Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modeling groundwater quality by using hybrid intelligent and geostatistical methods

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Environmental Science and Pollution Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Simulation of groundwater quality is important for managing water resources and mitigating water shortages, especially in arid and semiarid areas. Geostatistical models have been used for spatial prediction and interpolation of groundwater parameters. Recently, hybrid intelligent models have been employed for the simulation of dynamic systems. In this study, hybrid intelligent models, based on a neuro-fuzzy system integrated with fuzzy c-means data clustering (FCM) and grid partition (GP) models as well as artificial neural networks integrated with particle swarm optimization algorithm, were used to predict the spatial distribution of chlorine (Cl), electrical conductivity (EC), and sodium absorption ratio (SAR) parameters of groundwater. Results of the hybrid models were compared with geostatistical methods, including kriging, inverse distance weighting (IDW), and radial basis function (RBF). The latitude and longitude values of observation wells and qualitative parameters in three states of maximum, average, and minimum were introduced as input and output to the models, respectively. To evaluate the models, the root mean squared error (RMSE), the mean absolute error (MAE), and CC statistical criteria were used. Results showed that in the hybrid models, NF-GP with the lowest RMSE and MAE and highest CC was the most suitable model for the prediction of water quality parameters. The RMSE, MAE, and CC values were 107.175 (mg/L), 79.804 (mg/L), and 0.924 in the average state for Cl; were 518.544 (μmho/cm), 444.152 (μmho/cm), and 0.882 for electrical conductivity; and were 1.596, 1.350, and 0.582 for sodium absorption ratio, respectively. Among the geostatistical models, the kriging was found more accurate. Using the coordinates of wells will eventually allow the NF-GP to be used for more sampling and replace the visual techniques that require more time, cost, and facilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abonyi J, Andersen H, Nagy L, Szeifert F (1999) Inverse fuzzy-process-model based direct adaptive control. Math Comput Simul 51:119–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Adamowski J, Fung Chan H, Prasher SO, Ozga-Zielinski B, Sliusarieva A (2012) Comparison of multiple linear and nonlinear regression, autoregressive integrated moving average, artificial neural network, and wavelet artificial neural network methods for urban water demand forecasting in Montreal, Canada. Water Resour Res 48

  • Adnan RM, Liang Z, Trajkovic S, Zounemat-Kermani M, Li B, Kisi O (2019a) Daily streamflow prediction using optimally pruned extreme learning machine. J Hydrol 577:123981

    Google Scholar 

  • Adnan RM, Malik A, Kumar A, Parmar KS, Kisi O (2019b) Pan evaporation modeling by three different neuro-fuzzy intelligent systems using climatic inputs. Arab J Geosci 12:606

    Google Scholar 

  • Aguilar FJ, Agüera F, Aguilar MA, Carvajal F (2005) Effects of terrain morphology, sampling density, and interpolation methods on grid DEM accuracy. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 71:805–816

    Google Scholar 

  • Almasri MN, Kaluarachchi JJ (2005) Modular neural networks to predict the nitrate distribution in ground water using the on-ground nitrogen loading and recharge data. Environ Model Softw 20:851–871

    Google Scholar 

  • Apaydin H, Sonmez FK, Yildirim YE (2004) Spatial interpolation techniques for climate data in the GAP region in Turkey. Clim Res 28:31–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Arslan H (2012) Spatial and temporal mapping of groundwater salinity using ordinary kriging and indicator kriging: the case of Bafra Plain, Turkey. Agric Water Manag 113:57–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Azad N, Behmanesh J, Rezaverdinejad V, Abbasi F, Navabian M (2018) Developing an optimization model in drip fertigation management to consider environmental issues and supply plant requirements. Agric Water Manag 208:344–356

    Google Scholar 

  • Belkhiri L, Mouni L, Tiri A, Narany TS, Nouibet R (2018) Spatial analysis of groundwater quality using self-organizing maps. Groundw Sustain Dev 7:121–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Bezdek JC (1973): Cluster Validity with Fuzzy Sets. J Cybernetics 3:58–73

  • Cobaner M (2011) Evapotranspiration estimation by two different neuro-fuzzy inference systems. J Hydrol 398:292–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Coulibaly P, Anctil F, Bobée B (1999) Prévision hydrologique par réseaux de neurones artificiels: état de l'art. Can J Civ Eng 26:293–304

    Google Scholar 

  • Diop L, Bodian A, Djaman K, Yaseen ZM, Deo RC, El-Shafie A, Brown LC (2018) The influence of climatic inputs on stream-flow pattern forecasting: case study of upper Senegal River. Environ Earth Sci 77:182

    Google Scholar 

  • Elzwayie A, El-Shafie A, Yaseen ZM, Afan HA, Allawi MF (2017) RBFNN-based model for heavy metal prediction for different climatic and pollution conditions. Neural Comput & Applic 28:1991–2003

    Google Scholar 

  • Emamgholizadeh S, Kashi H, Marofpoor I, Zalaghi E (2014) Prediction of water quality parameters of Karoon River (Iran) by artificial intelligence-based models. Int J Environ Sci Technol 11:645–656

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Emamgholizadeh S, Bahman K, Bateni SM, Ghorbani H, Marofpoor I, Nielson JR (2017) Estimation of soil dispersivity using soft computing approaches. Neural Comput & Applic 28:207–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao C, Gemmer M, Zeng X, Liu B, Su B, Wen Y (2010) Projected streamflow in the Huaihe River Basin (2010–2100) using artificial neural network. Stoch Env Res Risk A 24:685–697

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazzaz NM, Yusoff MK, Aris AZ, Juahir H, Ramli MF (2012) Artificial neural network modeling of the water quality index for Kinta River (Malaysia) using water quality variables as predictors. Mar Pollut Bull 64:2409–2420

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Geethanjali M, Slochanal SMR, Bhavani R (2008) PSO trained ANN-based differential protection scheme for power transformers. Neurocomputing 71:904–918

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghavidel SZZ, Montaseri M (2014) Application of different data-driven methods for the prediction of total dissolved solids in the Zarinehroud basin. Stoch Env Res Risk A 28:2101–2118

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu K, Huang Y, Li H, Li B, Chen D, White RE (2005) Spatial variability of shallow groundwater level, electrical conductivity and nitrate concentration, and risk assessment of nitrate contamination in North China Plain. Environ Int 31:896–903

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jalalkamali A (2015) Using of hybrid fuzzy models to predict spatiotemporal groundwater quality parameters. Earth Sci Inf 8:885–894

    Google Scholar 

  • Jang J-S (1993) ANFIS: adaptive-network-based fuzzy inference system. IEEE T SYST MAN CY B 23:665–685

  • Jin T, Cai S, Jiang D, Liu J (2019) A data-driven model for real-time water quality prediction and early warning by an integration method. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:30374–30385

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Karterakis SM, Karatzas GP, Nikolos IK, Papadopoulou MP (2007) Application of linear programming and differential evolutionary optimization methodologies for the solution of coastal subsurface water management problems subject to environmental criteria. J Hydrol 342:270–282

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization (PSO), Proc. IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, Perth, Australia, pp 1942–1948

  • Khalil B, Ouarda T, St-Hilaire A (2011) Estimation of water quality characteristics at ungauged sites using artificial neural networks and canonical correlation analysis. J Hydrol 405:277–287

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kholghi M, Hosseini S (2009) Comparison of groundwater level estimation using neuro-fuzzy and ordinary kriging. Environ Model Assess 14:729–737

    Google Scholar 

  • Kisi O, Sanikhani H (2015a) Modelling long-term monthly temperatures by several data-driven methods using geographical inputs. Int J Climatol 35:3834–3846

    Google Scholar 

  • Kisi O, Sanikhani H (2015b) Prediction of long-term monthly precipitation using several soft computing methods without climatic data. Int J Climatol 35:4139–4150

    Google Scholar 

  • Kisi O, Yaseen ZM (2019) The potential of hybrid evolutionary fuzzy intelligence model for suspended sediment concentration prediction. CATENA 174:11–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Kisi O, Zounemat-Kermani M (2014) Comparison of two different adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference systems in modelling daily reference evapotranspiration. Water Resour Manag 28:2655–2675

    Google Scholar 

  • Kisi O, Zounemat-Kermani M (2016) Suspended sediment modeling using neuro-fuzzy embedded fuzzy c-means clustering technique. Water Resour Manag 30:3979–3994

    Google Scholar 

  • Kisi O, Sanikhani H, Zounemat-Kermani M, Niazi F (2015) Long-term monthly evapotranspiration modeling by several data-driven methods without climatic data. Comput Electron Agric 115:66–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Kisi O, Keshavarzi A, Shiri J, Zounemat-Kermani M, Omran E-SE (2017) Groundwater quality modeling using neuro-particle swarm optimization and neuro-differential evolution techniques. Hydrol Res 48:1508–1519

  • Kördel W, Garelick H, Gawlik BM, Kandile NG, Peijnenburg WJ, Rüdel H (2013) Substance-related environmental monitoring strategies regarding soil, groundwater and surface water—an overview. Environ Sci Pollut Res 20:2810–2827

