MODELING STREAMFLOW FROM ARTIFICIALLY DRAINED AGRICULTURAL WATERSHEDS IN ILLINOIS

• Published in: Journal of the American Water Resources Association Vol. 38; no. 6; pp. 1753 - 1765
• Main Authors: Sogbedji, Jean M., Mclsaac, Gregory F.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.12.2002; American Water Resources Association
• Subjects: Agricultural and forest climatology and meteorology. Irrigation. Drainage; agricultural hydrology; Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions; Biological and medical sciences; drainage; Earth sciences; Earth, ocean, space; Exact sciences and technology; Freshwater; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; General agronomy. Plant production; Hydrology; Hydrology. Hydrogeology; Irrigation. Drainage; modeling; United States; North America; Illinois; America; Hydraulic model; Computer simulation; Subsurface drainage; Model study; Agricultural soil; Streamflow; Modeling; Drainage; Hydrology; Silt loam soil; Watershed; Water engineering; Rural area; Simulation model; Field study
• ISSN: 1093-474X; 1752-1688
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2002.tb04379.x

The Agricultural Drainage and Pesticide Transport (ADAPT) model was calibrated and tested for simulating streamflow on a yearly, monthly, weekly, and daily basis from three watersheds in central Illinois. The dominant soil type in the watersheds is Tama silt loam. The weather input data were daily values of precipitation, average temperature, solar radiation, wind speed, and average relative humidity, and other inputs included soil properties and crop and drainage system parameters. The model is detailed. The model was calibrated to fit the USGS streamflow data collected for a 7-yr period at the outlet of the Mackinaw watershed, and performance of the calibrated model was tested using weather and USGS streamflow data for the other two watersheds. Results showed that the ADAPT model satisfactorily predicted monthly and weekly streamflow values during calibration and testing. Model performance was enhanced somewhat by simulating deep seepage from the bottom of the soil profile and treating it as a component of streamflow. Because the model did not account for surface flow travel time, daily streamflow simulations were unsuccessful.