Abstract
This introductory editorial paper provides a review and prospective outlook of the achievements and challenges in karst research under a changing environment. A brief discussion of the past and future karst research has been focused on: (1) data and new technologies; (2) modeling of karst flow and reactive transport; (3) responses of karst hydrosystems to climate variability and changes across scales.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this article
We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.
Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
02 August 2018
In the original publication, the author name Andrew Hartmann was published incorrectly. The correct name should be Andreas Hartmann.
References
Adinehvand R, Raeisi E, Hartmann A (2017) A step-wise semi-distributed simulation approach to characterize a karst aquifer and to support dam construction in a data-scarce environment. J Hydrol 554:470–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.08.056
Anaya AA, Padilla I, Macchiavelli R, Vesper DJ, Meeker JD, Alshawabken AN (2014) Estimating preferential flow in karstic aquifers using statistical mixed models. Groundwater 52(4):584–596. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwat.12084
Chang Y, Wu J, Jiang G (2015) Modeling the hydrological behavior of a karst spring using a nonlinear reservoir-pipe model. Hydrogeol J 23(5):901–914. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-015-1241-6
Chen Z, Hartmann A, Goldscheider N (2017) A new approach to evaluate spatiotemporal dynamics of controlling parameters in distributed environmental models. Environ Model Softw 87:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.10.005
Cordero JF, Meeker JF, Loch-Caruso R et al (2018) Team science applied to environmental health research: karst hydrogeology and preterm birth in Puerto Rico. In: White WB, Herman JS, Herman EK, Rutigliano M (eds) Karst groundwater contamination and public health: beyond case studies. Springer, Berlin, pp 17–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51070-5
de Rooij R, Graham W (2017) Generation of complex karstic conduit networks with a hydrochemical model. Water Resour Res 53(8):6993–7011. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR020768
Faulkner J, Hu BX, Kish S, Hua F (2009) Laboratory analog and numerical study of groundwater flow and solute transport in a karst aquifer with conduit and matrix domains. J Contam Hydrol 110(1):34–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2009.08.004
Ford DC, Williams PW (2007) Karst hydrogeology and geomorphology. Wiley, Chichester
Geyer T, Birk S, Licha T, Liedl R, Sauter M (2007) Multitracer test approach to characterize reactive transport in karst aquifers. Groundwater 45(1):36–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2006.00261.x
Ghasemizadeh R, Hellweger F, Butscher C et al (2012) Review: groundwater flow and transport modeling of karst aquifers, with particular reference to the North Coast Limestone aquifer system of Puerto Rico. Hydrogeol J 20(8):1441–1461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-012-0897-4
Gill AL, Finzi AC (2016) Belowground carbon flux links biogeochemical cycles and resource-use efficiency at the global scale. Ecol Lett 19:1419–1428. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12690
Gochis DJ, Yu W, Yates DN (2013) The WRF-Hydro model technical description and user’s guide, version 1.0. NCAR technical document, p 120
Goldscheider N, Meiman J, Pronk M, Smart C (2008) Tracer tests in karst hydrogeology and speleology. Int J Speleol 37(1):3. https://doi.org/10.5038/1827-806X.37.1.3
Göppert N, Goldscheider N (2008) Solute and colloid transport in karst conduits under low- and high-flow conditions. Ground Water 46(1):61–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2007.00373.x
Hartmann A, Goldscheider N, Wagener T, Lange J, Weiler M (2014) Karst water resources in a changing world: review of hydrological modeling approaches. Rev Geophys 52:218–242. https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000443
Hartmann A, Gleeson T, Rosolem R, Pianosi F, Wada Y, Wagener T (2015) A large-scale simulation model to assess karstic groundwater recharge over Europe and the Mediterranean. Geosci Model Dev 8:1729–1746. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-8-1729-2015
Hartmann A, Barberá JA, Andreo B (2017a) On the value of water quality data and informative flow states in karst modelling. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 21:5971–5985. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2017-230
Hartmann A, Gleeson T, Wada Y, Wagener T, Kingdom U, Sciences O, Kingdom U (2017b) Enhanced groundwater recharge rates and altered recharge sensitivity to climate variability through subsurface heterogeneity. Proc Natl Acad Sci 19:EGU2017-12796. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1614941114
Huang F, Zhang C, Xie Y, Li L, Cao J (2015) Inorganic carbon flux and its source in the karst catchment of Maocun, Guilin, China. Environ Earth Sci 74:1079–1089. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4478-4
Jaquet O, Siegel P, Klubertanz G, Benabderrhamane H (2004) Stochastic discrete model of karstic networks. Adv Water Resour 27(7):751–760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2004.03.007
Jiang Z, Lian Y, Qin X (2014) Rocky desertification in Southwest China: impacts, causes, and restoration. Earth Sci Rev 123:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2014.01.005
Kauffeldt A, Wetterhall F, Pappenberger F, Salamon P, Thielen J (2015) Technical review of large-scale hydrological models for implementation in operational flood forecasting schemes on continental level. Environ Model Softw 75:68–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.09.009
Kenney JD, McGinnis RN, Willden GC, Abbott BA, Green RT (2012) Neutrally buoyant sensor apparatus and method for mapping a water pathway. US Patent 8165814. https://www.google.com/patents/US8165814. Accessed 1 Jun 2018
Kuniansky E (2016) Simulating groundwater flow in karst aquifers with distributed parameter models—comparison of porous-equivalent media and hybrid flow approaches. U.S. Geological survey scientific investigations report 2016–5116, p 14. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20165116
