Advertisement

Aquatic Geochemistry

, Volume 24, Issue 5–6, pp 363–396 | Cite as

Evaluation of Hydrogeochemical Processes for Waters’ Chemical Composition and Stable Isotope Investigation of Groundwater/Surface Water in Karst-Dominated Terrain, the Upper Tigris River Basin, Turkey

  • E. DişliEmail author
Original Article
  • 97 Downloads

Abstract

The Upper Tigris River Basin is one of the biggest basins in Turkey, where municipal, agricultural and industrial water supplies are highly dependent on groundwater and surface water resources. The interpretation of plots for different major ions indicates that the chemical compositions of the surface/groundwater in the Upper Tigris River Basin are dominated Ca2+, Mg2+, HCO3 and SO42− which have been arisen largely from chemical weathering of carbonate and evaporate rock, and reverse ion exchange reactions. Isotopic composition of surface and groundwater samples is influenced by two main air mass trajectories: one originating from the Central Anatolia that is cold and rainy and another originating from the rains falling over northeastern Syria that is warm and rainy, with warm winds. The relative abundance of cations and anions in water samples is in the order: Ca2+  > Mg2+  > Na+  > K+ for cations and HCO 3 −   > Cl− > SO42−, respectively. Majority of the water samples are plotted on a Piper diagram showing that the chemical composition of the water samples was predominantly Ca–Mg–HCO3 type. Groundwater and surface water have an average (Ca2+ + Mg2+/2HCO3) ratio of 0.65 and 0.74, indicating no significant difference in their relative solute distribution and dissolution of carbonate rock (calcite and dolomite) predominantly by carbonic acid. The Mg2+/Ca2+ and Mg2+/ HCO3 molar ratio values are ranging from 0.21 to 1.30 and 0.11 to 0.47 for the groundwater and from 0.13 to 2.46 and 0.10 to 0.61 for the surface water samples, respectively, indicating that significant contribution of dolomite dissolution has a higher advantage over limestone within the Upper Tigris River Basin.

Keywords

Karst hydrology Hydrogeochemistry Stable isotopes Water–rock interaction The Upper Tigris River Basin 

Notes

References

  1. Amangabara GT, Ejenma E (2012) Groundwater quality assessment of Yenagoa and environs Bayelsa State, Nigeria between 2010 and 2011. Resour Environ 2:20–29.  https://doi.org/10.5923/j.re.20120202.04 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Appelo CAJ, Postma D (2005) Geochemistry, groundwater and pollution, 2nd edn. Balkema, RotterdamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakalowicz M (2005) Karst groundwater: a challenge for new resources. Hydrogeol J 13(1):148–160.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-004-0402-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbieri M, Boschetti T, Mo Petitta, Tallini M (2005) Stable isotope (2H, 18O and 87Sr/86Sr) and hydrochemistry monitoring for groundwater hydrodynamics analysis in a karst aquifer (Gran Sasso, Central Italy). Appl Geochem 20:2063–2081.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2005.07.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barrett ME, Charbeneau RJ (1997) A parsimonious model for simulating flow in a karst aquifer. J Hydrol 196(1–4):47–65.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(96)03339-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bellen RC, Dunnington HV, Wetzel W, Morton DM (1959) Lexique stratigraphique international, Asie, Fasc., 10a, Iraq: Center Natl. Recherche Sci., ParisGoogle Scholar
  7. Çelikdemir EM, Dülger S, Görür N, Wagner C, Uygur K (1991) Stratigraphy, sedimentology, and hydrocarbon potential of the Mardin Group, SE Turkey. Spec Publ Eur Assoc Pet Geosci 1:439–454Google Scholar
  8. Clark ID, Fritz P (1997) Environmental isotopes in hydrogeology. Lewis, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Craig H (1961) Isotopic variations in meteoric waters. Science 133:1702–1703.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.133.3465.1702 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Das BK, Kaur P (2001) Major ion chemistry of Renuka lake and weathering processes, Sirmaur district, Himachal Pradesh, India. Environ Geol 40:908–917.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s002540100268 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deming D (2002) Introduction to hydrogeology, 1st edn. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Dinka MO, Loiskandl W, Ndambuki JM (2015) Hydrochemical characterization of various surface water and groundwater resources available in Matahara areas, Fantalle Woreda of Oromiya Region. J Hydrol Reg Stud 3:444–456.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2015.02.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dişli E (2017) Hydrochemical characteristics of surface and groundwater and suitability for drinking and agricultural use in the upper Tigris River Basin, Diyarbakır, Batman, Turkey. Environ Earth Sci 76:500.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6820-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Doğan U (2005) Land subsidence and caprock dolines caused by subsurface gypsum dissolution and the effect of subsidence on the fluvial system in the Upper Tigris Basin (between Bismil-Batman, Turkey). Geomorphology 71:389–401.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2005.04.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. DSİ (General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works) (1979) Yukarı Dicle Havzası Hidrojeolojik Etüd Raporu, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  16. Edmunds WM, Carrillo-Rivera JJ, Cardona A (2002) Geochemical evolution of groundwater beneath Mexico City. J Hydrol 258:1–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(01)00461-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Erenler M (1989) XI-XII. Bölge güney alanlarındaki kuyularda Mesozoyik çökel istifinin mikro paleontolojik incelenmesi. TPAO report no: 1364Google Scholar
  18. Ettazarini S (2005) Processes of water-rock interaction in the Turonian aquifer of Oum Er-Rabia Basin, Morocco. Environ Geol 49(2):293–299.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-005-0088-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Falcone AR, Falgiani A, Parisse B, Petitta M, Spizzico M, Tallini M (2008) Chemical and isotopic (δ18O%, δ2H%, δ13C%, 222Rn) multitracing for groundwater conceptual model of carbonate aquifer (Gran Sasso INFN underground laboratory-central Italy). J Hydrol 357(3–4):68–388.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.05.016 Google Scholar
  20. Fisher RS, Mullican WF (1997) Hydrochemical evolution of sodium-sulfate and sodium-chloride groundwater beneath the northern Chihuahuan Desert, Trans-Pecos, Texas, USA. Hydrogeol J 5:4–16.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s100400050102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ford D, Williams P (1989) Karst geomorphology and hydrology. Unwin Hayman, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ford D, Williams P (2007) Karst hydrology and geomorphology. Wiley, West Sussex, Karst hydrogeology and geomorphology.  https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118684986 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Freeze RA, Cherry JA (1979) Groundwater. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar
  24. Ghasemizadeh R, Hellweger F, Butscher C, Padilla I, Vesper D, Field M, Alshawabkeh A (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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jankowski J, Acworth RI (1997) Impact of debris-flow deposits on hydrogeochemical processes and the developement of dryland salinity in the Yass River catchment, New South Wales, Australia. Hydrogeol J 5:71–88.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s100400050119 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kanduč T, Grassa F, McIntosh J, Stibilj V, Ulrich-Supovec M, Supovec I, Jamnikar S (2014) A geochemical and stable isotope investigation of groundwater/surface-water interactions in the Velenje Basin, Slovenia. Hydrogeol J 22(4):971–984.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-014-1103-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kattan Z (1997) Chemical and environmental isotope study of precipitation in Syria. J Arid Environ 35:601–615.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jare.1996.0228 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Katz BG, Coplen TB, Bullen TD, Davis JH (1997) Use of chemical and isotopic tracers and geochemical modeling to characterize the interactions between ground water and surface water in mantled karst. Ground Water 35(6):1014–1028.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.1997.tb00174.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kaymakcı N, İnceöz M, Ertepınar P, Koç A (2010) Late Cretaceous to Recent kinematics of SE Anatolia (Turkey). Geol Soc Lond Spec Publ 340:409–435.  https://doi.org/10.1144/SP340.18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kim K, Rajmohan N, Kim HJ, Hwang GS, Cho MJ (2004) Assessment of groundwater chemistry in a coastal region (Kunsan, Korea) having complex contaminant sources: a stoichiometric approach. Environ Geol 46(6–7):763–774.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-004-1109-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kumar M, Ramanathan A, Rao MS, Kumar B (2006) Identification and evaluation of hydrogeochemical processes in the groundwater environment of Delhi, India. Environ Geol 50:1025.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-006-0275-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lang Y, Liu C, Zhao Z, Li S, Han G (2006) Geochemistry of surface and ground water in Guiyang, China: water/rock interaction and pollution in a karst hydrological system. Appl Geochem 21:887–903.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2006.03.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ma R, Shi J, Liu J, Gui C (2014) Combined use of multivariate statistical analysis and hydrochemical analysis for groundwater quality evolution: a case study in north chain plain. J Earth Sci 25(3):587–597.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12583-014-0446-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Marfia AM, Krishnamurthy RV, Atekwana EA, Panton WF (2004) Isotopic and geochemical evolution of ground and surface waters in a karst dominated geological setting: a case study from Belize, Central America. Appl Geochem 19:937–946.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2003.10.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Maxon HJ (1936) Oil possibilities of the district around Lake Van. MTA (General Directorate of Mineral Research Exploration) Rep., AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  36. Mayo AL, Loucks MD (1995) Solute and isotopic geochemistry and groundwater flow in the Central Wasatch Range, Utah, USA. J Hydrol 172:31–35.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(95)02748-E CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McLean W, Jankowski J (2000) Groundwater quality and sustainability in an alluvial aquifer, Australia. In: Sililo et al (eds) Proc XXX IAH congress on groundwater: past achievements and future challenges. Cape Town South Africa 26th November-1st December 2000. AA Balkema, Rotterdam, BrookfieldGoogle Scholar
  38. Meybeck M (1987) Global chemical weathering of surficial rocks estimated from river dissolved loads. Am J Sci 287:401–428.  https://doi.org/10.2475/ajs.287.5.401 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mülayim O, Mancini E, Çemen İ, Yılmaz İÖ (2016) Upper Cenomanian-Lower Campanian Derdere and Karababa formations in the Çemberlitaş oil field, southeastern Turkey: their microfacies analyses, depositional environments, and sequence stratigraphy. Turk J Earth Sci 25:46–63.  https://doi.org/10.3906/yer-1501-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Piper AM (1944) A graphic procedure in the geochemical interpretation of water-analyses. Trans Am Geophys Union 25:914–928.  https://doi.org/10.1029/TR025i006p00914 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pronk M, Goldscheider N, Zopfi J, Zwahlen F (2009) Percolation and particle transport in the unsaturated zone of a karst aquifer. Ground Water 47(3):361–369.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2008.00509.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Purushothaman P, Rao MS, Rawat YS, Kumar CP, Gopal K, Parveen T (2013) Evaluation of hydrogeochemistry and water quality in BistDoab region, Punjab, India. Environ Earth Sci 72:693–706.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-013-2992-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rajmohan N, Elango L (2004) Identification and evolution of hydrogeochemical processes in the groundwater environment in an area of the Palar and Cheyyar River Basins, Southern India. Environ Geol 46(1):47–61.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-004-1012-5 Google Scholar
  44. Reineck HE, Singh IB (1980) Depositional sedimentary environments with reference to terrigenous clastics, Second revised and update edition edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  45. Sass E, Bein A (1980) The Cretaceous carbonate platform in Israel. Cretac Res 3:135–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schmidt K (1935a) First report over geological and paleontological: Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration Compilation no: 1532Google Scholar
  48. Schmidt BC (1966) Stratigraphy of the Lower Paleozoic rock unit of petroleum district 5, Turkey: petrol. Admin Publ 11:8–90Google Scholar
  49. Şengör AMC, Yılmaz Y (1981) Tethyan evolution of Turkey. A plate tectonic approach. Tectonophysics 75:181–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Singh A, Hasnain S (1999) Environmental geochemistry of Damodar river basin, east coast of India. Environ Geol 37:124–136.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s002540050369 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Singh AK, Mondal GC, Kumar S, Singh TB, Tiwary BK, Sinha A (2008) Major ion chemistry, weathering processes and waste water quality assessment in upper catchment of Damodar river basin, India. Environ Geol 54:745–758.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-007-0860-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sophocleous M (2002) Interaction between groundwater and surface water: the state of the science. Hydrogeol J 10:52–67.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-001-0170-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Subramani T, Rajmohan N, Elango L (2010) Groundwater geochemistry and identification of hydrogeochemical processes in a hard rock region, Southern India. Environ Monit Assess 162:123–137.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-009-0781-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Szramek K, Walter LM, Kanduč T, Ogrinc N (2011) Dolomite versus calcite weathering in hydrogeochemically diverse watersheds established on bedded carbonates (Sava and Soča Rivers, Slovenia). Aquat Geochem 17:357–396.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10498-011-9125-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tolun N, Erentöz C, Ketin İ (1962) 1/500.000 ölçekli Türkiye jeolojisi haritası (Diyarbakır paftası). MTAGoogle Scholar
  56. Ulu Ü (2002) 1:500.000 Ölçekli Türkiye Jeoloji Haritası Hatay Paftası. Türkiye 1/500.000 Ölçekli Jeoloji Haritaları, No: 16, M. Şenel (Ed.). Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  57. Valdes D, Dupont JP, Laignel B, Ogier S, Leboulanger T, Mahler BJ (2007) A spatial analysis of structural controls on Karst groundwater geochemistry at a regional scale. J Hydrol 340:244–255.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.04.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wang H, Mao X, Feng L (2015) Evidence of groundwater degassing in a deep confined aquifer: noble gas concentrations with hydrogen, oxygen and carbon isotope data. Environ Earth Sci 74:4439–4451.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4482-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. White WB (1969) Conceptual models for carbonate aquifers. Ground Water 7(3):15–21.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.1969.tb01279.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. White WB (1988) Geomorphology and hydrology of karst terrains. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  61. White W (2002) Karst hydrology: recent developments and open questions. Eng Geol 65:85–106.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7952(01)00116-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Williams EL, Szramek KJ, Jin L, Ku TCW, Walter LM (2007) The carbonate system geochemistry of shallow groundwater-surface water systems in temperate glaciated watersheds (Michigan, USA): significance of open-system dolomite weathering. Bull Geol Soc Am 119:515–528.  https://doi.org/10.1130/B25967.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Yuan DX (1997) Sensitivity of karst process to environmental change along the PEP II transect. Quatern Int 37:105–113.  https://doi.org/10.1016/1040-6182(96)00012-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Zavadlav S, Kanduč T, McIntosh J, Lojen S (2013) Isotopic and chemical constraints on the biogeochemistry of dissolved inorganic carbon and chemical weathering in the Karst Watershed of Krka River (Slovenia). Aquat Geochem 19:209–230.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10498-013-9188-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Environmental Engineering Department, Faculty of EngineeringVan Yüzüncü Yıl UniversityVanTurkey

Personalised recommendations