Advertisement

Groundwater hydrogeochemical assessment using advanced spatial statistics methods: a case study of Tehran-Karaj plain aquifer, Iran

  • Shawgar KaramiEmail author
  • Mohammad Jalali
  • Homayoon Katibeh
  • Ahmad Fatehi Marj
Original Paper
  • 2 Downloads

Abstract

Geostatistical tools have been increasingly applied to compile spatial distribution maps of groundwater quality. Results of geostatistics can be helpful for decision-makers to carry out appropriate remedial actions to sustain the quality of groundwater sources. The main purpose of this paper is to assess the groundwater hydrogeochemistry of Tehran-Karaj plain aquifer, Iran, by a forward geostatistical method and an inverse geostatistical method called sequential Gaussian simulation. Seven important hydrogeochemical properties of the aquifer including total dissolved solids, sodium adsorption ratio, electrical conductivity, sodium, total hardness, chloride, and sulfate were analyzed and compiled geostatistically. Data were taken from 137 well samples in 2016. After data normalization, variography was compiled, and experimental variograms were plotted; then, the best theoretical model was fitted on each variogram based on the minimum residual sum of squares. Cross-validation was used to determine the accuracy of parameters related to the variograms. Estimation maps of the groundwater hydrogeochemistry were prepared, and the estimation variance map was drawn to assess the accuracy of estimation in each estimated point. Forward geostatistical methods are subjected to smoothing, while inverse geostatistical methods are not subjected to this problem. The results of this study revealed that the utilized inverse geostatistical methods called simulation algorithms are more accurate than forward methods. Eventually, estimation maps of each parameter, as well as error maps, were compiled, and critical regions have been proposed according to the simulated maps.

Keywords

Estimation Geostatistics Groundwater hydrogeochemistry Ordinary kriging Sequential Gaussian simulation Tehran-Karaj plain aquifer 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Iran Water Resources Management Company for collecting, analyzing, and providing the data. Also, we fully appreciate the anonymous reviewers for their professional reviewing. Their precious comments have improved the scientific quality of the paper. We thank the editorial board of the Arabian Journal of Geosciences for their consideration.

