4.3 Article

Testing of the Modified Streambank Erosion and Instream Phosphorus Routines for the SWAT Model

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1752-1688.12485

关键词

streambank erosion; instream phosphorus routine; phosphorus; SWAT; composite streambanks

资金

  1. U.S. Geological Survey 104b grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In some watersheds, streambanks are a source of two major pollutants, phosphorus (P) and sediment. P originating from both uplands and streambanks can be transported and stored indefinitely on floodplains, streambanks, and in closed depressions near the stream. The objectives of this study were to (1) test the modified streambank erosion and instream P routines for the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model in the Barren Fork Creek watershed in northeast Oklahoma, (2) predict P in the watershed with and without streambank-derived P, and (3) determine the significance of streambank erosion P relative to overland P sources. Measured streambank and channel parameters were incorporated into a flow-calibrated SWAT model and used to estimate streambank erosion and P for the Barren Fork Creek using modified streambank erosion and instream P routines. The predicted reach-weighted streambank erosion was 40kg/m vs. the measured 42kg/m. Streambank erosion contributed 47% of the total P to the Barren Fork Creek and improved P predictions compared to observed data, especially during the high-flow events. Of the total P entering the stream system, approximately 65% was removed via the watershed outlet and 35% was stored in the floodplain and stream system. This study successfully applied the SWAT model's modified streambank erosion and instream P routines and demonstrated that streambank-derived P can improve P modeling at the watershed scale. Editor's note: This paper is part of the featured series on SWAT Applications for Emerging Hydrologic and Water Quality Challenges. See the February 2017 issue for the introduction and background to the series.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据