The effects of climate change on groundwater recharge for different soil types of the west shore of Lake Urmia—Iran

  • Seyed Mehdi Esmat Saatloo
  • Maaroof SiosemardeEmail author
  • Seyed Abbas Hosseini
  • Hossein Rezaei
Original Paper


Global warming and climate change are the most important phenomena of the century with an impact on the water resources throughout the world. Increases in temperature led to changes in amount and time of precipitation, as well as evaporation across the world; as a result, variation in quality and quantity of the surface water and groundwater resources emerged. In the present research, two models of water general circulation, namely, CanESM2 and HadCM3, were used for 30-year period (1990–1961). For assessing the models, the mean absolute error and ​Percent Bias (PBIAS) index. PBIAS index were employed and CanESM2 model was used for determining the required factors of Visual-Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) in order to investigate the recharge rate of groundwater resources between 2011 and 2099 for five soil types in the west shore of Lake Urmia, Iran. Generally, the climatic change led to increase in recharge rate of groundwater for all soil types selected from Urmia Plain. The predicted values for recharge rate by the end of 2080 period for clay, gravel, sand, sandy clay, and silt clay are 15%, 9.3%, 13.9%, 13.2%, and 10.8% higher than that of recharge during the observational period for each soil.


CanESM2 model Global warming Groundwater resource HadCM3 model Visual HELP model 


  1. Abbasnia M, Tavousi T, Khosravi M (2017) A comprehensive assessment of seasonal changes in future maximum temperature of Iran during the warm period based on GCM models. Geographical Planning of Space 7:121–134Google Scholar
  2. Abo RK, Merkel BJ (2015) Comparative estimation of the potential groundwater recharge in Al Zerba catchment of Aleppo basin, Syria. Arab J Geosci 8:1339–1360. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen DM, Mackie DC, Wei M (2004) Groundwater and climate change: a sensitivity analysis for the Grand Forks aquifer, southern British Columbia, Canada. J Hydrol 12.
  4. Alley WM (2001) Ground water and climate. Ground Water 39:161. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson E (1973) National Weather Service River forecast system snow accumulation and ablation model. Hydrologic Research Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, MDGoogle Scholar
  6. Bates B (2008) IPCC technical paper on climate change and water. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York: IPCC. (No prelo)Google Scholar
  7. Brekke LD, Miller NL, Bashford KE, Quinn NW, Dracup JA (2004) Climate change impacts uncertainty for water resources in the san Jaoquin River Basin, California. J Am Water Resour Assoc 40:149–164. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cetin M (2015a) Determining the bioclimatic comfort in Kastamonu City. Environ Monit Assess 187(10):640. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cetin M (2015b) Evaluation of the sustainable tourism potential of a protected area for landscape planning: a case study of the ancient city of Pompeipolis in Kastamonu. Int J Sust Dev World 22(6):490–495. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cetin M (2015c) Using GIS analysis to assess urban green space in terms of accessibility: case study in Kutahya. Int J Sust Dev World 22(5):420–424. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cetin M (2016a) Determination of bioclimatic comfort areas in landscape planning: a case study of Cide Coastline. Turkish JAF Sci. Tech 4(9):800–804. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cetin M (2016b) Sustainability of urban coastal area management: a case study on Cide. J Sustain For 35(7):527–541. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cetin M, Topay M, Kaya LG, Yılmaz B (2010) Efficiency of bioclimatic comfort in landscape planning process: case of Kutahya. Turkish Journal of Forestry 1(1):83–95Google Scholar
  14. Cetin M, Sevik H, Zeren I (2017) Coastal biocomfort mapping for Doganyurt planning: a case study of the Yesilyuva Nature Park. The effects of environmental policies on sustainability: theory and methods, p.43Google Scholar
  15. Cetin M, Onac AK, Sevik H, Canturk U, Akpinar H (2018a) Chronicles and geoheritage of the ancient Roman city of Pompeiopolis: a landscape plan. Arab J Geosci 11:798. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cetin M, Adiguzel F, Kaya O, Sahap A (2018b) Mapping of bioclimatic comfort for potential planning using GIS in Aydin. Environ Dev Sustain 20(1):361–375. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cetin M, Yildirim E, Canturk U, Sevik H (2018c) Chapter 25: Investigation of bioclimatic comfort area of Elazig city centre. book title: Recent researches in science and landscape management (Edited by Recep Efe, Murat Zencirkiran and Isa Curebal), Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ISBN (10), pp 1–5275Google Scholar
  18. Cetin M, Zeren I, Sevik H, Cakir C, Akpinar H (2018e) A study on the determination of the natural park’s sustainable tourism potential. Environ Monit Assess 190(3):167. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Crowley TJ (1990) Are there any satisfactory geologic analogs for a future greenhouse warming? J Clim 3:1282–1292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dragoni W, Sukhija BS (2008) Climate change and groundwater: a short review. Geol Soc Lond, Spec Publ 288:1–12. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Earman S, Dettinger M (2011) Potential impacts of climate change on groundwater resources—a global review. J Water Clim Change 2:213–229. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Elçi A (2010) Assessing the impact of climate change on groundwater resources using groundwater flow models. J Water Clim Change:63–75. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Feizi V, Mollashahi M, Farajzadeh M, Azizi G (2014) Spatial and temporal trend analysis of temperature and precipitation in Iran. Ecopersia 2:727–742Google Scholar
  24. Goodarzi E, Dastorani M, Massah Bavani A, Talebi A (2015) Evaluation of the change-factor and LARS-WG methods of downscaling for simulation of climatic variables in the future (case study: Herat Azam watershed, Yazd—Iran). Ecopersia 3:833–846Google Scholar
  25. Hartmann A, Gleeson T, Wada Y, Wagener T (2017) Enhanced groundwater recharge rates and altered recharge sensitivity to climate variability through subsurface heterogeneity. Proc Natl Acad Sci 114(11):2842–2847. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. IPCC (1995) IPCC second assessment climate change 1995—a report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. IPCC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  27. Iran Meteorological Organization [online] (2017) Available at: [Accessed: (10 6 2017)]
  28. Jyrkama MI, Sykes JF (2007) The impact of climate change on spatially varying groundwater recharge in the Grand River watershed (Ontario). J Hydrol 338:237–250. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Karamuz M, Abulpur A, Nazif S (2011) Assessment of climate change impact on groundwater resources, case study: Rafsanjan plain. 4th Iran Water Resources Management ConferenceGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaya E, Agca M, Adiguzel F, Cetin M (2018) Spatial data analysis with R programming for environment. Hum Ecol Risk Assess:1–10.
  31. Koukidis EN, Berg AA (2009) Sensitivity of the Statistical DownScaling Model (SDSM) to reanalysis products. Atmosphere-Ocean 47:1–18. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kravkaz-Kuscu IS, Sariyildiz T, Cetin M, Yigit N, Sevik H, Savaci G (2018) Evaluation of the soil properties and primary forest tree species in Taskopru (Kastamonu) district. Fresenius Environ Bull 27(3):1613–1617Google Scholar
  33. Kuscu IS, Cetin M, Yigit N, Savaci G, Sevik H (2018) Relationship between enzyme activity (urease-catalase) and nutrient element in soil use. Pol J Environ Stud 27(5):2107–2112. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McBean E, Motiee H (2008) Assessment of impact of climate change on water resources: a long term analysis of the Great Lakes of North America. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 12:239–255. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mohan C, Western AW, Wei Y, Saft M (2018) Predicting groundwater recharge for varying land cover and climate conditions—a global meta-study. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 22(5):2689–2703. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Moriasi DN, Arnold JG, Van Liew MW, Bingner RL, Harmel RD, Veith TL (2007) Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Trans ASABE 50:885–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Motiee H, McBean E (2017) Assessment of climate change impacts on groundwater recharge for different soil types—Guelph Region in Grand River Basin, Canada. Ecopersia 5:1731–1744Google Scholar
  38. Parry M, Parry ML, Canziani O, Palutikof J, Van der Linden P, Hanson C (eds) (2007) Climate change 2007—impacts, adaptation and vulnerability: working group II contribution to the fourth assessment report of the IPCC, vol 4. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  39. Penner JE, Lister D, Griggs DJ, Dokken DJM, Farland M (2014) PCC report about aviation and global atmosphere. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 373Google Scholar
  40. Pulido-Velazquez D, García-Aróstegui JL, Molina JL, Pulido-Velazquez M (2015) Assessment of future groundwater recharge in semi-arid regions under climate change scenarios (Serral-Salinas aquifer, SE Spain). Could increased rainfall variability increase the recharge rate? Hydrol Process 29:828–844. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Richardson CW, Wright DA (1984) WGEN: a model for generating daily weather variables, ARS-8, Agricultural Research Service, USDA. 83 pp.Google Scholar
  42. Rivard C, Paniconi C, Gauthier MJ, François G, Sulis M, Camporese M, Larocque M, Chaumont D (2008) A modeling study of climate change impacts on recharge and surface–groundwater interactions for the Thomas brook catchment (Annapolis Valley, Nova Scotia). In: Proceedings of GeoEdmonton, Canadian Geotechnical Society—International Association of Hydrogeologists—Canadian National Chapter Joint Annual Conference, Edmonton, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  43. Sanderson M, Smith J (1990) Climate change and water in the Grand River, Ontario. In Proc. of the 43rd Annual Conf. of the Canadian Water Resources Association, 16–18 ppGoogle Scholar
  44. Schroeder PR, Dozier TS, Zappi PA, McEnroe BM, Sjostrom JW, Peyton RL (1994) The Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) model: engineering documentation for version 3, “EPA/600/R-94/168b, September 1994”, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  45. Scibek J, Allen DM (2006) Modeled impacts of predicted climate change on recharge and groundwater levels. Water Resour Res 42.
  46. Sevik H, Ozel HB, Cetin M, Özel HU, Erdem T (2018) Determination of changes in heavy metal accumulation depending on plant species, plant organism, and traffic density in some landscape plants. Air Qual Atmos Health 2018:1–7. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Toews MW (2007) Modelling climate change impacts on groundwater recharge in a semi-arid region, southern Okanagan, British Columbia. Doctoral dissertation, Dept. of Earth Sciences-Simon Fraser UniversityGoogle Scholar
  48. Treidel H, Martin-Bordes JL, Gurdak JJ (eds) (2011) Climate change effects on groundwater resources: a global synthesis of findings and recommendations. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  49. Turkyilmaz A, Cetin M, Sevik H, Isinkaralar K, Saleh EA (2018a) Variation of heavy metal accumulation in certain landscaping plants due to traffic density. Environ Dev Sustain:1–4.
  50. Turkyilmaz A, Sevik H, Isinkaralar K, Cetin M (2018b) Using Acer platanoides annual rings to monitor the amount of heavy metals accumulated in air. Environ Monit Assess 190(10):578. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Turkyilmaz A, Sevik H, Cetin M, Saleh EA (2018c) Changes in heavy metal accumulation depending on traffic density in some landscape plants. Pol J Environ Stud 27(5):2277–2284. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Turkyilmaz A, Sevik H, Cetin M (2018d) The use of perennial needles as biomonitors for recently accumulated heavy metals. Landsc Ecol Eng 14(1):115–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Turkyilmaz A, Sevik H, Isinkaralar K, Cetin M (2019) Use of tree rings as a bioindicator to observe atmospheric heavy metal deposition. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:1–9. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Waterloo Hydrologic Inc. (WHI) (2001) User’s manual of Visual HELP. p. 335Google Scholar
  55. Watson RT, Zinyowera MC, Moss RH (1996) Climate change 1995: impacts, adaptations and mitigation of climate change: scientific-technical analyses. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  56. Wilby RL, Dawson WC (2007) SDSM 4.2—a decision support tool for the assessment of regional climate change impacts, SDSM manual version 4.2. Environment Agency of England and Wales:94Google Scholar
  57. Wilby RL, Dawson CW, Barrow EM (2002) SDSM—a decision support tool for the assessment of regional climate change impacts. Environ Model Softw 17:145–157. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zierl B, Bugmann H (2005) Global change impacts on hydrological processes in Alpine catchments. Water Resour Res 41(2).

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Seyed Mehdi Esmat Saatloo
    • 1
  • Maaroof Siosemarde
    • 2
    Email author
  • Seyed Abbas Hosseini
    • 1
  • Hossein Rezaei
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering, Science and Research BranchIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran
  2. 2.Department of Water Engineering, Mahabad BranchIslamic Azad UniversityMahabadIran
  3. 3.Water Engineering Department, Agriculture FacultyUrmia UniversityUrmiaIran

Personalised recommendations