the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Identification, Mapping and Eco-hydrological Signal Analysis for Groundwater-dependent Ecosystems (GDEs) in Langxi River Basin, North China
Abstract. Groundwater-dependent ecosystems (GDEs) refer to ecosystems that require access partially or completely to groundwater to maintain their ecological structure and functions, provisioning very important services for the health of land, water, and coastal ecosystems. However, regional identification of GDEs is still difficult in areas affected by climate change and extensive groundwater extraction. To address this issue, taking the Langxi River Basin (LRB), one of the lower tributaries of the Yellow River in North China, as an example, we propose a four-diagnostic criteria framework for identifying the GDEs based on remote sensing, GIS data dredging and hydrogeological surveys. Firstly, the potential GDEs distributions are preliminarily delineated by the topographic features and the differences of vegetation water situation, soil moisture in the end of the dry and wet seasons. On this basis, according to the given GDEs identification criteria, three main types of GDEs in the basin including the stream-type GDEs (S-GDEs), vegetation-type GDEs (V-GDEs) and karst aquifer-type GDEs (K-GDEs) are further determined by comparing the relationship between groundwater table and riverbed elevation, vegetation root development depth, and though surveys of karst springs and aquifers. And then the GDEs are mapped using the spatial kernel density function which can represent the characteristics of spatial aggregation distribution. Results show that the potential GDEs are mainly distributed in plain areas and a small part in hilly areas, reflecting the moisture distribution status of waters, vegetation and wetlands in the basin that possibly receive groundwater recharge, however, the true GDEs are concentrated in the riverine and riparian zone, the vegetation-related wetland and the scattered karst spring surroundings which groundwater directly moves toward and into. To verify the reliability of GDEs distributions, ecohydrological signal analysis were also performed in this paper. The analysis of river hydrological process curve and karst spring hydrograph in Shuyuan section showed that the proportion of base flow to river flow is about 54.15 % and S-GDEs still receive spring water recharge even in the extremely dry season. And the analysis of hydrochemical sampling from the karst aquifer, Quaternary aquifer, spring water and surface reservoir water reveals that GDEs are also relished by groundwater. More important, we also found a distinctive ecohydrological signal of GDEs is the presence of millimeter-sized groundwater fauna living in the different types of GDEs. Finally, the validity of the method proposed in the study for identification and mapping of the GDEs is also discussed. It still has some room for improvement if the water, sediments and biotic connectivities between groundwater and GDEs are analyzed by using isotopes and DNA technology under the recommended four-diagnostic criteria framework.
- Preprint
(2401 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(308 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: closed
-
CC1: 'Comment on hess-2023-151', Kianoosh Mohammadihadadan, 22 Sep 2023
Interesting research! It is also a novel attempt to combine composite methods. Indeed, GDE is difficult to determine and changes over time. At present, there is no very clear way to delineate it. The comprehensive approach proposed by the authors is a good exploration. I wonder if the author's method has been tried in other areas? In addition, the addition of invertebrate groundwater organisms certainly makes research fascinating.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC1 -
CC2: 'Reply on CC1', Fulin Li, 22 Sep 2023
Thanks for your comments, it is indeed difficult to determine the extent of GDEs, which of course varies with seasonal changes, especially groundwater levels, and needs to be determined using a combination method of remote sensing, hydrogeological surveys, hydrochemistry and groundwater fauna surveys. At present, the project team members have used this comprehensive method to determine the distribution of river hyporheic zone, and a similar method, excluding the identification of groundwater invertebrates, is used to determine the distribution range of the groundwater strong leakage zone in karst areas.——Li Fulin
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC2 -
CC3: 'Reply on CC1', Mingyang Li, 25 Sep 2023
Thank you for your attention! Many current studies prefer model simulations, and there are few studies on field surveys. Through multi-faceted investigations and studies, we discovered the hydrological connectivity of the Karst region in many aspects. Our related research has also been well verified in the Karst Cave area, and is now in the stage of compiling the results. We welcome your continued attention and valuable comments!
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC3 -
CC4: 'Reply on CC3', Kianoosh Mohammadihadadan, 29 Sep 2023
A reply for both Fulin Li and Mingyang Li. Thanks for all your replies. It is a creative and practical study. Looking forward to the publication of your works.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC4
-
CC4: 'Reply on CC3', Kianoosh Mohammadihadadan, 29 Sep 2023
-
CC2: 'Reply on CC1', Fulin Li, 22 Sep 2023
-
CC5: 'Comment on hess-2023-151', zhang yunrui, 16 Oct 2023
This is a good research result. The author has carried out research on the identification and mapping of groundwater-dependent ecosystems by integrating multiple means and technologies (such as remote sensing images, field flow observations, hydrochemical tests and DNA technology). The research has led to some very novel insights, such as the discovery that the difference index between WET and NDBSI has better adaptability to identify potential GDE distributions. However, I have some questions that I would like the author to answer.
- As far as I know, baseflow is the amount of groundwater replenishing surface water, and it is also the basic flow of the river in the dry season. Generally speaking, in karst areas, the flow of spring discharge should be larger than the size of base flow. They should have the relationship of runoff > base flow > spring discharge, but this is not the case in the article. Please explain the reason.
- I don’t quite understand line 405 in the article, “Additionally, some of these springs have emerged as a result of 405 water engineering construction and groundwater extraction.” Please explain it in detail.
3 Line 73 in the article, 'Their model indicated that the stochastic, dynamic changes in groundwater level are closely tied to climate change, vegetation coverage, and water resource management levels', I think considering the description before and after this sentence, the stochastic would be more appropriate to remove it.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC5 -
CC6: 'Reply on CC5', Mingyang Li, 18 Oct 2023
Thank you for your attention! Here are our answers to your questions.
1. First of all, regarding the measurement location of the spring flow, we established a hydrological station on the flat section downstream of the spring water to measure the spring flow. According to Figure 9a in the article, it can be seen that the blue line (spring flow rate) is always greater than or equal to the red shade (base flow rate), indicating that spring flow rate > base flow rate. This is consistent with your statement that the spring flow should be greater than the base flow in the karst area you described. But in the description of the latter sentence, I found that you mentioned "runoff > base flow > spring discharge". This is inconsistent with your previous sentence. Can you explain it further?
2. Some springs in the basin appear as a result of engineering projects. Some springs are not natural, but were developed through certain local projects (such as irrigation drilling, etc.) and formed later.
3. We respect your suggestions very much and will modify the relevant content of the paper.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC6 -
CC8: 'Reply on CC6', zhang yunrui, 04 Nov 2023
Okay, my confusion is gone, and you are right about the first point being due to my spelling mistake.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC8
-
CC8: 'Reply on CC6', zhang yunrui, 04 Nov 2023
-
CC7: 'Reply on CC5', Fulin Li, 19 Oct 2023
Thank you for your comment. I just try to explain the reasons for the disappearance of the springs in line 405 of the manuscript. The main reasons for some springs stop gushing are due to the overexploitation of groundwater in the spring exposed area, and the reduction of rain water and runoff infiltration to the groundwater caused by water uses aswell as the artificial engineering constructions leading to ground hardening in the spring recharging area. Thank you again.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC7 -
CC9: 'Reply on CC7', zhang yunrui, 04 Nov 2023
Okay, so the actual situation in the wild is like this, I understand now, thank you.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC9
-
CC9: 'Reply on CC7', zhang yunrui, 04 Nov 2023
-
RC1: 'Comment on hess-2023-151', Anonymous Referee #1, 23 Jan 2024
This is a manuscript that deserves praise. It is difficult to concentrate on rich field experiments in the current setting. This study presents a framework for locating and mapping GDEs based on a mix of remote sensing, GIS, and hydrogeological field experiments in terms of research content and methodologies. The study's newly suggested normalized difference built-up and soil index, together with the difference between the wet index, may be used to assess changes in the water loss rate of plants at various stages of growth. After then, the spectrum of possible GDEs is defined by factors including slope, lithology, and elevation. Groundwater levels, river bed bottom elevation, plant root depth, karst springs, etc. were used to further infer different forms of GDEs. In the end, three factors were used to verify GDEs: groundwater biology, water chemical isotopes, and hydrological rhythm. Gaining a deeper understanding of a watershed may be achieved by employing a variety of techniques to examine its biological and hydrological features. I would want to share a few small ideas and inquiries with the author.
1. The author employed aquatic biology, hydrology, water chemistry, isotopes, and other elements to confirm. These verification findings demonstrate that spring flow and base flow in the basin have a substantial association, that the water chemistry and isotope composition of distinct water bodies vary, and that the water bodies in GDEs have comparatively separate ecosystems. It is still necessary to enhance the geographical representativeness of the aforementioned results. Is it attainable to categorize and validate GDEs in space, despite the fact that they are challenging to locate and define precisely?
2. The author used data from 2020 to 2021 to divide the scope of GDEs in the Langxi River Basin. This seems to be because the author conducted the experiment during this period. Does this method also work at other times?
3. The Langxi River Basin is a typical study area selected by the author. Is the GDEs identification and mapping framework proposed by the author also applicable to other river basins? I think this is also an interesting question for other readers.
Some other formatting questions or suggestions:
1. Line 275 should add relevant introduction to the base flow segmentation method.
2. It is recommended to use tables to express the data part of Line 310
3. Line 495 Please adjust the font size
4. Line 565 In the conclusion, the author uses the full names of K-GDE, S-GDE and V-GDE. In fact, the abbreviation has been used in the previous article, and it is recommended to use the abbreviation here.
5. The study area map of Line 710 in Figure 1 should be redesigned. It's not pretty now.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-RC1 - AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Mingyang Li, 22 Mar 2024
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Mingyang Li, 26 Apr 2024
Dear reviewers, based on the opinions of two reviewers and an editor, we have made major changes to the article. The attachment to the final response contains two files, one of which is a one-on-one response to the expert opinions and a modification description of how to modify the article. In another document, we have marked the opinions in the original text so that you can view and use them accordingly.
-
RC2: 'Comment on hess-2023-151', Anonymous Referee #2, 31 Mar 2024
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Mingyang Li, 26 Apr 2024
Dear reviewers, based on the opinions of two reviewers and an editor, we have made major changes to the article. The attachment to the final response contains two files, one of which is a one-on-one response to the expert opinions and a modification description of how to modify the article. In another document, we have marked the opinions in the original text so that you can view and use them accordingly.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Mingyang Li, 26 Apr 2024
-
RC3: 'Comment on hess-2023-151', Anonymous Referee #3, 30 Apr 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://hess.copernicus.org/preprints/hess-2023-151/hess-2023-151-RC3-supplement.pdf
- AC4: 'Reply on RC3', Mingyang Li, 27 May 2024
Status: closed
-
CC1: 'Comment on hess-2023-151', Kianoosh Mohammadihadadan, 22 Sep 2023
Interesting research! It is also a novel attempt to combine composite methods. Indeed, GDE is difficult to determine and changes over time. At present, there is no very clear way to delineate it. The comprehensive approach proposed by the authors is a good exploration. I wonder if the author's method has been tried in other areas? In addition, the addition of invertebrate groundwater organisms certainly makes research fascinating.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC1 -
CC2: 'Reply on CC1', Fulin Li, 22 Sep 2023
Thanks for your comments, it is indeed difficult to determine the extent of GDEs, which of course varies with seasonal changes, especially groundwater levels, and needs to be determined using a combination method of remote sensing, hydrogeological surveys, hydrochemistry and groundwater fauna surveys. At present, the project team members have used this comprehensive method to determine the distribution of river hyporheic zone, and a similar method, excluding the identification of groundwater invertebrates, is used to determine the distribution range of the groundwater strong leakage zone in karst areas.——Li Fulin
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC2 -
CC3: 'Reply on CC1', Mingyang Li, 25 Sep 2023
Thank you for your attention! Many current studies prefer model simulations, and there are few studies on field surveys. Through multi-faceted investigations and studies, we discovered the hydrological connectivity of the Karst region in many aspects. Our related research has also been well verified in the Karst Cave area, and is now in the stage of compiling the results. We welcome your continued attention and valuable comments!
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC3 -
CC4: 'Reply on CC3', Kianoosh Mohammadihadadan, 29 Sep 2023
A reply for both Fulin Li and Mingyang Li. Thanks for all your replies. It is a creative and practical study. Looking forward to the publication of your works.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC4
-
CC4: 'Reply on CC3', Kianoosh Mohammadihadadan, 29 Sep 2023
-
CC2: 'Reply on CC1', Fulin Li, 22 Sep 2023
-
CC5: 'Comment on hess-2023-151', zhang yunrui, 16 Oct 2023
This is a good research result. The author has carried out research on the identification and mapping of groundwater-dependent ecosystems by integrating multiple means and technologies (such as remote sensing images, field flow observations, hydrochemical tests and DNA technology). The research has led to some very novel insights, such as the discovery that the difference index between WET and NDBSI has better adaptability to identify potential GDE distributions. However, I have some questions that I would like the author to answer.
- As far as I know, baseflow is the amount of groundwater replenishing surface water, and it is also the basic flow of the river in the dry season. Generally speaking, in karst areas, the flow of spring discharge should be larger than the size of base flow. They should have the relationship of runoff > base flow > spring discharge, but this is not the case in the article. Please explain the reason.
- I don’t quite understand line 405 in the article, “Additionally, some of these springs have emerged as a result of 405 water engineering construction and groundwater extraction.” Please explain it in detail.
3 Line 73 in the article, 'Their model indicated that the stochastic, dynamic changes in groundwater level are closely tied to climate change, vegetation coverage, and water resource management levels', I think considering the description before and after this sentence, the stochastic would be more appropriate to remove it.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC5 -
CC6: 'Reply on CC5', Mingyang Li, 18 Oct 2023
Thank you for your attention! Here are our answers to your questions.
1. First of all, regarding the measurement location of the spring flow, we established a hydrological station on the flat section downstream of the spring water to measure the spring flow. According to Figure 9a in the article, it can be seen that the blue line (spring flow rate) is always greater than or equal to the red shade (base flow rate), indicating that spring flow rate > base flow rate. This is consistent with your statement that the spring flow should be greater than the base flow in the karst area you described. But in the description of the latter sentence, I found that you mentioned "runoff > base flow > spring discharge". This is inconsistent with your previous sentence. Can you explain it further?
2. Some springs in the basin appear as a result of engineering projects. Some springs are not natural, but were developed through certain local projects (such as irrigation drilling, etc.) and formed later.
3. We respect your suggestions very much and will modify the relevant content of the paper.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC6 -
CC8: 'Reply on CC6', zhang yunrui, 04 Nov 2023
Okay, my confusion is gone, and you are right about the first point being due to my spelling mistake.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC8
-
CC8: 'Reply on CC6', zhang yunrui, 04 Nov 2023
-
CC7: 'Reply on CC5', Fulin Li, 19 Oct 2023
Thank you for your comment. I just try to explain the reasons for the disappearance of the springs in line 405 of the manuscript. The main reasons for some springs stop gushing are due to the overexploitation of groundwater in the spring exposed area, and the reduction of rain water and runoff infiltration to the groundwater caused by water uses aswell as the artificial engineering constructions leading to ground hardening in the spring recharging area. Thank you again.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC7 -
CC9: 'Reply on CC7', zhang yunrui, 04 Nov 2023
Okay, so the actual situation in the wild is like this, I understand now, thank you.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-CC9
-
CC9: 'Reply on CC7', zhang yunrui, 04 Nov 2023
-
RC1: 'Comment on hess-2023-151', Anonymous Referee #1, 23 Jan 2024
This is a manuscript that deserves praise. It is difficult to concentrate on rich field experiments in the current setting. This study presents a framework for locating and mapping GDEs based on a mix of remote sensing, GIS, and hydrogeological field experiments in terms of research content and methodologies. The study's newly suggested normalized difference built-up and soil index, together with the difference between the wet index, may be used to assess changes in the water loss rate of plants at various stages of growth. After then, the spectrum of possible GDEs is defined by factors including slope, lithology, and elevation. Groundwater levels, river bed bottom elevation, plant root depth, karst springs, etc. were used to further infer different forms of GDEs. In the end, three factors were used to verify GDEs: groundwater biology, water chemical isotopes, and hydrological rhythm. Gaining a deeper understanding of a watershed may be achieved by employing a variety of techniques to examine its biological and hydrological features. I would want to share a few small ideas and inquiries with the author.
1. The author employed aquatic biology, hydrology, water chemistry, isotopes, and other elements to confirm. These verification findings demonstrate that spring flow and base flow in the basin have a substantial association, that the water chemistry and isotope composition of distinct water bodies vary, and that the water bodies in GDEs have comparatively separate ecosystems. It is still necessary to enhance the geographical representativeness of the aforementioned results. Is it attainable to categorize and validate GDEs in space, despite the fact that they are challenging to locate and define precisely?
2. The author used data from 2020 to 2021 to divide the scope of GDEs in the Langxi River Basin. This seems to be because the author conducted the experiment during this period. Does this method also work at other times?
3. The Langxi River Basin is a typical study area selected by the author. Is the GDEs identification and mapping framework proposed by the author also applicable to other river basins? I think this is also an interesting question for other readers.
Some other formatting questions or suggestions:
1. Line 275 should add relevant introduction to the base flow segmentation method.
2. It is recommended to use tables to express the data part of Line 310
3. Line 495 Please adjust the font size
4. Line 565 In the conclusion, the author uses the full names of K-GDE, S-GDE and V-GDE. In fact, the abbreviation has been used in the previous article, and it is recommended to use the abbreviation here.
5. The study area map of Line 710 in Figure 1 should be redesigned. It's not pretty now.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-151-RC1 - AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Mingyang Li, 22 Mar 2024
-
AC3: 'Reply on RC1', Mingyang Li, 26 Apr 2024
Dear reviewers, based on the opinions of two reviewers and an editor, we have made major changes to the article. The attachment to the final response contains two files, one of which is a one-on-one response to the expert opinions and a modification description of how to modify the article. In another document, we have marked the opinions in the original text so that you can view and use them accordingly.
-
RC2: 'Comment on hess-2023-151', Anonymous Referee #2, 31 Mar 2024
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Mingyang Li, 26 Apr 2024
Dear reviewers, based on the opinions of two reviewers and an editor, we have made major changes to the article. The attachment to the final response contains two files, one of which is a one-on-one response to the expert opinions and a modification description of how to modify the article. In another document, we have marked the opinions in the original text so that you can view and use them accordingly.
-
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Mingyang Li, 26 Apr 2024
-
RC3: 'Comment on hess-2023-151', Anonymous Referee #3, 30 Apr 2024
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://hess.copernicus.org/preprints/hess-2023-151/hess-2023-151-RC3-supplement.pdf
- AC4: 'Reply on RC3', Mingyang Li, 27 May 2024
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
682 | 231 | 62 | 975 | 61 | 30 | 29 |
- HTML: 682
- PDF: 231
- XML: 62
- Total: 975
- Supplement: 61
- BibTeX: 30
- EndNote: 29
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1