Journal of African Earth Sciences 154 (2019) 59–69

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of African Earth Sciences

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

Hydrogeological characterization and aquifer recharge mapping for T

groundwater resources management using multicriteria analysis and
numerical modeling: A case study from Tunisia
Ismail Chenini∗, Mohamed Haythem Msaddek, Mahmoud Dlala
Department of Geology, Faculty of Mathematical, Physical and Natural Sciences of Tunis, Tunis El Manar University, El Manar, 2092, Tunisia

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In hydrogeological modeling, the groundwater flow and the reservoir structure are key factors. The evaluation of
Aquifer recharge the aquifer system functioning and the water availability are the main issues in water resource management. In
Groundwater this study, a groundwater flow model and Geographic Information System tools were used to manage water
Numerical simulation model resources in arid area. In this study, multicriteria approach using a weighted-rating process was adopted to
Water resource
establish a map showing areas suitable for groundwater recharge. The high rechargeability index covers 45% of
Tunisia
the total shallow aquifer extension and the medium index covers only 29%. Recharge rates are introduced to the
established model using the software MODFLOW. The impact of the groundwater recharge is then evaluated by
hydraulic heads simulation and water budget analysis. The model exploitation illustrates the impact of the water
recharge on the hydraulic heads. In the first scenario, the increase of the exploitation of 20% decreases the
hydraulic heads. In the second scenario, with a constant exploitation and precipitation, the impact of a recharge
dam increases the piezometric levels. Results are helpful to manage water resources and to help decision makers
and planner.

1. Introduction
The groundwater recharge is defined as the water that infiltrates
naturally through the vadose zone to reach the aquifer (Scanlon et al.,
2002; Chenini et al., 2010; Chenini and Kouzana, 2016). This natural
process maintains the aquifer system equilibrium. The groundwater
recharge susceptibility mapping is the first step in the water resource
management policy in Nebraska (Ma and Spalding, 1997), in Oman
(Shammas and Thunvik, 2009), in Taiwan (Huang et al., 2013) and in
Morocco (El Mekki and Laftouhi, 2016). The identification of the sui-
table structures and management of recharging basins increases the
amount of infiltrated water in the aquifer (Başağaoğlu and Mariňo,
1999; Boronina et al., 2003). The geological structures, the ground-
water flow, and the aquifer boundary conditions are key factors in
groundwater resource management (Boronina et al., 2003; Nolan et al.,
2007; Dogrul et al., 2016).
Water resource management and groundwater recharge becomes a
field of interest in hydrogeology research (De Vries and Simmers, 2002;
Brini and Zammouri, 2016; Agarwal and Garg, 2016; Cao et al., 2016;
Eshtawi et al., 2016; Coelho et al., 2017; Moeck et al., 2017). The
technical evolutions in computer science and numerical modeling
affects the development of tools and software (Gaganis and Smith,
2001; Foglia et al., 2007; El Alfy, 2014; Singh, 2014; Doglioni and
Simeone, 2016; Ehtiat et al., 2016; Lafare et al., 2017; Maina et al.,
2017; Sahoo and Jha, 2017). Numerical modeling and Geographic In-
formation System improve groundwater management and modeling
(Sherif et al., 2012; Selvam et al., 2016). In numerical modeling, the
hydrogeological system is treated as a structure including several hy-
drodynamic processes that influenced the interactions between the
aquifer system parameters (Foglia et al., 2007; Manghi et al., 2012;
Ojha et al., 2013; Pisinaras et al., 2013; Jovanovic et al., 2017). The
aquifer parameters include the aquifer extension, the lithology, the
aquifer geometry hydraulic heads and groundwater flow direction.
The groundwater recharge is a process that meets water demand by
the aquifer resource renewal. Determining the suitable zone of the re-
charge needs a lot of parameters to understand the hydrogeological
functioning of the aquifer. Many approaches are available to map
groundwater recharge zone. It is important for water resource man-
agement strategies to map the groundwater recharge zone and to va-
lidate the impact of the aquifer recharge using numerical modeling.
This requires hydrogeological characterization of the aquifer. The ap-
proach adopted in this paper will help decision-makers and support

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ismail.chenini@fst.utm.tn (I. Chenini).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2019.02.031
Received 28 October 2018; Received in revised form 13 February 2019; Accepted 21 February 2019
Available online 20 March 2019
1464-343X/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
I. Chenini, et al. Journal of African Earth Sciences 154 (2019) 59–69

