Science of the Total Environment 499 (2014) 414423

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Science of the Total Environment

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv

Groundwater resources management through the applications of

simulation modeling: A review
Ajay Singh
Agricultural and Food Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, West Bengal 721302, India

H I G H L I G H T S

A comprehensive review on the simulation modeling applications has been provided.

Simulations of uid and mass transport were used for transition zone forecasting.
Major constraints for regional groundwater models are setting boundary conditions.
Distributed models often provide only slightly better results than the lumped models.
GIS and remote sensing is extremely useful for groundwater modeling.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The global population is increasing rapidly and expected to touch the 9.5 billion mark by 2050 from the current
Received 11 January 2014 7.2 billion. The management of the groundwater resources is a challenging task worldwide against the backdrop
Received in revised form 7 May 2014 of the growing water demand for industrial, agricultural, and domestic uses and shrinking resources. Moreover,
Accepted 12 May 2014
this task has been hampered signicantly due to declining/rising groundwater levels and associated contamina-
Available online 28 May 2014
tion. A broad range of solutions could be considered to address the aforementioned problems of groundwater
Editor: Carla M Koretsky management, but the effectiveness of all the solutions and their combinations cannot be veried with eld
experiments. Given their predictive capability, simulation models are often the only viable means of providing
Keywords: input to management decisions, as they can forecast the likely impacts of a particular water management strat-
Groundwater management egy. This paper presents a comprehensive review on the simulation modeling applications for the management
Simulation modeling of groundwater resources. The past papers on the overview of groundwater simulation models, use of remote
Groundwater depletion: remote sensing sensing and GIS in groundwater modeling, and application of simulation models in arid and semiarid regions
Semiarid region are described in detail. Conclusions are drawn where gaps exist and more research needs to be focused.
2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction socioeconomic impacts (Shah, 2007). While, overdraft causes the

The sustainability of groundwater resources is a critical issue (Alley
et al., 1999, 2002; Hiscock et al., 2002; Gleeson et al., 2012) against
the backdrop of increasing water demand for industrial, agricultural,
and domestic uses for the burgeoning global population, which is ex-
pected to touch the 9.5 billion mark by 2050 from the current 7.2 billion
(United Nations, 2012), and shrinking water resources (Singh and
Panda, 2012a). However, groundwater is often not adequately managed
to ensure its long-term sustainability (Sophocleous, 2010). In fact,
groundwater depletion and contamination are prevalent in both devel-
oped and developing countries (Konikow and Kendy, 2005; Fogg and
LaBolle, 2006; Rodell et al., 2009) and have locally led to signicant
Tel.: +91 3222281335, +91 9434706472; fax: +91 3222255303.
E-mail addresses: erajay07@yahoo.co.in, ajay@agfe.iitkgp.ernet.in.
groundwater depletion, untreated or partially treated sewage, industrial
efuents, and agricultural chemicals are the major contributors of con-
tamination. Similar to groundwater depletion, rising watertables are
also serious groundwater management problems in arid and semiarid
regions of the world (Boumans et al., 1988; Hoffman and Durnford,
1999; McFarlane and Williamson, 2002; Kitamura et al., 2006;
Konukcu et al., 2006; van Dam et al., 2006; Guganesharajah et al.,
2007; Ritzema et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2008; Han et al., 2011; Singh,
2012a,b; Singh and Panda, 2013). The continuous expansion of the
irrigation system, absence of natural and articial drainage, seepage
from unlined canal networks, percolation from irrigation elds, and
under-exploitation of poor quality groundwater are major factors
contributing to a rising watertable problem (Singh et al., 2012).
A wide range of solutions could be considered to address problems
in groundwater management, which involves both quantity and

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.05.048
0048-9697/ 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 A. Singh / Science of the Total Environment 499 (2014) 414423 415

quality-related issues (Das and Datta, 2001). But the effectiveness of all
the solutions and their combinations cannot be veried with eld ex-
periments (Singh et al., 2006a). Moreover, many problems and pros-
pects associated with a particular water management options are
often not recognized until they are well advanced. Simulation models
by way of their predictive capability are often the only feasible means
of providing input to management decisions (Singh, 2010). These
models can help to forecast the likely impacts of a particular water man-
agement strategy. Therefore, the results of simulation studies of existing
and proposed water management policy may form the basis for the
identication of suitable water management plans for the future
(Jhorar et al., 2009).
In recent years, a large number of simulation models have been used
for groundwater management by the researchers worldwide (Table 1).
Both, the nite element and nite difference techniques have been
widely used in groundwater simulation modeling. Almost all the previ-
ous studies in Table 1, except Konikow and Bredehoeft (1992), advocate
verication of model before it is used for simulation. During the last two
decades, many researchers have used remote sensing and geographic
information systems (GIS) for the solution of groundwater manage-
ment problems (Choudhury, 1994; Kite and Pietroniro, 1996; Kemna
et al., 2002; Herzog et al., 2003; Schmid et al., 2005; Leblanc et al.,
2007; Hendricks Franssen et al., 2008; Li et al., 2009; Xu et al., 2011).
As far as author is aware, there has been one previous review (Hunt,
2006) on groundwater modeling during the recent past. However, it
was only concentrated on the applications of analytic element method
and did not incorporate nite element and nite difference methods
in groundwater modeling. Application of simulation models in arid
and semiarid regions was not included. Also it fails to incorporate the
uses of GIS and remote sensing in groundwater modeling. A recent re-
view (Werner et al., 2013) has covered some aspects of groundwater
modeling. But it is specically limited to seawater intrusion processes
and management of coastal aquifers. This paper, therefore, presents a
comprehensive review on the simulation modeling applications for
the management of groundwater resources. The past papers are
grouped into three sections; overview of groundwater simulation
models, use of remote sensing and GIS in groundwater modeling, and
application of simulation models in arid and semiarid regions.
2. Overview of groundwater simulation models
Research on the development and application of groundwater ow
and transport models has increased signicantly over the last ve de-
cades (Tyson and Weber, 1964; Feddes et al., 1978; Wang and
Anderson, 1982; Belman et al., 1983; Lerner and Kumar, 1991;
Simunek et al., 1998; Varni and Carrera, 1998; Izbicki et al., 2004;
Bester et al., 2006; Howard and Maier, 2007; Michael and Voss, 2008;
Harou et al., 2009; Chandio et al., 2012). Groundwater simulation
models can be divided broadly into two categories viz. groundwater
ow and solute transport models. Groundwater ow models solve for
the spatio-temporal values of hydraulic head, whereas, the solute trans-
port models solve for the spatio-temporal values of solute concentra-
tion. Groundwater simulation models based either on nite difference
or nite element techniques have been advocated for predicting
groundwater levels (Verruijit, 1972; Ayers and Vacher, 1983). The rst
simulation model for studying the dynamic behavior of a groundwater
basin was developed by Tyson and Weber (1964) using nite difference
technique. Later, this model was used by a number of researchers (e.g.,
de Ridder and Erez, 1976; Tyagi, 1986; Tyagi et al., 1993). Sauerwein
(1967) also used the nite difference technique for the solution of
two-dimensional unsteady state ow conditions. Pinder and Cooper
(1970) and Shamir and Dagan (1971) considered a vertical cross section
and used vertical integration to develop one-dimensional equations,
which were solved using a nite difference approximation.
The rst nite element model using stream functions and concentra-
tion as dependent variables was introduced by Lee and Cheng (1974).
However, Segol et al. (1975) and Segol and Pinder (1976) rst devel-
oped and demonstrated a eld application of an alternative model
using uid pressure, velocity components, and concentration as depen-
dent variables. The developed model performed better than the previ-
ous models. Numerous other researchers including Andrews (1981)
and Din et al. (1987) have used nite element models for groundwater
simulation using a diffusive interface approach. Models that incorporate
transition-zone simulation require simultaneous solution of uid-ow
and mass-transport equations. Further, Frind (1982) extended the
Galerkin nite element to deal with two-dimensional coastal aquifer
aquitard systems and Rubin (1983) used the concept of boundary-

Table 1
Simulation models used in the past.

Model/code Basic model features Purpose Model applications Region

1D-Simulation model FDM S Gupta and Pandey (1983) and Gupta (1985) India
3D-GWFM FDM Freyberg (1988) USA
PLASM, MODFLOW, AQUIFEMM-1 FDM, FEM C, V, S Anderson and Woessner (1992)
FEM, FDM V Konikow and Bredehoeft (1992) USA
MODFLOW, GFLOW FDM C Hunt et al. (1998) USA
SWAP-SWATRE, SIMGRO FEM C, S D'Urso et al. (1999) Italy
SWAP, SLURP FEM S Kite and Droogers (2000) Turkey
MODFLOW, GFLOW, MODPATH FDM C, S Pint et al. (2003), Budge and Sharp (2009) USA
SWAP, WOFOST, SEBAL FEM C, S van Dam and Malik (2003) India
GWFM C, V Hassan (2004)
GLUE SA Beven (2006)
UCODE, MMA C Poeter (2007)
MODFLOW FDM S Michael and Voss (2008) Bangladesh, India
WBM FDM C, V Zhang et al. (2008) Australia
HEM Harou et al. (2009)
UPFLOW S Raes (2009) Belgium
MODFLOW, MT3D FDM V, S Wondzell et al. (2009) USA
ISOQUAD FEM, FDM S Yang et al. (2009a) Taiwan
SEAWAT, UCODE FDM C Sanford and Pope (2010) USA
SVAT, MODFLOW, SIMGRO FDM, FEM V, S van Walsum and Veldhuizen (2011) Netherlands
MODFLOW FDM C, V, S Sherif et al. (2012) UAE
SGMP FDM C, S, SA, S Singh (2013) India
HYDRUS-1D, SWMS2D FEM, FDM V, S Zhu et al. (2013) China

FDM nite difference method; FEM nite element method; GWFM groundwater ow model; WBM water balance model; HEM hydro-economic model; S simulation;
C calibration; V validation/verication; SA sensitivity analysis.
416 A. Singh / Science of the Total Environment 499 (2014) 414423
layer approximation to simulate advectivedispersive transport of salt
in the transition zone. However, this approach is applicable to only
simple cases where the DupuitForchheimer assumptions and
boundary-layer approximations are justied. The nite difference and
nite element models were respectively developed and used by
Sondhi et al. (1989) and Rao and Sarma (1993) for simulating ground-
water ow in large canal irrigation projects in India. The seepage losses
from canal networks and percolation losses from agricultural elds
were estimated as components of recharge, in these models.
Although, in theory, distributed models are expected to outperform
their lumped counterparts, in reality, there have been mixed results.
Beven (1989) and Grayson et al. (1992) concluded that physically
based distributed models, when compared to lumped models, often
provide only slightly better results. A similar observation was made by
Reed et al. (2004), who reported the results of a comprehensive inter-
comparison study of several physically based and conceptual distribut-
ed models and concluded that lumped model outperformed distributed
models in most cases. Given these conclusions and the magnitude of
efforts required to parameterize and validate distributed hydrologic
models, it is reasonable to question whether distributed models can
effectively be used in forecasting. Carpenter and Georgakakos (2006)
presented the results of an intercomparison of lumped versus distribut-
ed hydrologic model and concluded that a distributed model gave better
results than the lumped model. They applied the models in two study
watersheds located in the southern Central Plains of the US and used
operational quality data to drive the models. Khakbaz et al. (2012)
calibrated a semi-distributed model for the Illinois River Basin at Siloam
Springs, Arkansas using streamow observations at the basin outlet
only. They concluded that model performance at the basin outlet can
be improved by using a semi-distributed structure calibrated at both
interior points and the outlet, even when only a few years of historical
record are available. While, Wilson et al. (1979) showed that accounting
for the spatial variation of precipitation signicantly inuences the vol-
ume, time to peak, and peak ow of predicted hydrograph. The results
of Wilson et al. (1979) were substantiated by Troutman (1983), Beven
(1985), Krajewski et al. (1991), Ogden and Julien (1994), and Shah
et al. (1996). The researchers i.e., Refsgaard and Knudsen (1996), Shah
et al. (1996), Boyle et al. (2001), Koren et al. (2004), and Zhang et al.
(2004) have compared distributed versus lumped model simulations.
Studies on the distributed and lumped modeling have also been under-
taken by Beven (1992, 2002), Duan et al. (1992), Michaud and
Sorooshian (1994), Boyle et al. (2001), Smith et al. (2004), and Kampf
and Burges (2007).
The MODFLOW model has been used worldwide because of its easy
accessibility, user-friendliness and versatility (Kashaigili et al., 2003).
Palma and Bentley (2007) used MODFLOW for simulating the ow in
the Leon-Chinandega aquifer located in Nicaragua. The model results
indicated that pumping induces a decrease in base ow, depleting
river discharge. The agriculturally based watershed model SWAT and
the groundwater model MODFLOW with streamaquifer interaction
routines were suitably modied and linked into a comprehensive
basin model known as SWATMOD by Sophocleous et al. (1999). The de-
veloped model SWATMOD, which is capable of simulating the surface
water, groundwater, and stream aquifer interactions, was applied in
the Rattlesnake Creek basin in south central Kansas. The model was
run for a 40 year historical simulation period and a 40 year prediction
period. A number of hypothetical management scenarios involving re-
ductions and variations in withdrawal rates and patterns were simulat-
ed. Later, the fully distributed groundwater model MODFLOW was
integrated with the quasi distributed watershed model SWAT by
Sophocleous and Perkins (2000) and applied in Kansas. Budge and
Sharp (2009) derived aquifer parameters of the Barton Springs segment
of the Edwards Aquifer by introducing spatially varying parameters in
MODFLOW. They used the algorithms developed by Padilla and
Pulido-Bosch (1995) to investigate the heterogeneity of karst aquifers
and concluded that spatial variability within an aquifer can be inferred
using cross-correlation analysis. Some other applications of
MODFLOW by Ting et al. (1998) in the Pingtung Plain, Taiwan;
Gedeon et al. (2007) in the north-east Belgium; and Pisinaras et al.
(2007) in the Ismarida plain, North Greece, are found in the literature.
Recently, Xu et al. (2012) integrated a SoilWaterAtmospherePlant
(SWAP) package with the groundwater ow model MODFLOW in
such a way that the SWAP package calculates vertical ux for
MODFLOW, while MODFLOW provides averaged watertable depth to
determine the bottom boundary condition for SWAP zones. They
applied the integrated model to simulate a regional groundwater ow
problem in Hetao Irrigation District, upper Yellow River basin of North
China. The results of MODFLOW applications are better when it is inte-
grated with other software applications. This is mainly because each
software works in sync with each other to solve many aspects of
groundwater management problem.
The traditional numerical models with specic boundary conditions
are able to depict the complex structures of aquifers including compli-
cated prediction of groundwater levels (Sorooshian and Gupta, 1995;
Singh and Woolhiser, 2002; Wu et al., 2003). A three dimensional
steady-state nite difference groundwater ow model was used to
quantify the groundwater uxes and analyze the subsurface hydrody-
namics in the Akaki catchment by giving particular emphasis to the
well eld that supplies water to the city of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
(Ayenew et al, 2008). The model can also be used for analyzing the
groundwatersurface water interaction, effect of pumping on the well
eld, and groundwater ow pattern.
Yang et al. (2009b) applied two groundwater models BPANN and ITS
for prediction of groundwater levels in western Jilin Province, China.
They compared the model performance in terms of MAE, RMSE, and
CE and found that BPANN models are superior to the ITS in forecasting
the groundwater levels. The use of standard regional groundwater
ow models in predicting regional patterns of water chemistry based
on well-water was evaluated by Furlong et al. (2011). They concluded
that particle tracking with the implied ow eld of a standard regional
groundwater ow model can account for uncertainties in ow and
regional water quality interpretations. Groundwater ow and transport
models have also been used in a number of past studies by the re-
searchers worldwide (Besbes et al., 1978; Flug et al., 1980; Carrea and
Neuman, 1986; Tracy, 1995; Zhao et al., 1998; Bakker et al., 1999;
Vermulst and De Lange, 1999; Bethke and Johnson, 2002; Helweig
et al., 2002; Weissmann et al., 2002; Trowsdale and Lerner, 2003,
2007; Plummer et al., 2004; Sanford et al., 2004; Zhang et al., 2008).
3. Use of remote sensing and GIS in groundwater modeling
Groundwater resources management and modeling are hindered
signicantly by a lack of good quality data. The problem is particularly
serious in arid and semiarid regions where observation infrastructure is
weak (Schmid et al., 2005; Brunner et al., 2007). Regional groundwater
models require distributed input data (Wondzell et al., 2009), while, typ-
ical hydrological measurements provide only point data. In the absence
of required extensive data, these models cannot be used as reliable
decision support tool because of under/over estimation of outputs
(Storey et al., 2003; Kasahara and Hill, 2006). The new sources for spatial
input data have emerged with the recent developments in remote
sensing and GIS (Bobba et al., 1992; Kite and Pietroniro, 1996; Jackson,
2002; Leblanc et al., 2003; Brunner et al., 2004; Dar et al., 2010; Stisen
et al., 2011). A detailed review of the remote sensing applications in
groundwater modeling is provided by Brunner et al. (2007). The review
also provided the examples of its uses in Botswana and China. The differ-
ent aspects regarding the use of remote sensing technique in water re-
sources management are given in Becker (2006). Earlier, Tsihrintzis
et al. (1996) have presented a review of the uses of GIS in water
resources.
Groundwater ow models are appropriate tools to assess the effect
of foreseen future human activities on groundwater dynamics
 A. Singh / Science of the Total Environment 499 (2014) 414423
(Dawoud et al., 2005; Mylopoulos et al., 2007). However, models re-
quire good quality data on the physical and hydrogeological settings.
The physical ones refer to topography, land use, soils, canals and
drainage ditches, climate and crops demand for water (Xu et al.,
2011). The hydrogeological settings include the aquifer system and
boundary conditions, main hydraulic parameters characterizing each
aquifer layer, and the dynamics of groundwater levels. All of them
vary both, in space and time, thus adopting GIS in association with a
model is helpful. Coupling GIS technology with a process-based ground-
water model may facilitate hydrogeological and hydrologic system con-
ceptualization and characterization (Hinaman, 1993; Kolm, 1996; Gogu
et al., 2001), thus also a proper adaptation of the groundwater ow
model to the area under study (Brodie, 1998). Various examples con-
rm the appropriateness of GIS applications in groundwater hydrology
(Herzog et al., 2003; Brunner et al., 2008; Li et al., 2008).
The calibration of a groundwater model is necessary for achieving a
close match between the observed and simulated state variables. The
trial and error method is usually used for adjusting the sensitive param-
eters of the model during the calibration (Poeter and Hill, 1997; Gupta
et al., 1998). However, adjusting too many parameters during the
calibration will result in an over-parameterized groundwater model,
which will have a very little predictive value (Li et al., 2009). Garcia
et al. (2006) introduced a model that utilizes GIS to predict relative re-
ductions in crop yield due to waterlogging and salinity at a eld-scale
by incorporating spatially and temporally variable crop, climatic, and
irrigation data to simulate crop yields. This model utilizes soil and
water data commonly collected in eld-scale studies. Some examples
of remote sensing data applications in groundwater modeling can also
be found in Choudhury (1994), Meijerink (1996), Hendricks Franssen
et al. (2008), and Dams et al. (2013).
The potential of GIS technique in numerical modeling for groundwa-
ter resources was demonstrated by Chenini and Mammou (2010). They
coupled GIS software ARCVIEW with groundwater model MODFLOW
and used it in the Maknassy basin of central Tunisia. The similar studies
of GIS-MODFLOW applications in groundwater modeling were also
undertaken by Kim et al. (2008) and Depaz et al. (2009) for mapping
the groundwater recharge. Akbar et al. (2011) developed a GIS-based
modeling system ArcPRZM-3, which can be used for a site-specic
single simulation or regional synchronized multiple simulations which
require spatial distributed data. The model was applied in Woodruff
County, Arkansas, USA for developing a health risk map, which was
based on dissolved bentazon concentration in soil. Ireson et al. (2006)
proposed the coupling of a water resources management simulation
model (MIKE-Basin) and a nite difference groundwater model
(ASM). The GIS software ArcView was used in this study. They applied
the models in data scarce Vrbas River basin, in Republic Srpska in
Bosnia and Herzegovina and concluded that the proposed technique is
valid as an initial knowledge development and optioneering step,
which can support the collection exercise for detailed modeling.
A GIS module GRASS (Kunkel and Wendland, 2002; Neteler and
Mitasova, 2004) was created to overcome the proprietary problem of
common GIS software. The GRASS was integrated with nite difference
groundwater ow model MODFLOW by Carrera-Hernandez and Gaskin
(2006). The results indicate that the integrated model can be used to
solve large scale groundwater ow problems. Thus, the module GRASS
provides a tool for groundwater ow modeling to those users who can-
not afford commercially available software. Leblanc et al. (2007) used
the remote sensing and GIS techniques for regional groundwater
modeling in Lake Chad Basin, Africa located in a semiarid area. They
demonstrated the usefulness of these techniques through a better
denition of groundwater recharge and discharge areas, groundwater/
surface water interaction, and paleohydrological settings. Gaur et al.
(2011) developed a methodology by combining the MODFLOW and
GIS. The developed methodology was applied on the sub-basin of the
Banganga River, India for delineating the groundwater potential zones.
They concluded that the developed model is very helpful for the
417
evaluation of groundwater resources and for deciding the location of
rainwater harvesting structures in semiarid regions.
Chowdary et al. (2003) advocated the coupling of simulation models
and GIS because GIS had no data representation exibility for space and
time. Coupling can range from loose to tight coupling. A loose coupling
involves a data transfer from one system to another, while, in a tight
coupling, the data management is integrated into the system. The GIS
is used to preprocess data or to make maps of input data or model re-
sults. This approach was adopted by the majority of the past applica-
tions because it allows the use of existing physical models with little
or no modications to the software (Roaza et al., 1993). Fayer et al.
(1996) used GIS technique for identifying all possible combinations of
soil type and vegetation which was used for estimating the areal distri-
bution of natural recharge for a groundwater ow and transport model.
Recently, a spatially distributed water balance model WetSpass in
conjunction with remote sensing images and GIS tools was used by
Gebreyohannes et al. (2013) for the assessment of available water
resources in the Geba basin of Ethiopia. They used the model for prepar-
ing the digital maps of long-term surface runoff, evapotranspiration and
groundwater recharge. The model predictions are veried with
observed river ow data and were found reliable.
4. Application of simulation models in arid and semiarid regions
Water and salt are the key elements that decide the sustainability of
irrigated agriculture in arid and semiarid ecosystems. Due to that, water
and salt balance studies have been done at various research stations
worldwide (Williams, 1987; Garg and Ali, 2000; Dai and Labadie,
2001; Upadhyaya and Chauhan, 2002; Oster and Wichelns, 2003;
Tuteja et al., 2003). In arid and semiarid areas, provision of irrigation is
vital to enhance crop production. However, without appropriate man-
agement, irrigated agriculture can be detrimental to the environment
and may endanger its sustainability (Sakthivadivel et al., 1999; van
Dam et al., 2006). For example, during the past four decades, most of
the canal irrigated areas of Haryana State (India) are facing rising
groundwater levels, and problems such as waterlogging and soil
salinization are emerging (Agarwal and Roest, 1996; Singh et al.,
2010; Singh, 2011). The groundwater simulation models were devel-
oped and applied for the management of waterlogged saline lands by
many researchers worldwide, i.e., Gates and Grismer (1989), Hossain
et al. (1994), Aslam and Skogerboe (1995), Hill (1996), Simunek et al.
(1996), Havard et al. (1997a,b), Nathan and Mudgway (1997), Cheng
et al. (1998), Ramasesha (1998), Lamsal et al. (1999), and Singh
(2013). Almost in all the previous studies, a recharge reduction and/or
draft increase measures are recommended to combat the problems of
waterlogging and associated salinization.
Some researchers used one dimensional unsaturated ow model to
simulate water management under drained and undrained conditions
(Singh and Kumar, 1998). While, others used a groundwater simulation
model to predict the dynamic behavior of the watertable in response to
groundwater pumpage and net recharge (Singh et al., 1984). A distrib-
uted irrigation water management model FRAME, which was a combi-
nation of an unsaturated ow model SIWARE and a groundwater
simulation model SGMP (Boonstra and de Ridder, 1990; Boels et al.,
1996) was used for the simulation study by Kumar and Singh (2003).
The model FRAME was applied on a regional scale in Sirsa Irrigation
Circle in the northwestern part of Haryana, India, which was faced
with serious waterlogging and salinity problems in areas underlain
with saline groundwater irrigated by the canal networks. It was con-
cluded that the model FRAME can be used for studying the impact of
policy changes on the future groundwater behavior, which is the
major benet of the model. Connell (2007) presented a series of semi-
analytical and analytical solutions for transport of a surface released
contaminant vertically through the unsaturated zone to the watertable
and then within groundwater. The study presented three different
approaches to describe transport in the unsaturated zone. Earlier the
418 A. Singh / Science of the Total Environment 499 (2014) 414423
similar studies were undertaken by Refsgaard et al. (1999) and Hantush
et al. (2000). A three dimensional nite element model, based on Galerkin
weighted residual techniques, was presented by Chandio et al. (2012).
The model was applied in a waterlogged area located in the lower Indus
Basin, Pakistan for groundwater simulation. Babajimopoulos et al.
(2007) applied a mathematical model SWBACROS to estimate the contri-
bution of a shallow groundwater to the water needs of a maize crop.
Management of waterlogging and secondary salinization is causing
universal concern because of its implication on food security and envi-
ronmental conservation (Sharma, 1999; Singh et al., 2010). Researchers
i.e., Skaggs (1982), Workman and Skaggs (1989), and Singh et al.
(2006b) used eld scale deterministic hydrological model DRAINMOD
to simulate groundwater ow under shallow watertable conditions
and they found that the model is quite useful for controlling the rising
watertable and groundwater salinity problems. However, Sinai and
Jain (2006), who used DRAINMOD for the prediction of watertable
depths in irrigated elds at the Jordan Valley, concluded that
DRAINMOD cannot give the right prediction because of a strong side
effect of the Jordan river, presence of sandy permeable layers below
the depth of the drains which magnies the boundary condition effect
of the Jordan River, and a very signicant component of deep and lateral
seepage. Raes and Deproost (2003) concluded that sophisticated mech-
anistic models for simulating water ow in unsaturated porous medium
(Feddes et al., 1978; Belman et al., 1983; Simunek et al., 1998) can be
used to obtain reliable estimates for any type of environment but the
data requirement is quite extensive and their use requires great
expertise.
The SoilWaterAtmospherePlant model (SWAP, van Dam et al.,
1997; Kroes et al., 1999) was applied by Anuraga et al. (2006) for the
estimation of groundwater recharge using land use and soil data of an
area located in an agricultural subwatershed in Karnataka, south India.
The model SWAP also can simulate water budgets under a broad
range of cropping systems and has been tested and validated for differ-
ent crops and irrigation scenarios in semiarid areas of India, Iran, and
Pakistan (Bastiaanssen et al., 1996; Smets et al., 1997; Kelleners et al.,
1999; Singh, 2004; Noory et al., 2011). The calibration and validation
of SWAP were done by Mandare et al. (2008) in the parts of northwest
India where the groundwater quality is marginal and canal water sup-
ply is scarce. They prepared some monographs for water management
alternatives at the eld level by considering the quality and quantity
of groundwater and its impact on the crop yield and soil salinity.
SWAP has also been applied in many hydrological studies for a wide
range of climatic and agriculture conditions (e.g., Kite and Droogers,
2000; van Dam and Malik, 2003; Qureshi et al., 2003). The digital
groundwater model PLASM has been extensively tested covering irriga-
tion commands in some of the critical basins, such as the Bist-Doab,
Upper Bari-Doab and the southwestern tracts in the Punjab (Sondhi
et al., 1996). This work has shown that models can effectively simulate
the seasonal behavior of groundwater basins and can, therefore, provide
information that can aid better planning and management. A nite ele-
ment model was developed to access water and dissolved solutes to
parallel drains in a tile-drained soil aquifer system (Kamra et al.,
1991a,b). The model results revealed that the closely spaced drains
are quite effective in desalinizing top 80 cm soil prole, where most
crop production activities take place. However, the deep-widely spaced
drains are more effective in removing the salts from the entire soil
prole.
An integrated Spatial-Agro-HYdro-Salinity MODel, SAHYSMOD
(Oosterbaan, 2005), which is a combination of the salinity model
SaltMod (Oosterbaan and de Lima, 1989) and the nodal groundwater
model SGMP (Boonstra and de Ridder, 1990), was used by Akram
et al. (2009) to evaluate factors affecting design and operation of a
bio-drainage system. The results showed that the major constraint of
bio-drainage is salt accumulation in tree plantation strips in arid and
semiarid regions. Earlier the model SAHYSMOD was used by Rao et al.
(1995) for the salt and water balance analysis of a waterlogged area
located in the Haryana State of India. Recently, Singh and Panda
(2012b,c) used SAHYSMOD in northwest India, where the groundwater
level is rising continuously. After successful calibration and validation,
they used the model for studying the long-term effect of different man-
agement alternatives on the future groundwater scenarios. None of the
previous applications of SAHYSMOD, except Singh and Panda (2012b,c),
considered the socio-economic issues, which have wider policy signi-
cance on the water resources management, in groundwater simulation.
Some models are used to simulate both the salt and water balances
of saturated and unsaturated systems. Oosterbaan and Abu Senna
(1989) used the model SaltMod in Nile delta of Egypt for salt and
water balance analysis. Some earlier applications of SaltMod by Rao
et al. (1992) in Tungabhandra Irrigation Project, Karnataka, India;
Vanegas Chacon (1993) in the Leziria Grande Polder, Portugal; Singh
et al. (2002a,b) in the coastal areas of Andhra Pradesh, India;
Srinivasulu (2002), and Srinivasulu et al. (2004) in Konanki pilot area,
Andhra Pradesh, India; Srinivasulu et al. (2005) in Nagarjuna Sagar
right canal command, India; Bahceci et al. (2006) in KonyaCumra
Plain, Turkey; Sarangi et al. (2006) in Krishna district of Andhra Pradesh,
India; and Singh (2012c) in Haryana State of northwest India, are found
in the literature. In all the previous studies, SaltMod was applied in areas
where sub-surface drainage system was installed except Singh (2012c).
Also the aquifer parameters were not calibrated and sensitivity analysis
of the model parameters was not performed in any studies except the
last one. The model SGMP was used by Tyagi et al. (1993) for the
groundwater balance analysis of an irrigated semiarid area located in
Lower Ghaggar Basin in the command of Bhakra Canal System in Hary-
ana State of India. Later, SGMP was used by Boels et al. (1996), Boonstra
and Bhutta (1996), Boonstra (1999), Anchal et al. (2002), Kumar and
Singh (2003), and Singh (2013) for the groundwater balance analyses
of different regions. The impact of potential policy changes on the
groundwater resources has not been studied in any previous applica-
tions of SGMP except the last one.
Conventional perception holds that the best solution for dealing
with the twin menace of waterlogging and salinity is to maintain a net
ux of salt away from the rootzone and to control the watertable. A
simulation model, SUTRA (Voss, 1984) was used by Khouri (1998) to
tackle the problems of waterlogging and salinization. Researchers like
Humphreys et al. (2006) and Khan (2007) suggested two approaches
to reduce net recharge to shallow saline groundwater from cropped
areas using a soil, water and groundwater management model, SWAG-
MAN. First approach applies the concept of growing deep-rooted crop
(crop consuming water from soil and shallow watertable) over an
area equivalent to recharge from a unit area of crop to maintain the
total water balance. The second approach involves achieving whole
farm water balance for average and wet climatic conditions to nd out
optimum cropping pattern to minimize recharge from cropped eld.
A physically-based regional hydrological model SIMGRO (Querner,
1988, 1997), which simulates the water ow in the saturated zone, in
the unsaturated zone, and in the surface water in an integrated manner,
was applied to an irrigated area of 2650 ha in the province of Mendoza,
Argentina, after it was calibrated with data on groundwater levels,
evapotranspiration and salinity (Kupper et al., 2002.) It can take into
account the effects of irrigation, drainage, groundwater use and their
impact on the evapotranspiration of different crops (Querner et al.,
1997). The modied version of the SIMGRO model was used by van
Walsum and Veldhuizen (2011) in a shallow watertable area of The
Netherlands. They concluded that the coupling of model is difcult if
the ow resistance across the boundaries of subdomains is small. Re-
cently, Querner et al. (2012) has applied SIMGRO in peat meadows of
The Netherlands, where the conditions for farming are not favorable
and soil subsidence prevails. They used the model to examine the possi-
ble future strategies to control water level and found that in the future
the soil subsidence will increase and more water will be needed to
maintain the target surface water levels. The model SIMGRO was used
for the simulation of water ow in an integrated manner in all the
 A. Singh / Science of the Total Environment 499 (2014) 414423
previous studies without considering the climate change impact.
However, Querner et al. (2012) used this model for simulating different
future scenarios by taking into account the impact of climate scenarios.
The accurate quantication of the water balance and water redistri-
bution in soil is strictly required for a proper simulation of solute trans-
port and for management of plant growth and irrigation. Several models
are available to serve the purpose (e.g., SWAP, CropSyst, Hydrus,
RZWQM, and MACRO). Despite their common basis of the representa-
tion of water ow in the unsaturated zone, apparently similar hydrolog-
ical models give different results when applied in the same ecological,
climatic and agronomic scenarios (Simunek et al., 2003; Vanderborght
et al., 2005). Bonfante et al. (2010) compared the performance of
three well known models (SWAP, MACRO and CropSyst) in terms of
simulated soil water contents, using detailed high frequency and high-
resolution measured data. They concluded that generally SWAP had
the best performance, followed by CropSyst and then MACRO. The
similar conclusions were made by Smets et al. (1997) who used
SWAP93 to analyze the water ow and salt transport for the prevailing
irrigation regime and climatic conditions, and Cirkel et al. (2010) who
used model SWAP to generate measured time series of groundwater
and surface water levels.
5. Summary and conclusions
The literature review revealed that groundwater models developed
and applied in the past, mainly dealt with the issues of water and solute
transport. It emerged from the available literature that the rst simula-
tion model for studying the dynamic behavior of groundwater was
applied about ve decades ago and it used the nite difference tech-
nique. Later nite element technique has also been used in groundwater
modeling along with nite difference technique. The other technique
used in groundwater modeling includes nite element technique with
diffusive interface approach. Simultaneous simulations of uid-ow
and mass-transport were used in the models which provide
transition-zone forecasting. The major constraints for the regional ap-
plication of groundwater models are setting the boundary conditions.
Linearized Boussinesq equation was also used by researchers for model-
ing of groundwater level variation. Physically based spatially distributed
models were used with additional capabilities to account for agricultur-
al features at the catchment scale. The general belief that the distributed
models outperform lumped models with a wide margin has been bro-
ken by many researchers in the past. They concluded that distributed
models often provide only slightly better results than the lumped
models. Considering these conclusions and the magnitude of efforts re-
quired to parameterize and validate distributed models, it is reasonable
to question whether distributed models can effectively be used in fore-
casting. Advanced soil water ow simulation models have been used by
researchers to solve relatively complex problems in groundwater, irri-
gation, and drainage management. Some researchers recommended
the use of multiple models to overcome the limitation(s) of a particular
model(s). GIS and remote sensing techniques are extremely useful in
the acquisition of spatially distributed data for groundwater modeling.
By interpreting remote sensing, we can get spatially exhaustive al-
though non-exact verication data in contrast to the traditional limited
number of more exact point data. The applications of remote sensing
with traditional methods provide a huge potential in improving the
quality of modeling work. The remote sensing and GIS techniques are
particularly useful in the developing countries with weak infrastructure
and data scarcity and where main water resource problems exist. On the
contrary, the use of these techniques is of less interest in most of the
developed countries which have strong spatial observation networks.
Despite the fact that the study has examined all possible literature
sources, it seems to be impractical to include in a review all publications.
This review paper highlights an overall approach for simulation model-
ing applications for the management of groundwater resources and
each section deserves a more comprehensive, special review. It is likely
419
that some aspects of some of the subjects have either been overlooked
or only briey referred to. It is expected that these gaps could be lled
by subsequent contributions and that there is scope for further discus-
sion about the subjects covered in this review.
Conict of interest
The author has no actual or potential conict of interest including
any nancial, personal or other relationships with other people or orga-
nizations within three years of the beginning of this work.
Acknowledgments
The author extends great gratitude to the editors and anonymous re-
viewers of the journal whose constructive and insightful comments and
suggestions have led to considerable improvement to the early versions
of the manuscript.
References
Agarwal MC, Roest CWJ. Towards improved water management in Haryana State; nal
report of the Indo-Dutch operational research project on hydrological studies. CCS
Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, International Institute for Land Reclamation
and Improvement, Wageningen, DLO Winand Staring Centre for Integrated Land,
Soil and Water Research, now Alterra Green World Research, Wageningen; 1996. p.
80.
Akbar TA, 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;37:82230.
Akram S, Kashkouli HA, Pazira E. Sensitive variables controlling salinity and water table in
a bio-drainage system. Irrig Drain Syst 2009;22:27185.
Alley WM, Reilly TE, Franke OL. Sustainability of ground water resources. U S Geol Surv
Circ 1999;1186.
Alley WM, Healy RW, LaBaugh JW, Reilly T. Flow and storage in groundwater systems.
Science 2002;296(5575):198590.
Anchal V, Gupta SK, Mishra KL, Singh A. Application of a groundwater model to assess
land degradation problems. Proceedings of Commonwealth Geographical Bureau,
Food Security Workshop and International Symposium on Land Degradation, 711
April, held at M.M.H. College, Ghaziabad, India; 2002. p. 2318.
Anderson MP, Woessner WW. Applied groundwater modeling-simulation of ow and
advective transport. California: Academic Press Inc.; 1992. p. 381.
Andrews RW. Seawater intrusion in the Costa de Hermisillo, Mexico: a numerical analysis
of water management proposals. Groundwater 1981;19:63547.
Anuraga TS, Ruiz L, Mohan Kumar MS, Sekhar M, Leijnse TA. Estimating groundwater re-
charge using land use and soil data: a case study in south India. Agric Water Manag
2006;84:6576.
Aslam M, Skogerboe GV. Irrigation system salinity management modeling. Int J Water
Resour Dev 1995;11:26172.
Ayenew T, Demlie M, Wohnlich S. Application of numerical modeling for groundwater
ow system analysis in the Akaki Catchment, Central Ethiopia. Math Geosci 2008;
40(8):887906.
Ayers JF, Vacher HL. A numerical model describing unsteady ow in a fresh water lens.
Water Resour Bull 1983;19:78590.
Babajimopoulos C, Panoras A, Georgoussis H, Arampatzis G, Hatzigiannakis E, Papamichail
D. Contribution to irrigation from shallow water table under eld conditions. Agric
Water Manag 2007;92:20510.
Bahceci D, Dinc N, Tari AF, Agar AI, Sonmez B. Water and salt balance studies using
SaltMod to improve subsurface drainage design in the KonyaCumra Plain, Turkey.
Agric Water Manag 2006;85:26171.
Bakker M, Anderson EI, Olsthoorn TN, Strack ODL. Regional groundwater modeling of the
Yucca Mountain site using analytic elements. J Hydrol 1999;226:21123.
Bastiaanssen WGM, Singh R, Kumar S. Analysis and recommendations for integrated on
farm water management in Haryana, India: a model approach. Report 118, Alterra
Green World Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands; 1996. p. 152.
Becker MW. Potential for satellite remote sensing of ground water. Ground Water 2006;
44(2):30618.
Belman C, Wesseling JG, Feddes RA. Simulation model of the water balance for the
cropped soil: SWATRE. J Hydrol 1983;63:27186.
Besbes M, Delhomme JP, DeMarsily G. Estimating recharge from ephemeral streams in
arid regions: a case study at kariokan. Water Resour Res 1978;14(2):28190.
Bester ML, Frind EO, Molson JW, Rudolph DL. Numerical investigation of road salt impact
on an urban welleld. Ground Water 2006;44:16575.
Bethke CM, Johnson TM. Paradox of groundwater age: correction. Geology 2002;30:
3858.
Beven KJ. Distributed models. In: Anderson MG, Burt TP, editors. Hydrological forecasting.
New York: Wiley; 1985. [Ch. 13].
Beven K. Changing ideas in hydrology the case of physically-based models. J Hydrol
1989;105:15772.
Beven K. Future of distributed modeling. Hydrol Process 1992;6(3):2534.
420 A. Singh / Science of the Total Environment 499 (2014) 414423
Beven K. Towards an alternative blueprint for a physically based digitally simulated
hydrologic response modeling system. Hydrol Process 2002;16:189206.
Beven K. A manifesto for the equinality thesis. J Hydrol 2006;320:1836.
Bobba AG, Bukata RP, Jerome JH. Digitally processed satellite data as a tool in detecting
potential groundwater ow systems. J Hydrol 1992;131:2562.
Boels D, Smit AAMFR, Jhorar RK, Kumar R, Singh J. Analysis of water management in Sirsa
District in Haryana: model testing and application. Report 115. DLO Winand Staring
Centre for Integrated Land, Soil and Water Research, now Alterra Green World
Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands; 1996. p. 50.
Bonfante A, Basile A, Acutis M, De Mascellis R, Manna P, Perego A, et al. SWAP, CropSyst
and MACRO comparison in two contrasting soils cropped with maize in northern
Italy. Agric Water Manag 2010;97:105162.
Boonstra J. Use of simulation models for groundwater management in arid and semi-arid
regions. Proceedings of Salinity Management in Agriculture, 25 December 1998,
held at Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, India; 1999. p. 197205.
Boonstra J, Bhutta MN. Groundwater recharge in irrigated agriculture: the theory and
practice of inverse modeling. J Hydrol 1996;174:35774.
Boonstra J, de Ridder NA. Numerical modelling of groundwater basins. The Netherlands:
ILRI Publication 29, Wageningen; 1990.
Boumans JH, van Hoorn JW, Kruseman GP, Tanwar BS. Water table control, reuse and
disposal of drainage water in Haryana. Agric Water Manag 1988;14:53745.
Boyle DB, Gupta HV, Sorooshian S, Koren V, Zhang Z, Smith M. Toward improved
streamow forecasts, value of semi-distributed modeling. Water Resour Res 2001;
37(11):274959.
Brodie RS. Integrating GIS and RDBMS technologies during construction of a regional
groundwater model. Environ Model Softw 1998;14:11928.
Brunner P, Bauer P, Eugster M, Kinzelbach W. Using remote sensing to regionalize local
precipitation recharge rates obtained from the chloride method. J Hydrol 2004;294:
24150.
Brunner P, Hendricks Franssen HJ, Kgotlhang L, Bauer-Gottwein P, Kinzelbach W. How
can remote sensing contribute in groundwater modeling? Hydrogeol J 2007;15(1):
518.
Brunner P, Li HT, Kinzelbach W, Li WP, Dong XG. Extracting phreatic evaporation from
remotely sensed maps of evapotranspiration. Water Resour Res 2008;44:W08428.
Budge TJ, Sharp Jr JM. Modeling the usefulness of spatial correlation analysis on karst sys-
tems. Ground Water 2009;47(3):42737.
Carpenter TM, Georgakakos KP. Intercomparison of lumped versus distributed hydrologic
model ensemble simulations on operational forecast scales. J Hydrol 2006;329:
17485.
Carrea J, Neuman SP. Estimation of aquifer parameters under transient and steady state
conditions. I. Maximum likelihood method incorporating prior information. Water
Resour Res 1986;22(2):20111.
Carrera-Hernandez JJ, Gaskin SJ. The groundwater modeling tool for GRASS (GMTG):
open source groundwater ow modeling. Comput Geosci 2006;32(3):33951.
Chandio AS, Lee TS, Mirjat MS. The extent of waterlogging in the lower Indus Basin (Pakistan)
a modeling study of groundwater levels. J Hydrol 2012;426427:10311.
Cheng JR, Strobl RO, Yeh GT, Lin HC, Choi WH. Modeling of 2D density-dependent ow
and transport in the subsurface. J Hydrol Eng ASCE 1998;3:24857.
Chenini I, Mammou AB. Groundwater recharge study in arid region: an approach using
GIS techniques and numerical modeling. Comput Geosci 2010;36(6):80117.
Choudhury BJ. Synergism of multispectral satellite observations for estimating regional
land surface evaporation. Remote Sens Environ 1994;49:26474.
Chowdary VM, Rao NH, Sarma PBS. GIS-based decision support system for groundwater
assessment in large irrigation project areas. Agric Water Manag 2003;62:22952.
Cirkel DG, Witte J-PM, van der Zee SEATM. Estimating seepage intensities from ground-
water level time series by inverse modelling: a sensitivity analysis on wet meadow
scenarios. J Hydrol 2010;385:13242.
Connell LD. Simple models for subsurface solute transport that combine unsaturated and
saturated zone pathways. J Hydrol 2007;332:36173.
Dai T, Labadie JW. River basin network model for integrated water quantity/quality man-
agement. J Water Resour Plan Manag ASCE 2001;127:295305.
Dams J, Dujardin J, Reggers R, Bashir I, Canters F, Batelaan O. Mapping impervious surface
change from remote sensing for hydrological modeling. J Hydrol 2013;485:8495.
Dar IA, Sankar K, Dar MA. Remote sensing technology and geographic information system
modeling: an integrated approach towards the mapping of groundwater potential
zones in Hardrock terrain, Mamundiyar basin. J Hydrol 2010;394:28595.
Das A, Datta B. Application of optimization techniques in groundwater quantity and qual-
ity management. Sadhana 2001;26(4):293316.
Dawoud M, Darwish M, El-Kady M. GIS-based groundwater management model for
Western Nile Delta. Water Resour Manag 2005;19(5):585604.
de Ridder NA, Erez EOptimum use of water resources, IILRI, The Netherlands, publication
no. 21; 1976. p. 250.
Depaz JM, Delgado JA, Ramos C, Shaffer MJ, Barbarick KK. Use of a new GIS nitrogen index
assessment tool for evaluation of nitrate leaching across a Mediterranean region. J
Hydrol 2009;365:18394.
Din MMN, King IP, Tangi KK. Salinity management model: II applications. J Irrig Drain Eng
ASCE 1987;113:45468.
Duan QY, Sorooshian S, Gupta V. Effective and efcient global optimization for conceptual
rainfallrunoff models. Water Resour Res 1992;28(4):101531.
D'Urso G, Menenti M, Santini A. Regional application of one-dimensional water ow
models for irrigation management. Agric Water Manag 1999;40:291302.
Fayer MJ, Gee GW, Rockhold ML, Freshey MD, Walters TB. Estimating recharge rates for a
groundwater model using a GIS. J Environ Qual 1996;25:5108.
Feddes RA, Kowalik PJ, Zaradny H. Simulation of eld water use and crop yield.
The Netherlands: Wageningen Center for Agric. and Documentation, Wageningen;
1978.
Flug M, Abi-Ghanem GV, Duckstein L. An event based model of recharge from an ephem-
eral stream. Water Resour Res 1980;16(4):68590.
Fogg GE, LaBolle EM. Motivation of synthesis, with an example on groundwater quality
sustainability. Water Resour Res 2006;42:W03S05. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/
2005WR004372.
Freyberg DL. An exercise in ground-water model calibration and prediction. Ground
Water 1988;26:35060.
Frind EO. Seawater intrusion in continuous coastal aquitard systems. Adv Water Resour
1982;5:8997.
Furlong BV, Riley MS, Herbert AW, Ingram JA, Mackay R, Tellam JH. Using regional
groundwater ow models for prediction of regional wellwater quality distributions.
J Hydrol 2011;398:116.
Garcia LA, Foged N, Cardon GE. Development of GIS-based model to estimate relative re-
ductions in crop yield due to salinity and waterlogging. J Irrig Drain Eng ASCE 2006;
132(6):55363.
Garg NK, Ali A. Groundwater management for lower Indus basin. Agric Water Manag
2000;42:27390.
Gates TK, Grismer ME. Irrigation and drainage strategies in salinity affected regions. J Irrig
Drain Eng ASCE 1989;115(2):25580.
Gaur S, Chahar BR, Graillot D. Combined use of groundwater modeling and potential zone
analysis for management of groundwater. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 2011;13:
12739.
Gebreyohannes T, Smedt FD, Walraevens K, Gebresilassie S, Hussien A, Hagos M, et al.
Application of a spatially distributed water balance model for assessing surface
water and groundwater resources in the Geba basin, Tigray, Ethiopia. J Hydrol
2013;499:11023.
Gedeon M, Wemaere I, Marivoet J. Regional groundwater model of north-east Belgium. J
Hydrol 2007;335:1339.
Gleeson T, Alley WM, Allen DM, Sophocleous MA, Zhou Y, Taniguchi M, et al. Towards
sustainable groundwater use: setting long-term goals, backcasting, and managing
adaptively. Ground Water 2012;50(1):1926.
Gogu RC, Carabin G, Hallet V, Peters V, Dassargues A. GIS-based hydrogeological databases
and groundwater modelling. Hydrogeol J 2001;9:55569.
Grayson RB, Moore ID, McMahon TA. Physically based hydrologic modeling: 1. A terrain-
based model for investigative purposes. Water Resour Res 1992;28:263958.
Guganesharajah K, Pavey JF, van Wonderen J, Khasankhanova GM, Lyons DJ, Lloyd BJ.
Simulation of processes involved in soil salinization to guide soil remediation. J Irrig
Drain Eng ASCE 2007;133:1319.
Gupta SK. Leaching of saline soils through rainfall. J Indian Soc Soil Sci 1985;33:12836.
Gupta SK, Pandey RS. A mathematical model for evaluating leaching of saline soils when
saline and fresh water are used in conjunction. Indian J Agric Sci 1983;53:7016.
Gupta VK, Sorooshian S, Yapo PO. Towards improved calibration of hydrologic model:
multiple and noncommensurable measures of information. Water Resour Res 1998;
34:75163.
Han D, Song X, Currell MJ, Cao G, Zhang Y, Kang Y. A survey of groundwater levels and
hydrogeochemistry in irrigated elds in the Karamay Agricultural Development
Area, northwest China: implications for soil and groundwater salinity resulting
from surface water transfer for irrigation. J Hydrol 2011;405:21734.
Hantush MM, Marino MA, Islam MR. Models for leaching of pesticides in soils and
groundwater. J Hydrol 2000;227:6683.
Harou JJ, Pulido-Velazquez M, Rosenberg DE, Medelln-Azuara J, Lund JR, Howitt RE.
Hydro-economic models: concepts, design, applications, and future prospects. J
Hydrol 2009;375:62743.
Hassan AE. Validation of numerical ground water models used to guide decision making.
Ground Water 2004;42:27790.
Havard PL, Prasher SO, Bonnell RB, Madani A. LINKFLOW, a water ow computer model
for water table management: part 2. Model verication. Trans ASAE 1997a;40:
153942.
Havard PL, Prasher SO, Bonnell RB, Madani A. LINKFLOW, a water ow computer model for
water table management: part 3. Model application. Trans ASAE 1997b;40:15437.
Helweig TG, Madramootoo CA, Dodds GT. Modeling nitrate losses in drainage water using
DRAINMOD 5.0. Agric Water Manag 2002;56:15368.
Hendricks Franssen HJ, Brunner P, Makobo P, Kinzelbach W. Equally likely inverse solu-
tions to a groundwater ow problem including pattern information from remote
sensing images. Water Resour Res 2008;44:W01419.
Herzog LB, Larson DR, Abert CC, Wilson DS, Roadcap SG. Hydrostratigraphic modeling of a
complex, glacial-drift aquifer system for importation into MODFLOW. Ground Water
2003;41(1):5765.
Hill BM. Use of a numerical model for management of shallow groundwater levels in the
Yuma, Arizona area. Ground Water 1996;34:397404.
Hinaman KC. Use of a geographic information system to assemble input-data sets for a
nite difference model of ground-water ow. J Am Water Resour Assoc 1993;
29(3):4015.
Hiscock KM, Rivett MO, Davison RM. Sustainable groundwater development. In: Hiscock
KM, Rivett MO, Davison RM, editors. Sustainable groundwater development,
Geological Society. London: Special Publications; 2002. p. 114.
Hoffman GJ, Durnford DS. Drainage design for salinity control. In: Skaggs RW, van
Schilfgaarde J, editors. Agricultural drainage. Agronomy no.: 38. American Society of
Agronomy; 1999. p. 579614.
Hossain S, Hoque MM, Ahmed MU. Application of rainfall-runoff model NAM in the
northwest region of Bangladesh. J Irrig Eng Rural Plan 1994;38:308.
Howard KWF, Maier H. Road de-icing salt as a potential constraint on urban growth in the
Greater Toronto Area, Canada. J Contam Hydrol 2007;91:14670.
Humphreys E, Lewin LG, Khan S, Beecher HG, Lacy JM, Thompson JA, et al. Integration of
approaches to increasing water use efciency in rice-based systems in southeast
Australia. Field Crop Res 2006;97:1933.
 A. Singh / Science of the Total Environment 499 (2014) 414423
Hunt RJ. Ground water modeling applications using the analytic element method. Ground
Water 2006;44(1):515.
Hunt RJ, Anderson MP, Kelson VA. Improving a complex nite-difference ground water
ow model through the use of an analytic element screening model. Ground Water
1998;36:10117.
Ireson A, Makropolos C, Maksimovic C. Water resources modelling under data scarcity:
coupling MIKE BASIN and ASM groundwater model. Water Resour Manag 2006;20:
56790.
Izbicki JA, Stamos CL, Nishikawa T, Martin P. Comparison of groundwater ow model
particle-tracking results and isotopic data in the Mojave River ground-water basin,
southern California, USA. J Hydrol 2004;292:3047.
Jackson TJ. Remote sensing of soil moisture: implications for groundwater recharge.
Hydrogeol J 2002;10(1):4051.
Jhorar RK, Smit AAMFR, Roest CWJ. Assessment of alternative water management options
for irrigated agriculture. Agric Water Manag 2009;96:97581.
Kampf SK, Burges SJ. Parameter estimation for a physics-based distributed hydrologic
model using measured outow uxes and internal moisture states. Water Resour
Res 2007;43(12):W12414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2006WR005605.
Kamra SK, Singh SR, Rao KVGK, van Genuchten MT. A semi-discrete model for water and
solute movement in tile-drained soils. 1. Governing equations and solution. Water
Resour Res 1991a;27:243947.
Kamra SK, Singh SR, Rao KVGK, van Genuchten MT. A semi-discrete model for water and
solute movement in tile-drained soils. 2. Field validation. Water Resour Res 1991b;
27:244956.
Kasahara T, Hill AR. Hyporheic exchange ows induced by constructed rifes and steps in
lowland streams in southern Ontario, Canada. Hydrol Process 2006;20:4287305.
Kashaigili JJ, Mashauri DA, Abdo G. Groundwater management by using mathematical
modeling: case of the Makutupora groundwater basin in dodoma Tanzania. Botsw J
Technol 2003;12(1):1924.
Kelleners TJ, Beekma J, Chaudhry MR. Spatially variable soil hydraulic properties for
simulation of eld scale solute transport in the unsaturated zone. Geoderma 1999;
92:199215.
Kemna A, Vanderborght J, Kulessa B, Vereecken H. Imaging and characterisation of sub-
surface solute transport using electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) and equivalent
transport models. J Hydrol 2002;267:12546.
Khakbaz B, Imam B, Hsu K, Sorooshian S. From lumped to distributed via semi-
distributed: calibration strategies for semi-distributed hydrologic models. J Hydrol
2012;418419:6177.
Khan S. Equivalent cropping area and whole farm water balance approaches to reduce net
recharge to shallow saline groundwater from rice based cropping systems. Paddy
Water Environ 2007;5:14352.
Khouri N. Potential of dry-drainage for controlling soil salinity. Can J Civ Eng 1998;25:
195205.
Kim NW, Chung IM, Won YS, Arnold JG. Development and application of the integrated
SWATMODFLOW model. J Hydrol 2008;356:116.
Kitamura Y, Yano T, Honna T, Yamamoto S, Inosako K. Causes of farmland salinization and
remedial measures in the Aral Sea basinresearch on water management to prevent
secondary salinization in rice-based cropping system in arid land. Agric Water Manag
2006;85:114.
Kite G, Droogers P. Comparing evapotranspiration estimates from satellites, hydrological
models and eld data. J Hydrol 2000;229:318.
Kite GW, Pietroniro A. Remote sensing applications in hydrology. Hydrol Sci 1996;41:
56392.
Kolm KE. Conceptualization and characterization of ground-water systems using
geographic information systems. Eng Geol 1996;42(23):1118.
Konikow LF, Bredehoeft JD. Ground water models cannot be validated. Adv Water Resour
1992;15:7583.
Konikow LF, Kendy E. Groundwater depletion: a global problem. Hydrogeol J 2005;13(1):
31720.
Konukcu F, Gowing JW, Rose DA. Dry drainage: a sustainable solution to waterlogging and
salinity problems in irrigation areas. Agric Water Manag 2006;83:112.
Koren V, Reed S, Smith M, Zhang Z, Seo D-J. Hydrology laboratory research modeling
system (HL-RMS) of the U.S. national weather service. J Hydrol 2004;291(34):
297318.
Krajewski WF, Lakshmi V, Georgakakos KP, Jain SC. A Monte Carlo study of rainfall
sampling effect on a distributed catchment model. Water Resour Res 1991;27(1):
11928.
Kroes JG, van Dam JC, Huygen J, Vervoort RW. User's guide of SWAP version 2.0. Simula-
tion of water ow, solute transport and plant growth in the soilwateratmosphere
plant environment. Technical document 48, Alterra Green World Research,
Wageningen, report 81, Department of Water Resources, Wageningen University
and Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands; 1999. p. 127.
Kumar R, Singh J. Regional water management modeling for decision support in irrigated
agriculture. J Irrig Drain Eng ASCE 2003;129:4329.
Kunkel R, Wendland F. The GROWA98 model for water balance analysis in large river ba-
sinsthe river Elbe case study. J Hydrol 2002;259:15262.
Kupper E, Querner EP, Morabito JA, Menenti M. Using the SIMGRO regional hydrological
model to evaluate salinity control measures in an irrigation area. Agric Water Manag
2002;56:115.
Lamsal K, Paudyal GN, Saeed M. Model for assessing impact of salinity on soil water
availability and crop yield. Agric Water Manag 1999;41:5770.
Leblanc M, Leduc C, Razack M, Lemoalle J, Dagorne D, Mofor L. Application of remote sens-
ing and GIS for groundwater modelling of large semiarid areas: example of the Lake
Chad Basin, Africa. In: Servat E, Najem W, Leduc C, Shakeel A, editors. Hydrology of
Mediterranean and semiarid regions. Wallingford, UK: IAHS Publ. 278, IAHS; 2003.
p. 18692.
421
Leblanc M, Favreau G, Tweed S, Leduc C, Razack M, Mofor L. Remote sensing for ground-
water modelling in large semiarid areas: Lake Chad Basin, Africa. Hydrogeol J 2007;
15:97100.
Lee CH, Cheng RT. On seawater encroachment in coastal aquifers. Water Resour Res 1974;
10:103943.
Lerner DN, Kumar PB. Dening the catchment of a borehole in an unconsolidated valley
aquifer with limited data. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 1991;24:32331.
Li HT, Kinzelbach W, Brunner P, Li WP, Dong XG. Topography representation methods for
improving evaporation simulation in groundwater modelling. J Hydrol 2008;356:
199208.
Li HT, Brunner P, Kinzelbach W, Li WP, Dong XG. Calibration of a groundwater model
using pattern information from remote sensing data. J Hydrol 2009;377:12030.
Mandare AB, Ambast SK, Tyagi NK, Singh J. On-farm water management in saline ground-
water area under scarce canal water supply condition in the Northwest India. Agric
Water Manag 2008;95:51626.
McFarlane DJ, Williamson DR. An overview of water logging and salinity in southwestern
Australia as related to the Ucarro experimental catchment. Agric Water Manag
2002;53:529.
Meijerink AMJ. Remote sensing applications to hydrology: groundwater. Hydrol Sci J
1996;41:54961.
Michael HA, Voss CI. Evaluation of the sustainability of deep groundwater as an arsenic-
safe resource in the Bengal Basin. PNAS 2008;105:85316.
Michaud J, Sorooshian S. Comparison of simple versus complex distributed runoff models
on a mid-sized semiarid watershed. Water Resour Res 1994;30(3):593605.
Mylopoulos N, Mylopoulos Y, Tolikas D, Veranis N. Groundwater modelling and manage-
ment in a complex lake-aquifer system. Water Resour Manag 2007;21(2):46994.
Nathan RJ, Mudgway LB. Estimating salt loads in high water table areas II: regional salt
loads. J Irrig Drain Eng ASCE 1997;123:919.
Neteler M, Mitasova H. Open Source GIS: A GRASS GIS approach. The Kluwer International
Series in Engineering and Computer Science. 2nd ed. Boston, Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers; 2004. p. 424.
Noory H, van der Zee SEATM, Liaghat A-M, Parsinejad M, van Dam JC. Distributed agro-
hydrological modeling with SWAP to improve water and salt management of the
Voshmgir Irrigation and Drainage Network in Northern Iran. Agric Water Manag
2011;98:106270.
Ogden FL, Julien PY. Runoff model sensitivity to radar rainfall resolution. J Hydrol 1994;
158:118.
Oosterbaan RJ. SAHYSMOD (version 1.7a): description of principles, user manual and case
studies. The Netherlands: International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improve-
ment, Wageningen; 2005. p. 140.
Oosterbaan RJ, Abu Senna M. Using SaltMod to predict drainage and salinity in the Nile
Deltas. Annual report, ILRI, Wageningen, The Netherlands; 1989. p. 6374.
Oosterbaan RJ, de Lima P. SaltMod manual. International Institute for Land Reclamation
and Improvement. The Netherlands: Wageningen; 1989.
Oster JD, Wichelns D. Economic and agronomic strategies to achieve sustainable
irrigation. Irrig Sci 2003;22:10720.
Padilla A, Pulido-Bosch A. Study of hydrographs of karst aquifers by means of correlation
and cross-spectral analysis. J Hydrol 1995;168:7389.
Palma HC, Bentley LR. A regional-scale groundwater ow model for the LeonChinandega
aquifer, Nicaragua. Hydrogeol J 2007;15:145772.
Pinder GF, Cooper Jr HH. A numerical technique for calculating the transient position of
the saltwater front. Water Resour Res 1970;6:87580.
Pint CD, Hunt RJ, Anderson MJ. Flowpath delineation and ground water age, Allequash
Basin, Wisconsin. Ground Water 2003;41:895902.
Pisinaras V, Petalas C, Tsihrintzis VA, Zagana E. A groundwater ow model for water re-
sources management in the Ismarida plain, North Greece. Environmental Modeling
and Assessment, 12. Springer; 2007. p. 7589.
Plummer LN, Bexeld LM, Anderholm SK, Sanford WE, Busenberg E. Hydrochemical
tracers in the middle Rio Grande Basin, USA: 1. Conceptualization of groundwater
ow. Hydrogeol J 2004;12:35988.
Poeter E. All models are wrong, how do we know which are useful? Ground Water 2007;
45:3901.
Poeter EP, Hill MC. Inverse models: a necessary next step in ground-water ow modeling.
Ground Water 1997;35:25060.
Querner EP. Description of a regional groundwater ow model SIMGRO and some
applications. Agric Water Manag 1988;14:20918.
Querner EP. Description and application of the combined surface and groundwater ow
model MOGROW. J Hydrol 1997;192:15888.
Querner EP, Mora'bito JA, Manzanera M, Pazos J, Ciancaglini N, Menenti M. The use of hy-
drological models in the irrigated areas of Mendoza. Argentina. Agric Water Manag
1997;35:1128.
Querner EP, Jansen PC, van den Akker JJH, Kwakernaak C. Analysing water level strategies
to reduce soil subsidence in Dutch peat meadows. J Hydrol 2012;446447:5969.
Qureshi AS, Turral H, Masih I. Strategies for the management of conjunctive use of surface
water and groundwater resources in semi-arid areas: a case study from Pakistan. Re-
search report 86, International Water Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka. In:
van Dam JC, Malik RS, editors. Water productivity of irrigated crops in Sirsa district,
India: integration of remote sensing, crop and soil models and geographical informa-
tion Systems. WATPRO nal report; 2003. [173 pp.].
Raes D. UPFLOW-water movement in a soil prole from a shallow water table to the top-
soil, reference manual version 3.2. Belgium: Department of Earth and Environmental
Sciences, K.U.Leuven University; 2009.
Raes D, Deproost P. Model to assess water movement from a shallow water table to the
root zone. Agric Water Manag 2003;62:7991.
Ramasesha CS. Groundwater simulation for assessing waterlogged areas in northwest
India. In: Gupta, et al, editors. Salinity Management in Agriculture, Proceedings of
422 A. Singh / Science of the Total Environment 499 (2014) 414423
the National Conference. Karnal, India: CSSRI; 1998. p. 17581. [December 25, 1998
held at].
Rao VV, Sarma PBS. Regional groundwater modelling using nite element method: a case
study. Proceedings of Session III, International Conference on Hydrology and Water
Resources. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1993.
Rao KVGK, Ramesh G, Chauhan HS, Oosterbaan RJ. Salt and water balance studies to eval-
uate remedial measures for waterlogged saline irrigated soils. Proc. 5th Int. Drainage
Workshop, Lahore, Pakistan ICID & CHD II; 1992. p. 26777.
Rao KVGK, Oosterbaan RJ, Boonstra J. Regional agro-hydro-salinity model. In: Rao, et al,
editors. Reclamation and management of waterlogged saline soils, national seminar
proceedings. Hisar, India: CSSRI, Karnal and CCSHAU; 1995. p. 30311. [April 58,
1994].
Reed S, Koren V, Smith M, Zhang Z, Moreda F, Seo DJ. Overall distributed model intercom-
parison project results. J Hydrol 2004;298(14):2760.
Refsgaard JS, Knudsen J. Operational validation and intercomparison of different types of
hydrological models. Water Resour Res 1996;32(7):2189202.
Refsgaard JC, Thorsen M, Jensen JB, Kleeschulte S, Hansen S. Large scale modelling of
groundwater contamination from nitrate leaching. J Hydrol 1999;221:11740.
Ritzema HP, Satyanarayana TV, Raman S, Boonstra J. Subsurface drainage to combat
waterlogging and salinity in irrigated lands in India: lessons learned in farmers' elds.
Agric Water Manag 2008;95:17989.
Roaza H, Roaza RM, Jeffry RW. Integrating geographic information systems in groundwa-
ter applications using numerical modelling techniques. Water Resour Bull 1993;
29(4):84760.
Rodell M, Velicogna I, Famiglietti JS. Satellite based estimates of groundwater depletion in
India. Nature 2009;460:9991002.
Rubin H. On the application of the boundary layer approximation for simulation of
density stratied ows in aquifers. Adv Water Resour 1983;6:96105.
Sakthivadivel R, Thiruvengadachari S, Amerasinghe U, Bastiaanssen WGM, Molden D. Per-
formance evaluation of the Bhakra irrigation system, India, using remote sensing and
GIS techniques. Research report no. 28. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water
Management Institute; 1999. p. 32.
Sanford WE, Pope JP. Current challenges using models to forecast seawater intrusion: les-
sons from the Eastern Shore of Virginia, USA. Hydrogeol J 2010;18:7393.
Sanford WE, Plummer LN, McAda DP, Bexeld LM, Anderholm SK. Hydrochemical tracers
in the middle Rio Grande Basin, USA: 2. Calibration of a groundwater-ow model.
Hydrogeol J 2004;12:389407.
Sarangi A, Singh M, Bhattacharya AK, Singh AK. Subsurface drainage performance study
using SaltMod and ANN models. Agric Water Manag 2006;84:2408.
Sauerwein H. Numerical calculations of multidimensional and unsteady ows by the
method of characteristics. J Comput Phys 1967;1:40632.
Schmid T, Koch M, Gumuzzio J. Multisensor approach to determine changes of wetland
characteristics in semiarid environments (central Spain). IEEE Trans Geosci Remote
Sens 2005;43(11):251625.
Segol G, Pinder GF. Transient simulation of saltwater intrusion in Florida. Water Resour
Res 1976;12:6570.
Segol G, Pinder GF, Gray WG. A Glarkin nite element technique for calculating the tran-
sient position of seawater front. Water Resour Res 1975;11:3437.
Shah T. The groundwater economy of South Asia: an assessment of size, signicance and
socio-ecological impacts. In: Giordano M, Villholth KG, editors. The agricultural
groundwater revolution: opportunities and threats to development. Oxfordshire:
CABI; 2007. p. 736.
Shah SMS, O'Connell PE, Hosking JRM. Modelling the effects of spatial variability in rainfall
on catchment response, 2, experiments with distributed and lumped models. J
Hydrol 1996;175:89111.
Shamir V, Dagan G. Motion of the seawater interface in coastal aquifers: a numerical
solution. Water Resour Res 1971;7:64457.
Sharma BR. Regional salt and water balance modelling for sustainable irrigated agricul-
ture. Agric Water Manag 1999;40:12934.
Sherif M, Kacimov A, Javadi A, Ebraheem AZ. Modeling groundwater ow and seawater
intrusion in the coastal aquifer of Wadi Ham, UAE. Water Resour Manag 2012;26:
75174.
Simunek J, Suarez DL, Sejna M. UNSATCHEM software package for simulating the one-
dimensional variably saturated water ow, heat transport, carbon dioxide production
and transport, and multi component solute transport with major ion equilibrium and
kinetic chemistry, Version 2. Research report no. 141, U.S. Salinity Laboratory, ARS,
USDA, Riverside, California 186; 1996.
Simunek J, Sejna M, Van Genuchten MTh. HYDRUS 1D-software package for simulating
the one-dimensional movement of water, heat and multiple solutes in variable
saturated-media. Colorado, USA: International Ground Water Modeling Center, Colo-
rado School of Mines, Golden; 1998. p. 162.
Simunek J, Jarvis NC, van Genuchten MT, Gardenas A. Review and comparison of models
for describing non-equilibrium and preferential ow and transport in the vadose
zone. J Hydrol 2003;272:1435.
Sinai G, Jain PK. Evaluation of DRAINMOD for predicting water table heights in irrigated
elds at the Jordan Valley. Agric Water Manag 2006;79:13759.
Singh R. Simulations on direct and cyclic use of saline waters for sustaining cotton-
wheat in a semi-arid area of northwest India. Agric Water Manag 2004;66:
15362.
Singh A. Decision support for on-farm water management and long-term agricultural
sustainability in a semi-arid region of India. J Hydrol 2010;391(12):6376.
Singh A. Estimating long-term regional groundwater recharge for the evaluation of poten-
tial solution alternatives to waterlogging and salinisation. J Hydrol 2011;406(34):
24555.
Singh A. Optimal allocation of resources for the maximization of net agricultural return. J
Irrig Drain Eng ASCE 2012a;138(9):8306.
Singh A. Development and application of a watertable model for the assessment of
waterlogging in irrigated semi-arid regions. Water Resour Manag 2012b;26(15):
443548.
Singh A. Validation of SaltMod for a semi-arid part of northwest India and some options
for control of waterlogging. Agric Water Manag 2012c;115:194202.
Singh A. Groundwater modelling for the assessment of water management alternatives. J
Hydrol 2013;481:2209.
Singh J, Kumar R. Drainage disposal and reuse simulation in canal irrigated areas in
Haryana. Irrig Drain Syst 1998;12:122.
Singh A, Panda SN. Effect of saline irrigation water on mustard (Brassica Juncea) crop
yield and soil salinity in a semi-arid area of North India. Exp Agric 2012a;48(1):
99110.
Singh A, Panda SN. Integrated salt and water balance modelling for the management of
waterlogging and salinization. 1: validation of SAHYSMOD. J Irrig Drain Eng ASCE
2012b;138(11):95563.
Singh A, Panda SN. Integrated salt and water balance modelling for the management of
waterlogging and salinization. 2: application of SAHYSMOD. J Irrig Drain Eng ASCE
2012c;138(11):96471.
Singh A, Panda SN. Optimization and simulation modelling for managing the problems of
water resources. Water Resour Manag 2013;27(9):342131.
Singh VP, Woolhiser DA. Mathematical modeling of watershed hydrology. J Hydrol Eng
2002;7(4):27092.
Singh R, Sondhi SK, Singh J, Kumar R. A groundwater model for simulating the rise of
water table under irrigated conditions. J Hydrol 1984;71:16579.
Singh M, Bhattacharya AK, Nair TVR, Singh AK. Nitrogen losses through subsurface
drainage efuent in coastal rice elds from India. Agric Water Manag 2002a;52:
24960.
Singh M, Bhattacharya AK, Singh AK, Singh A. Application of SaltMod in coastal clay soils
in India. Irrig Drain Syst 2002b;16:21331.
Singh R, Helmers MJ, Zhiming Q. Calibration and validation of DRAINMOD to design sub-
surface drainage systems for Iowa's tile landscapes. Agric Water Manag 2006a;85:
221332.
Singh R, Kroes G, van Dam JC, Feddes RA. Distributed ecohydrological modelling to
evaluate the performance of irrigation systems in Sirsa district. India I: current
water management and its productivity. J Hydrol 2006b;329:692713.
Singh A, Krause P, Panda SN, Flugel WA. Rising water table: a threat to sustainable agricul-
ture in an irrigated semi-arid region of Haryana, India. Agric Water Manag 2010;
97(10):144351.
Singh A, Panda SN, Flugel W-A, Krause P. Waterlogging and farmland salinisation: caused
and remedial measures in an irrigated semi-arid region of India. Irrig Drain 2012;
61(3):35765.
Skaggs RW. Field evaluation of a water management simulation model. Trans ASAE 1982;
25:66674.
Smets SMP, Kuper M, van Dam JC, Feddes RA, Hamdy A. Modelling the effect of irrigation
on salinity and crop transpiration for current irrigation practices in Pakistan's Punjab.
CIHEAM International Conference, Valenzano, Bari, Italy, 2226 September 1997;
1997. p. 22953.
Smith MB, Seo D-J, Koren VI, Reed SM, Zhang Z, Duan Q, et al. The distributed model in-
tercomparison project (DMIP): motivation and experiment design. J Hydrol 2004;
298(14):426.
Sondhi SK, Rao NH, Sarma PBS. Assessment of groundwater potential for conjunctive
water use in a large irrigation project in India. J Hydrol 1989;107:28395.
Sondhi SK, Kaushal MP, Panesar PS. Computer simulation model for groundwater basins.
Bull. PAU/1996/T/609/E. New Delhi: PAU, Ludhiana and ICAR; 1996. p. 55.
Sophocleous M. Review: groundwater management practices, challenges, and innova-
tions in the High Plains aquifer, USA-lessons and recommended actions. Hydrogeol
J 2010;18(3):55975.
Sophocleous M, Perkins SP. Methodology and application of combined watershed and
ground-water models in Kansas. J Hydrol 2000;236:185201.
Sophocleous MA, Koelliker JK, Govindaraju RS, Birdie T, Ramireddygari SR, Perkins SP.
Integrated numerical modeling for basin-wide water management: the case of the
Rattlesnake Creek basin in south-central Kansas. J Hydrol 1999;214:17996.
Sorooshian S, Gupta VK. Model calibration. In: Singh VP, editor. Computer models of
watershed hydrology. Colorado 80126-0026, USA: Water Resources Publication,
Highlands Ranch; 1995. p. 2368.
Srinivasulu A. Salt and water balance modeling of the data from Konanki pilot area.
Deputation report on collaborative research carried out at ILRI, Wageningen.
New Delhi, India: The Netherlands submitted to the Government of India;
2002. p. 23.
Srinivasulu A, Rao CS, Lakshmi GV, Satyanarayana TV, Boonstra J. Model studies on salt
and water balances at Konanki pilot area, Andhra Pradesh, India. Irrig Drain Syst
2004;18:117.
Srinivasulu A, Satyanarayana TV, Hemakumar HV. Subsurface drainage in a pilot area in
Nagarjuna Sagar right canal command, India. Irrig Drain Syst 2005;19:6170.
Stisen S, McCabe MF, Refsgaard JC, Lerer S, Butts MB. Model parameter analysis using re-
motely sensed pattern information in a multi-constraint framework. J Hydrol 2011;
409:33749.
Storey RG, Howard KWF, Williams DD. Factors controlling rife-scale hyporheic exchange
ows and their seasonal changes in a gaining stream: a three-dimensional ground-
water ow model. Water Resour Res 2003;39:1034. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/
2002WR001367.
Ting CS, Zhou Y, de Vries JJ, Simmers I. Development of a preliminary groundwater ow
model for water resources management in the Pingtung Plain, Taiwan. Ground
Water 1998;36(1):2036.
Tracy FT. l-D, 2-D, and 3-D analytical solutions of unsaturated ow in groundwater. J
Hydrol 1995;170:199214.
 A. Singh / Science of the Total Environment 499 (2014) 414423
Troutman BM. Runoff prediction errors and bias in parameter estimation induced by
spatial variability of precipitation. Water Resour Res 1983;19(3):791810.
Trowsdale SA, Lerner DN. Implications of ow patterns in the sandstone aquifer beneath
the mature conurbation of Nottingham (UK) for source protection. Q J Eng Geol
Hydrogeol 2003;36:197206.
Trowsdale SA, Lerner DN. A modelling approach to determine the origin of urban ground
water. J Contam Hydrol 2007;91:17183.
Tsihrintzis VA, Hamid R, Fuentes HR. Use of geographic information systems (GIS) in
water resources: a review. Water Resour Manag 1996;10:2517.
Tuteja NK, Beale G, Dawes W, Vaze J, Murphy B, Barnett P, et al. Predicting the effects of
land use change on water and salt balance a case study of a catchment affected
by dryland salinity in NSW, Australia. J Hydrol 2003;283:6790.
Tyagi NK. Optimal water management strategies for salinity control. J Irrig Drain Eng
ASCE 1986;112:817.
Tyagi NK, Tyagi KC, Pillai NN, Willardson LS. Decision support for irrigation system im-
provement in saline environment. Agric Water Manag 1993;23:285301.
Tyson HN, Weber EM. Use of electronic computer in the simulation of dynamic behaviour
of groundwater basin. Proc. ASCE Water Resources Conference, Milwaukee, Wisconsin,
USA; 1964.
United Nations. World Population Prospects: 2012 Revision Population Database online.
http://www.un.org/esa/population/unpop.htm, 2012. [accessed on 19th July 2013].
Upadhyaya A, Chauhan HS. Water table rise in sloping aquifer due to canal seepage and
constant recharge. J Irrig Drain Eng ASCE 2002;128:1607.
Water productivity of irrigated crops in Sirsa district, India: integration of remote sensing,
crop and soil models and geographical information systems. In: van Dam JC, Malik RS,
editors. WATPRO nal report; 2003. [173 pp].
van Dam JC, Huygen J, Wesseling JG, Feddes RA, Kabat P, van Walsum PEV, et al. Theory of
SWAP version 2.0. Simulation of water ow, solute transport and plant growth in the
soilwateratmosphereplant environment. Report 71, sub department of Water
Resources, Wageningen University, Technical document 45, Alterra Green World
Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands; 1997. p. 167.
van Dam JC, Singh R, Bessembinder JJE, Leffelaar PA, Bastiaanssen WGM, Jhorar RK, et al.
Assessing options to increase water productivity in irrigated river basins using
remote sensing and modeling tools. Int J Water Resour Dev 2006;22:11533.
van Walsum PEV, Veldhuizen AA. Integration of models using shared state variables: Im-
plementation in the regional hydrologic modelling system SIMGRO. J Hydrol 2011;
409(12):36370.
Vanderborght J, Kasteel R, Herbst M, Javaux M, Thiery D, Vanclooster M, et al. A set of an-
alytical benchmarks to test numerical models of ow and transport in soils. Vadose
Zone J 2005;4:20621.
Vanegas Chacon EA. Using SaltMod to predict desalinization in the Leziria Grande Polder,
Portugal [M.Sc. Thesis] The Netherlands: Wageningen Agricultural University; 1993.
p. 1174.
Varni M, Carrera J. Simulation of groundwater age distributions. Water Resour Res 1998;
34:327181.
Vermulst JAPH, De Lange WJ. An analytic-based approach for coupling models for unsat-
urated and saturated groundwater ow at different scales. J Hydrol 1999;226:
26273.
Verruijit A. Solution of transient groundwater ow problems by the nite dement meth-
od. Water Resour Res 1972;8:7257.
423
Voss CI. SUTRA. A nite element simulation model for saturatedunsaturated uid
density dependent groundwater ow with energy transport or chemically reactive
single species transport. US Geol Surv Water Res Investig 1984:409.
Wang HF, Anderson MP. Introduction to groundwater modeling: nite difference and
nite element methods. New York: W.H. Freeman & Co; 1982. p. 237.
Wang Y, Xiao D, Li Y, Li X. Soil salinity evolution and its relationship with dynamics of
groundwater in the oasis of inland river basins: case study from the Fubei region of
Xinjiang Province, China. Environ Monit Assess 2008;140:291302.
Weissmann GS, Zhang Y, LaBolle EM, Fogg GE. Dispersion of ground water age in an allu-
vial aquifer system. Water Resour Res 2002;38(10):1198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/
2001WR000907.
Werner AD, Bakker M, Post VEA, Vandenbohede A, Lu C, Ataie-Ashtiani B, et al. Seawater
intrusion processes, investigation and management: recent advances and future chal-
lenges. Adv Water Resour 2013;51:326.
Williams WD. Salinization of rivers and streams: an important environmental hazard.
Ambio 1987;16:1805.
Wilson CB, Valdes JB, Rodriquez-Iturbe I. On the inuence of the spatial distribution of
rainfall on storm runoff. Water Resour Res 1979;15(2):3218.
Wondzell SM, LaNier J, Haggerty R. Evaluation of alternative groundwater ow models for
simulating hyporheic exchange in a small mountain stream. J Hydrol 2009;364(12):
14251.
Workman SR, Skaggs RW. Comparison of two drainage simulation models using eld
data. Trans ASAE 1989;32:19338.
Wu JC, Hu BX, Zhang DX, Shirley C. A three-dimensional numerical method of moments
for groundwater ow and solute transport in a nonstationary conductivity eld.
Adv Water Resour 2003;26(11):114969.
Xu X, Huang G, Qu Z, Pereira LS. Using MODFLOW and GIS to assess changes in ground-
water dynamics in response to water saving measures in irrigation districts of the
upper Yellow River basin. Water Resour Manag 2011;25(8):203559.
Xu X, Huang G, Zhan H, Qu Z, Huang Q. Integration of SWAP and MODFLOW-2000 for
modeling groundwater dynamics in shallow water table areas. J Hydrol 2012;
412413:17081.
Yang C-C, Chang L-C, Chen C-S, Yeh M-S. Multi-objective planning for conjunctive use of
surface and subsurface water using genetic algorithm and dynamics programming.
Water Resour Manag 2009a;23:41737.
Yang ZP, Lu WX, Long YQ, Li P. Application and comparison of two prediction models for
groundwater levels: a case study in Western Jilin Province, China. J Arid Environ
2009b;73(45):48792.
Zhang ZY, Koren V, Smith M, Reed S, Wang D. Use of next generation weather radar data
and basin disaggregation to improve continuous hydrograph simulations. J Hydrol
Eng 2004;9(2):10315.
Zhang L, Potter N, Hickel K, Zhang Y, Shao Q. Water balance modeling over variable time
scales based on the Budyko framework model development and testing. J Hydrol
2008;360:11731.
Zhao X, Fritzel TLB, Quinodoz HAM, Bethke CM, Torgersen T. Controls on the distribution and
isotopic composition of helium in deep ground-water ows. Geology 1998;26:2914.
Zhu Y, Shi L, Yang J, Wu J, Mao D. Coupling methodology and application of a fully inte-
grated model for contaminant transport in the subsurface system. J Hydrol 2013;
501:5672.