| Literature DB >> 31641130 |
Denghua Yan1, Kun Wang2, Tianling Qin1, Baisha Weng1, Hao Wang1, Wuxia Bi3, Xiangnan Li1, Meng Li1, Zhenyu Lv1, Fang Liu1, Shan He1, Jun Ma1, Zhenqian Shen1, Jianwei Wang1, Heng Bai1, Zihao Man1, Congwu Sun1, Meiyu Liu1, Xiaoqing Shi1, Lanshu Jing1, Ruochen Sun1, Shuang Cao1, Cailian Hao1, Lina Wang1, Mengtong Pei1, Batsuren Dorjsuren1, Mohammed Gedefaw1, Abel Girma1, Asaminew Abiyu1.
Abstract
As basic data, the river networks and water resources zones (WRZ) are critical for planning, utilization, development, conservation and management of water resources. Currently, the river network and WRZ of world are most obtained based on digital elevation model data automatically, which are not accuracy enough, especially in plains. In addition, the WRZ code is inconsistent with the river network, hindering the efficiency of data in hydrology and water resources research. Based on the global 90-meter DEM data combined with a large number of auxiliary data, this paper proposed a series of methods for generating river network and water resources zones, and then obtained high-precision global river network and corresponding WRZs at level 1 to 4. The dataset provides generated rivers with high prevision and more accurate position, reasonable basin boundaries especially in inland and plain area, also the first set of global WRZ at level 1 to 4 with unified code. It can provide an important basis and support for reasonable use of water resources and sustainable social development in the world.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31641130 PMCID: PMC6805875 DOI: 10.1038/s41597-019-0243-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Data ISSN: 2052-4463 Impact factor: 6.444
Fig. 1The process to build the river network and WRZ.
Fig. 2The process of revising DEM and determining the location of correct river (e.g. Amazon river Basin). (a) The original SRTM-DEM. (b) The river obtained after modifying the DEM, based on the digital rivers drawn according to the real river in Google earth. (c) The comparison of the rivers before and after DEM modified.
Definition of rivers at level 1 to 4.
| Type | Definition of the rivers at level 1 to 4 |
|---|---|
| The independent WRZ | L1 river: the river that flows into the sea or lake. |
| L2 river: the river that flows into the L1 river, and its confluence area is larger than one hundredth of the L1 river or 10,000 km2. | |
| L3 river: the river that flows into the L2 river, and its confluence area is larger than one hundredth of the L2 river or 1000 km2. | |
| L4 river: the river that flows into the L3 river, and its confluence area is large than one hundredth of the L3 river or 100 km2. | |
| The combined WRZ | L2 river: the river which has second-order tributary. |
| L3 river: the river which has first-order tributary. | |
| L4 river: the river which has no tributary. |
Fig. 3The examples of the defining the river level for two situations. The river level definition for the independent WRZ (e.g. the Yangtze River Basin in Asia, a) and for the combined WRZ (e.g. the Northeast part in South America, b).
Fig. 4The sketch map of coding rivers and determining watershed at level 1 to 4.
Fig. 5The process of zoning the combined water resources zones.
Fig. 6The global rivers at level 1 to 4.
Fig. 7The global Water Resources Zones at level 1.
The distribution of Water Resources Zones in the world.
| The number of WRZ | Asia | Europe | Africa | North America | South America | Australasia | Global |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L1 | 41 | 16 | 19 | 15 | 15 | 13 | 119 |
| L2 | 578 | 205 | 355 | 240 | 220 | 74 | 1672 |
| L3 | 9432 | 1945 | 4765 | 2995 | 2929 | 805 | 22,871 |
| L4 | 23,923 | 4434 | 11,624 | 9480 | 7534 | 3842 | 60,837 |
The attribute table of rivers at level 1 to 4.
| Data label | Description |
|---|---|
| FID | The ID code of river |
| ID | The code of river |
| Length | The length of river (m) |
The attribute table of water resources zones at level 1 to 4.
| Data label | Description |
|---|---|
| FID | The ID of WRZ |
| ID | The code of WRZ |
| AREA | Area (km2) |
Fig. 8The accuracy comparison of our river and HDMA.
The accuracy comparison of different methods.
| Continent | The mean deviation distance from generated rivers to the center points of real rivers (m) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| River level | This study | HDMA | Difference | Difference in percent | |
| Mean of all continent | 1 | 176.73 | 570.58 | 393.85 | 69% |
| 2 | 119.07 | 515.97 | 396.89 | 77% | |
| 3 | 108.13 | 450.24 | 342.12 | 76% | |
| 4 | 125.18 | 490.52 | 365.34 | 74% | |
| Mean of all levels | 132.28 | 506.83 | 374.55 | 74% | |
| South America | 1 | 65.93 | 866.14 | 800.21 | 92% |
| 2 | 71.41 | 670.75 | 599.34 | 89% | |
| 3 | 55.13 | 326.11 | 270.98 | 83% | |
| 4 | 63.86 | 420.24 | 356.38 | 85% | |
| North America | 1 | 234.33 | 377.33 | 142.99 | 38% |
| 2 | 106.68 | 411.08 | 304.39 | 74% | |
| 3 | 135.54 | 198.22 | 62.67 | 32% | |
| 4 | 98.58 | 243.90 | 145.32 | 60% | |
| Europe | 1 | 128.90 | 305.78 | 176.88 | 58% |
| 2 | 110.79 | 539.31 | 428.53 | 79% | |
| 3 | 117.06 | 735.84 | 618.78 | 84% | |
| 4 | 95.10 | 655.71 | 560.61 | 85% | |
| Africa | 1 | 364.93 | 935.81 | 570.88 | 61% |
| 2 | 184.89 | 610.68 | 425.79 | 70% | |
| 3 | 102.32 | 668.20 | 565.88 | 85% | |
| 4 | 217.21 | 661.89 | 444.68 | 67% | |
| Asia | 1 | 228.73 | 850.46 | 621.72 | 73% |
| 2 | 112.63 | 590.73 | 478.10 | 81% | |
| 3 | 130.62 | 569.97 | 439.35 | 77% | |
| 4 | 196.17 | 750.87 | 554.69 | 74% | |
| Oceania | 1 | 37.58 | 87.96 | 50.38 | 57% |
| 2 | 128.04 | 273.24 | 145.20 | 53% | |
| 3 | 108.10 | 203.13 | 95.04 | 47% | |
| 4 | 80.16 | 210.50 | 130.34 | 62% | |
| Measurement(s) | river |
| Technology Type(s) | computational modeling technique |
| Factor Type(s) | geographic location |
| Sample Characteristic - Environment | freshwater river |
| Sample Characteristic - Location | Earth (Planet) |