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar M, Raghuwanshi N, Singh R, Wallender W, Pruitt W (2002) Estimating evapotranspiration using artificial neural network. J Irrig Drain Eng 128:224–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu M, Lu J (2014) Support vector machine―an alternative to artificial neuron network for water quality forecasting in an agricultural nonpoint source polluted river? Environ Sci Pollut Res 21:11036–11053

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liu B, Wang L, Jin Y-H (2007) An effective PSO-based memetic algorithm for flow shop scheduling. IEEE Trans Syst Man B Cybern 37:18–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo D, Guo Q, Wang X (2003) Simulation and prediction of underground water dynamics based on RBF neural network. Acta Geosci Sin 24:475–478

    Google Scholar 

  • Mantoglou A, Papantoniou M, Giannoulopoulos P (2004) Management of coastal aquifers based on nonlinear optimization and evolutionary algorithms. J Hydrol 297:209–228

    Google Scholar 

  • Maroufpoor S, Fakheri-Fard A, Shiri J (2017) Study of the spatial distribution of groundwater quality using soft computing and geostatistical models. ISH J Hydraul Eng 25:232–238 

  • Maroufpoor E, Sanikhani H, Emamgholizadeh S, Kişi Ö (2018) Estimation of wind drift and evaporation losses from sprinkler irrigation systems by different data-driven methods. Irrig Drain 67:222–232

    Google Scholar 

  • Maroufpoor S, Maroufpoor E, Bozorg-Haddad O, Shiri J, Yaseen ZM (2019a) Soil moisture simulation using hybrid artificial intelligent model: hybridization of adaptive neuro fuzzy inference system with grey wolf optimizer algorithm. J Hydrol 575:544–556

    Google Scholar 

  • Maroufpoor S, Sanikhani H, Kisi O, Deo RC, Yaseen ZM (2019b) Long‐term modelling of wind speeds using six different heuristic artificial intelligence approaches. Int J Climatol 39:3543–3557 

  • Maroufpoor S, Shiri J, Maroufpoor E (2019c) Modeling the sprinkler water distribution uniformity by data-driven methods based on effective variables. Agric Water Manag 215:63–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Maroufpoor S, Bozorg-Haddad O, Chu X (2020) Geostatistics: principles and methods. In: Pijush S, Dieu TB, Ravinesh CD, Subrata C (eds) Handbook of Probabilistic Models. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 229–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehdizadeh S, Behmanesh J, Khalili K (2017) A comparison of monthly precipitation point estimates at 6 locations in Iran using integration of soft computing methods and GARCH time series model. J Hydrol 554:721–742

  • Melin P, Olivas F, Castillo O, Valdez F, Soria J, Valdez M (2013) Optimal design of fuzzy classification systems using PSO with dynamic parameter adaptation through fuzzy logic. Expert Syst Appl 40:3196–3206

    Google Scholar 

  • Nas B (2009) Geostatistical approach to assessment of spatial distribution of groundwater quality. Pol J Environ Stud 18:1073–1082

  • Niroobakhsh M, Musavi-Jahromi S, Manshouri M, Sedghi H (2012) Prediction of water quality parameter in Jajrood River basin: application of multi layer perceptron (MLP) perceptron and radial basis function networks of artificial neural networks (ANNs). Afr J Agric Res 7:4131–4139

    Google Scholar 

  • Nourani V, Khanghah TR, Sayyadi M (2013) Application of the artificial neural network to monitor the quality of treated water. J Inf Technol Manag 3:39–45

  • Palani S, Liong S-Y, Tkalich P (2008) An ANN application for water quality forecasting. Mar Pollut Bull 56:1586–1597

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Poli R, Kennedy J, Blackwell T (2007) Particle swarm optimization. Swarm Intell 1:33–57

  • Rostami AA, Isazadeh M, Shahabi M, Nozari H (2019) Evaluation of geostatistical techniques and their hybrid in modelling of groundwater quality index in the Marand Plain in Iran. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:34993–35009

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sahinkaya E, Muhsin N, Ozkaya B, Yesilnacar MI (2008) Neural network prediction of nitrate in groundwater of Harran Plain, Turkey. J Environ Geol 56:19–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanikhani H, Kisi O (2012) River flow estimation and forecasting by using two different adaptive neuro-fuzzy approaches. Water Resour Manag 26:1715–1729

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanikhani H, Kisi O, Maroufpoor E, Yaseen ZM (2019) Temperature-based modeling of reference evapotranspiration using several artificial intelligence models: application of different modeling scenarios. Theor Appl Climatol 135:449–462

