Nat Resources, Sari, Iran
[2] Univ Ottawa, Civil Engn Dept, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
[3] Louisiana State Univ, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA
[4] Texas A&M Univ, Dept Biol & Agr Engn, College Stn, TX 77843 USA
[5] Texas A&M Univ, Zachry Dept Civil Engn, College Stn, TX 77843 USA
[6] Aristotle Univ Thessaloniki, Sch Geol, Thessaloniki, Greece
[7] Florida Int Univ, Dept Earth & Environm, AHC 5-390, Miami, FL USA
[8] Bhaskarchalya Inst Space Applicat & Geoinformat B, Dept Sci & Technol, Gandhinagar, India
[9] Univ South Eastern Norway, Dept Business & IT, Geog Informat Syst Grp, Gullbringvegen 36, N-3800 Bo I Telemark, Norway
[10] Ton Duc Thang Univ, Geog Informat Sci Res Grp, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
[11] Ton Duc Thang Univ, Fac Environm & Labour Safety, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
关键词
Groundwater vulnerability; DRASTIC; Weights-of-Evidence; Shannon Entropy; Logistic Model Tree; Bootstrap Aggregating; ARTIFICIAL-INTELLIGENCE APPROACH; FLOOD SUSCEPTIBILITY ASSESSMENT; BIVARIATE STATISTICAL-MODELS; SUPPORT VECTOR MACHINE; MULTICRITERIA DECISION; AQUIFER VULNERABILITY; SUPERVISED COMMITTEE; LOGISTIC-REGRESSION; FREQUENCY RATIO; RISK-ASSESSMENT;
D O I
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.06.130
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Groundwater vulnerability assessment is a measure of potential groundwater contamination for areas of interest. The main objective of this study is to modify original DRASTIC model using four objective methods, Weights-of-Evidence (WOE), Shannon Entropy (SE), Logistic Model Tree (LMT), and Bootstrap Aggregating (BA) to create a map of groundwater vulnerability for the Sari-Behshahr plain, Iran. The study also investigated impact of addition of eight additional factors (distance to fault, fault density, distance to river, river density, land-use, soil order, geological time scale, and altitude) to improve groundwater vulnerability assessment. A total of 109 nitrate concentration data points were used for modeling and validation purposes. The efficacy of the four methods was evaluated quantitatively using the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve (AUC). AUC value for original DRASTIC model without any modification of weights and rates was 0.50. Modification of weights and rates resulted in better performance with AUC values of 0.64, 0.65, 0.75, and 0.81 for BA, SE, LMT, and WOE methods, respectively. This indicates that performance of WOE is the best in assessing groundwater vulnerability for DRASTIC model with 7 factors. The results also show more improvement in predictability of the WOE model by introducing 8 additional factors to the DRASTIC as ADC value increased to 0.91. The most effective contributing factor for ground water vulnerability in the study area is the net recharge. The least effective factors are the impact of vadose zone and hydraulic conductivity. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1032 / 1049
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Assessing Groundwater Vulnerability: DRASTIC and DRASTIC-Like Methods: A Review
    Barbulescu, Alina
    WATER, 2020, 12 (05)
  • [2] USEFUL VULNERABILITY MAPPING METHODS FOR GETTING GROUNDWATER: DRASTIC
    Nalbantcilar, M. Tahir
    SGEM 2008: 8TH INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE, VOL II, CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, 2008, : 29 - 31
  • [3] Integrated assessment of groundwater pollution vulnerability in Goulmima: a comparative analysis of DRASTIC and GOD methods
    Lahssaine, Ismail Ait
    Kabiri, Lahcen
    Messaoudi, Badre
    Saadi, Youssef
    Essahlaoui, Ali
    Essafraoui, Badre
    Ouali, Lamya
    Kadiri, Abdelhakim
    EURO-MEDITERRANEAN JOURNAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRATION, 2024, 9 (04) : 2109 - 2122
  • [4] Comparative study for assessment of groundwater vulnerability to pollution using DRASTIC methods applied to central Nile Delta, Egypt
    Metwally M.I.
    Armanuos A.M.
    Zeidan B.A.
    International Journal of Energy and Water Resources, 2023, 7 (2) : 175 - 190
  • [5] A Comparison of Data-Driven Groundwater Vulnerability Assessment Methods
    Sorichetta, Alessandro
    Ballabio, Cristiano
    Masetti, Marco
    Robinson, Gilpin R., Jr.
    Sterlacchini, Simone
    GROUND WATER, 2013, 51 (06) : 866 - 879
  • [6] Optimization of the DRASTIC method for groundwater vulnerability assessment via the use of simple statistical methods and GIS
    G. P. Panagopoulos
    A. K. Antonakos
    N. J. Lambrakis
    Hydrogeology Journal, 2006, 14 : 894 - 911
  • [7] Methods for groundwater vulnerability assessment and their application
    Baoxiang, Zhang
    Fanhai, Meng
    Kaining, Yu
    JOURNAL OF CHINA UNIVERSITY OF GEOSCIENCES, 2007, 18 : 128 - 130
  • [8] Optimization of the DRASTIC method for groundwater vulnerability assessment via the use of simple statistical methods and GIS
    Panagopoulos, G. P.
    Antonakos, A. K.
    Lambrakis, N. J.
    HYDROGEOLOGY JOURNAL, 2006, 14 (06) : 894 - 911
  • [9] Comparative analysis of EPIK, DRASTIC, and DRASTIC-LUC methods for groundwater vulnerability assessment in karst aquifers of the Western Amazon Basin
    Naranjo, Elizabeth
    Conicelli, Bruno
    Moulatlet, Gabriel Massaine
    Hirata, Ricardo
    ENVIRONMENTAL EARTH SCIENCES, 2025, 84 (03)
  • [10] Comparison of Three Groundwater Vulnerability Assessment Methods in Minab Aquifer, Iran
    Kavehkar, Neda
    Javadi, Saman
    Pirooz, Behrooz
    Mohammadi, Kourosh
    Kholghi, Majid
    PROCEEDINGS OF 2010 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND DEVELOPMENT, 2010, : 53 - 58