Continental Scale Hydrostratigraphy: Comparing Geologically Informed Data Products to Analytical Solutions

IF 2 4区 地球科学 Q3 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Groundwater Pub Date : 2023-09-15 DOI:10.1111/gwat.13354
Jackson S. Swilley, Danielle Tijerina-Kreuzer, Hoang V. Tran, Jun Zhang, Chen Yang, Laura E. Condon, Reed M. Maxwell
{"title":"Continental Scale Hydrostratigraphy: Comparing Geologically Informed Data Products to Analytical Solutions","authors":"Jackson S. Swilley,&nbsp;Danielle Tijerina-Kreuzer,&nbsp;Hoang V. Tran,&nbsp;Jun Zhang,&nbsp;Chen Yang,&nbsp;Laura E. Condon,&nbsp;Reed M. Maxwell","doi":"10.1111/gwat.13354","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study synthesizes two different methods for estimating hydraulic conductivity (K) at large scales. We derive analytical approaches that estimate K and apply them to the contiguous United States. We then compare these analytical approaches to three-dimensional, national gridded K data products and three transmissivity (T) data products developed from publicly available sources. We evaluate these data products using multiple approaches: comparing their statistics qualitatively and quantitatively and with hydrologic model simulations. Some of these datasets were used as inputs for an integrated hydrologic model of the Upper Colorado River Basin and the comparison of the results with observations was used to further evaluate the K data products. Simulated average daily streamflow was compared to daily flow data from 10 USGS stream gages in the domain, and annually averaged simulated groundwater depths are compared to observations from nearly 2000 monitoring wells. We find streamflow predictions from analytically informed simulations to be similar in relative bias and Spearman's rho to the geologically informed simulations. <i>R</i>-squared values for groundwater depth predictions are close between the best performing analytically and geologically informed simulations at 0.68 and 0.70 respectively, with RMSE values under 10 m. We also show that the analytical approach derived by this study produces estimates of K that are similar in spatial distribution, standard deviation, mean value, and modeling performance to geologically-informed estimates. The results of this work are used to inform a follow-on study that tests additional data-driven approaches in multiple basins within the contiguous United States.</p>","PeriodicalId":12866,"journal":{"name":"Groundwater","volume":"62 1","pages":"75-92"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gwat.13354","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Groundwater","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gwat.13354","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study synthesizes two different methods for estimating hydraulic conductivity (K) at large scales. We derive analytical approaches that estimate K and apply them to the contiguous United States. We then compare these analytical approaches to three-dimensional, national gridded K data products and three transmissivity (T) data products developed from publicly available sources. We evaluate these data products using multiple approaches: comparing their statistics qualitatively and quantitatively and with hydrologic model simulations. Some of these datasets were used as inputs for an integrated hydrologic model of the Upper Colorado River Basin and the comparison of the results with observations was used to further evaluate the K data products. Simulated average daily streamflow was compared to daily flow data from 10 USGS stream gages in the domain, and annually averaged simulated groundwater depths are compared to observations from nearly 2000 monitoring wells. We find streamflow predictions from analytically informed simulations to be similar in relative bias and Spearman's rho to the geologically informed simulations. R-squared values for groundwater depth predictions are close between the best performing analytically and geologically informed simulations at 0.68 and 0.70 respectively, with RMSE values under 10 m. We also show that the analytical approach derived by this study produces estimates of K that are similar in spatial distribution, standard deviation, mean value, and modeling performance to geologically-informed estimates. The results of this work are used to inform a follow-on study that tests additional data-driven approaches in multiple basins within the contiguous United States.

Abstract Image

大陆尺度水文地层学:地质知情数据产品与分析解决方案的比较。
本研究综合了两种不同的方法来大规模估计水力传导率(K)。我们得出了估计K的分析方法,并将其应用于毗邻的美国。然后,我们将这些分析方法与从公开来源开发的三维国家网格K数据产品和三种透射率(T)数据产品进行了比较。我们使用多种方法来评估这些数据产品:定性和定量比较它们的统计数据,并与水文模型模拟进行比较。其中一些数据集被用作科罗拉多河上游流域综合水文模型的输入,结果与观测结果的比较被用于进一步评估K数据产品。模拟的平均日流量与该领域10个美国地质调查局测流仪的日流量数据进行了比较,年平均模拟地下水深度与近2000个监测井的观测结果进行了比较。我们发现,分析知情模拟的流量预测在相对偏差和Spearman的rho方面与地质知情模拟相似。地下水深度预测的R平方值介于最佳分析模拟和地质模拟之间,分别为0.68和0.70,RMSE值低于10 m.我们还表明,本研究得出的分析方法产生的K估计值在空间分布、标准差、平均值和建模性能方面与地质知情估计值相似。这项工作的结果被用于为后续研究提供信息,该研究在美国境内的多个盆地中测试了额外的数据驱动方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Groundwater
Groundwater 环境科学-地球科学综合
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
3.80%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: Ground Water is the leading international journal focused exclusively on ground water. Since 1963, Ground Water has published a dynamic mix of papers on topics related to ground water including ground water flow and well hydraulics, hydrogeochemistry and contaminant hydrogeology, application of geophysics, groundwater management and policy, and history of ground water hydrology. This is the journal you can count on to bring you the practical applications in ground water hydrology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信