Kuniansky E, Weary DJ, Kaufmann JE (2016) The current status of mapping karst areas and availability of public sinkhole-risk resources in karst terrains of the United States. Hydrogeol J 24(3):613–624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-015-1333-3
Liedl R, Sauter M, Hückinghaus D, Clemens T, Teutsch G (2003) Simulation of the development of karst aquifers using a coupled continuum pipe flow model. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001WR001206
Lu R (2007) Karst water resources and geo-ecology in typical regions of China. Environ Geol 51:695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-006-0381-3
Maxwell RM, Lundquist JK, Mirocha JD, Smith SG, Woodward CS, Tompson AF (2011) Development of a coupled groundwater–atmosphere model. Mon Weather Rev 139(1):96–116. https://doi.org/10.1175/2010MWR3392.1
Mazzilli N, Jourde H, Jacob T et al (2013) On the inclusion of ground-based gravity measurements to the calibration process of a global rainfall-discharge reservoir model: case of the Durzon karst system (Larzac, southern France). Environ Earth Sci 68:1631–1646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-012-1856-z
Padilla IY, Vesper DJ (2018) Fate, transport, and exposure of emerging and legacy contaminants in karst system:state of knowledge and uncertainty. In: White WB, Herman JS, Herman EK, Rutigliano M (eds) Karst groundwater contamination and public health: beyond case studies. Springer, Berlin, pp 33–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51070-5
Padilla IY, Irizarry C, Steele K (2011) Historical contamination of groundwater resources in the north coast karst aquifers of Puerto Rico, dimensión. Año 25 3:7–12
Pardo-Igúzquiza E, Dowd PA, Xu C, Durán-Valsero JJ (2012) Stochastic simulation of karst conduit networks. Adv Water Resour 35:141–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2011.09.014
Rehrl C, Birk S, Klimchouk AB (2008) Conduit evolution in deep-seated settings: conceptual and numerical models based on field observations. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2008WR006905
Reimann T, Geyer T, Shoemaker WB, Liedl R, Sauter M (2011) Effects of dynamically variable saturation and matrix-conduit coupling of flow in karst aquifers. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR010446
Scanlon BR, Mace RE, Barrett ME, Smith B (2003) Can we simulate regional groundwater flow in a karst system using equivalent porous media models? Case study, Barton Springs Edwards aquifer, USA. J Hydrol 276:137–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00064-7
Shoemaker WB, Kuniansky EL, Birk S, Bauer S, Swain ED (2008) Documentation of a conduit flow process (CFP) for MODFLOW-2005. US geological survey techniques and methods 6-A24
Weidner N, Rahman S, Li AQ, Rekletis I (2017) Underwater cave mapping using stereo vision. IEEE Int Conf. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2017.7989672
Werner C (1998) Determination of groundwater flow patterns from cave exploration in the Woodville Karst Plain, Florida, vol 46. Florida Geological Survey Special Publication, Florida
White WB (2018) Abstracts of additional conference papers, karst groundwater contamination and public health. Spring, Cham, pp 335–340
Winnick MJ, Carroll RW, Williams KH, Maxwell RM, Dong W, Maher K (2017) Snowmelt controls on concentration-discharge relationships and the balance of oxidative and acid-base weathering fluxes in an alpine catchment, East River, Colorado. Water Resour Res 53(3):2507–2523. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR019724
Worthington SR, Ford DC (2009) Self-organized permeability in carbonate aquifers. Ground Water 47(3):326–336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2009.00551.x
Xu Z, Hu BX (2017) Development of a discrete-continuum VDFST-CFP numerical model for simulating seawater intrusion to a coastal karst aquifer with a conduit system. Water Resour Res. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR018758
Xu Z, Hu BX, Davis H, Cao J (2015a) Simulating long term nitrate-N contamination processes in the Woodville Karst Plain using CFPv2 with UMT3D. J Hydrol 524:72–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.02.024
Xu Z, Hu BX, Davis H, Kish S (2015b) Numerical study of groundwater flow cycling controlled by seawater/freshwater interaction in a coastal karst aquifer through conduit network using CFPv2. J Contam Hydrol 182:131–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2015.09.003
Xu Z, Bassett SW, Hu BX, Dyer SB (2016) Long distance seawater intrusion through a karst conduit network in the Woodville Karst Plain, Florida. Sci Rep 6:32235. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep32235 doi
Xu Z, Hu BX, Ye M (2018) Numerical modeling and sensitivity analysis of seawater intrusion in a dual-permeability coastal karst aquifer with conduit networks. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 22:221–239. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-221-2018
Yu X, Ghasemizadeh R, Padilla IY, Irizarry C, Kaeli D, Alshawabkeh A (2015) Spatiotemporal changes of CVOC concentrations in karst aquifers: analysis of three decades of data from Puerto Rico. Sci Total Environ 511:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.12.031
Zeng C, Liu Z, Zhao M, Yang R (2016) Hydrologically-driven variations in the karst-related carbon sink fluxes: insights from high-resolution monitoring of three karst catchments in Southwest China. J Hydrol 533:74–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.11.049
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This article is a part of Topical Collection in Environmental Earth Sciences on Characterization, Modeling, and Remediation of Karst in a Changing Environment, guest edited by Zexuan Xu, Nicolas Massei, Ingrid Padilla, Andrew Hartmann, and Bill Hu.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Xu, Z., Massei, N., Padilla, I. et al. Characterization, modeling, and remediation of karst in a changing environment. Environ Earth Sci 77, 476 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-018-7660-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-018-7660-7