4.2 Article

Spatiotemporal groundwater recharge estimation for the largest rice production region in Sanjiang Plain, Northeast China

Journal

Publisher

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/aqua.2014.024

Keywords

groundwater recharge; irrigation management; Jiansanjiang Farming Bureau; Sanjiang Plain; water-table fluctuation method

Funding

  1. Key Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [KSZD-EW-Z-021]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) [2010CB428404]
  3. CAS/SAFEA International Partnership Program for Creative Research Teams

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Accurate estimation of groundwater recharge is important for sustainable management of water resources in intensively irrigated agriculture. In this study, the water-table fluctuation (WTF) method, combined with statistical regression analysis, was used to understand the spatiotemporal variability of groundwater recharge in the largest rice production farming region on China's Sanjiang Plain. Monthly and annual groundwater recharge rates were estimated using the WTF method and simple kriging, respectively. Average annual recharge volumes were estimated for the entire region using the Thiessen polygon method. The study showed a large spatial and temporal variation of groundwater recharge in the region. Seasonally, the recharge rate was high during the spring and early summer when snowmelt occurred and heavier rainfall was concentrated. Nearly 68% of the total annual recharge took place during the 4 months from April to July. Annually, recharge volumes varied greatly, ranging from 7.9 x 10(8) m(3)/yr (2005) to 9.9 x 10(8) m(3)/yr (2006). There was a large spatial difference in recharge with the highest annual rate (191 mm/yr) in the south and the lowest (9 mm/yr) annual rate in the north. The findings demonstrated that the WTF is simple and very useful for shallow groundwater assessment for such a large alluvial plain.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available