Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tgel20

Groundwater potential mapping using geospatial

techniques: a case study of Dhungeta-Ramis sub-
basin, Ethiopia

Abebe Debele Tolche

To cite this article: Abebe Debele Tolche (2021) Groundwater potential mapping using geospatial
techniques: a case study of Dhungeta-Ramis sub-basin, Ethiopia, Geology, Ecology, and
Landscapes, 5:1, 65-80, DOI: 10.1080/24749508.2020.1728882

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2020.1728882

© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa

UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group on behalf of the International Water,
Air & Soil Conservation Society(INWASCON).

Published online: 23 Feb 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 12759

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 46 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tgel20
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES
2021, VOL. 5, NO. 1, 65–80
https://doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2020.1728882 INWASCON

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Groundwater potential mapping using geospatial techniques: a case study of

Dhungeta-Ramis sub-basin, Ethiopia
Abebe Debele Tolche
School of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, Haramaya Institute of Technology, Haramaya University, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The objective of this paper is to exploit the potential application of weighted index overlay Received 29 October 2019
analysis for assessing groundwater potential mapping at Dhungeta-Ramis sub-basin, Wabi Accepted 30 January 2020
Shebele basin, Ethiopia using remote sensing and geographic information system (GIS) tech- KEYWORDS
nique. For this purpose, seven groundwater occurrences and movement controlling factors, Groundwater potential
including, lithology, slope, land use land cover (LULC), rainfall, lineaments, soil, and drainage zones; gis; remote Sensing;
density were mapped. Then, weight was assigned to thematic maps, and the groundwater weighted index overlay
prospective of the sub-basin is qualitatively classified into five classes, namely, very good, analysis; thematic map
good, moderate, poor, and very poor which account for 2.22%, 26.93%, 56.74%, 13.84%, and
0.26% landscape, respectively. The cross-validation of the resultant model was carefully carried
out using spring, hand-dug, and deep well data. The result reveals that 89% of springs were
overlaying good and/or very good groundwater potential zones and 58% of deep well shows
the same scenario, whereas 42% of deep well overlays moderate zone. As a result, the map
generated using this platform could be used as a preliminary reference in selecting suitable
sites for groundwater resource exploitation.

1. Introduction analysis of large volumes of data and quite decision-

making techniques for groundwater exploration.
Groundwater is the primary source of domestic, agri-
Remote sensing data that are a wide-range scale of the
cultural, and industrial use in many regions of the
space-time distribution provide good opportunities to
world (Burke & Moench, 2000; Hosseinifard &
current science in improving the understanding of the
Mirzaei Aminiyan, 2015). Groundwater has been
hydrological system (Hoffmann & Sander, 2007). Besides
found to be a more preferred resource due to its less
of its scale, remote sensing provides information on
susceptible contamination than surface water
inaccessible areas (Sener, Davraz, & Ozcelik, 2005) and
(Naghibi, Moghaddam, Kalantar, Pradhan, & Kisi,
saves time and money as well (Murthy, 2010; Solomon &
2017). It can be considered as the largest single fresh-
Quiel, 2006; Tweed, Leblanc, Webb, & Lubczynski,
water source in many parts of the world, especially
2007). Thus, remote sensing and GIS are being increas-
during prolonged dry periods (Assaf & Saadeh, 2008).
ingly used for the identification of groundwater potential
The utility of water is continuously growing and
zones (Andualem & Demeke, 2019) as well as ground-
causes groundwater resource stress predictably
water recharge and discharge zones (Chenini, Mammou,
(Vaux, 2011). In developing countries like Ethiopia,
& Elmay, 2010; Russo, Fisher, & Lockwood, 2015). GIS
the unregulated growth of population and improper
has also been used for processing and interpretation of
management resources affected directly and/or indir-
groundwater quality data (Srinivasan & Jugran, 2003).
ectly both the quality and quantity of groundwater.
Moreover, researchers have been used an integrated
Hence, unscientific exploitation and improper use of
approach using remote sensing, GIS, and geophysical
water policy are also possible factors. Therefore, the
techniques to assess groundwater resources (Srivastava
assessment of groundwater resources is critical for
& Bhattacharya, 2006).
sustainable management.
Recently, several studies have been applied using
Most groundwater potential investigation techniques
weighted overlay analysis for assessing groundwater
(i.e., geophysical methods, ground-based survey, and
potential zones (Andualem & Demeke, 2019; Das, Pal,
exploratory drilling) are uneconomical and time-
Malik, & Rabin Chakrabortty, 2019; Hussein, Govindu,
consuming and require large data sets (Nampak,
& Nigusse, 2016; Ibrahim-Bathis & Ahmed, 2016;
Pradhan, & Manap, 2014; Singh & Prakash, 2002).
Kumar, Herath, Avtar, & Takeuchi, 2016; Magesh,
However, an integrated GIS and remote sensing study
Chandrasekar, & Soundranayagam, 2012; Rahmati,
can provide the appropriate platform for the convergent
Samani, Mahdavi, Pourghasemi, & Zeinivand, 2014).

CONTACT Abebe Debele Tolche abeberobe@gmail.com School of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, Haramaya Institute of
Technology, Haramaya University, P.O. Box 138, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia
© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group on behalf of the International Water, Air & Soil Conservation Society(INWASCON).
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
66 A. D. TOLCHE
Among many determinant factors of the occurrence and
movement of groundwater, topography, geomorphol-
ogy, lithology, geological structures, lineaments, porosity,
slope, drainage patterns, rainfall, LULC, water quality,
depth to water, net groundwater recharge, and climate
can be listed as examples (Andualem & Demeke, 2019;
Elewa & Qaddah, 2011; Jaiswal, Mukherjee,
Krishnamurthy, & Saxena, 2003; Jha, Chowdhury,
Chowdary, & Peiffer, 2007; Murthy & Mamo, 2009).
Hence, the factors used are different per researches, and
consequently, the results vary (Magesh et al., 2012).
In Ethiopia, groundwater is a source of domestic
water in urban and rural areas, hence the only practical
means of meeting rural communities in arid and semi-
arid regions (Kebede, 2013). Considering hydrogeologi-
cal properties, groundwater potential within the territory
of Ethiopia was estimated to be about 1000 billion m3
(Kebede, 2013). Specifically, in the Dhungeta-Ramis sub-
basin (an area of approximately 16,076.64 km2) of Wabi
Shebele river basin, groundwater resources are primarily
used for irrigation and domestic utilities since the
amount of surface water in the area is scarce and those
available are not developed well.
The practical development of the groundwater
resources will have a significant effect on the improve-
ment of the community livelihood. In fact, generating
groundwater potential map has a significant effect to
enhance sustainable management of groundwater
resources in the study area as well as in the country.
Thus, a detailed study has been performed to identify
the potential areas of groundwater resources for better
utility. Accordingly, this paper contributes by provid-
ing delineated groundwater potential zones through
implementing remote sensing techniques and GIS
tools to have proper administration, management,
and sustainable use of groundwater resources in the
Figure 1. The geographic location of Dhungeta-Ramis sub-basin.
sub-basin. Seven determinant factors, namely, lithol-
ogy, slope, LULC, rainfall, lineaments, and drainage
density, were accounted for in the study.
2. Study area
The study area Dhungeta-Ramis sub-basin is located
in the upper portion of Wabi Shebele basin, Ethiopia.
Geographically, the study site is situated between lati-
tude 7°55ʹ52” to 9°25ʹ44” N and longitude 40°16ʹ13” to
41°44ʹ12” E with an aerial extent of 16,076.64 Km2
(Figure 1). As shown in Figure 1, the study area gen-
erally ought to a higher elevation in the northern and
northwestern areas and lower elevation in the south-
ern with minimum and maximum elevation of 597 m
and 3401 m from mean sea level (datum), respectively,
and the standard deviation of 341.54 m. The hydro-
logical behaviors of the sub-basin are characterized by
spatial and temporal variability. The mean annual
rainfall of the Dhungeta-Ramis sub-basin is
720–1255 mm, with high spatial and temporal varia-
bility. The study area is dominated by humid to sub-
humid tropical climate and having a mean annual
temperature of 19.5° with small seasonal variability.
A groundwater resource in Dhungeta-Ramis sub-
basin is exploited through springs, hand-dug, and
deep well. The groundwater potential assessment is
vital in this area since groundwater supplies drinking
water and irrigation necessities for the dwellers.
3. Materials and methods
In this study, various types of data and software have
been used. A digital elevation model (DEM) with 30 m
resolution was obtained from Shuttle Radar
Topography Mission (SRTM) to derive slope and

drainage density map using the ArcGIS tool. The
development of drainage density involves filling
sinks, flow direction, flow accumulation, and stream
network extraction. Then, the drainage density map
was produced using a line density analysis tool.
Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager (OLI) satellite
image was obtained from the United States
Geological Society (USGS) website and used to gener-
ate lineament density and LULC maps (USGS, 2019).
Automatic lineament extraction was performed using
the line module of PCI Geomatica. The daily rainfall
data of 23 years (1994–2016) and groundwater well
data were provided from the National Metrological
Agency and Ethiopian Ministry of Water, Energy
and Electricity, whereas geological data were obtained
from the Ethiopian geological survey. A rainfall map
was developed using inverse distance weight methods.
Soil map of the study area was prepared using the
Harmonized World Soil Database (HWSD).
Once the thematic maps were developed the weight
was assigned to the parameters influencing ground-
water occurrence and movement. Then, groundwater
potential map was developed using weighted index
overlay analysis. The groundwater potential index
was calculated using a weighted linear combination
method (Malczewski, 1999) (Eq. 1). In general, the
study procedure adopted was shown in the flowchart
(Figure 2).
GPx ¼ Lw Lr þ Lcw Lcr þ Ldw Ldr þ Sgw Sgr þ Ddw Ddr
þ Rw Rr þ Sw Sr
(1)
where GPx is the groundwater potential index [-]; L is
the score of lithology [-]; Dd is the score of drainage
Landsat 8 (OLI) DEM SRTM
Lineament Slope and
density and drainage density
LULC map map
Mapping
Overlay
groundwater
Analysis
potential zones
and Validation
Figure 2. Conceptual framework adopted for the generation of groundwater potential map.
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 67
density [-]; Ld is the score of lineament density [-]; Sg is
the score of slope gradient [-]; LC is the score of LULC
[-], S is the score of soil [-], and where the subscripts
w and r refer to the weight of a theme and the rate of
individual features of a theme, respectively.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Deterministic factors for groundwater
occurrence and movements
4.1.1. Lithology
Lithology plays an important role in the occurrence
and distribution of groundwater since it is the con-
trolling factor of infiltration rate and flow. The geolo-
gical map (Figure 3) of the study area reveals the
presence of lithology with range of geological time-
scale, namely, Precambrian (4.34%), Paleozoic–Early
Jurassic (3.95%), Middle–Late Jurassic (76.03%),
Cretaceous (5.49%), Tertiary (4.37%), and
Quaternary (5.83%). Precambrian lithology of
Ethiopia which is mainly of metamorphic rocks is
considered as low yielding regional aquicludes
(Chernet, 1993); nevertheless, regoliths and fractures
are the main groundwater holding and transmitting
media in a metamorphic terrain (Kebede, 2013).
Mesozoic sediments have better productivity because
they have intergranular permeability and can have
extensive aquifers (Chernet, 1993). The quaternary
sediments are composed of alluvium (sand, silt, and
clay and their inter-bedding) river gravels, fans, and
travertine (Table 1). The quaternary alluvial has good
potential because they are recent deposits and have
better permeability and productivity (Kebede, 2013). If
fractured, quaternary volcanic could yield a good
HWSD Rainfall data
Textural soil Rainfall
map map
Geological
map
Weight assignment to
thematic parameters
68 A. D. TOLCHE
Figure 3. Lithology map of the study area.
amount of water. The weight is therefore assigned
according to the aforementioned characteristics of
the hydrogeological units.
4.1.2. Land use land cover (LULC)
LULC includes the type of soil deposits, the distribution
of residential areas, waterbody, and vegetation cover
within a certain area. It is an important factor affecting
groundwater recharge, groundwater occurrence, and
availability (Hussein et al., 2016; Kumar et al., 2016;
Pande, Khadri, Moharir, & Patode, 2017; Yeh, Cheng,
Lin, & Lee, 2016).
Supervised image classification was conducted to
classify and identify the type of LULC, where
Landsat 8 (OLI) satellite image of 2018 with 30-
m spatial resolution used. The study area consists of
seven types of LULC (Figure 4) namely; agricultural
area (45.68%), shrubs cover area (27.72%), grassland

Figure 4. Land use land cover map of the study area.
(24.23%), forest/woodland (2.17%), bare soil/rock
(0.08%), settlement area (0.08%), and water-
body (0.04%).
4.1.3. Lineament
Geological lineaments are the manifestation at the
earth’s surface of deeper geological structures (faults
and fractures that have obvious displacement, rup-
tures that have no significant fracture displacement)
(Han, Liu, Ning, & Zhao, 2018). It has been used to
investigate the distribution of minerals (Bahiru &
Woldai, 2016), determine the potential areas for runoff
water harvesting (Elewa, Qaddah, & El-Feel, 2012), the
regional distribution of groundwater potential
(Magesh et al., 2012), geological disasters (Yusof,
Ramli, Pirasteh, & Shafri, 2011), geothermal resources,
earthquakes (Elmahdy & Mohamed, 2016) and
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 69
geomorphology. Moreover, identification of the
weathered zones from the lineament density map is
useful in soil erosion studies (Krishna, Kishan, &
Sarup, 2015). Areas with high lineament density
denote a permeable zone so reveal good groundwater
potential zones.
Thanks to the USGS website for open accessibility
Landsat 8 (OLI) satellite image captured in
January 2019 was obtained to have a cloud-free
image for the betterment of the results. In preceding
studies for automatic lineament extraction, VNIR
band 3 of ASTER and the fused band 4 of the
Landsat ETM (Hung, Batelaan, & De Smedt, 2005)
and band 8 (panchromatic) of Landsat 8 (El-Sawy,
Ibrahim, El-Bastawesy, & El-Saud, 2016) were used,
where others use principal components (Han et al.,
2018). In this study, band 8 of Landsat 8 (OLI) was
70 A. D. TOLCHE
used due to its higher spatial resolution. The linea-
ment map was prepared using the line module of PCI
Geomatica (Hashim, Ahmad, Johari, & Pour, 2013).
Whereas, before starting the process, atmospheric cor-
rection and geometric correction were applied to
remove errors in the image. Considering the linea-
ment map as a baseline, lineament density (Ld) defined
as the total length of lineaments per unit area
(Greenbaum, 1985; Magesh et al., 2012; Yeh et al.,
2016), was calculated (Eq. 2) to prepare lineament
density map.
Pn
Li
Ld ¼ i¼1
(2)
A which accounts for 33.30% and 23.43%, respectively.
Figure 5. Lineament density map of the study area.
Pn
where Li is the total length of lineaments [L],
A refers to unit area of study site [L2], and n stand
i¼1
for number of drainage networks in the sub-basin [-].
The lineament density of the study area was classi-
fied into six classes (Figure 5). The map reveals that
the more densely distributed lineaments were along
Dhungeta and Ramis River, which could be the result
of serious erosion downstream. Areas having
a lineament density between 0.82 and 1.33 km/km2
were considered as excellent groundwater prospective
zone covering about 6.67% of the landscape. Referring
to the map, it is clear that the major part of the study
area is having poor and very poor lineament density
 GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 71

Despite, landscape having an area coverage of 4.1.5. Drainage density

3647.33 km2 (22.69%) was scored as good lineament
density. Overall percentage and area coverage of linea-
ment density classes are presented in Table 2.
4.1.4. Slope
Topography and/or slope gradient directly influence the
infiltration of rainfall and could be considered as one of
the indicators of groundwater potential accessibility (Al
Saud, 2018). It can also give an indication for the general
groundwater flow direction (Gupta & Srivastava, 2010).
The slope percentage map of the study area (Figure 6)
was prepared from DEM with 30 m resolution using
a spatial analysis tool in ArcGIS 10.4. The slope percen-
tage of the study area varies between 0 and 80%. Despite
the flat slope region causes more infiltration to the steep
slope, the study area has been classified into six slope
classes. About 40.29% of landscape is under the gentle
slope (0º-5º) category and could be a pointer of the
presence of high groundwater potential zones (Hussein
et al., 2016). This is due to the fact that gentle slope areas
have an affinity for holding rainfall and facilitate recharge
to groundwater. The region with a very steep slope (20-
35º) and escarpment (35-78º) accounts for 15.34% and
2.46% of landscape, respectively. This covers the
Northeast parts of the study area and the escarpment
area with a buffer zone of the valley. However, the gentle
(0-5º), moderate (5-10º), and moderately steep (10-20º)
slope covers about 40.29%, 20.08%, and 12.33% of the
total area of sub-basin, respectively.
Drainage density is one of the important indicators of
groundwater recharge (Magesh et al., 2012) and
groundwater occurrence (Sener et al., 2005). In fact,
it is linked with water percolation properties of under-
lying lithology, consequently having close relation
with groundwater mapping. The drainage density is
an inverse function of permeability. An area with low
permeable surface prone to high drainage density and
water comes from precipitation goes to a high runoff
as well and vice versa. As a result, high drainage
density implies low groundwater potential.
The algorithm has put forward to extract drainage
networks from DEM with 30 m resolution using
a spatial analysis tool in ArcGIS 10.4. Afterwards,
a drainage density map is produced using a line den-
sity analysis tool (Figure 7). As per the definition of
preceding studies (Greenbaum, 1985; Magesh et al.,
2012), drainage density (Dd) is the total length of the
stream segments divided by the unit area (Eq. 3).
Pn
Li
Dd ¼ i¼1 (3)
A
P
n
where Li the total length of drainage [L], A is total
i¼1
area of study site [L2], and n stand for number of
drainage networks in the sub-basin [-].
Figure 7 illustrates the drainage density class in the
study area. The class has been assigned according to its
importance to potentiality for groundwater storage,

Table 1. Characteristic features of lithological groups in the Dhungeta-Ramis sub-basin (source: Alemu, 2010; Gebrekidan, 2005;
Kebede, 2013; Teklay, Kroner, Mezger, & Oberhonsl, 1998).
No Code Lithology Geological age Formation properties
1 Pc2b Boye group Precambrian Represented by varying proportion of schists and gneisses interbedded with marble, quartzite, and
amphibolite, all metamorphosed in the mid- to upper amphibolite facies.
2 Pc3k Soka groups Represented by metavolcanics and metasediments with numerous lenses or pods of mafic-ultramafic
rocks.
3 Pc1 Mafic gneisisses High-grade metamorphic rock
4 Pc2m Marbles High-grade metamorphic rocks that could be potential zone of groundwater in the presence of karst
formation.
5 Pzt Wayu sandstone Paleozoic – Early It composed of (i) medium to coarse grained and compacted sandstone, (ii) interbedded mudstone,
Jurassic shale, and sandstone, and (iii) grayish yellow, medium grained, compacted, and less porous
sandstone from bottom to top.
6 Ja Adigrat formation It composed of conglomeratic sandstone, then cross bedded coarser sandstone overlain by beds of
laminated medium to fine grained siltstone and mudstone with cyclical deposition. Its upper
portion is porous.
7 Jh1 Lower Hamanlei Middle–Late It is marine sediment formed by the flooding of the sea and consists of mixed carbonate-clastic
formation: Jurassic sediments (limestone and Shale)
8 Jh2 Upper Hamanlei It is marine sediment formed by the flooding of the sea and comprised of pure limestone
formation
9 Ju Urandab In the study area, this formation is represented by (i) thin to very thinly bedded limestone in the
formation southwestern part of the area in the deep cut valleys of Dhungeta and Shannan Rivers, and (ii)
coralliferous limestone, burrowed limestone, brachiopod-gastropod bearing limestone, and
ammonite bearing limestone, in northeastern part of the area around the upper course of Ramis
Rivers.
10 Ka Amba Aradon Cretaceous This formation is subdivided into upper and lower member, where the first one is characterized by
formation medium to coarse grained, cross bedded sandstone at the top and interbedded shale, mudstone
and siltstone with fine to medium grained sandstone at the bottom, and the later where
dominantly fine to medium grained sandstone with interbeds of shale and mudstone with coal
seams.
11 Pna1 Alaji basalts Tertiary Characterized by aphyric to locally porphyritic basalt
12 Nag Arba Gugu Quaternary made up mostly of porphyritic pyroxene and/or plagioclase basalts
basalts
13 Qa Alluvial Composed of unsorted composition; coarse grained sand; medium to fine grained sand with variable
sediments content of silt and clay.
72 A. D. TOLCHE

Table 2. Categorization of factors influencing groundwater movement and occurrence and their associated aerial extent within
the study area.
Parameter Rank (%) Class/unit Potentiality for groundwater storage Weight Area coverage (%)
Lithology 25 Arba Gugu basalts (Nag) Excellent 25 0.04
Alaji basalts (Pna1) Excellent 25 4.37
Alluvial sediments (Qa) Excellent 25 5.79
Amba Aradon formation (Ka) Very good 20 5.49
Urandab formation (Ju) Good 15 5.36
Upper Hamanlei formation (Jh2) Good 15 43.61
Lower Hamanlei formation (Jh1) Good 15 27.06
Adigrat formation (Ja) Poor 10 3.84
Wayu sandstone (Pzt) Poor 10 0.11
Marbles (Pc2m) Poor 10 0.28
Mafic gneisisses (Pc1) Very Poor 5 1.48
Boye group (Pc2b) Very Poor 5 2.39
Soka groups (Pc3k) Very Poor 5 0.19
Land use and land cover 16.5 Waterbody Excellent 16.5 0.04
Agricultural area Very good 14.5 45.68
Grassland Good 12.5 24.23
Forest/woodland Medium good 10.5 2.17
Shrubs cover areas Medium poor 8.5 27.72
Bare areas Poor 6.5 0.08
Settlement areas Very poor 4.5 0.08
Lineament 15.5 0.82–1.33 (segment per 1 km2) Excellent 15.5 6.67
0.60–0.82 Very good 12 13.91
0.43–0.60 Good 8.5 22.69
0.26–0.43 Poor 5 33.30
0–0.26 Very Poor 1.5 23.43
Slope (degree) 15 0–5 Excellent 15 40.29
5–10 Very good 12 20.08
10–15 Good 9 12.33
15–20 Poor 6 9.49
20–35 Very poor 3 15.34
35–78 Null 0 2.46
Drainage density 10.5 0–0.25 (segment per 1 km2) Excellent 10.5 1.73
0.25–0.5 Very good 8.5 25.07
0.5–0.75 Good 6.5 61.18
0.75–1.00 Poor 4.5 11.62
1.00–1.42 Very poor 2.5 0.4
Annual rainfall (mm) 10 1150–1255 Excellent 10 10.44
1040-1150 Very good 8.5 19.55
935–1040 Good 7 62.32
830–935 Poor 5.5 5.70
720–830 Very poor 4 1.99
Soil 7.5 Sandy clay loam Excellent 7.5 0.45
Loam Very good 6 57.12
Clay loam Good 4 34.34
Clay Poor 2 8.09

namely “very poor” (1.00–1.42 km/km2), “poor”
(0.75–1.00 km/km2), “good” (0.5–0.75 km/km2), “very
good” (0.25–0.5 km/km2), and excellent (0–0.25 km/
km2). In the study area, 1.73% and 25.07% of landscape
were found in 0–0.25 km/km2 and 0.25–0.5 km/km2
drainage density class, respectively. This implies the
availability of good groundwater potential zones.
Moreover, 61.18% was entitled under drainage class
with good potentiality for groundwater storage.
4.1.6. Rainfall
Rainfall is one of the important factors to delineate
groundwater potential zones. In fact, it is the main
source of natural recharge that develops groundwater
resources. Rainfall map was developed from the his-
torical rainfall data of 23 years (1994–2016) which is
measured at the meteorology stations located in and
within a buffer zone of the study area using inverse
distance weight method. As it is shown in Figure 8, the
mean annual rainfall of the sub-basin ranges from 720
up to 1255 mm. The intensity of rainfall plays
a significant role in infiltration; consequently, the
weight was given to rainfall classes.
4.1.7. Soil
Soil type plays a vital role in controlling the infil-
tration rate of precipitated water and water-holding
capacity of the area. Consequently, it could be
considered as one of the important factors for the
delineation of groundwater potential zones (Kumar
et al., 2016; Magesh et al., 2012). Soil map of the
area was prepared using Harmonized World Soil
Database (FAO/IIASA/ISRIC/ISSCAS/JRC, 2012)
and having 10 soil types per FAO 90
nomenclatures.
The statistical analysis of the soil type reveals that
the study area is predominantly covered by loam
(Eutric Leptosols; Haplic Calcisols; Rendzic Leptosols)
soil which accounts for 57.12% area coverage, followed
by clay (Vertic Luvisols; Eutric Vertisols), clay loam

Figure 6. Slope class map of the study area.
(Chromic Cambisols; Eutric Cambisols; Lithic
Leptosols), and sandy clay loam (Chromic Luvisols;
Haplic Luvisols) with area coverage of 34.34%, 8.09%,
and 0.45%, respectively. These soil types are character-
ized by poor to good infiltration property. Figure 9
shows the soil map of the study area.
4.2. Weight assignment to parameters
In this study, seven factors (i.e., lithology, slope,
LULC, lineament, drainage, soil, and rainfall) were
selected to delineate the groundwater potential zones
of the study area. The influence of these factors in
groundwater potential zonation is not the same
(Magesh et al., 2012). The weight of each factor was
assigned depending on its influence on the movement
and storage of groundwater and in reference to
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 73
literatures (Andualem & Demeke, 2019; Ibrahim-
Bathis & Ahmed, 2016; Magesh et al., 2012; Naghibi
et al., 2017; Nampak et al., 2014; Pande et al., 2017;
Rahmati et al., 2014; Sener et al., 2005; Yeh et al.,
2016).
The weight value of a factor represents the propor-
tion of its value in groundwater potential zonation, in
which high weight value is given to the dominant
influencing factor (Table 2). To illustrate, geology
plays a vital role with the highest score weight of
25% followed by LULC, lineament, slope, drainage
density, rainfall, and soil with score weight of 16.5%,
15.5%, 15%, 10.5%, 10%, and 7.5%, respectively.
An area having high lineament density was given high
weight and vice versa (Ibrahim-Bathis & Ahmed, 2016;
Naghibi et al., 2017; Nampak et al., 2014; Yeh et al.,
2016). An area having high drainage density was
74 A. D. TOLCHE
Figure 7. Drainage density map of the study area.
assigned very low weight (Andualem & Demeke, 2019;
Ibrahim-Bathis & Ahmed, 2016; Rahmati et al., 2014).
An area with low slope to flat was given high weight,
whereas steep slope area assigned to low weight
(Andualem & Demeke, 2019; Hussein et al., 2016;
Ibrahim-Bathis & Ahmed, 2016). Since rainfall distribu-
tion directly affects the infiltration rate of runoff water,
high weight was given to high rainfall region. Moreover,
high weight was given to course texture soil (Ibrahim-
Bathis & Ahmed, 2016).
4.3. Delineation of groundwater potential zones
Groundwater potential map was developed using
a weighted index overlay analysis by summing up the
weight value of each thematic layer. The area score with
a high weighted value was considered as groundwater
prospective area (Ibrahim-Bathis & Ahmed, 2016).
Consequently, the groundwater potential map has
been classified into five classes with groundwater poten-
tiality from very good to very poor owing to the grading
method of equal intervals (Figure 10). This is attributed
as: 2.22% (very good), 26.93% (good), 56.74% (moder-
ate), 13.84% (poor), and 0.26% (very poor).
As demonstrates in Figure 10, very good and good
groundwater potential zones are concentrated in the
area where Cenozoic (tertiary and quaternary) sedi-
mentary rock (alluvial plain) and volcanic rock (arba
gugu basalt and alaji basalts) allocated (Kebede, 2013).
Those formations are characterized by the presence of
high primary and secondary porosity, respectively,
and, consequently, have a high potentiality of retain-
ing groundwater since they allow maximum percola-
tion. The groundwater perspective zones also follow

Figure 8. Rainfall map of the study area.
the valley section of Dhungeta River and lower portion
of Ramis River due to alluvial deposits that could
increase the degree of groundwater recharge.
Moreover, high lineament density was also illustrated
as one of the fundamental factors for groundwater
potential zonation (Ibrahim-Bathis & Ahmed, 2016).
The poor to very poor potential zones are mainly
distributed in the areas having high drainage density.
Hence, the groundwater potential in these areas could
be not sufficient for irrigation and other livelihood
requirements. Therefore, groundwater development
activities preferred to be performed in high ground-
water prospective zones.
4.4. Validation
The results obtained using overlay analyses were com-
pared with spring, hand-dug, and deep well data
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 75
(Figure 11). A total of 19 springs, 19 deep wells, and
2 hand-dug data were used for validation, where most
of them are positioned on the upper portion of the
sub-basin. Data availability in the lower portion of the
sub-basin is limited due to topography and scarce
population settlement. Besides, due to uneven distri-
bution of point data, preparation of the groundwater
level map was not plausible. Therefore, the validity of
the groundwater potential map was performed by only
overlying the point data of springs, hand-dug and
deep well with the map generated using weighted
index overlay analysis.
The overlay analysis shows that 89% of springs with
static water levels equivalent to ground surface were
overlaid good and very good groundwater potential
zones. Springs is paramount important for successful
groundwater determination, protection, and manage-
ment, where some researchers use groundwater spring
76 A. D. TOLCHE
Figure 9. Soil map of the study area.
potential zones as an indicator of groundwater poten-
tial zones (Moghaddam, Rezaei, Pourghasemi,
Pourtaghie, & Pradhan, 2015). Moreover,
Haghizadeh, Moghaddam, and Pourghasemi (2017)
were used spring locations as groundwater indicator
to analyze groundwater capacity in the Broujerd
region, Lorestan Province, Iran.
Hand-dug well having a shallow static water level of
4.2 m and 11.85 m depth from the ground surface was
overlays good and moderate groundwater potential
zones, respectively. In regards to deep well, about
58% was overlaid good groundwater potential zone,
nerveless, 42% was overlay area classified under mod-
erate groundwater potential zone. However, those
wells are very deep and their groundwater level is
low as compared to wells in the good potential zone.
For instance, the depth of wells HB-181 and HB-136
those overlay moderate groundwater potential zone is
about 221 m and 153 m from ground surface, respec-
tively (Figure 10). An area with a low groundwater
level anticipated to lie into the poor groundwater
potential zones (Kumar et al., 2016). Considering
this in an account, the cumulative effect of the
weighted multi influencing factors through overlay
analysis was obtained as a good platform for mapping
of groundwater potential zones in the study area.
5. Conclusion
Mapping groundwater potential using remote sensing
data and GIS techniques have been increasingly imple-
mented because of applicability in the inaccessible
area, saves time and money. In this study, qualitative
analysis was carried out to assess the groundwater
potential zones using GIS and remote sensing techni-
ques for Dhungeta-Ramis sub-basin, Wabi Shebele

Figure 10. Groundwater potential zone map of the study area.
basin, Ethiopia. The study merged effects of different
factors account for occurrence and movement of
groundwater, namely lithology, LULC, lineament,
slope, drainage density, rainfall, and soil with score
weight of 25%, 16.5%, 15.5%, 15%, 10.5%, 10%, and
7.5%, respectively.
According to the groundwater potential zone map,
sub-basin is categorized into five different zones,
namely “very good” (2.22% of the area), “good”
(26.93% of the area), “moderate” (56.74% of the
area), “poor” (13.84% of the area), and “very poor”
(0.26% of the area). The suitable potential ground-
water areas are found within Cenozoic (tertiary and
quaternary) sedimentary rock (alluvial plain) and vol-
canic rock (arba gugu basalt and alaji basalts).
Moreover, areas with high lineament density are also
found as the most potential zone of groundwater. The
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 77
results obtained using overlay analyses were validated
with springs, hand-dug, and deep well data, and it
reveals that groundwater potential zonation map gen-
erated via weighted index overlay analysis and point
data proves satisfactory correlation. Therefore, results
obtained could use as a preliminary reference in select-
ing suitable sites for groundwater resource explora-
tion/exploitation.
The investigation of groundwater potential in certain
areas is vital, but further investigation has to be per-
formed to be assured of its reliabilities. Moreover, the
studies can be done on the quality and its suitability for
different aspects such as drinking, agricultural and indus-
trial activities. Groundwater recharge strongly affects the
potential of the groundwater resource. Accordingly,
a quantitative investigation of groundwater recharge is
recommended for future study as it will aid in giving
78 A. D. TOLCHE

30

25

Water point 20

15

10

0
Very good Good Moderte Poor Very poor
Spring 4 13 2 0 0
Hand dug well 0 1 1 0 0
Deep well 0 11 8 0 0
Total 4 25 11 0 0
Figure 11. Comparison of groundwater prospective area map generated using weighted overlay analysis of multi-criteria
techniques and water point (springs, hand-dug, and deep well).

empirical evidence of the groundwater potential of an
area.
Acknowledgments
The author is highly indebted to all secondary data provider
organizations. The author is also grateful to those indivi-
duals who assist in different stages of this work.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
ORCID
Abebe Debele Tolche http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9633-
4002
References
Al Saud, M. (2018). Mapping potential areas for ground-
water storage in Wadi Aurnah Basin, western Arabian
Peninsula, using remote sensing and geographic informa-
tion system techniques. Hydrogeology Journal, 18(6),
1481–1495.
Alemu, T. (2010). Geological evolution of the northern
Ogaden basin: A review. Ethiopian Geosciences and
Mineral Engineering Association (EGMEA) Congress,
November 8 – 9 2008. Earth Sciences for Society in the
context of the UN proclaimed International Year of the
Planet Earth 2008.
Andualem, T. G., & Demeke, G. G. (2019). Groundwater
potential assessment using GIS and remote sensing:
A case study of Guna tana landscape, upper Blue Nile
Basin, Ethiopia. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies,
24, 100610.
Assaf, H., & Saadeh, M. (2008). Geostatistical assessment of
groundwater nitrate contamination with reflection on
DRASTIC vulnerability assessment: The case of the
upper Litani Basin, Lebanon. Water Resources
Management, 23(4), 775–796.
Bahiru, E. A., & Woldai, T. (2016). Integrated geological
mapping approach and gold mineralization in Buhweju
area, Uganda. Ore Geology Reviews, 72, 777–793.
Burke, J. J., & Moench, M. H. (2000). Groundwater and
society: Resources, tensions and opportunities. Themes in
groundwater management for the twenty-first century.
United Nations, New York: Department of International
Economic and Social Affairs, Statistical Office, United
Nations.
Chenini, I., Mammou, A. B., & Elmay, M. (2010).
Groundwater recharge zone mapping using GIS-based
multi-criteria analysis: A case study in central Tunisia
(Maknassy Basin). Water Resources Management, 24(5),
921–939.
Chernet, T. (1993). Hydrogeology of Ethiopia and water
resources development. Ethiopian institute of geological
surveys, Addis Ababa
Das, B., Pal, S. C., Malik, S., & Rabin Chakrabortty, R.
(2019). Modeling groundwater potential zones of
Puruliya district, West Bengal, India using remote sen-
sing and GIS techniques. Geology, Ecology, and
Landscapes, 3(3), 223–237.
Elewa, H. H., & Qaddah, A. A. (2011). Groundwater poten-
tiality mapping in the Sinai Peninsula, Egypt, using
remote sensing and GIS-watershed-based modeling.
Hydrogeology Journal, 19(3), 613–628.
Elewa, H. H., Qaddah, A. A., & El-Feel, A. A. (2012).
Determining potential sites for runoff water harvesting
using remote sensing and geographic information
systems-based modeling in Sinai. American Journal of
Environmental Sciences, 8(1), 42–55.

Elmahdy, S. I., & Mohamed, M. M. (2016). Mapping of
tecto-lineaments and investigate their association with
earthquakes in Egypt: A hybrid approach using remote
sensing data. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 7(2),
600–619.
El-Sawy, E. K., Ibrahim, A. M., El-Bastawesy, M. A., & El-
Saud, W. A. (2016). Automated, manual lineaments
extraction and geospatial analysis for Cairo-Suez district
(Northeastern Cairo-Egypt), using remote sensing and
GIS. International Journal of Innovative Science,
Engineering & Technology, 3(5), 491–500.
FAO/IIASA/ISRIC/ISSCAS/JRC. (2012). Harmonized
World Soil Database (version 1.2). FAO, Rome, Italy
and IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria.
Gebrekidan, E. (2005). Water balance and effect of irrigation
agriculture on the water quality in meteraha area. MSc
thesis, Addis Ababa University pp 105.
Greenbaum, D. (1985). Review of remote sensing applica-
tions to groundwater exploration in basement and rego-
lith (pp. 36). In British geological survey, Overseas Geology
Series. Nottingham, UK.
Gupta, M., & Srivastava, P. K. (2010). Integrating GIS and
remote sensing for identification of groundwater poten-
tial zones in the hilly terrain of Pavagarh, Gujarat, India.
Water International, 35(2), 233–245.
Haghizadeh, A., Moghaddam, D. D., & Pourghasemi, H. R.
(2017). GIS-based bivariate statistical techniques for
groundwater potential analysis (an example of Iran).
Journal of Earth System Science, 126, 109.
Han, L., Liu, Z., Ning, Y., & Zhao, Z. (2018). Extraction and
analysis of geological lineaments combining a DEM and
remote sensing images from the northern Baoji loess area.
Advances in Space Research, 62(9), 2480–2493.
Hashim, M., Ahmad, S., Johari, M. M., & Pour, A. B. (2013).
Automatic lineament extraction in a heavily vegetated
region using Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper
(ETM+) imagery. Advances in Space Research, 51(5),
874–890.
Hoffmann, J., & Sander, P. (2007). Remote sensing and GIS
in hydrogeology. Hydrogeology Journal, 15(1), 1–3.
Hosseinifard, S. J., & Mirzaei Aminiyan, M. (2015).
Hydrochemical characterization of groundwater quality
for drinking and agricultural purposes: A case study in
Rafsanjan Plain, Iran. Water Quality, Exposure, and
Health, 7(4), 531–544.
Hung, L. Q., Batelaan, O., & De Smedt, F. (2005). Lineament
extraction and analysis, comparison of LANDSAT ETM
and ASTER imagery. Case study: Suoimuoi tropical karst
catchment, Vietnam. In the Preceding of Remote Sensing
for Environmental Monitoring, GIS Applications, and
Geology, 5983, Belgium. doi:10.1117/12.627699.
Hussein, A., Govindu, V., & Nigusse, A. G. M. (2016).
Evaluation of groundwater potential using geospatial
techniques. Applied Water Science, 7(5), 2447–2461.
Ibrahim-Bathis, K., & Ahmed, S. A. (2016). Geospatial tech-
nology for delineating groundwater potential zones in
Doddahalla watershed of Chitradurga district. India.
The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space
Sciences, 19(2), 223–234.
Jaiswal, R. K., Mukherjee, S., Krishnamurthy, J., &
Saxena, R. (2003). Role of remote sensing and GIS tech-
niques for generation of groundwater prospect zones
towards rural development – An approach.
International Journal of Remote Sensing, 24(5), 993–1008.
Jha, M. K., Chowdhury, A., Chowdary, V. M., & Peiffer, S.
(2007). Groundwater management and development by
integrated remote sensing and geographic information
GEOLOGY, ECOLOGY, AND LANDSCAPES 79
systems: Prospects and constraints. Water Resources
Management, 21(2), 427–467.
Kebede, S. (2013). Groundwater in Ethiopia. Features, num-
bers and opportunities. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer
Hydrogeology. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-30391-3
Krishna, R., Kishan, D., & Sarup, J. (2015). Lineament
extraction and lineament density assessment of
Omkareshwar, M P, India, using GIS Techniques.
International Journal of Engineering and Management
Research, 5(3), 717–720.
Kumar, P., Herath, S., Avtar, R., & Takeuchi, K. (2016).
Mapping of groundwater potential zones in Killinochi
area, Sri Lanka, using GIS and remote sensing techniques.
Sustainable Water Resources Management, 2(4), 419–430.
Magesh, N. S., Chandrasekar, N., & Soundranayagam, J. P.
(2012). Delineation of groundwater potential zones in
Theni district, Tamil Nadu, using remote sensing, GIS
and MIF techniques. Geoscience Frontiers, 3(2), 189–196.
Malczewski, J. (1999). GIS and multicriteria decision analy-
sis. New York: Wiley.
Moghaddam, D. D., Rezaei, M., Pourghasemi, H. R.,
Pourtaghie, Z. S., & Pradhan, B. (2015). Groundwater
spring potential mapping using bivariate statistical
model and GIS in the Taleghan Watershed, Iran.
Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 8(2), 913–929.
Murthy, K. S. R. (2010). Groundwater potential in a
semi-arid region of Andhra Pradesh geographical infor-
mation system approach. International Journal of Remote
Sensing, 21(9), 1867–1884.
Murthy, K. S. R., & Mamo, A. G. (2009). Multi-criteria deci-
sion evaluation in groundwater zones identification in
Moyale–Teltele subbasin, South Ethiopia. International
Journal of Remote Sensing, 30(11), 2729–2740.
Naghibi, S. A., Moghaddam, D. D., Kalantar, B., Pradhan, B.,
& Kisi, O. (2017). A comparative assessment of GIS-based
data mining models and a novel ensemble model in
groundwater well potential mapping. Journal of
Hydrology, 548, 471–483.
Nampak, H., Pradhan, B., & Manap, M. A. (2014).
Application of GIS based data driven evidential belief
function model to predict groundwater potential
zonation. Journal of Hydrology, 513, 283–300.
Pande, C. B., Khadri, S. F. R., Moharir, K. N., & Patode, R. S.
(2017). Assessment of groundwater potential zonation of
Mahesh River basin Akola and Buldhana districts,
Maharashtra, India using remote sensing and GIS
techniques. Sustainable Water Resources Management, 4
(4), 965–979.
Rahmati, O., Samani, A. N., Mahdavi, M.,
Pourghasemi, H. R., & Zeinivand, H. (2014).
Groundwater potential mapping at Kurdistan region of
Iran using analytic hierarchy process and GIS. Arabian
Journal of Geosciences, 8(9), 7059–7071.
Russo, T. A., Fisher, A. T., & Lockwood, B. S. (2015).
Assessment of managed aquifer recharge site suitability
using a GIS and modeling. Groundwater, 53(3), 389–400.
Sener, E., Davraz, A., & Ozcelik, M. (2005). An integration
of GIS and remote sensing in groundwater investigations:
A case study in Burdur, Turkey. Hydrogeology Journal, 13
(5–6), 826–834.
Singh, A. K., & Prakash, S. R. (2002). An integrated
approach of remote sensing, geophysics and GIS to
evaluation of groundwater potentiality of Ojhala sub-
watershed, Mirzapur district, UP, India. In
Proceedings of the First Asian Conference on GIS,
GPS, Aerial Photography and Remote Sensing,
Bangkok, Thailand.
80 A. D. TOLCHE
Solomon, S., & Quiel, F. (2006). Groundwater study using
remote sensing and geographic information systems
(GIS) in the central highlands of Eritrea. Hydrogeology
Journal, 14(6), 1029–1041.
Srinivasan, R. Y., & Jugran, K. D. (2003). Delineation of ground-
water potential zones and zones of groundwater quality
suitable for domestic purposes using remote sensing and
GIS. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 48(5), 821–833.
Srivastava, P. K., & Bhattacharya, A. K. (2006).
Groundwater assessment through an integrated approach
using remote sensing, using remote sensing, GIS and
resistivity techniques: A case study from a hard rock
terrain. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 27(20),
4599–4620.
Teklay, M., Kroner, A., Mezger, K., & Oberhonsl, R. (1998).
Geochemistry, Pb-Pb single zircon ages and Nd-Sr iso-
tope composition of Precambrian rocks from southern
and eastern Ethiopia: Implications for crustal evolution in
East Africa. Journal of African Earth Sciences, 26(2),
207–227.
Tweed, S. O., Leblanc, M., Webb, J. A., & Lubczynski, M. W.
(2007). Remote sensing and GIS for mapping ground-
water recharge and discharge areas in salinity prone
catchments, southeastern Australia. Hydrogeology
Journal, 15(1), 75–96.
U.S. Geological Survey. (2019). U.S. Geological Survey
database Available online at https://earthexplorer.usgs.
gov/
Vaux, H. (2011). Groundwater under stress: The importance
of management. Environmental Earth Sciences, 62(1),
19–23.
Yeh, H. F., Cheng, Y. S., Lin, H. I., & Lee, C. H. (2016).
Mapping groundwater recharge potential zone using
a GIS approach in Hualian River, Taiwan. Sustainable
Environment Research, 26(1), 33–43.
Yusof, N., Ramli, M. F., Pirasteh, S., & Shafri, H. Z. M.
(2011). Landslides and lineament mapping along the
Simpang Pulai to Kg Raja highway, Malaysia.
International Journal of Remote Sensing, 32(14),
4089–4105.