Identifying Priority Subwatersheds in the Illinois River Drainage Area in Arkansas Watershed Using a Distributed Modeling Approach

Pai, Naresh; Saraswat, Dharmendra; Daniels, Mike

doi:10.13031/2013.40657

Cited by 23 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The focus of relative modeling exercises is to accurately represent changes in H/WQ responses between scenarios. Examples of relevant assessment include climate scenarios (e.g., Parajuli, 2010;Sheshukov et al, 2011;Ahmadi et al, 2014;Mehtha et al, 2015), land-management scenarios, including spatial targeting (e.g., Qi et al, 2009;Woznicki et al, 2011;Daggupati et al, 2011;Pai et al, 2011;Ahmadi et al, 2013;Dile et al, 2015), and land use scenarios, including comparisons among management/mitigation efforts or spatial locations (e.g., Srinivasan et al, 2010;Knisel and Douglas-Mankin, 2012;Deb et al, 2015;Daggupati et al, 2015). Recent ASABE collections provide examples of each of these scenarios using the SWAT model (Douglas-Mankin et al, 2010;Tuppad et al, 2011;Arnold et al, 2012).…”

Section: Relative Vs Absolute Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, in areas of intensive crop production, prediction of runoff without calibration of crop growth could lead to erroneous parameter estimation. Other examples of cases in which it would be beneficial to calibrate multiple, dependent processes include calibrating runoff before sediment yield (Maski et al, 2008;Pai et al, 2011, Douglas-Mankin et al, 2013, nitrate-nitrogen yield (Knisel and Douglas-Mankin, 2012;Ma et al, 2012), or total phosphorus yield (Bottcher et al, 2012) or calibrating sediment yield before total nitrogen or phosphorus yield (Douglas-Mankin et al, 2010;Pai et al, 2011). Calibration of multiple output variables requires consideration of the interactions among the parameters used to calibrate each separate output variable.…”

Section: Complex Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Recommended Calibration and Validation Strategy for Hydrologic and Water Quality Models

2015

Trans. ASABE

167

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hydrologic and water quality (H/WQ) models are widely used to support site-specific environmental assessment, design, planning, and decision making. Calibration and validation (C/V) are fundamental processes used to demonstrate that an H/WQ model can produce suitable results in a particular application. However, the lack of comprehensive guidelines has led to the use of ad hoc, inconsistent, and incomplete C/V processes, which have made it difficult to interpret the myriad of published modeling studies, reduced the utility of many modeling applications, and slowed the advancement of H/WQ modeling. The objective of this article is to provide a generalized structure and process to assist modelers in developing a C/V strategy for H/WQ modeling applications. These best practice recommendations were developed based on an expansive review of the modeling literature, including a special collection of articles on H/WQ model calibration, validation, and use, as well as extensive discussion and debate among the authors. The model C/V recommendations include careful consideration, execution, and documentation of the following elements: (1) goals of model use, (2) data and parameters used in C/V, and (3) model C/V processes. Considerations in element 3 include the warm-up period, C/V strategy complexity, C/V process staging, spatiotemporal allocation of C/V comparison data, manual vs. automatic C/V, and additional diagnostics. Notable examples from the literature are provided for each strategy element. The comprehensive C/V strategy described herein will allow for better interpretation of future modeling studies, improved utility of modeling applications, and more systematic advancement of H/WQ models.

show abstract

Section: Relative Vs Absolute Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Complex Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Recommended Calibration and Validation Strategy for Hydrologic and Water Quality Models

2015

Trans. ASABE

167

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The majority of nutrient transport occurs during storm events (Owens et al, 1991;Pionke et al, 1999;Green and Haggard, 2001), requiring substantial resources to adequately monitor this flow condition (Harmel et al, 2006). Alternatively, nutrient loadings are often simulated with watershed models to predict potential sources and BMP effectiveness and to prioritize subwatersheds Chiang et al, 2010;Pai et al, 2011). What if, instead of estimating total annual nutrient loads, we only needed to monitor baseflow nutrient concentrations?…”

Section: Watershed Management Using Baseflow Nutrient Concentrationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can We Manage Nonpoint‐Source Pollution Using Nutrient Concentrations during Seasonal Baseflow?

McCarty

Haggard

2016

Agricultural & Env Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Core Ideas Nutrient concentrations in streams are positively correlated during baseflow and runoff conditions. High nutrient concentrations at baseflow suggest high nutrient loads from nonpoint sources. Manage nonpoint sources by targeting subwatersheds with elevated nutrient concentrations during baseflow. Focusing on baseflow conditions frees up resources to monitor water quality more broadly across watersheds. Nationwide, a substantial amount of resources has been targeted toward improving water quality, particularly focused on nonpoint‐source pollution. This study was conducted to evaluate the relationship between nutrient concentrations observed during baseflow and runoff conditions from 56 sites across five watersheds in Arkansas. Baseflow and stormflow concentrations for each site were summarized using geometric mean and then evaluated for directional association. A significant, positive correlation was found for NO3–N, total N, soluble reactive P, and total P, indicating that sites with high baseflow concentrations also had elevated runoff concentrations. Those landscape factors that influence nutrient concentrations in streams also likely result in increased runoff, suggesting that high baseflow concentrations may reflect elevated loads from the watershed. The results highlight that it may be possible to collect water‐quality data during baseflow to help define where to target nonpoint‐source pollution best management practices within a watershed.

show abstract

“…The use of multiple temporal land uses has shown improved spatial and temporal hydrological responses from the SWAT model [23]. Land use changes have also been reported to mask water quality improvements resulting from the implementation of CPs in a watershed [24].…”

Section: Swat Model Inputsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Sensitivity Analysis of Impacts of Conservation Practices on Water Quality in L’Anguille River Watershed, Arkansas

Singh

Saraswat

Sharpley

2018

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessing the performance of appropriate agricultural conservation practices (CPs) frequently relies on the use of simulation models as a cost-effective tool instead of depending solely on the monitoring of water quality at individual field and watershed levels. This study evaluates the predicted impacts of several CPs on nutrient and sediment loss at the hydrological response unit scale in the L'Anguille River Watershed, which is a watershed identified as a "focus watershed" under the Mississippi River Basin healthy watershed Initiative (MRBI) program. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool model was calibrated and validated between 1998-2005 and 2006-2012, respectively for flow, sediment, total phosphorus, and nitrate nitrogen. Out of the seven MRBI CPs modeled in this study, the highest reduction in sediment (80%) and nutrient (58% for total phosphorus and 16% for total nitrogen) was predicted for the critical area planting practice, followed by filter strip, irrigation land leveling, grade stabilization structure, irrigation pipeline, nutrient management, and irrigation water management. Some of the predicted impacts conflicted with expected CP performance. The study underscores the importance of the proper formulation of CP algorithms in using simulation models for predicting impacts on water quality.

show abstract

Identifying Priority Subwatersheds in the Illinois River Drainage Area in Arkansas Watershed Using a Distributed Modeling Approach

Cited by 23 publications

References 0 publications

A Recommended Calibration and Validation Strategy for Hydrologic and Water Quality Models

A Recommended Calibration and Validation Strategy for Hydrologic and Water Quality Models

Can We Manage Nonpoint‐Source Pollution Using Nutrient Concentrations during Seasonal Baseflow?

A Sensitivity Analysis of Impacts of Conservation Practices on Water Quality in L’Anguille River Watershed, Arkansas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About