Abstract

Accurate information on the sources of suspended sediment in riverine systems is essential to target mitigation. Accordingly, we applied a generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE) framework for quantifying contributions from three sub-basin spatial sediment sources in the Mehran River catchment draining into the Persian Gulf, Hormozgan province, southern Iran. A total of 28 sediment samples were collected from the three sub-basin sources and six from the overall outlet. 43 geochemical elements (e.g., major, trace and rare earth elements) were measured in the samples. Four different combinations of statistical tests comprising: (1) traditional range test (TRT), Kruskal–Wallis (KW) H-test and stepwise discriminant function analysis (DFA) (TRT + KW + DFA); (2) traditional range test using mean values (RTM) and two additional tests (RTM + KW + DFA); (3) TRT + KW + PCA (principle component analysis), and; 4) RTM + KW + PCA, were used to the spatial sediment source discrimination. Tracer bi-plots were used as an additional step to assess the tracers selected in the different final composite signatures for source discrimination. The predictions of spatial source contributions generated by GLUE were assessed using statistical tests and virtual sample mixtures. On this basis, TRT + KW + DFA and RTM + KW + DFA yielded the best source discrimination and the tracers in these composite signatures were shown by the biplots to be broadly conservative during transportation from source to sink. Using these final two composite signatures, the estimated mean contributions for the western, central and eastern sub-basins, respectively, ranged between 10–60% (overall mean contribution 36%), 0.3–16% (overall mean contribution 6%) and 38–77% (overall mean contribution 58%). In comparison, the final tracers selected using TRT + KW + PCA generated respective corresponding contributions of 1–42% (overall mean 20%), 0.5–30% (overall mean 12%) and 55–84% (overall mean 68%) compared with 17–69% (overall mean 41%), 0.2–12% (overall mean 5%) and 29–76% (overall mean 54%) using the final tracers selected by RTM + KW + PCA. Based on the mean absolute fit (MAF; ≥ 95% for all target sediment samples) and goodness-of-fit (GOF; ≥ 99% for all samples), GLUE with the final tracers selected using TRT + KW + PCA performed slightly better than GLUE with the final signatures selected by the three other combinations of statistical tests. Based on the virtual mixture tests, however, predictions provided by GLUE with the final tracers selected using TRT + KW + DFA and RTM + KW + DFA (mean MAE = 11% and mean RMSE = 13%) performed marginally better than GLUE with RTM + KW + PCA (mean MAE = 14% and mean RMSE = 16%) and GLUE with TRT + KW + PCA (mean MAE = 17% and mean RMSE = 19%). The estimated source proportions can help watershed engineers plan the targeting of conservation programmes for soil and water resources.

Highlights

  • Accurate information on the sources of suspended sediment in riverine systems is essential to target mitigation

  • Elevated suspended sediment loads in riverine systems resulting from the accelerated erosion due to human activities are a serious threat to the sustainable management of watersheds and ecosystem services therein ­worldwide[5]

  • The different properties used in sediment source fingerprinting (SSF) include colour, mineralogy, geochemical elements (e.g., major, trace and rare earth (REE) elements), isotopic signatures and ratios (e.g., 87Sr/86Sr, δ13C and δ15N), rare earth elements (REEs) indices, weathering indices, fallout radionuclides (FRNs) and absolute particle s­ ize[23–28]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Accurate information on the sources of suspended sediment in riverine systems is essential to target mitigation. The predictions of spatial source contributions generated by GLUE were assessed using statistical tests and virtual sample mixtures On this basis, TRT + KW + DFA and RTM + KW + DFA yielded the best source discrimination and the tracers in these composite signatures were shown by the biplots to be broadly conservative during transportation from source to sink. To the best of our knowledge, GLUE has not been used to quantify uncertainty associated with estimating the spatial sources of fluvial suspended sediment in river catchments Despite this less frequent application of GLUE, it is useful to bear in mind that Bayesian modelling, as an alternative to GLUE, is more sophisticated but more demanding, since it uses different distributions and transformations (e.g., posterior and prior, Dirichlet), centered log ratio (CLR)[35], additive log-ratio (ALR)[36] and iso-metric log ratio (ILR)37) in the data structure. Regardless of the approach used to estimate uncertainties associated with predicted sediment source proportions, the uncertainties associated with the SSF approach may originate from a variety of sources, including withinsource group tracer variability, tracer selection, limited numbers of source material or target sediment samples, laboratory analyses, and source group ­classification[5,28,38]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call