Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

ISSN 2095-2430

ISSN 2095-2449(Online)

CN 10-1023/X

Postal Subscription Code 80-968

2018 Impact Factor: 1.272

Front Struc Civil Eng    2013, Vol. 7 Issue (4) : 456-465    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-013-0218-6
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Effects of land use change on hydrological cycle from forest to upland field in a catchment, Japan
Chuan ZHANG1, Keiji TAKASE2(), Hiroki OUE3, Nobuhiro EBISU3, Haofang YAN3
1. The United Graduate School of Agricultural Sciences, Ehime University, Ehime Pref 790-8577, Japan; 2. Faculty of Bioresources and Environmental Sciences, Ishikawa Prefectural, Ishikawa 920-8580, Japan; 3. Faculty of Agriculture, Ehime University, Ehime Pref 790-8577, Japan
 Download: PDF(423 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Understanding the effects of land use change on the hydrological cycle is very important for development of sustainable water resource in an upland field catchment. In this study, soil and hydrological properties in an upland field catchment, which was reclaimed partially from a forest catchment, were compared with another forest catchment. The soil properties of surface and subsurface layers were investigated in the two catchments. The soil was compacted and water-holding capacity of soil in the upland field catchment became smaller after the reclamation from forest to upland field, which decreased infiltration rate and water storage in the soil layers. We found that peak discharge and direct runoff in the upland field catchment increased compared with the forest catchment. Annual evapotranspiration from the upland field catchment tended to be lower due to the change in vegetation type and soil properties. Furthermore, a semi-distributed hydrological model was applied in the upland field catchment to understand the integrated effects of reclamation on the hydrological cycle. The model parameters, which were determined using a nonlinear optimization technique—the Shuffled Complex Evolution method (SCE), were compared between the two catchments. The Nash and Sutcliffe coefficient was used to evaluate the model performance. The simulated results indicated that evapotranspiration was decreased and change in discharge was more obvious in the surface layer. We considered that declined infiltration and water storage and increased peak discharge and direct runoff have a negative impact on water resources in the upland field catchment. This study will provide information for forest managers in planning and making decisions for land and water resource management.

Keywords land-use change      hydrological processes      upland field catchment      forest catchment      semi-distributed hydrological model     
Corresponding Author(s): TAKASE Keiji,Email:hytakase@ishikawa-pu.ac.jp   
Issue Date: 05 December 2013
 Cite this article:   
Chuan ZHANG,Keiji TAKASE,Hiroki OUE, et al. Effects of land use change on hydrological cycle from forest to upland field in a catchment, Japan[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2013, 7(4): 456-465.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-013-0218-6
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2013/V7/I4/456
Fig.1  Topography of the experimental catchments. (a) Forest catchment; (b) upland field catchment
period after reclamation (AR)upland field catchment
soil dry density(g·cm-3)hydraulic conductivity/(cm·s-1)
surface layer(5-10 cm)subsurface layer(30 cm)surface layer(5-10 cm)subsurface layer (30 cm)
immediately AR1.511.5210-2-10-410-3-10-5
1 year AR1.251.47
2 and half year AR1.141.4810-2-10-410-2-104
originallyforest catchment
1.011.2010-2-10-410-2-10-4
Tab.1  Change in soil properties
Fig.2  omparison of water-holding capacity curves
Fig.3  Relationship between annual evapotranspiration rate and annual precipitation in the upland field (1980–1995) and forest catchment (1985–2010)
storm No.rainfall intensity/(mm·h-1)peak discharge/(m3/s/ha)Qpu/Qpf
upland field catchment(Qpu)forest catchment(Qpf)
122.55.61.24.7
225.54.00.75.7
324.06.31.15.7
424.54.61.82.6
524.04.92.52.0
Tab.2  Comparison of peak discharge between the upland field and forest catchment
storm No.upland field catchmentforest catchment
R/mmQd/mm(Qd/R)/%R/mmQd/mm(Qd/R)/%
155.016.530.056.511.320.0
257.025.144.155.521.739.1
369.520.729.873.016.222.2
4133.574.856.0105.530.028.4
5201.0114.757.1171.078.846.1
Tab.3  Comparison of direct runoff rate between the upland field and forest catchments
Fig.4  Comparison of storm hydrographs
Fig.5  Relationship between concentration time and excess rainfall intensity
Fig.6  Schematic figure of model
parametersforestreclaimed
A/%0.0450.046
FMAX/(mm·h-1)568.97769.89
F18/(mm·h-1)80.17144
FS/(mm·h-1)0.7310.378
SMmax/mm143.7131.6
S18/mm123.7107.1
B/(1/h)3.9635.850
AL6.7552.474
ECCmax1.2761.186
CN/(1/h)0.1020.405
CU hole/(1/h)0.1020.405
HU/mm21.813.4
C1/(1/h)0.1000.112
C2/ (1/h)0.0090.050
C3/(1/h)0.0040.012
C4/(1/h)0.0020.004
C5/(1/h)0.00060.0022
C6/(1/h)0.00010.0001
G2/(mm·h-1)0.2930.344
G3/(mm·h-1)0.1270.178
G4/(mm·h-1)0.0610.050
G5/(mm·h-1)0.0080.011
Tab.4  Comparison of model parameters
areaREpEtQtQCN + Q1Q2 + Q3Q4 + Q5Q6
forest1697.5962.5921.5771.5291.9158.7254.466.5
upland field1697.5962.5841.2850.9360.7131.7284.174.4
Tab.5  Comparison of average annual water balance/mm
Fig.7  Comparison of observed and calculated hydrographs in the forest catchment (1988)
Fig.8  Comparison of observed and calculated hydrographs by the semi-distributed model in the upland field catchment (1987)
Fig.9  Comparison of infiltration rate in forest and reclaimed field (1989)
Fig.10  Relationship between / ratio and soil moisture
1 Crooks S, Davies H. Assessment of land use change in the Thames catchment and its effect on the flood regime of the river. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth , 2001, 26(7–8): 583–591
doi: 10.1016/S1464-1909(01)00053-3
2 Brath A, Montanari A, Moretti G. Assessing the effect on flood frequency of land use change via hydrological simulation (with uncertainty). Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam) , 2006, 324(1–4): 141–153
doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.10.001
3 Li Z, Liu W Z, Zhang X C, Zheng F L. Impacts of land use change and climate variability on hydrology in an agricultural catchment on the Loess Plateau of China. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam) , 2009, 377(1–2): 35–42
doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.08.007
4 Wang Y, Takase K, He B. Application of a hydrologic model considering rainwater storage to analyze storm-induced landslides in a forest catchment. Water Resources Management , 2008, 22(2): 191–204
doi: 10.1007/s11269-006-9150-z
5 Luo P, Takara K, Apip, He B, Nover D. Palaeoflood simulation of the Kamo River basin using a grid-cell distributed rainfall run-off model. Journal of Flood Risk Management , 2013 (in press)
doi: 10.1111/jfr3.12038
6 Costa M H, Botta A, Cardille J A. Effects of large-scale changes in land cover on the discharge of the Tocantins River, Southeastern Amazonia. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam) , 2003, 283(1–4): 206–217
doi: 10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00267-1
7 Olchev A, Ibrom A, Priess J, Erasmi S, Leemhuis C, Twele A, Radler K, Kreilein H, Panferov O, Gravenhorst G. Effects of land-use changes on evapotranspiration of tropical rain forest margin area in Central Sulawesi (Indonesia): Modeling study with a regional SVAT model. Ecological Modelling , 2008, 212(1–2): 131–137
doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.10.022
8 Hernandez M, Miller S N, Goodrich D C, Goff B F, Kepner W G, Edmonds C M, Jones K G. Modeling runoff response to land cover and rainfall spatial variability in semi-arid watersheds. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment , 2000, 64(1): 285–298
doi: 10.1023/A:1006445811859
9 Ghaffari G, Keesstra S, Ghodousi J, Ahmadi H.SWAT-simulated hydroloigical impact of land-use change in the Zanjanrood Basin, Northwest Iran. Hydrological Processes , 2010, 24(7): 892–903
doi: 10.1002/hyp.7530
10 Nie W M, Yuan Y P, Kepner W, Nash M S, Jackson M, Erickson C. Assessing impacts of landuse and landcover changes on hydrology for the upper San Pedro watershed. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam) , 2011, 407(1–4): 105–114
doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.07.012
11 L?rup J K, Refsgaard J C, Mazvimavi D. Assessing the effect of land use change on catchment runoff by combined use of statistical tests and hydrological modeling: Case studies from Zimababwe. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam) , 1998, 205: 147–163
doi: 10.1016/S0168-1176(97)00311-9
12 Niehoff D, Fritshch U, Bronstert A. Land-use impacts on storm-runoff generation: scenarios of land-use change and simulation of hydrological response in a meso-scale catchment in SW-Germany. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam) , 2002, 267(1–2): 80–93
doi: 10.1016/S0022-1694(02)00142-7
13 Choi W, Deal B M. Assessing hydrological impact of potential land use change through hydrological and land use change modeling for the Kishwaukee River basin (USA). Journal of Environmental Management , 2008, 88(4): 1119–1130
doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.06.001 pmid:17689854
14 Takase K, Sato K. Comparison of evapotranspiration between a reclaimed upland field and a forest catchment. Journal of Japan Society of Hydrology and Water Resources , 1994, 7(6): 495–502
doi: 10.3178/jjshwr.7.6_495
15 Hong L, Takase K, Sato K. Properties of peak discharge and retention in a terraced paddy field catchment. Transactions of the Japanese Society of Irrigation, Drainage and Reclamation Engineering , 1998, 196: 189–195
16 Wang Y, He B, Takase K. Effects of temporal resolution on hydrological model parameters and its impact on prediction of river discharge. Hydrological Sciences Journal , 2009, 54(5): 886–898
doi: 10.1623/hysj.54.5.886
17 Wang Y, He B, Takase K. Reply to the discussion of “Effects of temporal resolution on hydrological model parameters and its impact on prediction of river discharge” by Littlewood et al. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 2011, 56(3): 525–528
doi: 10.1080/02626667.2011.565770
18 Chow, V T. Hydrological determination of waterway areas for the design of drainage structures in small drainage basins. University of Illinois, Engineering Experiment Station, Bulletin 462 , 1962
19 Kadoya M, Fukushima A. Handbook of Rural Engineering. Japan Soc Irrigation, Drainage and Reclamation Engineering , 1989, 164 (in Japanese)
20 Takeshita S. Takase K, Ihara K. Development of long-term runoff model including infiltration sub-model. Transactions of the Japanese Society of Irrigation. Drainage and Reclamation Engineering , 2001, 212: 71–77
21 Nash J E, Sutcliffe J V. River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I—A discussion of principles. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam) , 1970, 10(3): 282–290
doi: 10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6
22 Gupta H J, Sorooshian S, Yapo P O. Status of automatic calibration for hydrological models: Comparison with multilevel expert calibration. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering , 1999, 4(2): 135–143
doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(1999)4:2(135)
23 Duan Q, Sorooshian S, Gupta V. Effective and efficient global optimization for conceptual rainfall-runoff models. Water Resources Research , 1992, 28(4): 1015–1031
doi: 10.1029/91WR02985
24 Duan Q, Sorooshian S, Gupta V. Optimal use of the SCE-UA global optimization method for calibrating watershed models. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam) , 1994, 158(3–4): 265–284
doi: 10.1016/0022-1694(94)90057-4
25 He B, Takase K, Wang Y. Regional groundwater prediction model using automatic parameter calibration SCE method for a coastal plain of Seto Inland Sea. Water Resources Management , 2007, 21(6): 947–959
doi: 10.1007/s11269-006-9066-7
26 Wijesekara G N, Gupta A, Valeo C, Hasbani J G, Qiao Y, Delaney P, Marceau D J. Assessing the impact of future land-use changes on hydrological processes in the Elbow River watershed in southern Alberta, Canada. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam) , 2012, 412–413: 220–232
doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.04.018
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed