Next Article in Journal
How Robust Is a Multi-Model Ensemble Mean of Conceptual Hydrological Models to Climate Change?
Next Article in Special Issue
Evaluation of Fresh Groundwater Lens Volume and Its Possible Use in Nauru Island
Previous Article in Journal
A Comparative Study on Water and Gas Permeability of Pervious Concrete
Previous Article in Special Issue
Simulation of Heat Flow in a Synthetic Watershed: Lags and Dampening across Multiple Pathways under a Climate-Forcing Scenario
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

ORGANICS: A QGIS Plugin for Simulating One-Dimensional Transport of Dissolved Substances in Surface Water

1
Crop Science Research Center, Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, 56122 Pisa, Italy
2
Distretto Idrografico Alpi Orientali, 30121 Venezia, Italy
3
TEA SISTEMI S.p.A., 56122 Pisa, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Water 2022, 14(18), 2850; https://doi.org/10.3390/w14182850
Submission received: 5 August 2022 / Revised: 6 September 2022 / Accepted: 8 September 2022 / Published: 13 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Groundwater Hydrological Model Simulation)

Abstract

:
Surface water in streams and rivers is a valuable resource and pollution events, if not tackled in time, may have dramatic impacts on aquatic ecosystems. As such, in order to prepare pollution prevention plans and measures or to set-up timely remedial options, especially in the early stages of pollution incidents, simulation tools are of great help for authorities, with specific reference to environmental protection agencies and river basin authorities. In this paper, we present the development and testing of the ORGANICS plugin embedded in QGIS. The plugin is a first attempt to embed surface water solute transport modelling into GIS for the simulation of the concentration of a dissolved substance (for example an organic compound) in surface water bodies including advection dispersion and degradation. This tool is based on the analytical solution of the popular advection/dispersion equation describing the transport of contaminants in surface water. By providing as input data the concentration measured at the entry point of a watercourse (inlet boundary condition) and the average speed of the surface water, the model simulates the concentration of a substance at a certain distance from the entry point, along the profile of the watercourse. The tool is first tested on a synthetic case. Then data on the concentration of the pharmaceutical carbamazepine monitored at the inlet and outlet of a vegetated channel, in a single day, are used to validate the tool in a real environment. The ORGANICS plugin aims at popularizing the use of simple modelling tools within a GIS framework, and it provides GIS experts with the ability to perform approximate, but fast, simulations of the evolution of pollutants concentration in surface water bodies.

1. Introduction

Surface water in streams and rivers is a valuable resource, and pollution events, if not tackled in time, may have dramatic impacts on aquatic ecosystems [1,2,3,4]. As such, in order to prepare pollution prevention plans or to set up timely remedial options, especially in the early moment of pollution incidents, simulation tools are of great help for authorities, with specific reference to environmental protection agencies and river basin authorities. Modelling of solute transport in surface water is then a valuable and common option [5,6,7,8,9], especially by means of analytical solutions simplifying system description and reducing complexity [10,11,12], providing fast, even approximate, answers, particularly in cases of insufficient data availability for the implementation of more complex numerical models.
In order to advance the use of modelling tools and to support the digitalization of the technical sector these tools must be user-friendly, and built around free and open-source codes. An open code may guarantee the reproducibility and the reliability of the analyses performed [13,14] and their early deployment and impact [15,16].
Geographic Information Systems (GISs) are worldwide mainstreaming tools and methodologies for storing, managing/analyzing and visualizing large temporal, spatial and non-spatial datasets (for both geometric and alphanumerical data). Hence, they are widely applied to support environmental modelling [17,18]. The possibility of including modelling tools in Geographic Information Systems (i.e., via plugins), and the existing community of users and developers in constant growth, is potentially the most relevant strength of such tools [18,19,20]. For thirty years GIS and water modelling codes/applications have been successfully integrated. Vieux [21] presented an application of the GIS, ARC/INFO and the finite element solution to the kinematic wave equations to process the spatially variable terrain in a small watershed using a Triangular Irregular Network for the solution of overland flow. Oliveira et al. [22] presented ArcGIS-SWAT, a geodata model and GIS interface for the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT; [23]). Becker and Jiang [24] developed a computationally efficient method for predicting contaminant mass flux to a specified boundary, carrying out the method in a GIS and taking full advantage of widely available digital hydrologic data. Akbar et al. [25] showed a GIS-based modelling system called ArcPRZM-3 for the spatial modelling of pesticide leaching potential from soil towards groundwater. Rossetto et al. [26] integrated a suite of groundwater modelling tools in the gvSIG GIS application [27]. Oliveira and Martins [28] developed an application for the preliminary characterisation of the river boundary condition for a MODFLOW [29] finite difference groundwater flow numerical model. Bittner et al. [30] developed the LuKARS GIS-based model for simulating the hydrological effects of land use changes on karst systems.
Among GIS desktop applications, QGIS [31] is probably the most popular free geospatial software. Rosas-Chavoya et al. [20] conducted a bibliometric analysis on the acceptance of this application on documents published in Scopus from 2005 to 2020, considering 931 manuscripts. They observed a favorable trend in the acceptance of QGIS across the world and the development of large collaborative networks.
Several plugins have been developed for QGIS within the hydrological or aquatic domain. In particular, Nielsen et al. [32] developed the Water Ecosystems Tool, a workflow implemented (as a plugin) in QGIS, for the application and evaluation of aquatic ecosystem models. Ellsäßer et al. [33] developed the QWaterModel as an easy-to-use tool to make evapotranspiration predictions available to broader audiences. The QWaterModel is a QGIS plugin compatible with all versions of QGIS3. Dile et al. [34] developed an open-source user interface for the SWAT [23], QSWAT, using various functionalities of the QGIS application. Rossetto et al. [18] presented the FREEWAT plugin for managing the groundwater resource, including tools for the management of hydrochemical data [35] and nitrate leaching assessment [36].
In this paper, we present the development and testing of the ORGANICS plugin as a first attempt to embed surface water solute transport modelling into GIS. This tool allows users to simulate the concentration of a dissolved substance (for example an organic compound) in surface water bodies by applying an analytical solution of the advection dispersion equation, which includes also a first-order degradation term. By providing as input the stepwise time-variant concentration measured at the entry point of a watercourse, along with the related average water velocity, the concentration of a substance at a certain distance from the entry point along the profile of the watercourse, is simulated. A sketch of the presented problem is shown in Figure 1.
After presenting the theoretical and modelling approach, we show an example application of the plugin (to be used as a tutorial), and then a real case study application to simulate carbamazepine concentration in a vegetated channel collecting poorly treated wastewater.

2. Materials and Methods

The model used in the ORGANICS plugin is based on the analytical solution of the popular advection/diffusion/decay equation, in one-dimensional form, taken from [10,37]: where:
C t + v x C x = E 2 C x 2 k C
C: is the solute concentration expressed as mass per unit volume of water [M/L3],
vx: longitudinal fluid flow velocity is the input velocity [L/T].
x: is the longitudinal coordinate [L],
t: is time [T],
E: is the longitudinal dispersion coefficient accounting for the combined effects of ionic or molecular diffusion and hydrodynamic dispersion [L2/T].
k: is a first-order decay rate [T−1].
Using a constant concentration boundary condition at x0 = 0 [L] (the inlet point of a surface water body reach) at the initial time (t0 = 0) [T], for each x > 0 and t > 0 the Equation (1) may be reduced to the following analytical solution (2) [10,37].
C ( x , t ) = C 0 2 { exp [ U x 2 E ( 1 Γ ) ] erfc ( x U t Γ 2 E t ) + exp [ U x 2 E ( 1 + Γ ) ] erfc ( x + U t Γ 2 E t ) }
Γ = 1 + 4   k E U 2  
and U is the velocity module [L/T].
This approach entails the following assumptions:
(a) the flow is one-dimensional and oriented according to the main direction of the flow in the surface water body;
(b) the concentration at the inlet remains constant for the specified simulated time interval (first kind boundary condition);
(c) chemical interactions between different dissolved substances are not considered, nor are reactive geochemical processes simulated with other components (i.e., riverbed matrix);
(d) the morphology of the bed of the surface water body does not affect the solution;
(e) no sorption processes or production terms are considered;
(f) at t0 = 0 [T] the initial condition is C(x,0) = 0 [M/L3] along all the simulated domains.
The developed code uses Equation (2) to calculate the concentration value along the line input provided by the user to represent the selected surface water body. This input can be given as a linear vector layer (for instance the common ESRI. shp file). The code calculates the solution (concentration value) at nodes at homogeneous lengths from the inlet point as specified by the user, and at selected homogeneous time-steps also defined by the user.

2.1. Software Development

The plugin was developed in Python3 [38] language, using the Qt5 [39] graphics libraries and the QGIS [40] Application Program Interface. The solute transport code is embedded in the QGIS desktop application. This means a full integration at programming language level, with models using GIS data format included as full component of the host GIS application [41,42].
The plugin can be used as an add-on to the QGIS desktop application, version 3.4 or higher, once it has been installed on a PC. During the development phase, some specific Python libraries were used, but each of them is already included in the official QGIS desktop distribution. This choice allows the user to use the plugin without requiring further software updates.

2.2. Data Needs

In order to use the plugin, the user has to prepare a set of input files. These are:
  • a *.csv file specifying the water average longitudinal velocity (U) and concentration values at the inlet of the watercourse (constant concentration boundary condition), and the time these data refer to. The file must comply with the template format defined for the plugin. In particular, the file must contain data relating to (at least) one dataset, specifying:
    -
    starting date and time, in YYYY-MM-DD HH: MM: SS format;
    -
    average flow velocity in the surface water body, in m · s−1. This value will be used at all the node of the surface water body;
    -
    the concentration of the source at the inlet point.
When considering time-varying boundary condition (that is the concentration input changing with time), the user must specify for each different time all the above information on consecutive lines of the. csv file.
  • an ESRI linear Shapefile representing the surface water body. The file may consist of one or more segments. The line must be digitized towards the flow direction. When more segments are used, the topology must be respected (all the lines must be connected).
An example of the required files to run a first test are provided in the template_files folder of the plugin itself as Supplementary material.

2.3. Model Implementation and Run

Once data are prepared in the form of the required files, the first operation consists in loading the Shapefile geographic layer of the line into the QGIS view.
By clicking on ORGANICS in the Plugin menu, the main window opens. This is divided in four sections: (1) Run; (2) Plot Results; (3) Help; (4) About. By entering the Run section, the user input the following data (Figure 2):
(a) the *.csv file. Upon the file selection, the drop-down menus will automatically update. Through these menus the user must select the name of the fields in the *.csv file corresponding to the required information;
(b) the linear shapefile representing the watercourse. At this step the user must specify the length of the homogeneous reaches at whose ends the concentration values will be calculated;
(c) the value of the first-order decay rate coefficient (s−1);
(d) the value of the coefficient of longitudinal dispersion (m2/s);
(e) the length of the timestep (in minutes) at which the solution will be calculated over a time interval (in minutes from the start of the simulation) at each point of the reach;
(f) the name of the output file (*.shapefile) and the directory where the file will be saved. Should this field be left blank, the output will be saved as a temporary layer (memory layer) in QGIS.
Although time data are input both in seconds and in minutes, all the calculations are internally run in seconds, while results are provided in minutes or within hours.
Once the simulation is run, the code will: (i) divide the line in several nodes, according to the length specified by the user, and (ii) calculate the solution at each node at the end of a reach, at each time step as specified by the user. The result consists in a *.shapefile point layer in which the simulated concentration values at different times are saved at each point. This layer can be used to visualize the results using the tools in QGIS. For example, it can be themed with color scales depending on the level of the selected solute concentration. Animations to visualize the evolution of the concentration in the various points may be produced by applying the TimeManager plugin (plugin, downloadable from the QGIS PluginManager).
A *.csv file of the output will also be saved in the previously defined destination folder. This file can be used by the user to conduct further analyses externally to the plugin and/or from QGIS (i.e., using spreadsheet).
Graphs of the solutions may be drawn opening the Plot Results section, where a number of options for producing solution plots or further customizing the draw and to save it in image format (i.e., as *.png file) are provided (Figure 3).
The user must choose the output layer to process. Graph drawing can be performed at any time, even after the execution of the model, by selecting the output file from the drop-down menu. However, in order for the desired layer to appear in the ORGANICS menu, the layer must be loaded in the QGIS layer panel. Once the layer is selected, the drop-down menus below will automatically update.
The following options for creating the graphs are available:
  • Select a position (distance in m from the entry point): this option will create a graph displaying the concentration trend in a point defined by the user at a certain distance from the starting point, as a function of time (Figure 4);
  • Use the selected position on the layer: this option allows to view the same result as above, but in this case the position is provided by selecting, using the classic selection tools on the map, one or more points of the output layer (Figure 5);
  • Select a time: this graph will display the concentration values, at a given simulated time, as a function of the distance from the inlet (Figure 6). The times available for selection correspond to the discretization obtained with the time step chosen in input by the user.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Model Validation

We successfully validated the model implemented within the tool by simulating the same case described by the analytical solution shown in [10]. The simulation results (Figure 7) are obtained using the following parameters:
U = 1.0 m/s
k = 0 s−1 (no decay is simulated)
E = 5.0 m2/s
where:
C(0,0) = C0, and
C(x,0) = 0 at x > 0
The solution (concentration value) is provided at 100, and 1000 m from the source.

3.2. Example Problem

In this section, three tests are presented in order to show the behavior of the calculated solution in different scenarios. The cases tested are:
(a) C0 mass injection, constant over time;
(b) time-limited pulse C0 mass injection;
(c) C0 mass input, variable over time (multi-pulse input condition).
Concerning the cases with time-limited or time-varying input (cases b and c, respectively), we implemented a solution using the principle of superimposition of the individual analytical solutions at each stress period, as reported in [10,43,44]. The parameter values used in the example problem are presented in Table 1. The .csv file and the .shp file are provided in the Supplementary Material.

3.2.1. C0 Mass Injection, Constant over Time

In this test, we simulated the release of a mass with concentration C0 = 100 ng/L constant over time. The solution is presented at the end of the simulation time, which is the time needed for the mass to reach the outlet.
Figure 8 displays the solution at the beginning of the reach (x = 0 m), at x = 500 m, and approximately at the end of the reach (x = 1100 m). In the middle of the reach (x = 500 m) the solution tends to an asymptotic value, which is less than 100 ng/L due to the effect of the simulated decay process.

3.2.2. Time-Limited Pulse C0 Mass Injection

In this test we simulated a time-limited pulse C0 = 100 ng/L mass injection for a 2 h duration. This time-limited pulse case, at constant concentration, can be implemented by defining in the *csv file an initial period (of known duration, with concentration C0; first line in the *csv file) followed by a second period with zero concentration (second line in the *csv file). In this test, the second input is then two hours long with concentration set at C2h = 0 ng/L. The solution is then displayed in Figure 9 at an infinite time (that is, the time needed for the dissolved substance to reach the outlet of the water course considered). The solution is presented at x = 500 m (Figure 9). At this distance, mass arrival is recorded after 30 min from the beginning of the simulation.

3.2.3. C0 Mass Input, Variable over Time (Multi-Pulse Boundary Condition)

In this test, we simulated C0 mass input, variable over time (multi-pulse input condition) according to data presented in Table 2. The global solution works as the superposition of the several pulses, each one having a constant condition for a specified time interval. Superposing each “pulse-solution” makes the model able to consider time-dependent boundary conditions. Results are shown at x = 400 m, x = 800 m, and x = 1200 m from the inlet point for time step length of:
-
20 min (Figure 10);
-
10 min (Figure 11);
-
5 min (Figure 12);
from the beginning of the simulation, in order to present the impact of the different time discretization on the solution (Figure 10, Figure 11 and Figure 12).

3.3. Case Study Application

The ORGANICS plugin was then applied to compute the concentration of the pharmaceutical compound carbamazepine at a reach of a vegetated channel receiving poorly treated wastewater, in low-flow conditions, in the Pisa municipality (Tuscany, Italy, Figure 13). Carbamazepine (CBZ) is an anticonvulsant or anti-epileptic drug commonly found in poorly treated wastewater and consequently in surface- and ground-water [45,46]. Removal efficiency in secondary wastewater treatment is typically less than 10% for CBZ [47]. Composite samples (2 volumes of 0.5 L every 30 min representative for one hour) were collected approximatively every two hours during an experiment run on 28 May 2018 at the inlet (point PSMw = 0 m) and the outlet (point PSMz = 420 m) of the channel reach (Figure 13) in low-flow conditions. Analytical determinations were performed following the method described in [48]. Mean longitudinal flow velocities were measured by means of an acoustic digital current meter (OTT Messtechnik GmbH, Kempten; Germany). Data for CBZ and mean longitudinal flow velocities are presented in Table 3.
A multi-pulse boundary condition was prepared by exploiting data from the five monitoring points. Figure 14 shows the simulated carbamazepine concentration at the outlet point, PSMz, 420 m from the inlet point. The Simulated value (PSMz_sim) column in Table 3 presents the simulated value against the measured ones (Outlet (PSMz) column). In Figure 13 CBZ simulated concentrations are themed with color scales depending on the concentration value.
The first-order decay rate and the longitudinal dispersion coefficients are relevant parameters in our analyses, and, more in general, in surface water quality modelling [49,50]. No experimental data were available for these parameters. As such, the model was calibrated to get the best fit (R2 = 0.95) between simulated and measured concentrations with values of the longitudinal dispersion coefficient of 35 m2/s and decay rate equal to 3 · 10−5 s−1. Good fit (R2 > 0,9) was also obtained varying these two parameters within the range of 30 and 35 m2/s for longitudinal dispersivity and between 2.5 · 10−5 and 3 · 10−5 s−1 for the decay rate coefficient. The values of the longitudinal dispersion coefficient are coherent with values found in [49,50] for similar open channels. The calibrated values of the decay rate are slightly higher than calculated values from half-life time data for CBZ reported in [51].

4. Conclusions

The developed open-source and free plugin allows simulating transport of dissolved substances in water courses following advection/dispersion, and degradation processes. The present formulation combining a simple analytical solution of the advection dispersion equation and GIS tools guarantees intuitive spatial data management. Authorities may also benefit from the ease of use of such tools in order to set in place pollution prevention measures. This solution, because few parameters are needed, could hence be applied to data-scarce environments. Furthermore, using this tool values for longitudinal dispersivity and first-order decay rate coefficients may be derived. In our case study application, we estimated the longitudinal dispersion coefficient and the decay rate coefficient to be 35 m2/s and 3 · 10−5 s−1 for the pharmaceutical compound carbamazepine. Another potential application could be in the feasibility stage of the design of water-related green infrastructures for the improvement of water quality [46,52]. On the other hand, the increasing number of integrated geographical databases (including surface water bodies characteristics) along with the increasing availability of sensors gathering and distributing quasi real-time monitoring data (such as surface water heads) may allow for the combined use of monitoring and modelling to set up early warning systems to track pollution events [53,54,55]. To this aim, further research and pilot experimental sites are needed.
The open and free characteristics of the developed code guarantee reproducibility of the run analyses, and also use of the tool, one of the most important aspects of science, making free software an ideal framework for scientific work. In this context, the use of free software is consolidating in our societies in a gradual, but constant way [56]. Integration in the FREEWAT plugin [18] and inclusion within the list of the official plugin of QGIS will guarantee the dissemination and potentially the application of this research product.
In the present formulation, the ORGANICS tool does not allow users to simulate the transport of substances under conditions where flow may increase/decrease downstream not only by tributaries, but also by continuous groundwater drainage from the surrounding domain. Nor does it allow for the spatial or time variability of the degradation rate. The latter could be beneficial to differentiate, for example, the relative importance in time of biodegradation from photodegradation processes [50,57,58]. Future development may include integration of more complex analytical solutions, comprising also source terms.
The ORGANICS plugin is a first attempt to popularize the use of simple modelling tools. For more complex solutions and the inclusion of time-varying source/sink terms, a wide range of numerical tools exist [7,10]. We wish therefore to stress that the main element of this tool resides in its simplicity. Finally, the ORGANICS plugin provides GIS experts the ability to perform approximate, but fast simulations of the evolution of pollutants concentration in surface water bodies at selected targets.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/w14182850/s1. The Supplementary Material folder contains: folder organics: contains the plugin to be installed in QGIS v3.xx; folder example_problems: contains the files used to run the Example problem described in Section 3.2 of the paper.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.R. and I.B.; methodology, R.R., I.B., L.S., L.E., A.C. and N.D.L.; software, I.B. and R.R.; validation, R.R., N.D.L. and L.S. and L.E.; formal analysis, R.R. and L.E.; resources, A.B. and R.R.; data curation, R.R. and I.B.; writing—original draft preparation, R.R. and I.B.; writing—review and editing, R.R., A.C., N.D.L., L.S. and L.E.; visualization, R.R. and I.B.; funding acquisition, A.B. and R.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This paper presents the ORGANICS plugin. The development of the ORGANICS plugin was financed through the research agreement between Distretto Idrografico Alpi Orientali and Istituto di Scienze della Vita—Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna: CONVENZIONE DI RICERCA per lo sviluppo di un modello con metodi numerici integrati in software per la gestione dei dati spaziali (GIS) che descriva i meccanismi di trasporto, abbattimento e circolazione in acque superficiali di fitofarmaci e composti azotati (2019–2021), co-funded within the GREVISLIN INTERREG Italia-Slovenia Project (Green infrastructures for the conservation and improvement of the condition of habitats and protected species along the rivers, CUP number: G76I18000080007) [https://www.ita-slo.eu/en/grevislin (accessed on 1 August 2022)].

Data Availability Statement

Data used in the section “Case study application” come from research run within the Italian-Israeli bilateral project PHARM-SWAP MED (co-funded by the Italian Ministero degli Affari Esteri e della Cooperazione Internazionale).

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Sara Pasini and Matteo Bisaglia.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Walker, D.B.; Baumgartner, D.J.; Gerba, C.P.; Fitzsimmons, K. Chapter 16—Surface water pollution. In Environmental and Pollution Science, 3rd ed.; Mark, L.B., Ian, L.P., Charles, P.G., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019; pp. 261–292. ISBN 978-0-12-814719-1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Montuori, P.; De Rosa, E.; Di Duca, F.; Provvisiero, D.P.; Sarnacchiaro, P.; Nardone, A.; Triassi, M. Estimation of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Pollution in Mediterranean Sea from Volturno River, Southern Italy: Distribution, Risk Assessment and Loads. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Beermann, A.J.; Elbrecht, V.; Karnatz, S.; Ma, L.; Matthaei, C.D.; Piggott, J.J.; Leese, F. Multiple-stressor effects on stream macroinvertebrate communities: A mesocosm experiment manipulating salinity, fine sediment and flow velocity. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 610–611, 961–971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Jackson, M.C.; Loewen, C.J.G.; Vinebrooke, R.D.; Chimimba, C.T. Net effects of multiple stressors in freshwater ecosystems: A meta-analysis. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2016, 22, 180–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Bavumiragira, J.P.; Ge, J.; Yin, H. Fate and transport of pharmaceuticals in water systems: A processes review. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 823, 153635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pistocchi, C.; Silvestri, N.; Rossetto, R.; Sabbatini, T.; Guidi, M.; Baneschi, I.; Bonari, E.; Trevisan, D. A simple model to assess nitrogen and phosphorus contamination in ungauged surface drainage networks: Application to the Massaciuccoli Lake Catchment. Italy. J. Environ. Qual. 2012, 41, 544–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Anderson, E.J.; Phanikumar, M.S. Surface storage dynamics in large rivers: Comparing three-dimensional particle transport, one-dimensional fractional derivative, and multirate transient storage models. Water Resour. Res. 2011, 47, W09511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. De Wit, M.; Pebesma, E.J. Nutrient fluxes at the river basin scale. II: The balance between data availability and model complexity. Hydrol. Processes 2001, 15, 761–775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Runkel, R.L. One-Dimensional Transport with Inflow and Storage (OTIS): A Solute Transport Model for Streams and Rivers; USGS Water Resources Investigations Report 98-4018; U.S. Geological Survey: Denver, CO, USA, 1998. Available online: http://co.water.usgs.gov/otis/ (accessed on 1 July 2022).
  10. Van Genuchten, M.T.; Leij, F.J.; Skaggs, T.H.; Toride, N.; Bradford, S.A.; Pontedeiro, E.M. Exact analytical solutions for contaminant transport in rivers 1. The equilibrium advection-dispersion equation. J. Hydrol. Hydromech. 2013, 61, 146–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. De Smedt, F.; Brevis, W.; Debels, P. Analytical solution for solute transport resulting from instantaneous injection in streams with transient storage. J. Hydrol. 2005, 315, 25–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Šimůnek, J.; Van Genuchten, M.T.; Sejna, M.; Toride, N.; Leij, F.J. The STANMOD Computer Software for Evaluating Solute Transport in Porous Media Using Analytical Solutions of Convection-Dispersion Equation; Version 2.0, IGWMC-TPS-71; International Ground Water Modeling Center (IGWMC), Colorado School of Mines: Golden, CO, USA, 2000; p. 32. Available online: http://www.pc-progress.com/en/Default.aspx?stanmod (accessed on 1 July 2022).
  13. Ince, D.C.; Hatton, L.; Graham-Cumming, J. The case for open computer programs. Nature 2012, 482, 485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Brovelli, M.A.; Minghini, M.; Moreno-Sanchez, R.; Oliveira, R. 2017. Free and open source software for geospatial applications (FOSS4G) to support Future Earth. Int. J. Digit. Earth 2017, 10, 386–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Communication to the Commission, Open Source Software Strategy 2020–2023; Think Open: Brussels, Belgium, 2020.
  16. Coetzee, S.; Ivánová, I.; Mitasova, H.; Brovelli, M.A. Open Geospatial Software and Data: A Review of the Current State and A Perspective into the Future. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2020, 9, 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kresic, N.; Mikszewski, A. Hydrogeological Conceptual Site Models: Data Analysis and Visualization; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  18. Rossetto, R.; De Filippis, G.; Triana, F.; Ghetta, M.; Borsi, I.; Schmid, W. Software tools for management of conjunctive use of surface-and ground-water in the rural environment: Integration of the Farm Process and the Crop Growth Module in the FREEWAT platform. Agric. Water Manag. 2019, 223, 105717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Foglia, L.; Borsi, I.; Mehl, S.; de Filippis, G.; Cannata, M.; Vasquez-Sune, E.; Criollo, R.; Rossetto, R. FREEWAT, a Free and Open Source, GIS-Integrated, Hydrological Modeling Platform. Groundwater 2018, 56, 521–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Rosas-Chavoya, M.; Gallardo-Salazar, J.L.; López-Serrano, P.M.; Alcántara-Concepción, P.C.; León-Miranda, A.K. QGIS a constantly growing free and open-source geospatial software contributing to scientific development. Cuad. Investig. Geográfica 2022, 48, 197–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Vieux, B.E. Geographic information systems and non-point source water quality and quantity modelling. Hydrol. Processes 1991, 5, 101–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Olivera, F.; Valenzuela, M.; Srinivasan, R.; Choi, J.; Cho, H.; Koka, S.; Agrawal, A. ArcGIS-SWAT: A geodata model and GIS interface for SWAT. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 2006, 42, 295–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Neitsch, S.L.; Arnold, J.G.; Kiniry, J.R.; Williams, J.R.; King, K.W. Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT): Theoretical Documentation; Version 2000; TWRI Report TR-191; TexasWater Resources Institute: College Station, TX, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  24. Becker, M.W.; Jiang, Z. Flux-based contaminant transport in a GIS environment. J. Hydrol. 2007, 343, 203–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Akbar, T.A.; Lin, H.; DeGroote, J. Development and evaluation of GIS-based ArcPRZM-3 system for spatial modeling of groundwater vulnerability to pesticide contamination. Comput. Geosci. 2011, 37, 822–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Rossetto, R.; Borsi, I.; Schifani, C.; Bonari, E.; Mogorovich, P.; Primicerio, M. SID&GRID: Integrating hydrological modeling in GIS environment. Rend. Online Soc. Geol. Ital. 2013, 24, 282–283. [Google Scholar]
  27. Anguix, A.; Díaz, L. gvSIG: A GIS desktop solution for an open SDI. J. Geogr. Reg. Plan. 2008, 1, 41–48. [Google Scholar]
  28. Oliveira, M.M.; Martins, T.N. A methodology for the preliminary characterization of the river boundary condition in finite difference groundwater flow numerical models. Acque Sotter. Ital. J. Groundw. 2019, 8, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Harbaugh, A.W. MODFLOW-2005, the U.S. Geological Survey Modular Groundwater Model—The Ground-water Flow Process; U.S. Geological Survey, Techniques and Methods 6–A16; U.S. Geological Survey: Reston, VA, USA, 2005.
  30. Bittner, D.; Rychlik, A.; Klöffel, T.; Leuteritz, A.; Disse, M.; Chiogna, G. A GIS-based model for simulating the hydrological effects of land use changes on karst systems—The integration of the LuKARS model into FREEWAT. Environ. Model. Softw. 2020, 127, 104682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. QGIS A Free and Open Source Geographic Information System. Open Source. Geospatial Foundation Project. 2009. Available online: http://qgis.osgeo.org (accessed on 1 July 2022).
  32. Nielsen, A.; Bolding, K.; Hu, F.; Trolle, D. An open source QGIS-based workflow for model application and experimentation with aquatic ecosystems. Environ. Model. Softw. 2017, 95, 358–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ellsäßer, F.; Röll, A.; Stiegler, C.; Hendrayanto Hölscher, D. Introducing QWaterModel, a QGIS plugin for predicting evapotranspiration from land surface temperatures. Environ. Model. Softw. 2020, 130, 104739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Dile, Y.T.; Daggupati, P.; George, C.; Srinivasan, R.; Arnold, J. Introducing a new open source GIS user interface for the SWAT model. Environ. Model. Softw. 2016, 85, 129–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Criollo, R.; Velasco, V.; Nardi, A.; De Vries, L.M.; Riera, C.; Scheiber, L.; Jurado, A.; Brouyère, S.; Pujades, E.; Rossetto, R.; et al. AkvaGIS: An open source tool for water quantity and quality management. Comput. Geosci. 2019, 127, 123–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. De Filippis, G.; Ercoli, L.; Rossetto, R. A Spatially Distributed, Physically-Based Modeling Approach for Estimating Agricultural Nitrate Leaching to Groundwater. Hydrology 2021, 8, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Benedini, M.; Tsakiris, G. Water quality modelling for rivers and streams. In Water Science and Technology Library; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; Volume 70. [Google Scholar]
  38. Python Software Foundation. Python 3 Release. Available online: https://www.python.org/download/releases/3.0/ (accessed on 1 July 2022).
  39. Qt5 Library. One framework. One codebase. Any platform. Available online: https://www.qt.io/ (accessed on 1 July 2022).
  40. QGIS. QGIS Python API. Available online: https://qgis.org/pyqgis/3.10/ (accessed on 1 July 2022).
  41. Pullar, D.; Springer, D. Towards integrating GIS and catchment models. Environ. Model. Softw. 2000, 15, 451–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Wang, L.; Jackson, C.R.; Pachocka, M.; Kingdon, A. A seamlessly coupled GIS and distributed groundwater flow model. Environ. Model. Softw. 2016, 82, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Toride, N.; Leij, F.J.; van Genuchten, M.T. The CXTFIT Code for Estimating Transport Parameters from Laboratory or Field Tracer Experiments; Version 2.0. Research Report No. 137; U.S. Salinity Laboratory, USDA, ARS: Riverside, CA, USA, 1995.
  44. Van Genuchten, M.T.; Alves, W.J. Analytical Solutions of the One-Dimensional Convective Dispersive Solute Transport Equations; Technical Bulletin No. 1661; U.S. Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 1982.
  45. Tixier, C.; Singer, H. Occurrence and fate of carbamazepine, clofibric acid, diclofenac, ibuprofen, ketoprofen, and naproxen in surface waters. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003, 37, 1061–1068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Barbagli, A.; Jensen, B.N.; Raza, M.; Schueth, C.; Rossetto, R. Assessment of soil buffer capacity on nutrients and pharmaceuticals in nature-based solution applications. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 759–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Zhang, Y.; Geißen, S.U.; Gal, C. Carbamazepine and diclofenac: Removal in wastewater treatment plants and occurrence in water bodies. Chemosphere 2008, 73, 1151–1161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Cardini, A.; Pellegrino, E.; Ercoli, L. Predicted and Measured Concentration of Pharmaceuticals in Surface Water of Areas with Increasing Anthropic Pressure: A Case Study in the Coastal Area of Central Italy. Water 2021, 13, 2807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Julínek, T.; Říha, J. Longitudinal dispersion in an open channel determined from a tracer study. Environ. Earth Sci. 2017, 76, 592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Liu, Y.; Zarfl, C.; Basu, N.B.; Cirpka, O.A. Modeling the fate of pharmaceuticals in a fourth-order river under competing assumptions of transient storage. Water Resour. Res. 2020, 56, e2019WR026100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Acuña, V.; von Schiller, D.; García-Galán, M.J.; Rodríguez-Mozaz, S.; Corominas, L.; Petrovic, M.; Poch, M.; Barceló, D.; Sabater, S. Occurrence and in-stream attenuation of wastewater-derived pharmaceuticals in Iberian rivers. Sci. Total Environ. 2015, 503–504, 133–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Piacentini, S.M.; Rossetto, R. Attitude and Actual Behaviour towards Water-Related Green Infrastructures and Sustainable Drainage Systems in Four North-Western Mediterranean Regions of Italy and France. Water 2020, 12, 1474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Rossetto, R.; Barbagli, A.; Borsi, I.; Mazzanti, G.; Vienken, T.; Bonari, E. Site investigation and design of the monitoring system at the Sant’Alessio Induced RiverBank Filtration plant (Lucca, Italy). Rend. Online Soc. Geol. Ital. 2015, 35, 248–251. [Google Scholar]
  54. Luo, L.; Lan, J.; Wang, Y.; Li, H.; Wu, Z.; McBridge, C.; Zhou, H.; Liu, F.; Zhang, R.; Gong, F.; et al. A Novel Early Warning System (EWS) for Water Quality, Integrating a High-Frequency Monitoring Database with Efficient Data Quality Control Technology at a Large and Deep Lake (Lake Qiandao), China. Water 2022, 14, 602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Liu, J.; Wang, P.; Jiang, D.; Nan, J.; Zhu, W. An integrated data-driven framework for surface water quality anomaly detection and early warning. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 251, 119145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Robles, G.; Steinmacher, I.; Adams, P.; Treude, C. Twenty Years of Open Source Software: From Skepticism to Mainstream. IEEE Softw. 2019, 36, 12–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Hanamoto, S.; Nakada, N.; Yamashita, N.; Tanaka, H. Modeling the photochemical attenuation of down-the-drain chemicals during river transport by stochastic methods and field measurements of pharmaceuticals and personal care products. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47, 13571–13577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Guillet, G.; Knapp, J.L.A.; Merel, S.; Cirpka, O.A.; Grathwohl, P.; Zwiener, C.; Schwientek, M. Fate of wastewater contaminants in rivers: Using conservative-tracer based transfer functions to assess reactive transport. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 656, 1250–1260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Schematic draw of contaminant movement along a surface water reach.
Figure 1. Schematic draw of contaminant movement along a surface water reach.
Water 14 02850 g001
Figure 2. The ORGANICS plugin main window.
Figure 2. The ORGANICS plugin main window.
Water 14 02850 g002
Figure 3. The ORGANICS plugin Plot results section.
Figure 3. The ORGANICS plugin Plot results section.
Water 14 02850 g003
Figure 4. Example graph: solution at a selected point as function of time.
Figure 4. Example graph: solution at a selected point as function of time.
Water 14 02850 g004
Figure 5. Example graph: solution at a selected points as function of time. Two points selected by using the GIS selection tools.
Figure 5. Example graph: solution at a selected points as function of time. Two points selected by using the GIS selection tools.
Water 14 02850 g005
Figure 6. Example graph: solution at a selected time as function of distance from the inlet point.
Figure 6. Example graph: solution at a selected time as function of distance from the inlet point.
Water 14 02850 g006
Figure 7. Computed simplified analytical solution implemented in Organics in time at x = 100 m and x = 1000 m.
Figure 7. Computed simplified analytical solution implemented in Organics in time at x = 100 m and x = 1000 m.
Water 14 02850 g007
Figure 8. C0 mass injection, constant over time: concentration values at selected points of the reach.
Figure 8. C0 mass injection, constant over time: concentration values at selected points of the reach.
Water 14 02850 g008
Figure 9. Time-limited pulse C0 mass injection: concentration values at 500 m from the inlet.
Figure 9. Time-limited pulse C0 mass injection: concentration values at 500 m from the inlet.
Water 14 02850 g009
Figure 10. Simulated concentration at x = 400 m, x = 800 m, and x = 1200 m from the inlet point with 20 min time step length.
Figure 10. Simulated concentration at x = 400 m, x = 800 m, and x = 1200 m from the inlet point with 20 min time step length.
Water 14 02850 g010
Figure 11. Simulated concentration at x = 400 m, x = 800 m, and x = 1200 m from the inlet point with 10 min time step length.
Figure 11. Simulated concentration at x = 400 m, x = 800 m, and x = 1200 m from the inlet point with 10 min time step length.
Water 14 02850 g011
Figure 12. Simulated concentration at x = 400 m, x = 800 m, and x = 1200 m from the inlet point with 5 min time step length.
Figure 12. Simulated concentration at x = 400 m, x = 800 m, and x = 1200 m from the inlet point with 5 min time step length.
Water 14 02850 g012
Figure 13. Case study location, investigated channel reach, and monitored points.
Figure 13. Case study location, investigated channel reach, and monitored points.
Water 14 02850 g013
Figure 14. Simulated concentration at x = 20 m, and x = 420 m from the inlet point with 10 min time step length.
Figure 14. Simulated concentration at x = 20 m, and x = 420 m from the inlet point with 10 min time step length.
Water 14 02850 g014
Table 1. Parameters values used in the example problem.
Table 1. Parameters values used in the example problem.
ParameterValueUnits
Total length of the reach1200m
Simulation length50m
Time step10min
Velocity (U)0.1m/s
First order decay rate (k)0.00005s−1
Longitudinal dispersion (E)5.0m2/s
Initial time28 May 2018 00:00dd/mm/yyyy hh:mm
Table 2. Data used in the test presented in Section 3.2.3.
Table 2. Data used in the test presented in Section 3.2.3.
Date and TimeC0 (ng/L)
28 May 2018 0:000
28 May 2018 0:20100
28 May 2018 2:0050
28 May 2018 2:3025
28 May 2018 3:3075
28 May 2018 4:000
Table 3. Carbamazepine concentrations at the inlet (PSMw) and outlet (PSMz) points of the vegetated channel on 28 May 2018, and simulated results.
Table 3. Carbamazepine concentrations at the inlet (PSMw) and outlet (PSMz) points of the vegetated channel on 28 May 2018, and simulated results.
TimeInlet (PSMw) (ng/L)Outlet (PSMz)(ng/L)Flow Velocity (m/s)Simulated Value (PSMz_sim) (ng/L)
07:20123-0.025-
09:50181-0.026-
11:00-105-112
12:20162-0.026-
13:10-112-116
14:20162-0.021-
15:40-115-119
16:50150-0.029-
18:00-125-122
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Rossetto, R.; Cisotto, A.; Dalla Libera, N.; Braidot, A.; Sebastiani, L.; Ercoli, L.; Borsi, I. ORGANICS: A QGIS Plugin for Simulating One-Dimensional Transport of Dissolved Substances in Surface Water. Water 2022, 14, 2850. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14182850

AMA Style

Rossetto R, Cisotto A, Dalla Libera N, Braidot A, Sebastiani L, Ercoli L, Borsi I. ORGANICS: A QGIS Plugin for Simulating One-Dimensional Transport of Dissolved Substances in Surface Water. Water. 2022; 14(18):2850. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14182850

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rossetto, Rudy, Alberto Cisotto, Nico Dalla Libera, Andrea Braidot, Luca Sebastiani, Laura Ercoli, and Iacopo Borsi. 2022. "ORGANICS: A QGIS Plugin for Simulating One-Dimensional Transport of Dissolved Substances in Surface Water" Water 14, no. 18: 2850. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14182850

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop