See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/268883829

Application of the SWAT hydrologic model to a tropical watershed at Brazil

Article  in  Catena · February 2015

DOI: 10.1016/j.catena.2014.10.032

CITATIONS READS

100 960

5 authors, including:

Danilo Costa Fukunaga Roberto Avelino Cecilio

10 PUBLICATIONS   162 CITATIONS   
Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo
163 PUBLICATIONS   1,272 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Sidney S. Zanetti Lais Oliveira

Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo
60 PUBLICATIONS   673 CITATIONS    6 PUBLICATIONS   104 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Artificial intelligence applied to Forest Mensuration and Management View project

hydrological simulation View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Danilo Costa Fukunaga on 24 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Catena 125 (2015) 206–213

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Catena
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/catena

Application of the SWAT hydrologic model to a tropical watershed

at Brazil
Danilo Costa Fukunaga a, Roberto Avelino Cecílio b,⁎, Sidney Sára Zanetti b,
Laís Thomazini Oliveira b, Marco Aurélio Costa Caiado c
a
Petrobrás Biocombustível S.A., Av. República do Chile, 65 — Centro, 20031-912 Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
b
Espírito Santo Federal University/UFES, Forest and Wood Sciences Department, PO Box 16, 29500-000 Alegre, ES, Brazil
c
Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Espírito Santo (IFES), Rive, 29500-000 Alegre, ES, Brazil

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

Article history: The current paper presents the evaluation of the ability of the SWAT hydrological model (Soil and Water Assess-
Received 7 March 2014 ment Tool) to reproduce continuous daily streamflows of the upper Itapemirim River basin (Brazil). The model
Received in revised form 14 September 2014 parameters were calibrated and validated with data collected from 1993 to 2000. The model was found to be
Accepted 27 October 2014
highly sensitive to baseflow, its primary calibration variable. Validation analyses resulted in values of statistical
indexes (NS = 0.67; NSlog = 0.68; PBIAS = 22% and RSR = 0.57) that show that SWAT performance was
Keywords:
Hydrologic modelling
satisfactory in this application.
Itapemirim River watershed © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Calibration
Validation
Streamflow

1. Introduction
There is an urgent need to address Earth's water resource situation
by developing durable socio-political and economic strategies to
promote sustainable water use. This message was at the core of the
Rio + 20 Earth Summit organised by the United Nations (Ehrlich
et al., 2012; Suweis et al., 2013; Wible, 2012). The known linkages be-
tween water (quantity and quality) and land use must all be addressed
in the quest for sustainability (Alcamo et al., 2008). In recent decades,
there has been a growing consensus that an effective way to enhance
the long-term sustainability of agriculture in rural communities is
through integrated land-use planning and management at the water-
shed scale (Heathcote, 2009; Qi and Altinakar, 2013).
Land-use planning on watershed management affects various phys-
ical processes that directly affect the environment and ecosystems, and
it provides a framework for integrating knowledge and perspectives on
social and natural sciences into planning, policy and decision making.
Thus, it plays an important role because it not only influences environ-
mental processes such as water surface flow, sediment yields and
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +55 28 3558 2520.
E-mail addresses: danilofukunaga@gmail.com (D.C. Fukunaga), roberto.cecilio@ufes.br
(R.A. Cecílio), sidney.zanetti@ufes.br (S.S. Zanetti), lais.thomazini@gmail.com
(L.T. Oliveira), mccaiado@gmail.com (M.A.C. Caiado).
nutrient concentrations, but it also affects social and economic values
at the watershed scale (Qi and Altinakar, 2011). Watershed best man-
agement practices can help to reduce soil loss (Shi et al., 2012),
sediment pollution and flooding (Lin et al., 2011; Mahmoud et al.,
2011), and they can help to increase water balance (Bormann et al.,
2007; Wheater and Evans, 2009), water quality (Zampella et al., 2007),
average streamflow (Zhang et al., 2008) and ecosystem services
(Polasky et al., 2011).
Computer-based hydrologic models are essential tools for water re-
source planning, development, and management because they enable
long-term simulations of the effects of watershed processes and man-
agement activities (Singh and Woolhiser, 2002). The evaluation of
best management practices has also been facilitated by watershed hy-
drologic models (Arabi et al., 2006; Douglas-Mankin et al., 2010). Addi-
tionally, these models facilitate the simulation of various conservation
programs, and they can be used to design policies to mitigate water
and soil quality degradation by determining suitable conservation pro-
grams for particular watershed settings (Moriasi et al., 2007).
A good hydrologic model must correctly reflect changes in land use
and agricultural management and their effects on stream flow. Arnold
et al. (1998) listed six important characteristics of a good hydrologic
model: computational efficiency; high spatial detail; readily available
inputs; continuous time representation; the ability to simulate land-
management scenarios; and the ability to provide reasonable results.
However, the implementation of these models often requires the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2014.10.032
0341-8162/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 D.C. Fukunaga et al. / Catena 125 (2015) 206–213
integration of geographic information systems (GIS), remote sensing,
and multiple databases for the development of the model input param-
eters and for the analysis and visualisation of the simulation results
(He, 2003).
The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) is a physically based,
continuous-time mathematical hydrological model (Arnold et al.,
1998) that was designed to predict daily stream-flow and soil and nu-
trient losses in a watershed. Although several previous studies showed
promising results using SWAT as a hydrologic model under different
environmental conditions (Baker and Miller, 2013; Brzozowski et al.,
2011; Cheng et al., 2009; Cibin et al., 2010; Du et al., 2009; Galvan
et al., 2007; Gül and Rosbjerg, 2010; Stehr et al., 2008; Thampi et al.,
2010; Ullrich and Volk, 2009; Zhang et al., 2009, 2011), it has seen
only limited application in Brazil (Andrade et al., 2013; Aragão et al.,
2013; Durães et al., 2011; Pinto et al., 2013; Strauch et al., 2012,
2013; Uzeika et al., 2012), specially at watersheds with low availability
of environmental data.
Itapemirim River basin (IRB) has a wide variety of soils, rainfall re-
gimes and land use types, which help to create many different environ-
ments. The most prominent economic activities are the extraction and
processing of marble and granite, the alcohol industry, the raising of
livestock and agricultural production (mainly coffee). These activities
are responsible for much of the deforestation, water usage, and reduc-
tion in water quality affecting the 500,000 habitants of the IRB. Water-
shed management and land-use planning are thus the main ways
to promote environmental sustainability in the IRB. However, there is
a very low availability of environmental data, especially climate data
at IRB area. Thus, the objective of the present study is to evaluate the
ability of SWAT to model continuous daily streamflows in the upper
Itapemirim River basin.
2. Material and methods
2.1. Study area
The upper IRB (2237 km2) is situated in Espírito Santo State, Brazil,
between the following geographical coordinates: E 207,623 m and
258,970 m and N 7,766,625 m and 7,684,790 m (Fig. 1). Its altitude
ranges from 108 m to 2854 m. The basin outlet is located at 243,212 m
7780000
200000
7760000
7740000
7720000
Minas Gerais
7700000
7680000
7660000
Rio de Janeiro
Outlet
Uper Itapemirim River Basin
200000
Itapemirim River Basin
10 5 0
Fig. 1. Location of the Itapemirim River basin.
207
and N 7,703,905 m, where a flow measurement station named Rive
(code number: 57450000), belonging to the Brazilian Water Agency
(Agência Nacional de Águas — ANA), exists. The local climate includes
Aw, Cwa and Cwb types, according to the Köppen classification.
The predominating soil types, as shown in Fig. 2a, are Latosol,
Cambisol, Argisol and Litholic Neosol (RadamBrasil, 1983). In terms of
land use (Fig. 2b), the basin is marked by agricultural crops (coffee
crop mainly), pastureland, eucalyptus plantations, native forest, regen-
eration of native forest, rocks and urbanised area, as illustrated by 2008
aerial photographs (GeobasES, 2008) obtained using remote sensing
photo-interpretation techniques.
2.2. Model description
The SWAT model is a continuous, long-term, distributed-parameter
model that can simulate surface flow, subsurface flow, soil erosion, sed-
iment deposition, and the movement of nutrients through watersheds
(Arnold et al., 1998). SWAT data entry requires a suitable computer
program interface and requires the following digital map-formatted
information: digital terrain elevation model (DEM), soil type, land
cover and land use (Fig. 2a and b). The model interface takes these in-
puts and subdivides the basin into sub-basins based on the direction
of drainage overland flow, which is derived from the DEM. Then, it ex-
tracts input data from each sub-basin database. After that, it delineates
the hydrologic response units (HRU), which have unique combinations
of land cover and soil types for each sub-basin. Soil water content, sur-
face runoff, nutrient cycling, crop growth and management practices
are all simulated for each HRU, and the results are aggregated for the
sub-basin by weighted average.
The input data are incorporated into the model using tables that con-
tain information about the hydrologic characteristics of relevant soils
(based on the hydrologic groups of the CN-SCS method). This allows a
CN value to be estimated for each hydrologic unit. The model also re-
quires daily climatic information about rainfall, solar radiation, wind
speed, relative humidity, and maximum and minimum temperatures.
Finally, the locations of existing rainfall and streamflow gauging stations
must be included. Based on these meteorological data, the Penman–
Monteith model is then applied to estimate evapotranspiration and to
establish the water balance of each HRU.
7780000
220000 240000 260000 280000 300000 320000
/
7760000
7740000
7720000
Espírito Santo
7700000
7680000
7660000
220000 240000 260000 280000 300000 320000
10 20 30 Universal Transverse Mercator Projection
km Zone 24 S - SIRGAS 2000
208 D.C. Fukunaga et al. / Catena 125 (2015) 206–213

200000 220000 240000 260000 280000 200000 220000 240000 260000 280000

/ /

7760000

7760000
7760000

7760000
Coffee

7740000

7740000
7740000

7740000
Eucalyptus
Cambisol Pasture
Ferralsol Native forest
Alisol Secondary

7720000

7720000
7720000

7720000
Litholic Neosol regeneration forest
Urban Area
Rock

7700000

7700000
7700000

7700000
Universal Transverse Mercator Projection Universal Transverse Mercator Projection
Zone 24 - SIRGAS 2000 Zone 24 - SIRGAS 2000

7680000

7680000
7680000

7680000
10 5 0 10 20 30 10 5 0 10 20 30
km km
200000 220000 240000 260000 280000 200000 220000 240000 260000 280000

(a) (b)
Fig. 2. Map of soil types (a) and land use (b) in the Itapemirim River basin.

2.3. Input data
Daily climate and streamflow data were collected from meteorologi-
cal and streamflow gauge stations for ten years (January 1991–December
2000) by the Brazilian Institute of Meteorology (Instituto Nacional
de Meteorologia — INMET) and the Brazilian Water Agency (Agência
Nacional de Águas — ANA). The precipitation, solar radiation, wind
speed, temperature and relative humidity data were taken from one
automatic station, located in Alegre city (INMET code number: A617).
Rainfall data from three other stations: Iúna (ANA code number:
2041013), Ibitirama (ANA code number: 2041016) and Rive (ANA code
number: 2041003) was also used. IRB outlet streamflow data were
collected from the Rive flow station (ANA code number: 57450000).
For the current study, a database of all input data required for SWAT
was created. This allowed us to bring together disparate environmental
data about the study area. The DEM was obtained from an SRTM mission
(radar satellite imagery) and had a resolution of 90 m per pixel (Rabus
et al., 2003). In this part of the IRB, there was no sufficient data for SWAT
to determine the stream network, so an additional vector layer was
included for the stream network constructed from a GeobasES (2008)
topographical map. This resulted in a DEM with hydrological correction
(HCDEM), as shown in Fig. 3.
The land cover and use map presented in Fig. 2b were used as input
for SWAT. All the 35 vegetation parameters were obtained from the
SWAT database, with some changes on some parameters (maximum
leaf area index, maximum stomatal conductance, maximum root
depth and Manning coefficient for the soil surface) to better represent
tropical conditions, according to the values proposed by Almeida and
200000 220000 240000 260000
Soares (2003), Almeida et al. (2007), Viola et al. (2009) and Pereira
et al. (2014). The soil map presented in Fig. 2a was also used as input
to SWAT. For each soil type, the soil parameters needed to run SWAT
were determined based on the Brazilian soil database presented by
Baldissera (2005) and the hydrologic soil group presented by Pruski
et al. (1997).
2.4. SWAT sensitivity analysis, calibration and validation
As recommended by many researchers (Arnold et al., 2000, 2012;
Thampi et al., 2010), before running the SWAT simulations the hydro-
logic and meteorological datasets were divided into two sub-datasets:
one for SWAT calibration (1991 to 1995) and one for SWAT validation
(1996 to 2000).
The next step in the calibration and validation process was to deter-
mine the most sensitive parameters for IRB. Sensitivity analysis is the
process of determining the rate of change in model output with respect
to changes in model input parameters (Arnold et al., 2012). In the
current study, SWAT-CUP (calibration and uncertainty programs) was
used for the sensitivity analysis, calibration and uncertainty analysis of
the model runs. SWAT-CUP is a public domain program developed by
Abbaspour (2007). SUFI-2 uncertainty analysis routine (Abbaspour,
2007) was used. The degree to which all uncertainties are accounted
for is quantified by a measure referred to as the P-factor, which is the
percentage of measured data bracketed by the 95% prediction uncer-
tainty (Abbaspour, 2007). In the first step an objective function was
defined: Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency coefficient (Eq. (1)) greater than
0.4. The second step was the establishment of physically meaningful
absolute minimum and maximum ranges for the parameters being
280000 optimised (Table 1). It was assumed that all parameters are uniformly
distributed within a region bounded by minimum and maximum

/ values. One parameter at a time, all the parameters were varied be-
7760000
7760000

tween minimum and maximum values.

After running the sensitivity analysis and defining the initial values
of the IRB parameters (watershed delineation, land use and soil charac-
7740000
7740000

Digital Elevation Model (m) terisation), it was proceed to run the SWAT calibration and validation.
High : 2854
The surface runoff from daily rainfall was estimated by the modified
Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Curve Number method (Neitsch et al.,
7720000
7720000

Low : 108
2011). In this method, the amount of runoff was estimated based on
local land use, soil type, and the antecedent soil moisture condition.
The Penman–Monteith method was used to estimate potential evapo-
7700000
7700000

transpiration effects.
Universal Transverse Mercator Projection
Zone 24 - SIRGAS 2000 To evaluate the ability of SWAT to reproduce the continuous IRB
7680000
7680000

10 5 0 10 20 30 daily streamflows, statistical indexes and graphical analysis were used

200000 220000 240000 260000 280000
km
to compare the simulated and observed outlet streamflow hydrographs
(based on Rive flow station data). The following statistical indexes were
Fig. 3. Hydrologically corrected digital elevation model for Itapemirim River basin. used for the calibration and validation phases: the Nash–Sutcliffe
 D.C. Fukunaga et al. / Catena 125 (2015) 206–213 209

Table 1 compensation factor (ESCO); maximum canopy storage (CANMX); the

SWAT parameters modified in the calibration phase (the first 5 years of streamflow in saturated hydraulic conductivity of soil layer n (SOL_Kn); the available
Itapemirim River basin).
water capacity of soil layer n (SOL_AWCn); the depth to bottom of soil
Parameter Minimum Maximum Initial Calibrated layer n (SOL_Zn); the baseflow recession constant (ALPHA_BF); the
calibration calibration value value maximum potential leaf area index for land cover/plants (BLAI); the
value value
groundwater “revap” coefficient (GW_REVAP); the effective hydraulic
Soil parameters conductivity in the main channel alluvium (CH_K2); Manning's rough-
CN2 (dimensionless) 20 90 59 to 75 −9.40%
ness coefficient value for the main channel (CH_N2); groundwater
SOL_Kn (mm/h) 0 2000 12.5 to 90 +54.4%
SOL_AWCn (mm/mm) 0 1 0.15 to 0.7 +41.8% delay (GW_DELAY); the moist soil albedo (SOL_ALB); the plant uptake
ESCO (dimensionless) 0.01 1 0.95 0.566 compensation factor (EPCO); the threshold depth for “revap” of water
in the shallow aquifer (REVAPMN); and the surface runoff lag time
Cover/land use factor
CANMX (mm) 0 100 0 11.3 (SURLAG). As it can be seen, the most sensitive parameters are those re-
lated to groundwater (GWQMIN, ALPHA_BF, GW_REVAP, GW_DELAY,
Groundwater parameters
REVAPMN) and that represents ponds, wetlands, soil, drainage and sur-
SURLAG (dimensionless) 1 24 4 7.98
GWQMIN (mm) 0 5000 0 3907 face runoff (CN2, ESCO, SOL_Kn, SOL_AWCn, SOL_Zn, CH_K2, CH_N2,
GW_REVAP (dimensionless) 0.02 0.2 0.02 0.188 SOL_ALB). Not all of the parameters identified by sensitivity analysis
GW_DELAY (day) 0 500 31 287 were modified during the calibration phase, only the parameters listed
ALFHA_BF (1/day) 0 1 0.048 0.027 in Table 1.
Stream network parameters All the parameters identified on sensitivity analysis were also identi-
CH_K2 (mm/h) 0 150 0 35.2 fied as the most important for the SWAT calibration phase by many
CH_N2 (s/m1/3) 0 0.3 0.035 0.023 other researchers studying different basins around the world (Aragão
ALPHA_BF — baseflow recession constant; CH_K2 — effective hydraulic conductivity in the et al., 2013; Baltokoski et al., 2010; Cibin et al., 2010; Guse et al., 2013;
main channel alluvium; CH_N2 — Manning's roughness coefficient value for the main Lélis et al., 2012; Mulungu and Munishi, 2007; Schmalz and Fohrer,
channel; CANMX — maximum canopy storage; CN2 — initial SCS runoff curve number
2009; Strauch et al., 2012, 2013; Thampi et al., 2010; White and
for moisture condition II; ESCO — soil evaporation compensation factor; GW_DELAY —
groundwater delay; GWQMIN — threshold depth for return flow of water in the shallow Chaubey, 2005; Zhang et al., 2011).
aquifer; GW_REVAP — groundwater “revap” coefficient; EPCO — plant uptake compensa- Analysis of the calibrated parameters in Table 1 shows that CN2 was
tion factor; REVAPMN — threshold depth for “revap” of water in the shallow aquifer; reduced by approximately 9.4%. This reduction during calibration was
SOL_Kn — saturated hydraulic conductivity of soil layer n; SOL_AWCn — available water also observed by Paim and Menezes (2009), Strauch et al. (2012),
capacity of soil layer n; SOL_Zn — depth to bottom of soil layer n; SOL_ALB — moist soil
albedo; SURLAG — surface runoff lag time; BLAI — maximum potential leaf area index
Andrade et al. (2013) and Strauch et al. (2013) for other Brazilian basins.
for land cover/plants. This might indicate that initially assumed reference values for CN2
were too high. It is also possible that soil physical properties (such as in-
filtration capacity and soil management practices) were not properly
efficiency coefficient (NS); the logarithm NS (NSlog); the percent bias reflected in initial CN2 values. Silva and Oliveira (1999), Carlesso et al.
(PBIAS) and the ratio of mean squared error to the standard deviation (2011) and Santos et al. (2013) showed that the Curve Number method
of the measured data (RSR). All of these techniques were used because may overestimate runoff and streamflow when applied at the water-
testing only a few techniques can lead to misleading results and inap- shed scale. In this vein, it was noticed that the reduction of CN2 brings
propriate model selection, according to Tedeschi (2006). our streamflow predictions closer to the measured values.
The SOL_Kn and SOL_AWCn values were greatly increased during
XJ
ðOi −Si Þ2 calibration. SOL_Kn was increased by 54.4%, just as reported by
NS ¼ 1− X i¼1 2 ð1Þ Andrade et al. (2013) for another Brazilian tropical basin. That indicates
J
i¼1
Oi −O that the values presented by Baldissera (2005), 12.5 to 90 mm/h, do not
correctly reflect IRB soil characteristics. In an IRB sub-basin, Santos et al.
XJ 2 (2013) found higher SOL_Kn values (20 to 150 mm/h), which are closer
½ logðOi Þ− logðSi Þ
NS log ¼ 1− X i¼1
h  i2 ð2Þ to the calibrated values.
J
i¼1
log ðO i Þ− log O The ESCO value of 0.566 was close to other values reported for dif-
ferent Brazilian basins: Pinto et al. (2013) reported 0.685, Strauch et al.
XJ (2012) reported approximately 0.8 and Strauch et al. (2012) used
100 ðOi −Si Þ values slightly less than 0.5.
PBIAS ¼ i¼1
XJ ð3Þ The calibrated values of CN2, SOL_Kn and SOL_AWCn resulted in
O
i¼1 i greater simulated values for water infiltration and soil water storage,
reflecting a reduction of surface runoff and maximum peak flow. Addi-
qXffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
J tionally, the CANMAX calibrated value contributed to reducing the
ðOi −Si Þ2
i¼1
RSR ¼ rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi initial abstractions, and it helped reduce the surface runoff and peak
XJ  2ffi: ð4Þ
O −O flow. However, the value of 11.3 mm for CANMAX can be considered
i¼1 i
high for the IRB, where 60% of land cover has a low interception ca-
pacity. On the other hand, the increased value of SURLAG also acts to
In these equations, J is the number of daily streamflow data points; raise the peak flow estimate.
Oi is the observed (measured) daily streamflow; Si is the SWAT daily The calibrated values of groundwater parameters were very similar
simulated streamflow; and Ō is the daily observed average streamflow. to those used by Baldissera (2005), Lélis et al. (2012), Salles (2012),
Strauch et al. (2012), Pinto et al. (2013) and Strauch et al. (2013)
3. Results and discussion for Brazilian watersheds. The calibrated value of GWQMN was only
20% less than the value proposed by Baldissera (2005). The value of
On the descending order of importance, sensitivity analysis showed GW_REVAP (0.188) was quite close to those of Baldissera (2005) and
that the most sensitive parameters were the initial SCS runoff curve Salles (2012). The GW_DELAY value of 287 days was between the
number for moisture condition II (CN2); the threshold depth for return values used by Strauch et al. (2012) and Strauch et al. (2013); they
flow of water in the shallow aquifer (GWQMIN); the soil evaporation used 200 and 300 days, respectively. The ALPHA_BF value was very
210 D.C. Fukunaga et al. / Catena 125 (2015) 206–213

Fig. 4. Measured and simulated IRB streamflow values before (left) and after (right) the SWAT calibration phase.

close to these used by Salles (2012), Andrade et al. (2013) and Pinto
et al. (2013).
Calibration of the stream network parameters resulted in a CH_K2
value of 35.2 mm/h, quite close to that of Pinto et al. (2013), who used
24.1 mm/h. Strauch et al. (2012) used values greater than 30 mm/h,
and Strauch et al. (2013) used values greater than 20 mm/h. The
CH_N2 value (0.023 s/m1/3) is characteristic of natural streams with
low stands of timber and underbrush. Considering that the riparian
zone of the IRB stream network is poorly covered by gallery forests,
this value appears to be reasonable.
The Fig. 4 shows the measured and simulated daily streamflows
before and after the SWAT phase calibration. These were the statisti-
cal indexes before calibration: NS = − 0,38; NSlog = − 23.78;
PBIAS = − 24% and RSR = 1.18. After calibration, the following
values were obtained: NS = 0.75; NSlog = 0.78; PBIAS = 11% and
RSR = 0.50. The significant statistical index values indicate that calibra-
tion improved the model from not recommended (NS b 0) to good and
suitable (NS ≥ 0.75) or satisfactory (NS N 0.50 and RSR b 0.70 and
− 25% b PBIAS b 25%), according to the criteria of Van Liew et al.
(2005) and Moriasi et al. (2007). Additionally, the calibrated value of
NSlog is greater than the NS value, indicating that low streamflow was
better simulated.
The Fig. 5 shows, for the five-year calibration period, a comparison
of the IRB measured hydrograph and the IRB estimated hydrograph
before and after parameter calibration. SWAT calibration resulted in
better agreement between the simulated and observed streamflows
(Figs. 4 and 5). The peak discharges values were clearly reduced after
calibration. Baseflow values increased after calibration and were better
simulated. The SWAT simulations changed from overestimating to
underestimating the IRB streamflow. The annual average streamflow
decreased from 45.5 m3/s to 32.6 m3/s, which is quite close to the mea-
sured value (36.9 m3/s). These improvements are mainly due changes
in the values of CN2, SOL_AWCn and SOL_Kn, which increased the sim-
ulated infiltration, soil storage and actual evapotranspiration and re-
duced the stream discharge.
Finally, Fig. 6 shows the measured and simulated daily streamflow
values for the SWAT validation period and Fig. 7 shows the measured
and simulated hydrographs for the five-year validation phase. At valida-
tion phase the SWAT simulations tend to underestimate the streamflow
values. Comparison of the right panel of Fig. 4 (calibration phase) with

Fig. 5. Comparison of measured hydrograph with the SWAT simulated time series (before and after calibration) for the five-year calibration period.
 D.C. Fukunaga et al. / Catena 125 (2015) 206–213 211

Fig. 6. Measured and simulated streamflow for the validation period.

Fig. 6 (validation phase) shows that the angular coefficient of the trend
line is lower and the linear coefficient is higher for the validation phase,
which means that the model performs worse for the validation phase
than for the calibration phase. However, the statistical indexes of
the validation phase (NS = 0.67; NSlog = 0.68; PBIAS = 22% and
RSR = 0.57) are only slightly worse than the calibration phase indexes.
The significant NS value indicates that the validation is acceptable
(satisfactory) according to the criterion of Van Liew et al. (2005;
0.36 b NS b 0.75) or that of Moriasi et al. (2007). It is common for the
statistical indexes of the validation period to be worse than the indexes
for the calibration period (Aragão et al., 2013; Du et al., 2009; Lélis et al.,
2012; Pinto et al., 2013) because the parameter values are specifically
optimised for the calibration period. The validation period may have
different conditions that cause the calibrated parameters to be less
than optimal.
Validation phase hydrograph (Fig. 7) shows that both the baseflow
and the peak flow were underestimated, which was also the case
for other Brazilian basins studied by Aragão et al. (2013). Fig. 7 also
shows that the baseflow and minimum flow were better simulated
than the peak flow values, as evidenced by the greater value of NSlog
compared to NS. This particular result suggests that a simulated
streamflow series can be used to calculate minimum reference flow
for basins with little or no discharge data, which would be valuable
tool for water resource planning and management (Andrade et al.,
2013; Viola et al., 2009, 2012). Thus, the SWAT hydrological model
has the potential to be used a useful tool for water resource manage-
ment, especially when applied to two of the most important instru-
ments of Brazilian water resource policy: the concession of water
resource use rights and billing for the use of water resources.
The results also show that hydrologic modelling can be a useful tool
for predicting the impacts of land use and best management practices
on river water discharge, which affects water availability. In many
parts of the world, policy makers, farmers and other water users are
often unable to sustainably manage their water resources because
they lack accurate information, fair institutional mechanisms, and ap-
propriate incentives (Asquith et al., 2008). Quantity is the first attribute
of a water service that many people consider; it is defined as the amount
of water available for drinking or agricultural use, or in the case of flood
waters, it describes the volume of water. For water-based services, an
increase in quantity is beneficial; in flood mitigation, decreasing the
quantity is beneficial. As noted by Brauman et al. (2007), Willaarts
et al. (2012) and Banerjee et al. (2013), the predicted water quantity
or stream flow can be useful and realistic parameter to guide decision-
making on programs of payment for environmental services, especially
for water resources provider programs like the Brazilian National Water
Agency (ANA) Water Provider Program.

Fig. 7. Comparison of measured hydrograph with SWAT simulated time series for the validation period.
212 D.C. Fukunaga et al. / Catena 125 (2015) 206–213
4. Conclusions
In this study, the SWAT parameters identified as most sensitive
were, on the descending order of importance, CN2, GWQMIN, ESCO,
CANMX, SOL_Kn, SOL_AWCn, SOL_Zn, ALPHA_BF, BLAI, GW_REVAP,
CH_K2, CH_N2, GW_DELAY, SOL_ALB, EPCO, REVAPMN and SURLAG. It
was also observed that SWAT hydrological model provided satisfactory
results for the simulation of streamflow on the Itapemirim River basin. It
was observed that after the calibration phase, SWAT provided better
results for minimum and average streamflows than peak flows. Finally,
it can be concluded that SWAT hydrological model is a useful tool to be
applied to simulate streamflow of tropical basins under low availability
of environmental data, especially meteorological data.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank “Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Espírito
Santo — FAPES” for the undergraduate research scholarship (process
number 50227718/2010) and financial support (process number
59941456/2012), and also “Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Ci-
entífico e Tecnológico — CNPq” for a research productivity fellowship
(process number 304997/2010-2) and financial support (process num-
ber 484587/2011-0).
References
Abbaspour, K.C., 2007. User Manual for SWAT-CUP, SWAT Calibration and Uncertainty
Analysis Programs. Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology,
Dübendorf, Switzerland.
Alcamo, J., Vörösmarty, C.J., Naiman, R.J., Lettenmaier, D., Pahl-Wostl, C., 2008. A grand
challenge for freshwater research: understanding the global water system. Environ.
Res. Lett. 3, 1–6.
Almeida, A.A., Soares, J.V., 2003. Comparison of water use in Eucalyptus grandis planta-
tions and Atlantic Rainforest in eastern coast of Brazil. Rev. Árvore 27, 159–170
(in Portuguese).
Almeida, A.C., Soares, J.V., Landsberg, J.J., Rezende, G.D., 2007. Growth and water balance
of Eucalyptus grandis hybrid plantations in Brazil during a rotation for pulp produc-
tion. For. Ecol. Manag. 251, 10–21.
Andrade, M.A., Mello, C.R., Beskow, S., 2013. Hydrological simulation in a watershed with
predominance of Oxisol in the Upper Grande river region, MG — Brazil. Rev. Bras. Eng.
Agric. Ambient 17, 69–76 (in Portuguese).
Arabi, M., Govindaraju, R.S., Hantush, M.M., 2006. Role of watershed subdivision on eval-
uation of long-term impact of best management practices on water quality. J. Am.
Water Resour. Assoc. 42, 513–528.
Aragão, R., Cruz, M.A.S., Amorim, J.R.A., Mendonça, L.C., Figueiredo, E.E., Srinivasan, V.S.,
2013. Sensitivity analysis of the parameters of the SWAT model and simulation of
the hydrosedimentological processes in a watershed in the northeastern region of
Brazil. Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo 37, 1091–1102 (in Portuguese).
Arnold, J.G., Srinivasan, R., Muttiah, R.S., Williams, J.R., 1998. Large area hydrologic
modeling and assessment. Part I: model development. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc.
34, 73–89.
Arnold, J.G., Muttiah, R.S., Srinivasan, R., Allen, P.M., 2000. Regional estimation of base
flow and groundwater recharge in the Upper Mississippi river basin. J. Hydrol. 227,
21–40.
Arnold, J.G., Moriasi, D.N., Gassman, P.W., Abbaspour, K.C., White, M.J., Srinivasan, R.,
Santhi, C., Harmel, R.D., van Griensven, A., van Liew, M.W., Kannan, N., Jha, M.K.,
2012. SWAT: model use, calibration, and validation. Trans. ASABE 55, 1491–1508.
Asquith, N.M., Vargas, M.T., Wunder, S., 2008. Selling two environmental services: in-kind
payments for bird habitat and watershed protection in Los Negros, Bolivia. Ecol. Econ.
65, 675–684.
Baker, T.J., Miller, S.N., 2013. Using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) to assess
land use impact on water resources in an East African watershed. J. Hydrol. 486,
100–111.
Baldissera, G.C., 2005. Aplicabilidade do modelo de simulação hidrológica SWAT (Soil and
Water Assessment Tool), para a bacia hidrográfica do Rio Cuiabá/MT (MS Thesis)
Mato Grosso Federal University, Cuiabá, Brazil.
Baltokoski, V., Tavares, M.H.F., Machado, E.R., Oliveira, M.P., 2010. Model calibration
for flow rate and total phosphorous export simulations in the watersheds of the
rivers conrado and Pinheiro, Pato Branco (PR). Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo 34, 253–261
(in Portuguese).
Banerjee, O., Bark, R., Connor, J., Crossman, N.D., 2013. An ecosystem services approach to
estimating economic losses associated with drought. Ecol. Econ. 91, 19–27.
Bormann, H., Breuer, L., Gräff, T., Huisman, J.A., 2007. Analysing the effects of soil proper-
ties changes associated with land use changes on the simulated water balance:
a comparison of three hydrological catchment models for scenario analysis. Ecol.
Model. 209, 29–40.
Brauman, K.A., Daily, G.C., Duarte, T.K., Mooney, H.A., 2007. The nature and value of eco-
system services: an overview highlighting hydrologic services. Annu. Rev. Environ.
Resour. 32, 67–98.
Brzozowski, J., Miatkowski, Z., Śliwiński, D., Smarzyńska, K., Śmietanka, M., 2011. Applica-
tion of SWAT model to small agricultural catchment in Poland. J. Water Land Dev. 15,
157–166.
Carlesso, R., Spohr, R.B., Eltz, F.L.F., Flores, C.H., 2011. Runoff estimation in southern Brazil
based on Smith's modified model and the Curve Number method. Agric. Water
Manag. 98, 1020–1026.
Cheng, L., Xu, Z.X., Luo, R., Mi, Y.J., 2009. SWAT Application in arid and semi-arid regions:
a case study in Kuye River basin. Geogr. Res. 28, 65–74.
Cibin, R., Sudheer, K.P., Chaubey, I., 2010. Sensitivity and identifiability of stream flow
generation parameters of the SWAT model. Hydrol. Process. 24, 1133–1148.
Douglas-Mankin, K.R., Srinivasan, R., Arnold, J., 2010. Soil and water assessment tool
(SWAT) model: current developments and applications. Trans. ASABE 53, 1423–1431.
Du, B., Ji, X., Harmel, R.D., Hauck, L.M., 2009. Evaluation of a watershed model for estimating
daily flow using limited flow measurements. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 45, 475–484.
Durães, F., Mello, C.R., Naghettini, M., 2011. Applicability of the SWAT model for hydrologic
simulation in Paraopeba river basin, MG. Cerne 17, 481–488.
Ehrlich, P.R., Kareiva, P.M., Daily, G.C., 2012. Securing natural capital and expanding equity
to rescale civilization. Nature 486, 68–73.
Galvan, L., Olias, M., Villaran, R.F., Santos, J.M.D., 2007. Application of SWAT hydrological
model to the Meca river watershed (Huelva, Spain). Geogaceta 42, 63–66 (in Spanish).
GeobasES, 2008. Ortofotomosaico IEMA 2007/2008. Available at: http://www.geobases.
es.gov.br/ (Access: 03 de junho de 2012. (in Portuguese)).
Gül, G.O., Rosbjerg, D., 2010. Modelling of hydrologic processes and potential response to
climate change through the use of a multisite SWAT. Water Environ. J. 24, 21–31.
Guse, B., Reusser, D.E., Fohrer, N., 2013. How to improve the representation of hydrolog-
ical processes in SWAT for a lowland catchment — temporal analysis of parameter
sensitivity and model performance. Hydrol. Process. 28, 2651–2670.
He, C., 2003. Integration of geographic information systems and simulation model for
watershed management. Environ. Model. Softw. 18, 809–813.
Heathcote, I.W., 2009. Integrated Watershed Management: Principles and Practice. Wiley,
Hoboken.
Lélis, T.A., Calijuri, M.L., Santiago, A.F., Lima, D.C., Rocha, E.O., 2012. Sensitivity analysis and
calibration of SWAT model applied to a watershed in southeastern Brazil. Rev. Bras.
Ciênc. Solo 36, 623–634 (in Portuguese).
Lin, Y.J., Chang, Y.H., Tan, Y.C., Lee, H.Y., Chiu, Y.J., 2011. National policy of watershed
management and flood mitigation after the 921 Chi-Chi earthquake in Taiwan. Nat.
Hazards 56, 709–731.
Mahmoud, M.I., Gupta, H.V., Rajagopal, S., 2011. Scenario development for water re-
sources planning and watershed management: methodology and semi-arid region
case study. Environ. Model. Softw. 26, 873–885.
Moriasi, D.N., Arnold, J.G., Van Liew, M.W., Bingner, R.L., Harmel, R.D., Veith, T.L., 2007.
Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed
simulations. Trans. ASABE 50, 885–900.
Mulungu, M.M., Munishi, S.E., 2007. Simiyu River catchment parameterization using
SWAT model. Phys. Chem. Earth 32, 1032–1039.
Neitsch, S.L., Arnold, J.G., Kiniry, J.R., Williams, J.R., 2011. Soil and Water Assessment Tool:
Theoretical Documentation Version 2009. Texas A&M University System, Texas: USA.
Paim, J.B., Menezes, J.T., 2009. Estimate of sediment budget of the Tijucas river basin
applying SWAT hydrologic model. Rev. Geogr. Acad. 3, 5–14 (in Portuguese).
Pereira, D.P., Almeida, A.Q., Martinez, M.A., Rosa, D.R.Q., 2014. Impacts of deforestation on
water balance components of a watershed on the Brazilian East Coast. Rev. Bras.
Ciênc. Solo 38, 1350–1358.
Pinto, D.B.F., Silva, A.M., Beskow, S., Mello, C.R., Coelho, G., 2013. Application of the Soil
and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) for sediment transport simulation at a headwa-
ter watershed in Minas Gerais state, Brazil. Trans. ASABE 56, 697–709.
Polasky, S., Nelson, E., Pennington, D., Johnson, K.A., 2011. The impact of land-use change
on ecosystem services, biodiversity and returns to landowners: a case study in the
state of Minnesota. Environ. Resour. Econ. 48, 219–242.
Pruski, F.F., Ferreira, P.A., Ramos, M.M., Cecon, P.R., 1997. Model to design level terraces.
J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 123, 8–12.
Qi, H., Altinakar, M.S., 2011. A conceptual framework of agricultural land use planning
with BMP for integrated watershed management. J. Environ. Manag. 92, 149–155.
Qi, H., Altinakar, M.S., 2013. Integrated watershed management with multiobjective land-
use optimizations under uncertainty. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 139, 239–245.
Rabus, B., Eineder, M., Roth, A., Bamler, R., 2003. The shuttle radar topography mission — a
new class of digital elevation models acquired by spaceborne radar. ISPRS J.
Photogramm. 57, 241–262.
Radambrasil, P., 1983. Folha SF24 Cachoeiro do Itapamirim: geologia, geomorfologia,
pedologia, vegetação e uso potencial da terra.
Salles, L.A., 2012. Calibração e validação do modelo SWAT para a predição de vazões na
bacia do ribeirão Pipiripau. (MS Thesis). Brasília University, Brasília, Brazil.
Santos, L.N.S., Cecílio, R.A., Zanetti, S.S., 2013. Application of hydrological model
HidroBacia in Jaqueira stream watershed, Espírito Santo. Semina 34, 2103–2116
(in portuguese).
Schmalz, B., Fohrer, N., 2009. Comparing model sensitivities of different landscapes using
the ecohydrological SWAT model. Adv. Geosci. 21, 91–98.
Shi, Z.H., Ai, L., Fang, N.F., Zhu, H.D., 2012. Modeling the impacts of integrated small
watershed management on soil erosion and sediment delivery: a case study in the
Three Gorges Area, China. J. Hydrol. 438, 156–167.
Silva, C.L., Oliveira, C.A.S., 1999. Runoff measurement and prediction for a watershed
under natural vegetation in central Brazil. Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo 23, 695–702.
Singh, V.P., Woolhiser, D.A., 2002. Mathematical modeling of watershed hydrology.
J. Hydrol. Eng. 7, 270–292.
 D.C. Fukunaga et al. / Catena 125 (2015) 206–213
Stehr, A., Debels, P., Romero, F., Alcayaga, H., 2008. Hydrological modelling with SWAT
under conditions of limited data availability: evaluation of results from a Chilean
case study. Hydrol. Sci. J. 53, 588–601.
Strauch, M., Bernhofer, C., Koide, S., Volk, M., Lorz, C., Makeschin, F., 2012. Using precipita-
tion data ensemble for uncertainty analysis in SWAT streamflow simulation. J. Hydrol.
414, 413–424.
Strauch, M., Lima, J.E., Volk, M., Lorz, C., Makeschin, F., 2013. The impact of Best Manage-
ment Practices on simulated streamflow and sediment load in a Central Brazilian
catchment. J. Environ. Manag. 127, S24–S36.
Suweis, S., Rinaldo, A., Maritan, A., D'Odorico, P., 2013. Water-controlled wealth of nations.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 110, 4230–4233.
Tedeschi, L.O., 2006. Assessment of the adequacy of mathematical models. Agric. Syst. 89,
225–247.
Thampi, S.G., Raneesh, K.Y., Surya, T.V., 2010. Influence of scale on SWAT model calibra-
tion for streamflow in a river basin in the humid tropics. Water Resour. Manag. 24,
4567–4578.
Ullrich, A., Volk, M., 2009. Application of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) to
predict the impact of alternative management practices on water quality and quantity.
Agric. Water Manag. 96, 1207–1217.
Uzeika, T., Merten, G.H., Minella, J.P.G., Moro, M., 2012. Use of the SWAT model for hydro-
sedimentologic simulation in a small rural watershed. Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo 36, 557–565.
Van Liew, M.W., Arnold, J.G., Bosch, D.D., 2005. Problems and potential of autocalibrating
a hydrologic model. Trans. ASAE 48, 1025–1040.
Viola, M.R., Mello, C.R., Acerbi Júnior, F.W., Silva, A.M., 2009. Hydrologic modeling in the
Aiuruoca river basin, Minas Gerais State. Rev. Bras. Eng. Agric. Ambient 13, 581–591
(in Portuguese).
View publication stats
213
Viola, M.R., Mello, C.R., Giongo, M., Beskow, S., Santos, A.F., 2012. Hydrological modeling
in a watershed of the Lower Araguaia River Basin, TO. J. Biotechnol. Biodivers. 3,
38–47 (in Portuguese).
Wheater, H., Evans, E., 2009. Land use, water management and future flood risk. Land Use
Policy 26, 251–264.
White, K.L., Chaubey, I., 2005. Sensitivity analysis, calibration, and validations for a multi-
site and multivariable swat model. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 41, 1077–1089.
Wible, B., 2012. Science for sustainable development. Science 336, 1396–1398.
Willaarts, B.A., Volk, M., Aguilera, P.A., 2012. Assessing the ecosystem services supplied
by freshwater flows in Mediterranean agroecosystems. Agric. Water Manag. 105,
21–31.
Zampella, R.A., Procopio, N.A., Lathrop, R.G., Dow, C.L., 2007. Relationship of land-use/
land-cover patterns and surface-water quality in the Mullica River Basin. J. Am.
Water Resour. Assoc. 43, 594–604.
Zhang, X., Zhang, L., Zhao, J., Rustomji, P., Hairsine, P., 2008. Responses of streamflow to
changes in climate and land use/cover in the Loess Plateau, China. Water Resour.
Res. 44.
Zhang, X., Srinivasan, R., Zhao, K., Liew, V.M., 2009. Evaluation of global optimization
algorithms for parameter calibration of a computationally intensive hydrologic
model. Hydrol. Process. 23, 430–441.
Zhang, X., Srinivasan, R., Arnold, J., Izaurralde, R.C., Bosch, D., 2011. Simultaneous calibra-
tion of surface flow and baseflow simulations: a revisit of the SWAT model calibration
framework. Hydrol. Process. 25, 2313–2320.