References

  1. Adhikary PP, Dash CJ, Chandrasekharan H, Bej R (2011) Indicator and probability kriging methods for delineating cu, Fe, and Mn contamination in groundwater of Najafgareh block, Delhi, India. Environ Monit Assess 176:663–676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asghari O, Soltani F, Amnieh HB (2009) The comparison between sequential Gaussian simulation (SGS) of Choghart ore deposit and geostatistical estimation through ordinary kriging. Aust J Basic Appl Sci 3:330–341Google Scholar
  3. Barca E, Passarella G (2008) Spatial evaluation of the risk of groundwater quality degradation. A comparison between disjunctive kriging and geostatistical simulation. Environ Monit Assess 137:261–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bastante FG, Ordóñez C, Taboada J, Matías JM (2008) Comparison of indicator kriging, conditional indicator simulation and multiple-point statistics used to model slate deposits. Eng Geol 98:50–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chandan KS, Yashwant BK (2017) Optimization of groundwater level monitoring network using GIS-based geostatistical method and multi-parameter analysis: a case study in Wainganga sub-basin, India. Chin Geogr Sci 27:201–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chilès JP, Delfiner P (2012) Wiley series in probability and statistics. In: Geostatistics: Modeling Spatial Uncertainty. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 705–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chitsazan M, Tabari MMR, Eilbeigi M (2017) Analysis of temporal and spatial variations in groundwater nitrate and development of its pollution plume: a case study in Karaj aquifer. Environ Earth Sci 76:391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cinnirella S, Buttafuoco G, Pirrone N (2005) Stochastic analysis to assess the spatial distribution of groundwater nitrate concentrations in the Po catchment (Italy). Environ Pollut 133:569–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clark I (1979) Practical geostatistics, vol 3. Applied Science Publishers, London, p 129Google Scholar
  10. Delbari M, Motlagh MB, Kiani M, Amiri M (2013) Investigating spatiotemporal variability of groundwater quality parameters using geostatistics and GIS. IJBAS 4:3623–3632Google Scholar
  11. Deutsch CV, Journel AG (1998) GSLIB: Geostatistical software library and User’s guide, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Dungan JL (1999) Conditional simulation: an alternative to estimation for achieving mapping objectives. In: Spatial statistics for remote sensing. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 135–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Esfahani NM, Asghari O (2013) Fault detection in 3D by sequential Gaussian simulation of rock quality designation (RQD). Arab J Geosci 6:3737–3747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Golekar R, Bartakke VV, Patil SN, Baride MV (2014) Groundwater quality assessment from Tarali river sub-basin of Krishna river basin, western Maharashtra (India). Int J Adv Geosci 2:8–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jalali M, Karami S, Fatehi Marj A (2016) Geostatistical evaluation of spatial variation related to groundwater quality database: case study for Arak plain aquifer, Iran. Environ Model Assess 21:707–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jalali M, Karami S, Marj AF (2019) On the problem of the spatial distribution delineation of the groundwater quality indicators via multivariate statistical and geostatistical approaches. Environ Monit Assess 191:323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jolly WM, Graham JM, Michaelis A, Nemani R, Running SW (2005) A flexible, integrated system for generating meteorological surfaces derived from point sources across multiple geographic scales. Environ Model Softw 20:873–882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Journel AG, Huijbregts CJ (1978) Mining Geostatistics. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Karami S, Madani H, Katibeh H, Marj AF (2018) Assessment and modeling of the groundwater hydrogeochemical quality parameters via geostatistical approaches. Appl Water Sci 8:23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kevin J, Jay M, Ver H, Krivoruchko K, Neil L (2003) Using ArcGIS® Geostatistical analyst. ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute), RedlandsGoogle Scholar
  21. Krige DG (1996) A practical analysis of the effects of spatial structure and of data available and accessed, on conditional biases in ordinary kriging. Geosta Wollon 96:799–810Google Scholar
  22. Lin YP, Tan YC, Rouhani S (2001) Identifying spatial characteristics of transmissivity using simulated annealing and kriging methods. J Environ Geol 41:200–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McBratney AB, Webster R (1986) Choosing functions for semi-variograms of soil properties and fitting them to sampling estimates. J Soil Sci 37:617–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Medici G, West LJ, Banwart SA (2019) Groundwater flow velocities in a fractured carbonate aquifer-type: implications for contaminant transport. J Contam 222:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mohammadi K, Niknam R, Majd VJ (2009) Aquifer vulnerability assessment using GIS and fuzzy system: a case study in Tehran–Karaj aquifer, Iran. J Environ Geol 58:437–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mouser PJ, Rizzo DM (2004) Evaluation of geostatistics for combined hydrochemistry and microbial community fingerprinting at a waste disposal site. In: Critical Transitions in Water and Environmental Resources Management, pp 1–11Google Scholar
  27. Nasrabadi T, Maedeh PA (2014) Groundwater quality assessment in southern parts of Tehran plain, Iran. Environ Earth Sci 71:2077–2086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Perttunen CD, Stuckman BE (1992) The normal score transformation applied to a multi-univariate method of global optimization. J Glob Optim 2:167–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Puttiwongrak A, Suteerasak T, Mai PK, Hashimoto K, Gonzalez JC, Rattanakom R, Prueksakorn K (2019) Application of multi-monitoring methods to investigate the contamination levels and dispersion of Pb and Zn from tin mining in coastal sediments at Saphan Hin, Phuket, Thailand. J Clean Prod 218:108–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ramazi H, Jalali M (2015) Contribution of geophysical inversion theory and geostatistical simulation to determine geoelectrical anomalies. Stud Geophys Geod 59:97–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Reyes-López JA, Ramírez-Hernández J, Lázaro-Mancilla O, Carreón-Diazconti C, Garrido MML (2008) Assessment of groundwater contamination by landfill leachate: a case in México. J Waste Manag 28:S33–S39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rezaee H, Asghari O, Koneshloo M, Ortiz JM (2014) Multiple-point geostatistical simulation of dykes: application at Sungun porphyry copper system, Iran. Stoch Env Res Risk A 28:1913–1927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rossi ME, Deutsch CV (2014) Mineral resource estimation. Springer Science & Business Media, CitadoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sabzban F, Fatemi Aghda SM (2011) Predicting of Karaj plain subsidence using PMWIN software. 15th Conference of Tarbiat Moallem University on Geology, Tehran, Iran, December 14–15, 7 pGoogle Scholar
  35. Sajil Kumar PJ, Jegathambal P, James EJ (2011) Multivariate and Geostatistical analysis of groundwater quality in Palar River basin. Int J Geol 5:108–119Google Scholar
  36. Snowden DV (2001) Practical interpretation of mineral resource and ore reserve classification guidelines. Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve Estimation-The Guide to Good Practice, AUSIMM 23:653–660Google Scholar
  37. Soltani F, Afzal P, Asghari O (2014) Delineation of alteration zones based on sequential Gaussian simulation and concentration–volume fractal modeling in the hypogene zone of Sungun copper deposit, NW Iran. J Geochem Explor 140:64–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Talebi H, Asghari O, Emery X (2014) Simulation of the lately injected dykes in an Iranian porphyry copper deposit using the plurigaussian model. Arab J Geosci 7:2771–2780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tavassol SF, Gopalakrishna GS (2014) Pb contamination and analysis of aquifer in Karaj plain, Alborz Province, Iran using GIS-based DRASTIC model. BEPLS 3:263–271Google Scholar
  40. Tavassol SF, Ashamanjari KG, Chandra KS (2016) Chemistry of the groundwater in KARAJ plain, ALBORZ province, IRAN. IJGES 2:31–42Google Scholar
  41. Theodossiou N, Latinopoulos P (2006) Evaluation and optimization of groundwater observation networks using the kriging methodology. Environ Model Softw 21:991–1000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Torcal F, Posadas AM, Chica M, Serrano I (1999) Application of conditional geostatistical simulation to calculate the probability of occurrence of earthquakes belonging to a seismic series. Geophys J Int 139:703–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Uyan M, Cay T (2010) Geostatistical methods for mapping groundwater nitrate concentrations. In: 3rd International Conference on cartography and GISGoogle Scholar
  44. Webster R, Oliver M (2001) Local estimation or prediction: kriging. In: Geostatistics for environmental scientists, 2nd edn. Wiley, London, pp 153–194Google Scholar
  45. Wijewardana NS, Galagedara LW, Mowjood MIM (2012) Assessment of groundwater contamination by landfill leachate with ground penetrating radar. In: 14th international conference on ground-penetrating radar (GPR), IEEE, pp 728–732Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mining EngineeringAmirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic)TehranIran
  2. 2.Mining Exploration Engineering and Academic Researcher in Civil and Geoscience Institute, Department of Mining EngineeringAmirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic)TehranIran
  3. 3.Soil Conservation & Watershed Management Research Institute (SCWMRI), & DamavandIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran

Personalised recommendations