Environmental Earth Sciences

, Volume 70, Issue 6, pp 2577–2585 | Cite as

Evaluating sampling locations in river water quality monitoring networks: application of dynamic factor analysis and discrete entropy theory

  • Milad Memarzadeh
  • Najmeh MahjouriEmail author
  • Reza Kerachian
Original Article


In this paper, a methodology is proposed for evaluating sampling locations in an existing river water quality monitoring network. The dynamic factor analysis is utilized to extract the independent dynamic factors from time series of water quality variables. Then, the entropy theory is applied to the independent dynamic factors to construct transinformation–distance (T–D) curves. The computation time in the case of using dynamic factors is significantly less than when the raw data is used because the number of independent dynamic factors is usually much less than the number of monitored water quality variables. In this paper, it is also shown that by clustering the study area to some homogenous zones and developing T–D curves for each zone, the accuracy of the results is significantly increased. To evaluate the applicability and efficiency of the proposed methodology, it is applied to the Karoon River which is the most important river system in Iran.


Water quality monitoring Dynamic factor analysis Entropy theory Karoon River 


  1. Abdul-Wahab SA, Bakheit CS, Al-Alawi SM (2005) Principal component and multiple regression analysis in modelling of ground-level ozone and factors affecting its concentrations. J Env Modell Softw 20:1263–1271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Camdevyren H, Demyr N, Kanik A, Keshkyn S (2005) Use of principal component scores in multiple linear regression models for prediciton of Chlorophyll-a in reservoirs. J Echol Modell 181:581–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ezekwe IC, Odu NN, Chima GN, Opigo A (2012) Assessing regional groundwater quality and its health implications in the Lokpaukwu, Lekwesi and Ishiagu mining areas of southeastern Nigeria using factor analysis. Environ Earth Sci 67(4):971–986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Harmancioglu NB (1981) Measuring the information content of hydrological processes by the entropy concept: Issue for the Centennial of Ataturk’s Birth. Ege University, Izmir, Turkey, pp 13–40Google Scholar
  5. Harmancioglu NB, Alpaslan N (1992) Water quality monitoring network design: a problem of multi-objective decision making. Water Resour Bull 28(1):179–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Harmancioglu NB, Baran T (1989) Effects of recharge systems on hydrologic information transfer along rivers. Proc Third Sci Assembly New Dir Surf Water Modell 181:223–233Google Scholar
  7. Harmancioglu NB, Yevjevich V (1987) Transfer of hydrologic information among river points. J Hydrol 91:103–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Harmancioglu NB, Fistikoglu O, Ozkul SD, Singh VP, Alpaslan N (1999) Water quality monitoring network design. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston 299 ppCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Huang JJ, Tzeng GH, Ong CS (2006) A novel algorithm for dynamic factor analysis. J Appl Math Comput 175:1288–1297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hyvarinen A, Oja E (2000) Independent component analysis: algorithms and applications. J Neural Netwoks 13(4–5):411–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Karamouz M, Zahraie B, Kerachian R (2003) Development of a master plan for water pollution control using MCDM techniques: a case study. Water Int 28(4):478–490Google Scholar
  12. Karamouz M, Nokhandan AK, Kerachian R, Maksimovic C (2009a) Design of on-line river water quality monitoring systems using the entropy theory: a case study. Environ Monit Assess 155(1–4):63–81. doi: 10.1007/s10661-008-0418-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Karamouz M, Kerachian R, Akhbari M, Hafez B (2009b) Design of river water quality monitoring networks: a case study. Environ Model Assess 14(6):705–714. doi: 10.1007/s10666-008-9172-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kuo YM, Lin HJ (2010) Dynamic factor analysis of long-term growth trends of intertidal seagrass Thalassia hemprichii in southern Taiwan. J Estuarine, Coastal Shelf Sci 86:225–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lathauwer LD, Moor BD, Vandewalle J (2000) An introduction to independent component analysis. J Chemometrics 14:123–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mahjouri N, Kerachian R (2011) Revising river water quality monitoring networks using discrete entropy theory: the Jajrood River experience. Environ Monit Assess 175:291–302. doi: 10.1007/s10661-010-1512-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Masoumi F, Kerachian R (2008) Assessment of the groundwater salinity monitoring network of the Tehran region: application of the discrete Entropy theory. Water Sci Technol 58(4):765–771. doi: 10.2166/wst.2008.674 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Masoumi F, Kerachian R (2010) Optimal redesign of groundwater quality monitoring networks: a case study. Environ Monit Assess 161(1–4):247–257. doi: 10.1007/s10661-008-0742-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mazlum N, Ozed A, Mazlum S (1999) Interpretation of water quality data by principal components analysis. J Eng Env Sci 23:19–26Google Scholar
  20. Mogheir Y, Singh VP (2002) Application of information theory to groundwater quality monitoring networks. Water Resour Manage 16:37–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mogheir Y, Singh VP (2003) Specification of information needs for groundwater management planning in developing country. Groundw Hydrol (Balema Publisher, Tokyo) 2:3–20Google Scholar
  22. Mogheir Y, de Lima JLMP, Singh VP (2004) Characterizing the spatial variability of groundwater quality using the entropy theory: I, synthetic data. J Hydrol Process 18:2165–2179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mogheir Y, de Lima JLMP, Singh VP (2009) Entropy and multi-objective based approach for groundwater quality monitoring network assessment and redesign. Water Resour Manage 23(8):1603–1620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mondal NC, Singh VP (2010) Entropy-based approach for estimation of natural recharge in Kodaganar River basin, Tamil Nadu. India Curr Sci 99:1560–1569Google Scholar
  25. Mondal NC, Singh VP (2012) Evaluation of groundwater monitoring network of Kodaganar River basin from Southern India using entropy. Environ Earth Sci 66:1183–1193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Munoz-Carpena R, Ritter A, Li YC (2005) Dynamic factor analysis of groundwater quality trends in an agricultural area adjacent to Everglades National Park. J Contam Hydrol 80:49–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mutihac R, Van Hulle MM (2004) Comparison of principal component analysis and independent component analysis for blind source separation. Romanian Rep Phys 56:20–32Google Scholar
  28. Ouyang Y (2005) Evaluation of river water quality monitoring stations by principal component analysis. Water Res 39:2621–2635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Parinet B, Lhote A, Legube B (2004) Principal component analysis: an appropriate tool for water quality evaluation and management: application to a tropical lake system. J Echol Modell 178:295–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ritter A, Munoz-Carpena R (2006) Dynamic factor modeling of ground and surface water levels in an agricultural area adjacent to Everglades National Park. J Hydrol 317:340–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shannon CE, Weaver W (1949) The mathematical theory of communication. The University of Illinois Press, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  32. Wan J, Bu H, Zhang Y, Meng W (2012) Classification of rivers based on water quality assessment using factor analysis in Taizi River basin, northeast China. Environ Earth Sci. doi: 10.1007/s12665-012-1976-5 Google Scholar
  33. Yeh HC, Chen YC, Wei C, Chen RH (2011) Entropy and kriging approach to rainfall network design. Paddy Water Environ, doi: 10.1007/s10333-010-0247-x Google Scholar
  34. Zhao G, Gao J, Tian P, Tian K, Ni G (2011) Spatial–temporal characteristics of surface water quality in the Taihu Basin, China. Environ Earth Sci 64:809–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zuur AF, Pierce GJ (2004) Common trends in northeast Atlantic squid time series. Sea Res 52:57–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zuur AF, Fryer RJ, Jolliffe IT, Dekker R, Beukema JJ (2003a) Estimating common trends in multivariate time series using dynamic factor analysis. Envirometrics 14:665–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zuur AF, Tuck ID, Bailey N (2003b) Dynamic factor analysis to estimate common trends in fisheries time series. Fish Aquat Sci 60:542–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Milad Memarzadeh
    • 1
  • Najmeh Mahjouri
    • 2
    Email author
  • Reza Kerachian
    • 3
  1. 1.Advanced Infrastructure Systems, Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.Faculty of Civil EngineeringK.N. Toosi University of TechnologyTehranIran
  3. 3.School of Civil Engineering and Center of Excellence for Engineering and Management of Civil Infrastructures, College of EngineeringUniversity of TehranTehranIran

Personalised recommendations