Advertisement

Environmental Earth Sciences

, Volume 63, Issue 4, pp 809–825 | Cite as

Hydrogeochemical controls on shallow alluvial groundwater under agricultural land: case study in central Portugal

  • A. I. A. S. S. Andrade
  • T. Y. Stigter
Original Article

Abstract

A hydrogeochemical study employing graphical, multivariate statistical, and modeling tools was conducted in an area of alluvial deposits in the Mondego river basin, to determine the factors and processes controlling the shallow groundwater chemistry. Groundwater was collected from 29 observation wells in six sampling campaigns, between March 2001 and September 2002. Samples were analyzed for basic physicochemical parameters, major ions and some minor ions. Hierarchical cluster analysis was applied to the data set, including both the spatial and temporal monitoring data and resulted in the definition of eight distinct water types. With the aid of hydrochemical (and physicochemical) scatter plots, it was possible to identify the main processes controlling the groundwater chemistry: (1) evapotranspiration and recharge; (2) calcium and magnesium carbonate and CO2 dissolution; (3) nitrate leaching from agriculture; (4) oxidation and reduction; and (5) cation exchange. These processes are frequently common to more than one water type but unique in combination and/or extent, in space and/or time. Geochemical modeling of the water types (using PHREEQC) allowed the validation and, to a certain extent, quantification of the processes that affect the shallow groundwater evolution. These tools can provide an essential support for the assessment of groundwater vulnerability to contamination and for the elaboration of groundwater resource management strategies.

Keywords

Hydrogeochemistry Shallow groundwater Alluvial sediments Agriculture Hierarchical cluster analysis PHREEQC 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to express their thanks to the Departamento de Ciências da Terra, Instituto de Investigação da Água and Centro de Geociências da Universidade de Coimbra for the support during the progress of this study, to the farmers who allowed the installation of the observation wells on their lands, to the Escola Superior Agrária de Coimbra for the availability of the equipment for well installation, to Eng. Filipe Melo and Sr. José Borralho for the help during the installation of the wells and for many agricultural informations and finally to the Associação de Beneficiários da Obra de Fomento Hidroagrícola do Baixo Mondego and Direcção-Geral de Agricultura e Desenvolvimento Rural—Projecto Mondego for all the support in the field work and information data. The second author holds a post-doctoral research position under the Ciencia 2007 program financed by the FCT—Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia.

References

  1. Almeida AC, Soares AF, Cunha L, Marques JF (1990) Proémio ao estudo do baixo Mondego. Biblos LXVI:17–47 (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  2. Almeida C, Mendonça JL, Jesus MR, Gomes AJ (2000) Sistemas aquíferos de Portugal Continental. Instituto da Água/Centro de Geologia da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, 3 volumes (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  3. Andrade AIASS (2005) Hidrogeoquímica e caracterização da contaminação hídrica nos corpos aluvionares do Mondego entre Coimbra e Montemor-o-Velho [in Portuguese]. PhD Thesis, Universidade de Coimbra, Portugal, 365 pp (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  4. Andrade AIASS, Stigter TY (2009) Multi-method assessment of nitrate and pesticide contamination in shallow alluvial groundwater as a function of hydrogeological setting and land use. Agric Water Manag 96:1751–1765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Appelo CAJ, Postma D (2005) Geochemistry, groundwater and pollution, 2nd edn. A.A. Balkema Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands, p 649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ayenew T, Fikre S, Wisotzky F, Demlie M, Wohnlich S (2009) Hierarchical cluster analysis of hydrochemical data as a tool for assessing the evolution and dynamics of groundwater across the Ethiopian rift. Int J Phys Sci 4:76–90Google Scholar
  7. Banks D, Frengstad B, Midtgard AK, Krog JR, Strand T (1998) The chemistry of Norwegian groudwaters: I The distribution of radon, major and minor elements in 1604 cristalline bedrock groundwaters. Sci Total Environ 222:71–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barbosa BP, Soares AF, Rocha RB, Manupella G, Henriques MH (1988) Carta Geológica de Portugal. Notícia explicativa da folha 19-A Cantanhede. Serviços Geológicos de Portugal, Lisboa, 46 pp. (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  9. Causapé J, Quiléz D, Aragüés R (2004) Assessment of irrigation and environmental quality at the hydrological basin level II. Salt and nitrate loads in irrigation return flows. Agric Water Manag 70:211–228Google Scholar
  10. CCRC (1988) Programa de desenvolvimento da região Centro, vol 1. Comissão de Coordenação da Região Centro. Minist. Plan. e Adm. do Território, Coimbra, 146 p (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  11. Clesceri LS, Greenberg AE, Eaton AD (1998) Standard methods for the examination of water and waste water. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation, 20th edn. United Book Press Inc., Washington, USA p. variateGoogle Scholar
  12. Cloutier V, Lefebvre R, Therrien R, Savard MM (2008) Multivariate statistical analysis of geochemical data as indicative of the hydrogeochemical evolution of groundwater in a sedimentary rock aquifer system. J Hydrol 353:294–313Google Scholar
  13. Cristo FP (1998) Águas subterrâneas no Baixo Mondego. In: Projecto Praxis XXI 2/2.1/CTA—156/94—O Baixo Mondego: organização, geossistemática e recursos naturais, Coimbra, Portugal, pp 105–123 (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  14. DGADR (2008) Aproveitamento Hidroagrícola do Baixo Mondego. Direcção-Geral de Agricultura e Desenvolvimento Rural. http://www.dgadr.pt/ar/a_hidroagricolas/exploracao/ahmond.htm. Accessed 1 Nov 2008 (in Portuguese)
  15. Dreher T (2003) Comment on Güler C, Thyne GD, McCray JE, Turner AK (2002) Evaluation of graphical and multivariate statistical methods for classification of water chemistry data. (Hydrogeol J 10:455–474). Hydrogeol J 11:605–606Google Scholar
  16. EEA (2003) Europe’s water: an indicator-based assessment. Topic Report 1/2003, European Environmental Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark, 97 pp. http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/topic_report_2003_1. Accessed 26 Nov 2009
  17. EEA (2005) Source apportionment of nitrogen and phosphorus inputs into the aquatic environment. EEA Report No 7/2005, European Environmental Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark, 48 pp. http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/eea_report_2005_7. Accessed 26 Nov 2009
  18. Everitt BS (1986) Cluster analysis (reprinted version), 2nd edn. Gower Publishing Company Ltd., Hampshire, England 136Google Scholar
  19. 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 5:4–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Goulding K (2000) Nitrate leaching from arable and horticulture land. Soil Use Manag 16:145–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Güler C, Thyne GD (2003) Reply to comment by T. Dreher to Güler C, Thyne GD, McCray JE, Turner AK (2002) Evaluation of graphical and multivariate statistical methods for classification of water chemistry data. (Hydrogeol J 10:455–474). Hydrogeol J 11:607–608Google Scholar
  22. Güler C, Thyne G (2004) Hydrologic and geologic factors controlling surface and groundwater chemistry in Indian Wells–Owens Valley area, southeastern California, USA. J Hydrol 285:177–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Güler C, Thyne GD, McCray JE, Turner AK (2002) Evaluation of graphical and multivariate statistical methods for classification of water chemistry data. Hydrogeol J 10:455–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hazen A (1911) Discussion: dams on sand foundations. Trans Am Soc Civil Eng 73:199Google Scholar
  25. Helstrup H, Jørgensen NO, Banoeng-Yakubo B (2007) Investigation of hydrochemical characteristics of groundwater from the Cretaceous–Eocene limestone aquifer in southern Ghana and southern Togo using hierarchical cluster analysis. Hydrogeol J 15:977–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hvorslev MJ (1951) Time lag and soil permeability in ground water observations. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, Waterways Experimental Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Bulletin 36Google Scholar