Fig. 1. Location of Sbeitla watershed with simplified geological map (1: Plio-Quaternary - 2: Miocene - 3: Oligocène - 4: Eocene - 5: Late Cretaceous - 6: Early
Cretaceous - 7: Fault - 8: City; 9 watershed limit).

water resource management.
In this study, the hydrogeological characterization of the phreatic
aquifer is established to assess the aquifer functioning. The ground-
water recharge susceptibility was mapped using GIS tools and a
weighted-rating multicriteria approach. The hydrogeological modeling
is adopted to validate the rechargeability maps and to discuss the
aquifer behavior under different conditions for a better water resource
management policy. This paper presents the utility of GIS tools in hy-
drogeological mapping and the use of the hydrogeological modeling to
validate the groundwater recharge map. The goal is to assess a policy

60
I. Chenini, et al.
Fig. 2. Structural cross section of Sbeitla synclinal basin (modified after Dassi et al., 2005).
for a water resource management.
2. Study area
Located in central Tunisia, Sbeitla basin watershed covers 590 km2
(Fig. 1). Sbeitla catchment is limited by hills with lithological outcrops
from Cretaceous to Quaternary. The lithology and the structures of the
watershed are given in Fig. 1. About the surface water flow, the most
important rivers are Oued Er Rmal, Oued Ech Cheria and Oued Melah.
Many affluent of rivers are located in the surrounding hills. The general
surface water flow direction is from north to south.
The hydrogeological system of Sbeitla catchment is formed by two
aquifer levels: (1) the phreatic aquifer made up by Mio-Quaternary
deposits and (2) the deep aquifer defined essentially by upper cretac-
eous limestone. For the phreatic aquifer, the reservoir is made up by
sand and conglomerates (Fig. 2). The substratum is defined by marl and
clay deposits. A cross section oriented NW-SE demonstrates the aquifer
geometry of the Sbeitla bain (Fig. 2)
The specificity of this example is that the watershed limit does not
overlap with the hydrogeological extension of the phreatic aquifer
(Fig. 3). As demonstrated in Fig. 3, the sbeitla phreatic aquifer exten-
sion is different from the watershed limit. The geometry of the aquifer
and his extension are mapped based on the geological map. In the
numerical model we have consider the aquifer extension as a limit
because the aquifer doesn't cover all the watershed area.
3. Methodology
3.1. Data acquisition and processing
3.1.1. Outcrops lithology
Outcrops lithology in the phreatic aquifer extension (Fig. 4) was
prepared using available geological maps and from field observations
(Kadri et al., 1998; Dassi et al., 2005). The Miocene formation is the
most dominant outcrops. It is a heterogeneous formation subdivided
into different units: the Upper Cretaceous and Miocene outcrops. These
lithological units are mixed and made up of gravels and sandstone with
a heterogeneous granulometry. Upper Cretaceous formations are frac-
tured at different scales. The hydrostratigraphic analysis of lithological
formations and the interpretation of data from wells reveal that the
basin of Sbeitla is composed mainly of three hydrogeological units,
namely limestone fissured formation and tow porous units. These units
are separated by a clayey layer with a thickness from 30 m to 100m
(Fig. 2).
3.1.2. Drainage density
The drainage density map is established based on the topographic
map of the study basin. The kriging method was used to generate the
drainage density classes (Fig. 4).
61
Journal of African Earth Sciences 154 (2019) 59–69
3.1.3. Slope
The Digital Elevation Model of the study area was established using
SRTM data. The slope angle was calculated and integrated in a map
(Fig. 4). The groundwater recharge process is significant in low slope
zones.
3.1.4. Land cover
Data used to establish the land cover classification were extracted
from Landsat Thematic Mapper. Automated classification of land cover
was reached. This map was classified into main land cover categories
(Fig. 4).
3.1.5. Groundwater flow
In order to understand the hydrogeologic aspect of the phreatic
aquifer in Sbeitla Basin, we proceeded by the piezometric map ela-
boration and interpretations. The underground structure explains
aquifers dynamics. The cross-section was used to validate the ground-
water low directions and to demonstrate faults effect on the ground-
water percolation and recharge (Fig. 2). According to the piezometric
map (Fig. 4), the phreatic aquifer general flow occurs from north-west
to the south-east toward drainage axes constituted by major water-
courses. The interpretation of the piezometric map gives an idea about
the aquifer hydrodynamics and the groundwater flow direction.
3.2. Method
The hydrodynamic characterization aims to the aquifer con-
ceptualization based on the structural features and the boundary con-
ditions. The hydrogeological characteristics of reservoirs were gath-
ered. Pumping tests are used to delineate hydraulic characteristics of
aquifers. Piezometric map interpretations identify aquifer boundary
conditions such as groundwater flow direction and recharge or barrier
boundaries.
The integration of thematic layers in a Geobased hydrogeological
system is the first step of the approach. Several parameters control the
groundwater recharge process. For each hydrogeological parameter, a
map was established. To establish the groundwater recharge suscept-
ibility map, the following parameters are used in this study are (1) li-
thology of the outcrops, (2) drainage density, (3) slope, (4) land cover,
and (5) groundwater flow (piezometry). Using standard data acquisi-
tion, a map was established for each parameter. In the weighted-rating
approach, a weight (w) from 1 to 5 was associated to each factor based
on the influence of the parameter on the recharge process. The
Lithology of the outcrops (L) controls the infiltration. The weight 4 is
associated to this parameter. The Drainage density (D) influences the
aquifer recharge. The weight 3 is associated to this parameter. The
infiltration rate is important in zones with low Slope (S). We associate
the weight 3 to this parameter. The aquifer recharge is modified by the
land Cover (C). The land cover variability is an important parameter
with a weight 3. Piezometric maps (P) demonstrate the hydraulic heads
I. Chenini, et al. Journal of African Earth Sciences 154 (2019) 59–69

Fig. 3. Phreatic aquifer extension and Sbeitla watershed delineation.

variability. The interpretation of this map shows the groundwater flow 4. Results
directions and recharge zone. The weight 5 is associated to this factor
because it is the most important factor that defines zones with high 4.1. Groundwater recharge susceptibility index
rechargeability index. Each map was categorized in classes. For the five
parameters, a rating value (r) between 1 and 10 was assigned to each In order to map areas suitable for artificial recharge of groundwater,
class. A linear equation was used to evaluate the Groundwater a GIS-based model was specifically developed for integrating and ana-
Rechargeablity index (GR). lyzing different thematic maps. To evaluate the groundwater recharge
susceptibility index, a rate between 1 and 10 was assigned to each class
GR = LwLr + DwDr + SwSr + CwCr + PwPs (Table 1). The rate assigned to each class is low if the infiltration pro-
cess is not allowed. This rate is high if the infiltration is important in a
Where L, D, S, C and P are the considered parameters; w is the para-
parameter class. The final groundwater recharge susceptibility index
meter's weight and r is the parameter's class rating. The grid layers
map is generated (Fig. 6). Table 2 gives the groundwater recharge-
extension was used to evaluate the groundwater rechargeability index.
ability index. The high rechargeability index is located in the central
All generated maps are then superposed to establish the final ground-
part of the Sbeitla basin and covers 45% of the total phreatic aquifer
water rechargeability indexes map. Then, in the second stage, the hy-
extension. The medium index is from 72 to 108 and covers 29% of the
drogeological modeling was performed to simulate the impact of the
aquifer surface. The low index is located in the north-east and north-
groundwater recharge on the hydraulic heads.
ouest sides. The recharge susceptibility index is low and this area is not
In this paper, a concise methodology for groundwater management
suitable for the aquifer recharge.
is to integrate groundwater modeling with the Geographic Information
The class of high rechageability index is situated in a low slope area
Systems (GIS) to simulate the impact of the groundwater recharge on
with sand and conglomerate outcrops lithology. In this area the land
the hydraulic heads. The recharge variability is then discussed taking
cover is almost agricultural zones and the drainage density is low
into account the exploitation and infiltration rate. The following flow-
(< 1 m/Km2).
chart summarizes the steps of the adopted methodology (Fig. 5).
The effect of the groundwater flow on the recharge process is ex-
As an application of the proposed methodology, the phreatic aquifer
plored. Zones with high and medium rechargeability indexes are lo-
of Sbeitla basin is presented. A map showing the groundwater re-
cated in the recharge area of the phreatic aquifer mapped using the
chargability index of the phreatic aquifer is established. To demonstrate
piezometric map (Fig. 4).
the impact of the exploitation and the infiltration rate on the hydraulic
To validate the groundwater rechargeability index map, the nu-
heads, a hydrogeological model was created. Before the model ex-
merical model using the code Modflow is used. The modeling process is
ploitation, a calibration process and a model performance analysis was
used to assess the impact of the recharge process and to discuss the
performed. Two scenarios are described and compared to discuss the
phreatic aquifer behavior under different conditions.
impact of the exploitation and the infiltration on the aquifer hydraulic
heads.

62
I. Chenini, et al. Journal of African Earth Sciences 154 (2019) 59–69

Fig. 4. Thematic maps used for the groundwater recharge susceptibility mapping.

4.2. Groundwater flow modeling
The Sbeitla phreatic aquifer was firstly discretized unsing the code
Modflow (Chiang and Kinzelbach, 2001) with a regular grid
(500 m × 500 m). Fig. 7 shows the grid and the location of different
boundary conditions.
The boundary conditions of the studied aquifer are presented in
Fig. 7: (1) specified heads: this boundary condition characterized the
recharge zone and the outlets of the aquifer where potentials are known
and the flow needs to be evaluated. Head is defined as a function of
space and time; (2) specified flux: it characterized zones with direct
infiltration, pumping or natural aquifer recharge; and (3) Head

63
I. Chenini, et al.
Fig. 5. Main steps of the adopted methodology.
dependent flux such as drain and spring. In Sbeitla phreatic aquifer, the
boundary conditions are of 4 types; (1) direct alimentation from rain-
fall; (2) aquifer recharge from precipitation along water courses, (3)
water extraction and exploitation in wells, and (4) springs (drains).
According to piezometric map of the study area (Fig. 4), ground-
water flows from North Eastern part of the aquifer to the South Western
side. Springers are located along Cherai water course. Springs were
64
Journal of African Earth Sciences 154 (2019) 59–69
integrated into the model with the Drain Package of Modflow.
The amount of pumped water from the aquifer is introduced to the
model using the exploitation data related to the considered hydro-
logical year.
The annual rainfall from 2 meteorological stations was interpolated
during 10 years of observations from 2004 to 2014. The average of total
rainfall was 2.5 × 106 m3. The Groundwater balance was evaluated and
I. Chenini, et al. Journal of African Earth Sciences 154 (2019) 59–69

Table 1
Rate of classes defined for parameter used in the groundwater rechargeability index evaluation.
Outcrops lithology Drainage density (m/km2) Slope (%) Land cover Piezometry (hydraulic heads classes en (m))

Classes Rate Classes Rate Classes Rate Classes Rate Classes Rate

Sands and conglomerates 8 0–1 3 0–5 8 Bare land 8 > 595 1

Sandstone 7 1–2 5 5–10 6 Urban zone 5 590–595 2
Clay and gypsium 1 2–3 6 10–15 4 vegetation 4 585–590 7
Clays and marls 1 3–4 7 15–25 3 580–585 8
Limestone 3 4–5 8 25–35 2 575–580 6
570–575 6
< 570 1

estimations suggest that recharge is equal to 20% of the total rainfall.
This amount was in agreement with estimates from other similar studies
(Boronina et al., 2003). The total recharge is equal to 0.5 × 106 m3. The
groundwater recharge amounts were distributed and introduced to the
model with the assumption that infiltration or recharge increases with
altitude. The lithology of outcrops is the most important parameter to
be considered while introducing the recharge values in the established
model. The grid cells corresponding to a clay and marl lithology are
considered as impermeable cells with no recharge. In the other grid
cells, the recharge was distributed.

Fig. 6. Spatial variation of the groundwater recharge susceptibility index for the phreatic aquifer.

65
I. Chenini, et al. Journal of African Earth Sciences 154 (2019) 59–69

Table 2 parameters to achieve the best match. In this study, the calibration was
Variation of groundwater recharge susceptibility indexes. attempted manually by trial and error approach (Wilsnack et al., 2001;
Rechargeability Index Gr Classes of Gr % of the aquifer extension area Olsthoorn and Kamps, 2006; Foglia et al., 2007). First, we adjust the
value of recharge rate until the variance of the difference between si-
36–72 low 45 mulated and measured hydraulic heads was minimized. Then, the
72–108 Medium 29
transmissivity was fine-tuning in different part of aquifer extension to
108–144 High 26
minimize the variance of the hydraulic heads differences. Finally, we
check the variance of hydraulic heads difference and all steps were
All parameters are defined and introduced in the established Model. repeated until satisfactory variance was achieved. The calibration
Drain elevations were modified during the calibration process. The process was firstly carried out in a steady state. We consider data for the
model calibration is aimed at fine-tuning model simulations to match hydrologic year 1995–1996 and 2000–2001 because the rainfall rate is
the measurements in the field. It consists on forcing the simulated hy- close to the annual precipitation average and the human impact on
draulic head to match the measured heads. It requires changing groundwater was neglected. As a result of the calibration process, the

Fig. 7. (a) Map showing the location of boundaries conditions of the shallow aquifer; (b) Scatter diagram for observed and simulated hydraulic heads for 1995–1996;
(c) Scatter diagram for observed and simulated hydraulic heads for 2000–2001.

66
I. Chenini, et al. Journal of African Earth Sciences 154 (2019) 59–69

scatter diagram including the comparison between the simulated and hydrogeological modeling, the phreatic aquifer of Sbeitla basin was
calculated hydraulic heads for these two hydraulic years are given in studied with clear boundary conditions. The historical hydrogeological
Fig. 7. The comparisons of the simulated and measured hydraulic heads data are analyzed and coupled in a GIS-based model. The GIS-based
prove that they are generally similar with a variance of 15%. Then the model regroups a lot of data and offers the ability for the updating
calibration was made for the transient state using data for five hydraulic purpose. The two scenarios presented in this study make it interesting
years from 2009 to 20014. in the hydrogeological modeling and groundwater resources manage-
Model verification and validation is the next step after calibration. ment.
The objective of model validation is to check if the calibrated model The hydrogeological investigation of the phreatic aquifer of Sbeitla
works well on any date. is an essential step in the modeling process. The model configuration is
The groundwater flow through porous media is described by the related to the amount of available data and to the spatial variability and
partial-differential equation (McDonald and Harbaugh, 1988): repartition of data. In the model calibration step, parameter modifica-
tion serve as a helpful step to explore the aquifer functioning. To cali-
∂ ⎛ ∂h ∂ ⎛ ∂h ∂ ∂h ∂h
−Kx ⎞ + −Ky ⎞ ⎛−Kz ⎞ ± W = Ss
⎜ ⎟
brate the model, the aquifer functioning have to be analyzed. This step
∂x ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ∂y ⎝ ∂y ⎠ ∂z ⎝ ∂z ⎠ ∂t required the exploration of the model sensitivity to hydrogeological
parameters. The hydraulic heads evolution and aquifer exploitation is
Where Kx, Ky and Kz are the hydraulic conductivity along the x, y and z
necessary to accurately calibrate the model. The aquifer state evolution
axes (m/s), h = the hydraulic head (m), W = volumetric flux per unit
over the time was analyzed from the water budget generated as a model
volume, SS = specific storage (m−1).
output.
The mathematical model in hydrogeology is developed to simulate
The efficiency of the proposed methodology for the groundwater
the aquifer behavior in the future (Shammas and Thunvik, 2009;
recharge susceptibility mapping was validated and tested. The impact
Manghi et al., 2012; Sherif et al., 2012). The simulation of the water
of the groundwater recharge was forecasted using the aquifer behavior
level map was elaborated considering two water management sce-
simulation under different scenarios.
narios. In this study, two scenarios are considered to predict the effect
As demonstrated in this example, the numerical modeling was in-
of groundwater exploitation and recharge on the aquifer piezometry.
vestigated to provide useful results and recommendations for water
The first scenario considers a constant rainfall equal to 228 mm/year
resource management. Hydrogeological knowledges are merged to es-
and considers an increase in the exploitation rate of 25%. While the
tablish a model in order to discuss the groundwater recharge impact on
second scenario considers that rainfall and the pumping rates are
the aquifer. For better investigation of the model results, users and
constant with a groundwater recharge by introducing 2 Mm3/year of
planners have to be advised about the model restrictions (Gaganis and
infiltration from dam water in three different cells along Oued Ech
Smith, 2001).
Chahed watercourse (Fig. 8). In this study, the water resource man-
The groundwater recharge susceptibility as established in this ex-
agement scenarios were established to check the sensitivity of the hy-
ample was based on lithological and hydrodynamical parameters. The
drogeological model to the water recharge variation under a specific
amount of data and the spatial distribution of used data was the most
exploitation and with taking into account the precipitation rate.
important restriction of the used approach. In similar case study where
Model results for the two scenarios are illustrated in Fig. 8. The first
the watershed limit does not overlap with the aquifer extension, the
scenario results show that the increase in the volume of groundwater
model established is powerful tool to evaluate the relationship between
extracted induces a decrease in the piezometric level in the water table.
aquifer recharge and hydraulic heads evolution. This approach is
The fluctuation of the groundwater level is about 20m. For the second
helpful to manage water resource. The availability and the spatial re-
scenario, the simulation shows the increase of the simulated piezo-
partition are the most important parameters that affect the quality of
metry. The injection of water along the Sfisifa watercourse can con-
the simulation in the presented approach.
siderably reconstruct the groundwater reserve. An increase in ground-
The approach used in this study to map groundwater recharge was
water level for the two scenarios was noted compared to the measured
based on 5 recharge factors. A weighted rating approach was adopted.
piezometry for the 2014's hydrologic year. The maximum elevations in
Recharge factors are diverse. The weight attribution was made ac-
water level are mainly found in the central part of the aquifer, where
cording to the recharge impact of each parameter. The most important
the piezometric level rebounded and reached more than 18 m. On the
factor in the recharge process is the depth to water table of the hy-
other side, the piezometric level is almost the same. A slight increase of
draulic head and the lithology in outcrops. The drainage density, the
about 12 m in the extreme southeastern side of the phreatic aquifer is
land cover and the slope are considered with the same importance in
observed in the downstream side (Fig. 8).
the recharge process. All recharge factors were categorized according to
The rainfall rate is supposed constant for the two scenarios.
the impact of each class on the recharge process. In this weighted rating
Increasing water extraction reduces mainly the baseflow and changes
method, recharge factors are not equally combined and the rate asso-
the piezometric behavior of the simulated piezometry.
ciated to each class in the same factor is essential. Further refinements
In this study, an example of applied hydrogeology that merges the
of rate and classes are to be assigned in such a mapping procedure of
knowledge of hydrogeological modeling and GIS utilities was pre-
aquifer recharge area could be possible according to the specificity of
sented. The ultimate goal is to establish a model that can be used in the
the study area.
water resource management. By using other supplementary information
such as water supply evolution in the Sbeitla basin, decision-makers
6. Conclusion
and planners can use the model to discuss the water resource issues in
this arid area.
Hydrogeological assessment of aquifer is a key factor in ground-
water recharge susceptibility mapping and in numerical modeling. This
5. Discussion paper investigates the numerical modeling of the Sbeitla phreatic
aquifer using GIS and the code Modflow. A multicretaria approach
In this paper, we use GIS and MODFLOW to map aquifer recharge based on the weighted rating process was adopted to map the
area and to assess the impact of groundwater recharge on the hydraulic groundwater recharge susceptibility. The phreatic aquifer of the Sbeitla
heads. The modeling of Sbeitla phreatc aquifer is studied to present an basin is firstly characterized. Then, a map showing the recharge area
example of an arid area where groundwater resource scarcity must be was established. After the model calibration, the simulation of the re-
managed. Hydrogeological model establishment aims to model and si- charge impact on the hydraulic heads is done. Using the phreatic
mulate aquifer behavior. To understand the basic steps of the aquifer model, two scenarios were investigated. The comparison of the

67
I. Chenini, et al.
Fig. 8. (a) simulated hydraulic heads in Scenario 1; (b) simulated hydraulic heads in Scenario 1; (c) Comparison of the simulated hydraulic heads in the two
scenarios according to a NW-SE direction.
two scenario results shows that the groundwater recharge affect the
hydraulic head. The exploitation increase decreases the hydraulic
heads. The infiltration rates are widely related to the precipitation and
modify the hydraulic heads in the aquifer. The analysis of the hydraulic
heads impact on the groundwater recharge is helpful for water resource
management to maintain the aquifer system equilibrium. The hydro-
geological modeling provides planners and decision-makers with the
state of future water resources under specific conditions and variable
parameters.
68
Journal of African Earth Sciences 154 (2019) 59–69
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2019.02.031.
References
Agarwal, R., Garg, P.K., 2016. Remote sensing and GIS based groundwater potential &
recharge zones mapping using multi-criteria decision making technique. Water
Resour. Manag. 30 (1), 243–260.
Başağaoğlu, H., Mariňo, M.A., 1999. Joint management of surface and ground water
supplies. Gr. Water 37 (2), 214–222.
I. Chenini, et al.
Boronina, A., Renard, P., Balderer, W., Christodoulides, A., 2003. Groundwater resources
in the Kouris catchment (Cyprus): data analysis and numerical modelling. J. Hydrol.
271 (1–4), 130–149.
Brini, N., Zammouri, M., 2016. Groundwater recharge modelling in semi-arid regions; a
case study of El Khairat alluvial plain (Tunisia). Q. J. Eng. Geol. Hydrogeol. 49 (3),
229–236.
Cao, G., Scanlon, B.R., Han, D., Zheng, C., 2016. Impacts of thickening unsaturated zone
on groundwater recharge in the North China Plain. J. Hydrol 537, 260–270.
Chenini, I., Kouzana, L., 2016. Comment on “Assessment of groundwater recharge in a
semi-arid groundwater system using water balance equation, southern Iran” by
Mohammadi et al. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 95, 1–8 Journal of African Earth Sciences (118),
313-314.
Chenini, I., Mammou, A.B., El May, M., 2010. Groundwater recharge zone mapping using
GIS-based multi-criteria analysis: a case study in Central Tunisia (Maknassy Basin).
Water Resour. Manag. 24 (5), 921–939.
Chiang, W.,H., Kinzelbach, W., 2001. 3D Groundwater Modeling with PMWIN. Springer,
Berlin.
Coelho, V.H.R., Montenegro, S., Almeida, C.N., Silva, B.B., Oliveira, L.M., Gusmão,
A.C.V., Montenegro, A.A., 2017. Alluvial groundwater recharge estimation in semi-
arid environment using remotely sensed data. J. Hydrol. 548, 1–15.
Dassi, L., Zouari, K., Seiler, K.P., Faye, S., Kamel, S., 2005. Flow exchange between the
deep and shallow groundwaters in the Sbeϊtla synclinal basin (Tunisia): an isotopic
approach. Environ. Geol. 47 (4), 501–511.
De Vries, J.J., Simmers, I., 2002. Groundwater recharge: an overview of processes and
challenges. Hydrogeol. J. 10 (1), 5–17.
Doglioni, A., Simeone, V., 2016. Evolutionary modeling of response of water table to
precipitations. J. Hydrol. Eng. 22 (2) 04016055.
Dogrul, E.C., Brush, C.F., Kadir, T.N., 2016. Groundwater modeling in support of water
resources management and planning under complex climate, regulatory, and eco-
nomic stresses. Water 8 (12), 592.
Ehtiat, M., Mousavi, S.J., Vaghefi, S.A., Ghaheri, A., 2016. Analysis of recharge con-
ceptualization in inverse groundwater modelling. Hydrol. Sci. J. 61 (15), 2789–2801.
El Alfy, M., 2014. Numerical groundwater modelling as an effective tool for management
of water resources in arid areas. Hydrol. Sci. J. 59 (6), 1259–1274.
El Mekki, O.A., Laftouhi, N.E., 2016. Combination of a geographical information system
and remote sensing data to map groundwater recharge potential in arid to semi-arid
areas: the Haouz Plain, Morocco. Earth Sci. India 9 (4), 465–479.
Eshtawi, T., Evers, M., Tischbein, B., 2016. Quantifying the impact of urban area ex-
pansion on groundwater recharge and surface runoff. Hydrol. Sci. J. 61 (5), 826–843.
Foglia, L., Mehl, S.W., Hill, M.C., Perona, P., Burlando, P., 2007. Testing alternative
ground water models using cross‐validation and other methods. Gr. Water 45 (5),
627–641.
Gaganis, P., Smith, L., 2001. A Bayesian approach to the quantification of the effect of
model error on the predictions of groundwater models. Water Resour. Res. 37 (9),
2309–2322.
Huang, C.C., Yeh, H.F., Lin, H.I., Lee, S.T., Hsu, K.C., Lee, C.H., 2013. Groundwater re-
charge and exploitative potential zone mapping using GIS and GOD techniques.
Environmental Earth Sci. 68 (1), 267–280.
Jovanovic, N., Bugan, R.D., Tredoux, G., Israel, S., Bishop, R., Marinus, V., 2017.
Hydrogeological modelling of the atlantis aquifer for management support to the
atlantis water supply scheme. WaterSA 43 (1), 122–138.
69
Journal of African Earth Sciences 154 (2019) 59–69
Kadri, A., Ben Haj Ali, M., Jouirou, M., 1998. Explanatory Notes of the Geological Map of
Tunisia at Scale 1/50000 Sbeïtla Sheet No. 85. The National Office of Mines Tunisia
53pp.
Lafare, A., Jourde, H., Léonardi, V., Pistre, S., Dörfliger, N., 2017. Mathematical modeling
of karstogenesis: an approach based on fracturing and hydrogeological processes.
Carbonates Evaporites 32 (3), 391–401.
Ma, L., Spalding, R.F., 1997. Effects of artificial recharge on ground water quality and
aquifer storage recovery. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 33 (3), 561–572.
McDonald, M.G., Harbaugh, A., 1988. A Modular Three- Dimensional Finite-Difference
Ground-Water Flow Model: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources
Investigations. book 6, chap. Al, 586 pp.
Maina, F.H., Delay, F., Ackerer, P., 2017. Estimating initial conditions for groundwater
flow modeling using an adaptive inverse method. J. Hydrol. 552, 52–61.
Manghi, F., Williams, D., Safely, J., Hamdi, M.R., 2012. Groundwater flow modeling of
the Arlington basin to evaluate management strategies for expansion of the Arlington
desalter water production. Water Resour. Manag. 26 (1), 21–41.
Moeck, C., Affolter, A., Radny, D., Dressmann, H., Auckenthaler, A., Huggenberger, P.,
Schirmer, M., 2017. Improved water resource management for a highly complex
environment using three-dimensional groundwater modelling. Hydrogeol. J. 1–14,
86–93.
Nolan, B.T., Healy, R.W., Taber, P.E., Perkins, K., Hitt, K.J., Wolock, D.M., 2007. Factors
influencing ground-water recharge in the eastern United States. J. Hydrol. 332 (1–2),
187–205.
Ojha, R., Ramadas, M., Govindaraju, R.S., 2013. Current and future challenges in
groundwater. I: modeling and management of resources. J. Hydrol. Eng. 20 (1),
A4014007.
Olsthoorn, T.N., Kamps, P.T., 2006. Challenges to calibration: facing an increasingly
critical environment. Gr. Water 44 (6), 876–879.
Pisinaras, V., Petalas, C., Tsihrintzis, V.A., Karatzas, G.P., 2013. Integrated modeling as a
decision‐aiding tool for groundwater management in a Mediterranean agricultural
watershed. Hydrol. Process. 27 (14), 1973–1987.
Sahoo, S., Jha, M.K., 2017. Numerical groundwater-flow modeling to evaluate potential
effects of pumping and recharge: implications for sustainable groundwater manage-
ment in the Mahanadi delta region, India. Hydrogeol. J. 10 (1), 1–23.
Scanlon, B.R., Healy, R.W., Cook, P.G., 2002. Choosing appropriate techniques for
quantifying groundwater recharge. Hydrogeol. J. 10 (1), 18–39.
Selvam, S., Dar, F.A., Magesh, N.S., Singaraja, C., Venkatramanan, S., Chung, S.Y., 2016.
Application of remote sensing and GIS for delineating groundwater recharge poten-
tial zones of Kovilpatti Municipality, Tamil Nadu using IF technique. Earth Sci. India
9 (2), 137–150.
Shammas, M.I., Thunvik, R., 2009. Predictive simulation of flow and solute transport for
managing the Salalah coastal aquifer, Oman. Water Resour. Manag. 23 (14), 2941.
Sherif, M., Kacimov, A., Javadi, A., Ebraheem, A.A., 2012. Modeling groundwater flow
and seawater intrusion in the coastal aquifer of Wadi Ham. UAE. Water resources
Manag. 26 (3), 751–774.
Singh, A., 2014. Groundwater resources management through the applications of simu-
lation modeling: a review. Sci. Total Environ. 499, 414–423.
Wilsnack, M.M., Welter, D.E., Montoya, A.M., Restrepo, J.I., Obeysekera, J., 2001.
Simulating flow in regional wetlands with the modflow wetlands package. J. Am.
Water Resour. Assoc. 37 (3), 655–674.