    Google Scholar 

  • Selakov A, Cvijetinović D, Milović L, Mellon S, Bekut D (2014) Hybrid PSO–SVM method for short-term load forecasting during periods with significant temperature variations in city of Burbank. Appl Soft Comput 16:80–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Seyedzadeh A, Maroufpoor S, Maroufpoor E, Shiri J, Bozorg-Haddad O, Gavazi F (2020) Artificial intelligence approach to estimate discharge of drip tape irrigation based on temperature and pressure. Agric Water Manag 228:105905

    Google Scholar 

  • Soltani Mohammadi A, Sayadi Shahraki A, Naseri AA (2017) Simulation of groundwater quality parameters using ANN and ANN+ PSO models (Case study: Ramhormoz Plain). Pollution 3:191–200

    Google Scholar 

  • Subramani T, Elango L, Damodarasamy S (2005) Groundwater quality and its suitability for drinking and agricultural use in Chithar River basin, Tamil Nadu, India. Environ Geol 47:1099–1110

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sudheer K, Gosain A, Ramasastri K (2003) Estimating actual evapotranspiration from limited climatic data using neural computing technique. J Irrig Drain Eng 129:214–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka K (1997) An Introduction to Fuzzy Logic for Practical Applications. Springer, 154 pp

  • Tiwari MK, Adamowski J (2013) Urban water demand forecasting and uncertainty assessment using ensemble wavelet-bootstrap-neural network models. Water Resour Res 49:6486–6507

    Google Scholar 

  • Tung TM, Yaseen ZM (2020) A survey on river water quality modelling using artificial intelligence models: 2000-2020. J Hydrol 585:124670

  • Vaheddoost B, Guan Y, Mohammadi B (2020) Application of hybrid ANN-whale optimization model in evaluation of the field capacity and the permanent wilting point of the soils. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:13131–13141

  • Varouchakis EA, Kolosionis K, Karatzas GP (2016) Spatial variability estimation and risk assessment of the aquifer level at sparsely gauged basins using geostatistical methodologies. Earth Sci Inf 9:437–448

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang L-X (1997) A course in fuzzy systems and control, 2. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang L, Li X, Cui W (2012) Fuzzy neural networks enhanced evaluation of wetland surface water quality. Int J Comput Appl Technol 44:235–240

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO (1984) Guidelines for drinking water quality. World Health Organization, Geneva, p 130

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilding L (1985) Spatial variability: its documentation, accommodation and implication to soil surveys, Soil spatial variability. Workshop (Las Vegas NV 1985-11-30). Pudoc, Wageningen, pp. 166–194

  • Yaseen ZM, Ramal MM, Diop L, Jaafar O, Demir V, Kisi O (2018) Hybrid adaptive neuro-fuzzy models for water quality index estimation. Water Resour Manag 32:2227–2245

    Google Scholar 

  • Yaseen ZM, Ebtehaj I, Kim S, Sanikhani H, Asadi H, Ghareb MI, Bonakdari H, Mohtar W, Melini WH, Al-Ansari N (2019) Novel hybrid data-intelligence model for forecasting monthly rainfall with uncertainty analysis. Water 11:502

    Google Scholar 

  • Yavari S, Maroufpoor S, Shiri J (2018) Modeling soil erosion by data-driven methods using limited input variables. Hydrol Res 49:1349–1362

    Google Scholar 

  • Yesilnacar MI, Sahinkaya E (2012) Artificial neural network prediction of sulfate and SAR in an unconfined aquifer in southeastern Turkey. Environ Earth Sci 67:1111–1119

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou Z, Zhang G, Yan M, Wang J (2012) Spatial variability of the shallow groundwater level and its chemistry characteristics in the low plain around the Bohai Sea, North China. Environ Monit Assess 184:3697–3710

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Irrigation and Reclamation Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

    Saman Maroufpoor

  2. Department of Water Sciences and Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

    Mohammadnabi Jalali

  3. Department of Water Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran

    Saman Nikmehr & Eisa Maroufpoor

  4. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran

    Naser Shiri

  5. Water Engineering Department, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran

    Jalal Shiri

  6. Center of Excellence in Hydroinformatics, Faculty of Civil Eng, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran

    Jalal Shiri

Authors
  1. Saman Maroufpoor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohammadnabi Jalali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Saman Nikmehr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Naser Shiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jalal Shiri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Eisa Maroufpoor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eisa Maroufpoor.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Xianliang Yi

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

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Maroufpoor, S., Jalali, M., Nikmehr, S. et al. Modeling groundwater quality by using hybrid intelligent and geostatistical methods. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27, 28183–28197 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09188-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09188-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation