| Literature DB >> 27508082 |
Mohammad Ali Baghapour1, Amir Fadaei Nobandegani1, Nasser Talebbeydokhti2, Somayeh Bagherzadeh3, Ata Allah Nadiri4, Maryam Gharekhani4, Nima Chitsazan5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Extensive human activities and unplanned land uses have put groundwater resources of Shiraz plain at a high risk of nitrate pollution, causing several environmental and human health issues. To address these issues, water resources managers utilize groundwater vulnerability assessment and determination of protection. This study aimed to prepare the vulnerability maps of Shiraz aquifer by using Composite DRASTIC index, Nitrate Vulnerability index, and artificial neural network and also to compare their efficiency.Entities:
Keywords: Artificial neural network; Composite DRASTIC; Nitrate vulnerability; Shiraz aquifer
Year: 2016 PMID: 27508082 PMCID: PMC4977699 DOI: 10.1186/s40201-016-0254-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Environ Health Sci Eng
Fig. 1Satellite image of Shiraz plain
Ratings and weights given to the DRASTIC parameters [6]
| Depth to water table (m) | Topography slope (%) | Hydraulic conductivity (m day -1) | |||
| Range | Rating | Range | Rating | Range | Rating |
| 0.0–1.5 | 10 | 0–2 | 10 | 0–4.1 | 1 |
| 1.5–4.6 | 9 | 0–2 | 9 | 4.1–12.2 | 2 |
| 4.6–9.1 | 7 | 6–12 | 5 | 12.2–28.5 | 4 |
| 9.1–15.2 | 5 | 12–18 | 3 | 28.5–40.7 | 6 |
| 15.2–22.9 | 3 | >18 | 1 | 40.7–81.5 | 8 |
| 22.9–30.5 | 2 | ||||
| >30.5 | 1 | ||||
| Soil media | Aquifer media | Impact of the vadose zone | |||
| Range | Rating | Range | Rating a | Range | Rating a |
| Thin or absent | 10 | Massive shale | 1–3 (2) | Confining layer | 1 |
| Gravel | 10 | Metamorphic/igneous | 2–5 (3) | Silt/clay | 2–6 (3) |
| Sand | 9 | Weathered metamorphic/igneous | 3–5 (4) | Shale | 2–6 (3) |
| Peat | 8 | Glacial till | 4–6 (5) | Limestone | 2–5 (3) |
| Shiniking and/or aggregated clay | 7 | Bedded sandstone, limestone and shale sequence | 5–9 (6) | Sandstone | 2–7 (6) |
| Loam | 5 | Massive sandstone | 4–9 (6) | Bedded limestone, sandstone and shale | 4–8 (6) |
| Silty loam | 4 | Massive limestone | 4–9 (8) | Sand and gravel with significant silt and clay | 4–8 (6) |
| Clay loam | 3 | Sand and gravel | 4–9 (8) | Sand and gravel | 4–8 (8) |
| Muck | 2 | Basalt | 2–10 (9) | Basalt | 2–10 (9) |
| Non-shrinking and non-aggregated clay | 1 | Karst limestone | 9–10 (10) | Karst limestone | 8–10 (10) |
| Parameters | Relative weight | ||||
| Depth to water table | 5 | ||||
| Impact of the vadose zones | 5 | ||||
| Net recharge | 4 | ||||
| Aquifer media | 3 | ||||
| Hydraulic conductivity | 3 | ||||
| Soil media | 2 | ||||
| Topography slop | 1 | ||||
aTypical rating in parentheses according to Aller et al. [6]
Ranges and ratings applied to the potential risk associated with land use (L) according to the CD index [9]
| Land use categorya | Lr |
|---|---|
| Urban areas | 8 |
| Irrigated field crops | 8 |
| Orchards | 6 |
| Uncultivated land | 5 |
| Lw = 5 |
a Main land uses observed in Shiraz Plain
Vulnerability ranges corresponding to the CD index [9] and the NV index [12]
| Vulnerability | Ranges (CD index) | Ranges (NV index) |
|---|---|---|
| Very low | <100 | <70 |
| Low | 100–145 | 70–110 |
| Moderate | 145–190 | 110–150 |
| High | 190–235 | 150–190 |
| Very high | ≥235 | ≥190 |
Ranges and ratings applied to the potential risk associated with land use (LU) as a source of nitrate pollution for the NV index [12]
| Range | LU |
|---|---|
| Irrigated field crops | 1.0 |
| Urban areas | 0.8 |
| Uncultivated land and | 0.3 |
| Semi-natural areas | |
| Forests and natural areas | 0.2 |
Ranges and ratings applied to the Net Recharge parameter according to the Piscopo method [23]
| Slope | Rainfall | Soil permeability | Recharge value | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Slope % | Factor | Rainfall (mm/year) | Factor | Range | Factor | Range | Rating |
| <2 | 4 | 850< | 4 | High | 5 | 11–13 | 10 |
| 2–10 | 3 | 700–850 | 3 | Moderate to high | 4 | 9–11 | 8 |
| 10–33 | 2 | 500–700 | 2 | Moderate | 3 | 7–9 | 5 |
| >33 | 1 | 500> | 1 | Low | 2 | 5–7 | 3 |
| Very low | 1 | 3–5 | 1 | ||||
Fig. 2Rated maps of Depth to water table
Fig. 3Rated maps of net recharge
Fig. 4Rated maps of aquifer media
Fig. 5Rated maps of soil media
Fig. 6Rated maps of Topography
Fig. 7Rated maps of Impact of vadose zone
Fig. 8Rated maps of Hydraulic conductivity
Fig. 9The major land uses classes in the study area
Fig. 10Rated map of potential risk associated with land use (LU)
Fig. 11Map of specific vulnerability to nitrate pollution according to the CD index
Fig. 12Map of specific vulnerability to nitrate pollution according to the NV index
Fig. 13The vulnerability map using ANN method
Fig. 14Map of nitrate pollution of groundwater in Shiraz aquifer
Regression analysis results using the mean nitrate concentration of groundwater in the Shiraz aquifer
| Model | R Square |
|---|---|
| CD | 0.292 |
| NV | 0.303 |
| ANN | 0.80 |