  27. Ibrakhimov M, Khamzina A, Forkutsa I, Paluasheva G, Lamers JPA, Tischbein B, Vlek PLG, Martius C (2007) Groundwater table and salinity: spatial and temporal distribution and influence on soil salinization in Khorezm region (Uzbekistan, Aral Sea Basin). Irrig Drain Syst 21:219–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jalali M (2007) Assessment of the chemical components of Famenin groundwater, western Iran. Environ Geochem Health 29:357–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kim JH, Kim RH, Lee J, Chang HW (2003) Hydrogeochemical characterization of major factors affecting the quality of shallow groundwater in the coastal area at Kimje in South Korea. Environ Geol 44:478–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kumar M, Ramanathan Al, Keshari AK (2009) Understanding the extent of interactions between groundwater and surface water through major ion chemistry and multivariate statistical techniques. Hydrol Process 23:297–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lorite-Herrera M, Jimenez-Espinosa R (2008) Impact of agricultural activity and geologic controls on groundwater quality of the alluvial aquifer of the Guadalquivir River (province of Jaén, Spain): a case study. Environ Geol 54:1391–1402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martinez DE, Bocanegra EM (2002) Hydrogeochemistry and cation-exchange processes in the coastal aquifer of Mar Del Plata, Argentina. Hydrogeol J 10:393–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. O’Shea B, Jankowski J (2006) Detecting subtle hydrochemical anomalies with multivariate statistics: an example from ‘homogeneuos’ groundwaters in the Great Artesian Basin, Australia. Hydrol Process 20:4317–4333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Oliveira JT, Pereira E, Ramalho M, Antunes MT, Monteiro JH (coord.) (1992) Carta Geológica de Portugal na escala 1:500 000, 5ª edição, 2 folhas. Serviços Geológicos de Portugal. LisboaGoogle Scholar
  35. Parkhurst DL, Appelo CAJ (1999) User’s guide to PHREEQC (version 2.0)—A computer program for speciation, batch-reaction, one-dimensional transport, and inverse geochemical calculations, vol. Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4259. US Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado, USA, 312 pGoogle Scholar
  36. Postma D, Boesen C, Kristiansen H, Larsen F (1991) Nitrate reduction in an unconfined sandy aquifer: water chemistry, reduction processes, and geochemical modeling. Water Resour Res 27:2027–2045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 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 46:47–61Google Scholar
  38. Ramos C, Agut A, Lidón AL (2002) Nitrate leaching in important crops of the Valencian Community region (Spain). Environ Pollut 118:215–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rebelo F, Cunha L, Almeida AC (1990) Contribuição da geografia física para a inventariação das potencialidades turísticas do Baixo Mondego. Cadernos Geogr 9:3–34 (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  40. Scheytt T (1997) Seasonal variations in groundwater chemistry near Lake Belau, Schleswig-Holstein, Northern Germany. Hydrogeol J 5:86–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Soares AF, Marques JF, Rocha RB (1985) Contribuição para o conhecimento geológico de Coimbra. Memórias e Notícias, Publ. Mus. Lab. Mineral. Geol., Univ. Coimbra 100:41–71 (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  42. Spalding RF, Exner ME (1993) Occurrence of nitrate in groundwater—a review. J Environ Qual 22:392–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Spalding RF, Watts DG, Schepers JS, Burbach ME, Exner ME, Poreda RJ, Martin GE (2001) Controlling nitrate leaching in irrigated agriculture. J Environ Qual 30:1184–1194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. SPSS for Windows, Rel. 16.0.1.2007. SPSS Inc., ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  45. Stigter TY, van Ooijen SPJ, Post VEA, Appelo CAJ, Carvalho Dill AMM (1998) A hydrogeological and hydrochemical explanation of the groundwater composition under irrigated land in a Mediterranean environment, Algarve, Portugal. J Hydrol 208:262–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stigter TY, Carvalho Dill AMM, Ribeiro L, Reis E (2006a) Impact of the shift from groundwater to surface water irrigation on aquifer dynamics and hydrochemistry in a semi-arid region in the south of Portugal. Agric Water Manag 85:121–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stigter TY, Ribeiro L, Carvalho Dill AMM (2006b) Evaluation of an intrinsic and a specific vulnerability assessment method in comparison with groundwater salinisation and nitrate contamination levels in two agricultural regions in the south of Portugal. Hydrogeol J 14:79–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stumm W, Morgan JJ (1996) Aquatic chemistry, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York, USA, p 1022Google Scholar
  49. Swan ARH, Sandilands M (1995) Introduction to geological data analysis. Blackwell Science Ltd., Oxford, England, p 446Google Scholar
  50. Swanson SK, Bahr JM, Schwar MT, Potter KW (2001) Two-way cluster analysis of geochemical data to constrain spring source waters. Chem Geol 179:73–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Takai Y, Kamura T (1966) The mechanism of reduction in waterlogged paddy soil. Folia Microbiol 11:304–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Thayalakumaran T, Bristow KL, Charlesworth PB, Fass T (2008) Geochemical conditions in groundwater systems: implications for the attenuation of agricultural nitrate. Agric Water Manag 95:103–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zhu GF, Su YH, Feng Q (2008) The hydrochemical characteristics and evolution of groundwater and surface water in the Heihe River Basin, northwest China. Hydrogeol J 16:167–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Earth Sciences, Centro de GeofísicaUniversity of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal
  2. 2.Geo-Systems Centre/CVRM, Instituto Superior TécnicoLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations