Skip to main content

The selection of design methods for river water quality monitoring networks: a review

Abstract

Water quality monitoring (WQM) is crucial for managing and protecting riverine ecosystems. Current WQM network design practices often rely on unsubstantiated criteria rather than accountable algorithms. Water managers face difficulties to relate the impact of local boundary conditions on the choice of appropriate WQM network design methods. After reviewing the commonly used design methods and their resulting monitoring setups, it was evident that multivariate statistical analysis is the most frequently used method for designing WQM networks in rivers. The majority of studies reported in the literature were conducted on very large rivers and originated from high- to middle-income countries. Most commonly monitored water quality parameters cover the general physicochemical characteristics and organic pollutants, without considering the ecological quality of the river. In most studies, decision on sampling frequencies depended on expert’s judgements. Data availability and expertise seem to affect the selection of design methods rather than river size and the extent of the monitoring networks. Findings from this study support that future research should simultaneously consider all relevant aspects at watershed scale and focus more on biological indicators. In addition, comparative studies with several design methods could also help identify better selection principles.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. ANZECC, and ARMCANZ (2000) Australian Guidelines for Water Quality Monitoring and Reporting. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council and Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anvari A, Reyes JD, Esmaeilzadeh E, Jarvandi A, Langley N, Navia KR (2009) Designing an automated water quality monitoring system for west and rhode rivers. In: Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium, 2009. SIEDS’09., 131–136. IEEE. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/5166167/

  3. Arle J, Mohaupt V, Kirst I (2016) Monitoring of surface waters in germany under the water framework directive—a review of approaches, methods and results. Water 8(6):217. https://doi.org/10.3390/w8060217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Asadollahfardi G, Khodadai A, Azimi A, Jafarnejad M, Shahoruzi M (2011) Multiple criteria assessment of water quality monitoring system in karoon river. J Int Environ Appl Sci 6(3):434

    Google Scholar 

  5. Baker A (2006) Land use and water quality. In: Encyclopedia of hydrological sciences. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470848944.hsa195

  6. Bartram J, Ballance R, Nations U, Health Organization W (eds) (1996) Water quality monitoring: a practical guide to the design and implementation of freshwater quality studies and monitoring programmes, 1st edn. E & FN Spon, London

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bastidas JC, Vélez JJ, Zambrano J, Londoño A (2017) Design of water quality monitoring networks with two information scenarios in tropical andean basins. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24(25):20134–20148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9021-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Behmel S, Damour M, Ludwig R, Rodriguez MJ (2016) Water quality monitoring strategies—a review and future perspectives. Sci Total Environ 571(November):1312–1329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Biggs J, von Fumetti S, Kelly-Quinn M (2017) The importance of small waterbodies for biodiversity and ecosystem services: implications for policy makers. Hydrobiologia 793(1):3–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-016-3007-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. CCME (2015) Guidance Manual for Optimizing Water Quality Monitoring Program Design_Canada. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. http://www.ccme.ca/files/Resources/water/water_quality/Guidance%20Manual%20for%20Optimizing%20Water%20Quality%20Monitoring%20Program%20Design_1.0_e.pdf

  11. Chakraborty D, Mukhopadhyay K (2014) Status of water pollution in india and other countries of Asia. SpringerLink. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8929-5_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chilundo M, Kelderman P, O´keeffe JH (2008) Design of a water quality monitoring network for the limpopo river basin in Mozambique. Phys Chem Earth Parts A/B/C 33(8–13):655–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2008.06.055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Claussen U, Müller P, Arle J (2012) Comparison of environmental quality objectives, threshold values or water quality targets set for the demands of the European water framework directive.” Report for the CIS Working Group A “ECOSTAT.&#8221

  14. European EA (2008) Proposed river monitoring network. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/92-9167-023-5/page011.html

  15. European P, Council (2000) “Water Framework Directive.” http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:5c835afb-2ec6-4577-bdf8-756d3d694eeb.0004.02/DOC_1&format=PDF

  16. European Commission, and Working Group 2.7 (2003) Monitoring under the water framework directive—guidnace No. 7. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. http://bookshop.europa.eu/uri?target=EUB:NOTICE:KH5103213:EN:HTML

  17. Greve AI, Loftis JC, Brown JB, Buirgy RR, Alexander B (2003) Design and implementation of a cooperative water quality monitoring program in colorado’s big thompson watershed. Wiley Online Library. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2003.tb04427.x/abstract

  18. Griffith JA (2002) Geographic techniques and recent applications of remote sensing to landscape-water quality studies. Water Air Soil Pollut 138(1):181–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Grossman GM, Krueger AB (1995) Economic growth and the environment. Quart J Econ 110:353–378. https://doi.org/10.3386/w4634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Guigues N, Desenfant M, Hance E (2013) Combining multivariate statistics and analysis of variance to redesign a water quality monitoring network. Environ Sci: Processes Impacts 15(9):1692. https://doi.org/10.1039/c3em00168g

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Haddaway NR, Collins AM, Coughlin D, Kirk S (2015) The role of google scholar in evidence reviews and its applicability to grey literature searching. PLOS One 10(9):e0138237. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hamid A, Bhat SA, Bhat SU, Jehangir A (2016) Environmetric techniques in water quality assessment and monitoring: a case study. Environ Earth Sci 75(4):321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-5139-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Harmancioglu NB, Alpaslan N (1992) Water quality monitoring network design: a problem of multi-objective decision making. JAWRA J Am Water Resour Assoc 28(1):179–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Harmancioglu NB, Fistikoglu O, Ozkul SD, Singh VP, Alpaslan MN (1999) Water quality monitoring network design, vol 33. Springer Netherlands, Water Science and Technology Library. Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9155-3

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. Higgins JV, Bryer MT, Khoury ML, Fitzhugh TW (2005) A freshwater classification approach for biodiversity conservation planning. Conserv Biol 19(2):432–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00504.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Horowitz AJ (2013) A review of selected inorganic surface water quality-monitoring practices: are we really measuring what We think, and if so, are we doing it right? Environ Sci Technol 47(6):2471–2486. https://doi.org/10.1021/es304058q

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Icaga Y (2005) Genetic algorithm usage in water quality monitoring networks optimization in Gediz (Turkey) River Basin. Environ Monit Assess 108(1–3):261–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-005-4328-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Jacsó P (2005) Google scholar: the pros and the cons. Online Inf Rev 29(2):208–214. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520510598066

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Karamouz M, Kerachian R, Akhbari M, Hafez B (2009a) Design of river water quality monitoring networks: a case study. Environ Model Assess 14(6):705–714. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-008-9172-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Karamouz M, Mahjouri N, Kerachian R (2004) River water quality zoning: a case study of Karoon and Dez River System. Iran J Environ Healt 1:16–27

    Google Scholar 

  31. Karamouz M, Nokhandan AK, Kerachian R, Maksimovic Č (2009b) Design of on-line river water quality monitoring systems using the entropy theory: a case study. Environ Monit Assess 155(1–4):63–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0418-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Karamouz M, Hafez B, and R. Kerachian (2005) water quality monitoring network for river systems: application of ordinary kriging. In Impacts of Global Climate Change, 1–12. http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/ https://doi.org/10.1061/40792(173)91

  33. Khalil B, Ouarda TBMJ, St-Hilaire A (2011) A statistical approach for the assessment and redesign of the Nile Delta Drainage System Water-Quality-Monitoring Locations. J Environ Monit 13(8):2190. https://doi.org/10.1039/c0em00727g

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Khalil B, Ouarda TBMJ, St-Hilaire A, Chebana F (2010) A statistical approach for the rationalization of water quality indicators in surface water quality monitoring networks. J Hydrol 386(1–4):173–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.03.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Khalil B, Ouarda TBMJ (2009) Statistical approaches used to assess and redesign surface water-quality-monitoring networks. J Environ Monit 11 (11): 1915. https://doi.org/10.1039/b909521g

  36. Khalil B, Ou C, Proulx-McInnis S, St-Hilaire A, Zanacic E (2014) Statistical assessment of the surface water quality monitoring network in Saskatchewan. Water Air Soil Pollut 225 (10). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-014-2128-1

  37. Kohonen T (1982) Automatic monitoring of water quality. Helsinki

  38. Kulkarni AV, Aziz B, Shams I, Busse JW (2009) Comparisions of citations in web of science, scopus, and google scholar for articles published in general medical journals. JAMA 302(10):1092–1096. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.1307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Liu Y, Zheng BH, Wang M, Xu YX, Qin YW (2014) Optimization of sampling frequency for routine river water quality monitoring. Sci China Chem 57(5):772–778. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11426-013-4968-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Lo SL, Kuo JT, Wang SM (1996) Water quality monitoring network design of Keelung River, Northern Taiwan. Water Sci Technol 34(12):49–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Lo SL, Kuo JT, Wang SM (2002) The Influence of Artificial Cutoff on a Monitoring System and the Water Quality of the Keelung River. Water Sci Technol 46(11–12):231–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Loftis JC, Ward RC (1979) Regulatory water quality monitoring networks: statistical and economic considerations, vol 1. Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Office of Research: US Environmental Protection Agency

    Google Scholar 

  43. Loftis JC, Ward RC (1980) Water Quality Monitoring—some Practical Sampling Frequency Considerations. Environ Manage 4(6):521–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Mahjouri N, Kerachian R (2011) Revising river water quality monitoring networks using discrete entropy theory: the Jajrood River Experience. Environ Monit Assess 175(1–4):291–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1512-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Martinez-Tavera E, Rodriguez-Espinosa PF, Shruti VC, Sujitha SB, Morales-Garcia SS, Muñoz-Sevilla NP (2017) Monitoring the seasonal dynamics of physicochemical parameters from atoyac River Basin (Puebla), Central Mexico: multivariate approach. Environ Earth Sci 76(2):95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6406-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Mavukkandy MO, Karmakar S, Harikumar PS (2014) Assessment and rationalization of water quality monitoring network: a multivariate statistical approach to the Kabbini River (India). Environ Sci Pollut Res 21(17):10045–10066. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3000-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Memarzadeh M, Mahjouri N, Kerachian R (2013) Evaluating sampling locations in river water quality monitoring networks: application of dynamic factor analysis and discrete entropy theory. Environ Earth Sci 70(6):2577–2585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-013-2299-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Mustow SE (2002) Biological monitoring of rivers in thailand: use and adaptation of the BMWP score. Hydrobiologia 479(1–3):191–229. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021055926316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Naddeo V, Scannapieco D, Zarra T, Belgiorno V (2013) River water quality assessment: implementation of non-parametric tests for sampling frequency optimization. Land Use Policy 30(1):197–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.03.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Naddeo V, Zarra T, Belgiorno V (2007) Optimization of sampling frequency for river water quality assessment according to italian implementation of the EU water framework directive. Environ Sci Policy 10(3):243–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2006.12.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Newham LTH, Croke BFW, Jakeman AJ (2001) Design of water quality monitoring programs and automatic sampling techniques. Cooperative research centre for catchment hydrology. https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/40940

  52. Noble R, Cowx I (2002) Development of a River-Type Classification System (D1), Compilation and Harmonisation of Fish Species Classification (D2). http://www.boku.ac.at/fame/downloads/d1_2_typology_and%20species_classification.pdf

  53. Ongley ED (2001) Water quality programs in developing countries: design, capacity building, financing, and sustainability. Water Int 26(1):14–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060108686883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Ouyang Y (2005) Evaluation of river water quality monitoring stations by principal component analysis. Water Res 39(12):2621–2635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2005.04.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Ozkul S, Harmancioglu NB, Singh VP (2000) Entropy-based assessment of water quality monitoring networks. J Hydrol Eng 5(1):90–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Park SY, Choi JH, Wang S, Park SS (2006) Design of a water quality monitoring network in a large river system using the genetic algorithm. Ecol Model 199(3):289–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Richter S, Völker J, Borchardt D, Mohaupt V (2013) The water framework directive as an approach for integrated water resources management: results from the experiences in Germany on implementation, and future perspectives. Environ Earth Sci 69(2):719–728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-013-2399-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Sanders TG (1983) Design of networks for monitoring water quality. Water Resources Publication

  59. Sfikas A, Angelidis P, Samaras P, Zoras S, Evagelopoulos V (2013) Utilization of a multi-parameter sensor network for online monitoring of the water quality in the lignite mining area of Kozani, Greece. Desal Water Treat 51(13–15):2977–2986. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2012.748446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Singh KP, Malik A, Mohan D, Sinha S (2004) Multivariate statistical techniques for the evaluation of spatial and temporal variations in water quality of Gomti River (India)—a case study. Water Res 38(18):3980–3992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2004.06.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Stanford LL, Spacie A (1994) Biological monitoring of aquatic systems. CRC Press

  62. Strobl RO, Robillard PD (2008) Network design for water quality monitoring of surface freshwaters: a review. J Environ Manage 87(4):639–648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.03.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Strobl RO, Robillard PD, Day RL, Shannon RD, McDonnell AJ (2006b) A water quality monitoring network design methodology for the selection of critical sampling points: part II. Environ Monit Assess 122(1–3):319–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-006-0358-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Strobl RO, Robillard PD, Debels P (2007) Critical sampling points methodology: case studies of geographically diverse watersheds. Environ Monit Assess 129(1–3):115–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-006-9346-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Strobl RO, Robillard PD, Shannon RD, Day RL, McDonnell AJ (2006a) A Water Quality Monitoring Network Design Methodology for the Selection of Critical Sampling Points: Part I. Environ Monit Assess 112(1–3):137–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-006-0774-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Tavakol M, Arjmandi R, Shayeghi M, Monavari SM, Karbassi A (2017a) Application of multivariate statistical methods to optimize water quality monitoring network with emphasis on the pollution caused by fish farms. Iran J Publ Health 46(1):83

    Google Scholar 

  67. Tavakol M, Arjmandi R, Shayeghi M, Monavari SM, Karbassi A (2017b) Developing an environmental water quality monitoring program for Haraz River in Northern Iran. Environ Monit Assess 189 (8). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-017-6125-x

  68. UNEP (2016) A snapshot of the world’s water quality: towards a global assessment. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Environment Programme. https://uneplive.unep.org/media/docs/assessments/unep_wwqa_report_web.pdf

  69. USEPA (2003) “Elements of a State Water Monitoring and Assessment Program.” United States Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.chesapeakebay.net/documents/Elements_of_a_State_Water_Monitoring_and_Assessment_Program_2003.pdf

  70. USGAO (2002) Inconsistent state approaches complicate nation’s efforts to identify its most polluted waters. United States General Accounting Office. http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA398894

  71. Villas-Boas MD, Olivera F, de Azevedo JPS (2017) Assessment of the water quality monitoring network of the Piabanha River Experimental watersheds in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, using autoassociative neural networks. Environ Monit Assess 189 (9). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-017-6134-9

  72. Wagner RJ, Boulger RW Jr, Oblinger CJ, Smith B (2006) Guidelines and Standard Procedures for Continuous Water Quality Monitors—Station Operation, Record Computation, and Data Reporting: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 1-D3. https://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/2006/tm1D3/pdf/TM1D3.pdf

  73. Wang YB, Liu CW, Liao PY, Lee JJ (2014) Spatial pattern assessment of river water quality: implications of reducing the number of monitoring stations and chemical parameters. Environ Monit Assess 186(3):1781–1792. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-013-3492-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Ward RC, Loftis JC, McBride GB (1986) The ‘data rich but information-poor’ syndrome in water quality monitoring. Environ Manage 10(3):291–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. West LJ, Hankin RKS (2008) Exact tests for two-way contingency tables with structural zeros. J Stat Softw 28(11):1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Zhou F, Liu Y, Guo H (2007) Application of multivariate statistical methods to water quality assessment of the watercourses in Northwestern New Territories, Hong Kong. Environ Monit Assess 132(1–3):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-006-9497-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support from the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) and The United Nations University Institute for Integrated Management of Material Fluxes and of Resources (UNU-FLORES).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thuy Hoang Nguyen.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nguyen, T.H., Helm, B., Hettiarachchi, H. et al. The selection of design methods for river water quality monitoring networks: a review. Environ Earth Sci 78, 96 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-019-8110-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • River size
  • Land use
  • Sampling locations
  • Water quality parameters
  • Sampling frequencies
  • Systematic literature search