Next Article in Journal
Simulating the Effects of Lake Wind Waves on Water and Solute Exchange across the Lakeshore Using Hydrus-2D
Next Article in Special Issue
Water Resources of the Black Sea Catchment under Future Climate and Landuse Change Projections
Previous Article in Journal
Study on Effects of Electron Donors on Phosphine Production from Anaerobic Activated Sludge
Previous Article in Special Issue
Modeling the Fate and Transport of Malathion in the Pagsanjan-Lumban Basin, Philippines
Article

Comparison of SWAT and GWLF Model Simulation Performance in Humid South and Semi-Arid North of China

by 1, 1, 1,*, 1, 2 and 1,*
1
MOE Key Laboratory of Pollution Processes and Environmental Criteria, College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Nankai University, Tianjin 300350, China
2
Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Nankai University Binhai College, Tianjin 300272, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 31 May 2017 / Revised: 19 July 2017 / Accepted: 27 July 2017 / Published: 30 July 2017
Watershed models have gradually been adapted to support both decision and policy making for global environmental pollution control. In this study, two watershed models with different complexity, the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) and the Generalized Watershed Loading Function (GWLF), were applied in two catchments in data scarce China, namely the Tunxi and the Hanjiaying basins with contrasting climatic conditions (humid and semi-arid, respectively). The performances of both models were assessed via comparison between simulated and measured monthly streamflow, sediment yield, and total nitrogen. Time series plots as well as four statistical measures (the coefficient of determination (R2), the Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), percent bias (PBIAS), and RMSE (root mean square error)—observations standard deviation ratio (RSR)) were used to estimate the performance of both models. The results show that both models were generally able to simulate monthly streamflow, sediment, and total nitrogen loadings during the simulation period. However, SWAT performed better for detailed representations, while GWLF could produce much better average values of the observed data. Thus, GWLF offers a user-friendly prospective alternative watershed model that requires little input data and that is applicable for areas where the input data required for SWAT are not always available. SWAT is more suitable for projects that require high accuracy and offers an advantage when measured data are scarce. View Full-Text
Keywords: SWAT; GWLF; watershed modeling; comparison; streamflow; sediment; total nitrogen SWAT; GWLF; watershed modeling; comparison; streamflow; sediment; total nitrogen
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Qi, Z.; Kang, G.; Chu, C.; Qiu, Y.; Xu, Z.; Wang, Y. Comparison of SWAT and GWLF Model Simulation Performance in Humid South and Semi-Arid North of China. Water 2017, 9, 567. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/w9080567

AMA Style

Qi Z, Kang G, Chu C, Qiu Y, Xu Z, Wang Y. Comparison of SWAT and GWLF Model Simulation Performance in Humid South and Semi-Arid North of China. Water. 2017; 9(8):567. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/w9080567

Chicago/Turabian Style

Qi, Zuoda, Gelin Kang, Chunli Chu, Yu Qiu, Ze Xu, and Yuqiu Wang. 2017. "Comparison of SWAT and GWLF Model Simulation Performance in Humid South and Semi-Arid North of China" Water 9, no. 8: 567. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/w9080567

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop