| Literature DB >> 30249052 |
Juntao Fan1, Mengdi Li2, Fen Guo3, Zhenguang Yan4, Xin Zheng5, Yuan Zhang6, Zongxue Xu7, Fengchang Wu8.
Abstract
Identifying priority zones for river restoration is important for biodiversity conservation and catchment management. However, limited data due to the difficulty of field collection has led to research to better understand the ecological status within a catchment and develop a targeted planning strategy for river restoration. To address this need, coupling hydrological and machine learning models were constructed to identify priority zones for river restoration based on a dataset of aquatic organisms (i.e., algae, macroinvertebrates, and fish) and physicochemical indicators that were collected from 130 sites in September 2014 in the Taizi River, northern China. A process-based model soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) was developed to model the temporal-spatial variations in environmental indicators. A support vector machine (SVM) model was applied to explore the relationships between aquatic organisms and environmental indicators. Biological indices among different hydrological periods were simulated by coupling SWAT and SVM models. Results indicated that aquatic biological indices and physicochemical indicators exhibited apparent temporal and spatial patterns, and those patterns were more evident in the upper reaches compared to the lower reaches. The ecological status of the Taizi River was better in the flood season than that in the dry season. Priority zones were identified for different hydrological seasons by setting the target values for ecological restoration based on biota organisms, and the results suggest that hydrological conditions significantly influenced restoration prioritization over other environmental parameters. Our approach could be applied in other seasonal river ecosystems to provide important preferences for river restoration.Entities:
Keywords: SVM; SWAT; aquatic organisms; hydrological periods; river restoration
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30249052 PMCID: PMC6210177 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15102090
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Conceptual diagram of SWAT (soil and water assessment tool) and SVM (support vector machine) model coupling.
Figure 2Sampling locations in the Taizi River Basin, northern China.
Indicators applied in the SVM (support vector machine) model and related impact typologies.
| Indicators for the Ecological Status | Impact Typologies | |
|---|---|---|
| Biological indicators | ||
| Fish | Species Richness (F_S) | General degradation |
| Index of Biotic Integrity (F_IBI) | General degradation | |
| Berger-Parker Index (F_BP) | General degradation | |
| Macroinvert-ebrate | Families Richness (M_S) | General degradation |
| BiologicalMonitoring Working Party Score (M_BMWP) | Organic pollution | |
| Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera Family Richness (M_EPT) | General degradation | |
| Algae | Species Richness (A_S) | General degradation |
| Berger-Parker Index (A_BP) | General degradation | |
| Physicochemical indicators | ||
| Electric Conductivity (EC) | Salinization | |
| Dissolve Oxygen (DO) | Organic pollution | |
| Biological Oxygen Demand in 5 days (BOD5) | Organic pollution | |
| Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) | Organic pollution | |
| Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3-N) | Eutrophication | |
| Total Phosphorus (TP) | Eutrophication | |
| Water Quantity (WQ) | Alteration of hydrological regime | |
Geography, climate and agricultural data used for the SWAT model.
| Data Type | Category | Description | Data Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Geographic information | DEM | 30 m × 30 m | SRTM DEM |
| Land use map | Land use type patterns (1:100,000) | Spot image interpretation | |
| Soil type map | Soil type patterns | Institute of Soil Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences | |
| Meteorological information | Meteorological data | Meteorological factor daily data | China Meteorological Administration |
| Rainwater information | Precipitation | Daily precipitation data (1979–2015) | Liaoning Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research |
| Hydrological Information | Basic station information and daily hydrological data (1978–2002) | Liaoning Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research | |
| Reservoir information | Eigenvalues, releasing water | Liaoning Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research | |
| Point source information | Information of sewage inlets to the river | Location, blowdown, emission volume, TN, TP, COD and NH3-N | Liaoning Institute of Water Resources and Hydropower Research |
| Agricultural management information | Agricultural management measures | The type of crop and fertilization information | Investigation data, Statistical Yearbook, literatures, etc. |
SRTM: Shuttle Radar Topography Mission; DEM: digital elevation map.
Target values for ecological restoration in the Taizi River.
| Habitat Typologies | Target Values | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F_S | DO (mg/L) | TN (mg/L) | TP (mg/L) | |
| Highlands | ≥12 | ≥6 | ≤0.5 | ≤0.1 |
| Midlands and lowlands | ≥8 | ≥3 | ≤1.5 | ≤0.3 |
Figure 3Squared correlation coefficient (R2) values for SVM (support vector machine) models performance.
Squared correlation coefficient (R2) values for sensitivity analysis.
| Variables | EC | DO | BOD5 | COD | NH3-N | TP | TN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A_BP | 0.98 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.94 | 0.98 |
| A_S | 0.96 | 0.92 | 0.95 | 0.96 | 0.95 | 0.93 | 0.90 |
| F_BP | 0.97 | 0.94 | 0.93 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.95 | 0.94 |
| F_IBI | 0.65 | 0.62 | 0.63 | 0.65 | 0.64 | 0.63 | 0.63 |
| F_S | 0.96 | 0.94 | 0.93 | 0.96 | 0.97 | 0.98 | 0.96 |
| M_BMWP | 0.40 | 0.39 | 0.35 | 0.36 | 0.41 | 0.38 | 0.39 |
| M_EPT | 0.69 | 0.67 | 0.66 | 0.66 | 0.71 | 0.67 | 0.69 |
| M_S | 0.57 | 0.55 | 0.58 | 0.58 | 0.57 | 0.54 | 0.56 |
Model performance statistics of the simulated and measured runoff and total nitrogen (TN) during calibration and validation.
| Runoff | Hydrological Station | Measured Value (m3/s) | Simulated Value (m3/s) | R2 | NS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calibration period (1980–1992) | Benxi | 41.647 | 39.842 | 0.73 | 0.71 |
| Liaoyang | 54.108 | 53.047 | 0.81 | 0.83 | |
| Xiaolinzi | 66.442 | 67.271 | 0.82 | 0.83 | |
| Tangmazhai | 76.831 | 77.118 | 0.84 | 0.81 | |
| Haicheng | 4.493 | 4.329 | 0.78 | 0.82 | |
| Validation period (1993–2002) | Benxi | 37.357 | 42.861 | 0.69 | 0.71 |
| Liaoyang | 47.271 | 49.706 | 0.78 | 0.82 | |
| Xiaolinzi | 59.408 | 58.573 | 0.81 | 0.79 | |
| Tangmazhai | 70.266 | 71.586 | 0.82 | 0.80 | |
| Haicheng | 4.459 | 9.213 | 0.77 | 0.83 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Calibration period (2007–2008) | Benxi | 3.704 | 3.912 | 0.85 | 0.81 |
| Liaoyang | 4.916 | 5.101 | 0.86 | 0.83 | |
| Xiaolinzi | 5.293 | 5.012 | 0.79 | 0.76 | |
| Tangmazhai | 8.600 | 7.896 | 0.70 | 0.72 | |
| Validation period (2009) | Benxi | 3.206 | 2.963 | 0.82 | 0.80 |
| Liaoyang | 5.126 | 4.858 | 0.78 | 0.76 | |
| Xiaolinzi | 6.211 | 7.213 | 0.69 | 0.70 | |
| Tangmazhai | 8.422 | 7.689 | 0.75 | 0.77 |
Figure 4Temporal and spatial dynamics of TN concentration.
Figure 5Relationships between monthly water volume and TN (a) and total phosphorus (TP) (b).
Figure 6Temporal-spatial distribution dynamics of Fish Species Richness (F_S).
Figure 7Temporal-spatial distribution of Algae Species Richness (A_S).
Figure 8Verification of F_S (a) and A_S (b) simulation results.
Figure 9Priority zones (sub-basins) for ecological restoration in the dry season (a), the flood season (b), and the average water season (c).