377
Views
3
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Multi-site watershed model calibration for evaluating best management practice effectiveness in reducing fecal pollution

, &
Pages 2690-2715 | Received 29 Jul 2019, Accepted 12 Oct 2019, Published online: 24 Oct 2019

References

  • Abouali M, Nejadhashemi AP, Daneshvar F, Herman MR, Adhikari U, Calappi TJ, Selegean JP. 2018. Evaluation of the effectiveness of conservation practices under implementation site uncertainty. J Environ Manage. 228:197–204.
  • Ahmadisharaf E, Camacho RA, Zhang HX, Hantush MM, Mohamoud YM. 2019. Calibration and validation of watershed models and advances in uncertainty analysis in TMDL studies. J Hydrol Eng. 24(7):03119001.
  • Arnold JG, Kiniry JR, Srinivasan R. 2012. Soil & water assessment tool: input/output documentaion; [accessed 2019 Oct 17]. https://swat.tamu.edu/media/69296/swat-io-documentation-2012.pdf.
  • Arnold JG, Srinivasan R, Muttiah RS, Williams JR. 1998. Large area hydrologic modeling and assesment Part I: model development. J Am Water Resour Assoc. 34(1):73–89.
  • [AVMA] American Veterinary Medical Association. 2007. US pet ownership and demographics sourcebook. 2007 ed. Schaumburg (IL): American Veterinary Medical Association.
  • Baffaut C, Sadeghi A. 2010. Bacteria modeling with SWAT for assessment and remediation studies. A review. Trans ASABE. 53:1585–1594.
  • Bai J, Shen Z, Yan T. 2016. Effectiveness of vegetative filter strips in abating fecal coliform based on modified soil and water assessment tool. Int J Environ Sci Technol. 13(7):1723–1730.
  • Bicknell BR, Imhoff JC, Kittle JL, Donigian AS ,Johanson RC. 1996. Hydrological Simulation Program - Fortran user’s manual for release11. Athens (GA): US Environmental Protection Agency.
  • Borah DK, Ahmadisharaf E, Padmanabhan G, Imen S ,Mohamoud YM. 2019. Watershed models for development and implementation of total maximum daily loads. J Hydrol Eng. 24.
  • Borel K, Swaminathan V, Vance C, Roberts G ,Srinivasan R ,Karthikeyan R. 2017. Modeling the dispersion of E. coli in waterbodies due to urban sources: a spatial approach. Water (Switzerland). 9:665.
  • Bradshaw JK, Snyder BJ, Oladeinde A, Spidle D, Berrang ME, Meinersmann RJ, Oakley B, Sidle RC, Sullivan K, Molina M, et al. 2016. Characterizing relationships among fecal indicator bacteria, microbial source tracking markers, and associated waterborne pathogen occurrence in stream water and sediments in a mixed land use watershed. Water Res. 101:498–509.
  • Camacho RA, Martin JL, Wool T, Singh VP. 2018. A framework for uncertainty and risk analysis in Total Maximum Daily Load applications. Environ Model Softw. 101:218–235.
  • Chaudhary A, Hantush MM. 2017. Bayesian Monte Carlo and maximum likelihood approach for uncertainty estimation and risk management: application to lake oxygen recovery model. Water Res. 108:301–311.
  • Cho KH, Pachepsky YA, Kim M, Pyo J, Park M-H, Kim YM, Kim J-W, Kim JH. 2016. Modeling seasonal variability of fecal coliform in natural surface waters using the modified SWAT. J. Hydrol. 535:377–385.
  • Cho KH, Pachepsky YA, Oliver DM, Muirhead RW, Park Y, Quilliam RS, Shelton DR. 2016. Modeling fate and transport of fecally-derived microorganisms at the watershed scale: state of the science and future opportunities. Water Res. 100:38–56.
  • Coffey R, Cummins E, Flaherty VO, Cormican M. 2010. Analysis of the soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) to model Cryptosporidium in surface water sources. Biosyst Eng. 106(3):303–314.
  • Coffey R, Dorai-Raj S, O'Flaherty V, Cormican M, Cummins E. 2013. Modeling of pathogen indicator organisms in a small-scale agricultural catchment using SWAT. Hum Ecol Risk Assess. 19(1):232–253.
  • Cooper J, Alexander C. 2006. Pathogen TMDL for East Branch Coon Creek near Armada, MI. Lansing (MI): Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Water Resources Division.
  • de Brauwere A, Ouattara NK, Servais P. 2014. Modeling fecal indicator bacteria concentrations in natural surface waters: a review. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol. 44(21):2380–2453.
  • DeFlorio-Barker S, Wing C, Jones RM, Dorevitch S. 2018. Estimate of incidence and cost of recreational waterborne illness on United States surface waters. Environ Health. 17:1–10.
  • Devane ML, Weaver L, Singh SK, Gilpin BJ. 2018. Fecal source tracking methods to elucidate critical sources of pathogens and contaminant microbial transport through New Zealand agricultural watersheds – a review. J Environ Manage. 222:293–303.
  • Fonseca A, Boaventura RAR, Vilar V. 2018. Integrating water quality responses to best management practices in Portugal. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 25(2):1587–1596.
  • Frey SK, Topp E, Edge T, Fall C, Gannon V, Jokinen C, Marti R, Neumann N, Ruecker N, Wilkes G, et al. 2013. Using SWAT, bacteroidales microbial source tracking markers, and fecal indicator bacteria to predict waterborne pathogen occurrence in an agricultural watershed. Water Res. 47(16):6326–6337.
  • Gassman PW, Sadeghi AM, Srinivasan R. 2014. Applications of the SWAT model special section: overview and insights. J Environ Qual. 43(1):1–8.
  • Hantush MM, Chaudhary A. 2014. Bayesian framework for water quality model uncertainty estimation and risk management. J Hydrol Eng. 19:1–14.
  • Hyer KE, Mayer DL. 2004. Enhancing fecal coliform total maximum daily load models through bacterial source tracking. J Am Water Resour Assoc. 40(6):1511–1526.
  • Iqbal MS, Hofstra N. 2019. Modeling Escherichia coli fate and transport in the Kabul River basin using SWAT. Hum Ecol Risk Assess Int J. 25(5):1279–1297.
  • Jeong J, Wagner K, Flores JJ, Cawthon T, Her Y, Osorio J, Yen H. 2019. Linking watershed modeling and bacterial source tracking to better assess E. coli sources. Sci Total Environ. 648:164–175.
  • Jia Y, Culver TB. 2008. Uncertainty analysis for watershed modeling using generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation with multiple calibration measures. J Water Resour Plann Manage. 134(2):97–106.
  • Kafcas E, Payne T. 2005. Worksheet for establishing deer population goals – DMU 050, Macomb County, 2006–2010. Lansing (MI): Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
  • Kim J-W, Pachepsky YA, Shelton DR, Coppock C. 2010. Effect of streambed bacteria release on E. coli concentrations: monitoring and modeling with the modified SWAT. Ecol Model. 221(12):1592–1604.
  • Kim K, Whelan G, Molina M, Parmar R, Wolfe K, Galvin M, Duda P, Zepp R, Kinzelman JL, Kleinheinz GT, et al. 2018. Using integrated environmental modeling to assess sources of microbial contamination in mixed-use watersheds. J Environ Qual. 47(5):1103.
  • Kim SM, Benham BL, Brannan KM. 2007. Water quality calibration criteria for bacteria TMDL development. Appl Eng Agric. 23:171–176.
  • Lacher IL, Ahmadisharaf E, Fergus C, Akre T, Mcshea WJ, Benham BL, Kline KS. 2019. Scale-dependent impacts of urban and agricultural land use on nutrients, sediment, and runoff. Sci Total Environ. 652:611–622.
  • Liu Y, Guo T, Wang R, Engel BA, Flanagan DC, Li S, Pijanowski BC, Collingsworth PD, Lee JG, Wallace CW, et al. 2019a. A SWAT-based optimization tool for obtaining cost-effective strategies for agricultural conservation practice implementation at watershed scales. Sci Total Environ. 691:685–696.
  • Liu Y, Wang R, Guo T, Engel BA, Flanagan DC, Lee JG, Li S, Pijanowski BC, Collingsworth PD, Wallace CW, et al. 2019b. Evaluating efficiencies and cost-effectiveness of best management practices in improving agricultural water quality using integrated SWAT and cost evaluation tool. J Hydrol. 577:123965.
  • Luo Y, Zhang M. 2009. Management oriented sensitivity analysis for pesticide transport in watershed-scale water quality modeling using SWAT. Environ Pollut. 157(12):3370–3378.
  • [MDEQ] Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. 2011. Revised total maximum daily load for E. coli for East Branch Coon Creek, Macomb and St. Clair counties. Lansing (MI): Michigan Department of Environmental Quality.
  • Mishra A, Ahmadisharaf E, Benham BL, Gallagher DL ,Reckhow KH ,Smith EP. 2019. Two-phase monte carlo simulation for partitioning the effects of epistemic and aleatory uncertainty in TMDL modeling. J Hydrol Eng. 24:1–14.
  • Mishra A, Ahmadisharaf E, Benham BL, Wolfe ML, Leman SC, Gallagher DL, Reckhow KH, Smith EP. 2018. Generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation and Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation to prioritize TMDL pollutant allocations. J Hydrol Eng. 23(12):05018025.
  • 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. 50:885–900.
  • Moriasi DN, Gitau MW, Pai N, Daggupati P. 2015. Hydrologic and water quality models: performance measures and evaluation criteria. Trans ASABE. 58:1763–1785.
  • Naramngam S, Tong S. 2013. Environmental and economic implications of various conservative agricultural practices in the Upper Little Miami River basin. Agric Water Manage. 119:65–79.
  • Nash JE, Sutcliffe JV. 1970. River flow forecasting through conceptual models Part one: a discussion of principles. J Hydrol. 27:282–290.
  • [NESC] National Environmental Services Center. 2018. [accessed 2019 Oct 17]. http://www.nesc.wvu.edu/.
  • Niazi M, Obropta C, Miskewitz R. 2015. Pathogen transport and fate modeling in the Upper Salem River Watershed using SWAT model. J Environ Manag. 151:167–177.
  • [NOAA] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2018. Data Tools | Climate Data Online (CDO) | National Climatic Data Center (NCDC); [accessed 2019 Oct 17]. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datatools/.
  • [NRCS] Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2010. Statewide conservation practice typical installation cost information –2011. Michigan: Field Office Technical Guide.
  • Nshimyimana JP, Martin SL, Flood M, Verhougstraete MP, Hyndman DW, Rose JB. 2018. Regional variations of bovine and porcine fecal pollution as a function of landscape, nutrient, and hydrological factors. J Environ Qual. 47(5):1024.
  • Oliver DM, Porter KDH, Pachepsky YA, Muirhead RW, Reaney SM, Coffey R, Kay D, Milledge DG, Hong E, Anthony SG, et al. 2016. Predicting microbial water quality with models: over-arching questions for managing risk in agricultural catchments. Sci Total Environ. 544:39–47.
  • Pandey PK, Kass PH, Soupir ML, Biswas S, Singh VP. 2014. Contamination of water resources by pathogenic bacteria. AMB Express. 4(1):1–16.
  • Pandey PK, Soupir ML, Ikenberry CD, Rehmann CR. 2016. Predicting streambed sediment and water column Escherichia coli levels at watershed scale. J Am Water Resour Assoc. 52(1):184–197.
  • Parajuli PB, Mankin KR, Barnes PL. 2008. Applicability of targeting vegetative filter strips to abate fecal bacteria and sediment yield using SWAT. Agric Water Manage. 95(10):1189–1200.
  • Parajuli PB, Mankin KR, Barnes PL. 2009. Source specific fecal bacteria modeling using soil and water assessment tool model. Bioresour Technol. 100(2):953–963.
  • Petersen CM, Rifai HS, Stein R. 2009. Bacteria load estimator spreadsheet tool for modeling spatial Escherichia coli loads to an urban Bayou. J Environ Eng. 135(4):203–217.
  • Pyo J, Baek S-S, Kim M, Park S, Lee H, Ra J-S, Cho KH. 2017. Optimizing agricultural best management practices in a lake erie watershed. J Am Water Resour Assoc. 53(6):1281–1292. doi:10.1111/1752-1688.12571.
  • [PSC] Public Sector Consultants. 2018. An assessment of failing septic systems in the Saginaw Bay region. Lansing (MI): Public Sector Consultants.
  • Reder K, Flörke M, Alcamo J. 2015. Modeling historical fecal coliform loadings to large European rivers and resulting in-stream concentrations. Environ Model Softw. 63:251–263.
  • Sadeghi AM, Arnold JG. 2002. A SWAT/microbial sub-model for predicting pathogen loadings in surface and groundwater at watershed and basin scales. In: ASAE, ed. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL): Environmental Regulations, Proceedings of 2002 Conference. Fort Worth, TX: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers.
  • Santo Domingo JW, Bambic DG, Edge TA, Wuertz S. 2007. Quo vadis source tracking? Towards a strategic framework for environmental monitoring of fecal pollution. Water Res. 41(16):3539–3552.
  • [SSURGO] Soil Survey Geographic Database. 2018. SSURGO Downloader; [accessed 2019 Oct 17]. http://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=4dbfecc52f1442eeb368c435251591ec.
  • Song F, Lupi F, Kaplowitz M. 2010. Valuing Great Lakes beaches. Presentation at: the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association 2010 AAEA, CAES, & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting; 2010 July 25–27; Denver, CO.
  • Sowa SP, Herbert M, Mysorekar S, Annis GM, Hall K, Nejadhashemi AP, Woznicki SA, Wang L, Doran PJ. 2016. How much conservation is enough? Defining implementation goals for healthy fish communities in agricultural rivers. J Great Lakes Res. 42(6):1302–1321.
  • [STEPL] Spreadsheet Tool for Estimating Pollutant Load. 2006. STEPL: spreadsheet tool for estimating pollutant load v. 4.0. Fairfax (VA): Tetra Tech, Inc.
  • Teague A, Karthikeyan R, Srinivasan R, Persyn RA. 2009. Spatially explicit load enrichment calculation tool to identify potential E. coli sources in watersheds. Trans ASABE. 52:1109–1120.
  • [USDA-NASS] US Department of Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2012. CropScape - NASS CDL Program; [accessed 2019 Oct 17]. https://nassgeodata.gmu.edu/CropScape/.
  • [USDA-NRCS] US Department of Agriculture-Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2007. Reducing risk of E. coli O157:H7 contamination. National Nutrient Management Technical Note No. 7. Washington (DC): USDA-NRCS.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. Bacterial indicator tool: user’s guide. EPA-823-B-01e003. Washington (DC): Office of Water.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2012. Recreational water quality criteria. Report No. 820-F-12-058. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2017. Water quality assessment and TMDL Information; [accessed 2019 Oct 17]. https://ofmpub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_nation_cy.control#imp_water_by_state.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2018. About Clinton River AOC; [accessed 2019 Oct 17]. https://www.epa.gov/great-lakes-aocs/about-clinton-river-aoc.
  • [USGS] US Geological Survey. 2018a. The national map: elevation; [accessed 2019 Oct 17]. https://nationalmap.gov/elevation.html.
  • [USGS] US Geological Survey. 2018b. National water information system: web interface; [accessed 2019 Oct 17]. https://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis.
  • Verhougstraete MP, Martin SL, Kendall AD, Hyndman DW, Rose JB. 2015. Linking fecal bacteria in rivers to landscape, geochemical, and hydrologic factors and sources at the basin scale. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 112(33):10419–10424.
  • Walters HM, Brody S, Highfield W. 2018. Examining the relationship between development patterns and total phosphorus in the Galveston Bay Estuary. Environ Sci Pol. 88:10–16.
  • Whelan G, Kim K, Parmar R, Laniak GF, Wolfe K, Galvin M, Molina M, Pachepsky YA, Duda P, Zepp R, et al. 2018. Capturing microbial sources distributed in a mixed-use watershed within an integrated environmental modeling workflow. Environ Model Softw. 99:126–146.
  • Whitehead PG, Leckie H, Rankinen K, Butterfield D, Futter MN, Bussi G. 2016. An INCA model for pathogens in rivers and catchments: model structure, sensitivity analysis and application to the River Thames catchment, UK. Sci Total Environ. 572:1601–1610.
  • Wu J. 2019. Linking landscape patterns to sources of water contamination: implications for tracking fecal contaminants with geospatial and Bayesian approaches. Sci Total Environ. 650:1149–1157.
  • Zeckoski RW, Benham BL, Shah SB, et al. 2005. BSLC: a tool for bacteria source characterization for watershed management. Appl. Eng. Agric. 21:879–889.
  • Zeckoski RW, Smolen MD, Moriasi D, et al. 2014. Terminology for hydrologic and water quality modeling: challenges and consequences. Paper presented at: the 2014 ASABE and CSBE/SCGAB Annual International Meeting, ASABE, St. Joseph, MI.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.