Published date: Aug 26 2021

Journal Title: ESPOCH Congresses: The Ecuadorian Journal of S.T.E.A.M.

Issue title: Volume 1, Issue 1

Pages: 70–83

DOI: 10.18502/espoch.v1i1.9550

M. Ilbay-Yupamerckyu@hotmail.comIngeniería Ambiental, Facultad de Ciencias Agropecuarias y Recursos Naturales, Universidad Técnica de Cotopaxi, Latacunga, Ecuador

M. García-MoraEscuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo, Riobamba, Ecuador

N. LlugshaIngeniería Ambiental, Facultad de Ciencias Agropecuarias y Recursos Naturales, Universidad Técnica de Cotopaxi, Latacunga, Ecuador

The assessment of ecological flow is a great challenge, which has important implications in the protection of aquatic ecosystems and socio-economic development of an area. The Tennant-Montana method provides the ability to determine ecological flows considering the relationship between aquatic habitat conditions and the average annual flow of a channel. This research presents an estimat∫e of the ecological flow at 10, 30 and 60% of the average flow and trends of the Cebadas River located in the central Andes of Ecuador through a hydrological approach during the period 1966 to 2015. The results allowed to determine an average annual flow rate of 20,768 m3/s and identify a period of avenues (May-September) and a period of dry (October-April). Long-term trend analysis using linear regression and Spearman Rho's test determined that the flow rate has remain Zvirtually unchanged for 50 years and for decade periods. The selected ecological flow was 30% of the seasonal average with values of 6.22 m3/s and 8.32 m3/s for the dry and avenue period respectively. The hydrological variability of the Cebadas River was considered because it is a restrictive factor for the development of the different aquatic species. Flow rates at 30% flow could ensure adequate development and conservation of the aquatic habitats of the Barley River while ensuring a sufficient supply of water for food security.

Keywords: Cebadas River, ecological flow, trends, tennant.

Resumen

La evaluación del caudal ecológico es un gran desafío, que tiene importantes implicaciones en la protección de ecosistemas acuáticos y desarrollo socioeconómico de una zona. El método de Tennant-Montana provee la capacidad de determinar caudales ecológicos considerando la relación entre las condiciones del hábitat acuático y el flujo anual medio de un cauce. Esta investigación presenta una estimación del caudal ecológico al 10, 30 y 60% del caudal medio y tendencias del río Cebadas ubicado en los Andes centrales del Ecuador mediante un enfoque hidrológico durante el periodo de 1966 al 2015. Los resultados permitieron determinar un caudal promedio anual de 20.768 m3/s e identificar un periodo de avenidas (mayo- septiembre) y otro de estiaje (octubre-abril). El análisis de tendencias a largo plazo mediante la regresión lineal y el test de Spearman Rho determinaron que el caudal se ha mantenido prácticamente sin cambios durante 50 años y para los períodos decadales. El caudal ecológico seleccionado fue al 30% de la media estacional con valores de 6.22 m3/s y 8.32 m3/s para el periodo de estiaje y avenida respectivamente. Se consideró la variabilidad hidrológica del río Cebadas porque constituye un factor restrictivo para el desarrollo de las diferentes especies acuáticas. Los caudales al 30% de flujo podrían asegurar un desarrollo y conservación adecuada de los hábitats acuáticos del río Cebada y al mismo tiempo garantiza un suministro suficiente de agua para la seguridad alimentaria.

Palabras claves: río Cebadas, régimen fluvial, tendencias, tennant.

[1] Koundouri P, Rault P K, Pergamalis V, Skianis V, Souliotis I. Development of an integrated methodology for the sustainable environmental and socio- economic management of river ecosystems. J. Science of the Total Environment. 2016;540:90-100.

[2] Hoekstra A, Mekonnen M M. The water footprint of humanity. J. PNAS of the United States of America. 2012;109(9):3232–7.

[3] Clark E, Sheffield J, van Vliet M, Nijssen B, Lettenmaier D. Continental runoff into the oceans (1950–2008). J. Hydrometeorol. 2015;16(4):1502-1520.

[4] Malmqvist B, Rundle S. Threats to the running water ecosystems of the world. J. Environ. Conserv. 2002;29:134–153.

[5] Katano O, Matsuzaki S. Biodiversity of freshwater fish in Japan in relation to Inland fisheries. Biodiver. Observ. Network Asia-Pacific Reg. 2012. [citado 29 de enero de 2020]. Disponible en: sci- hub.tw/10.1007/978-4-431-54032-8_29

[6] Huang W. The study of ecological base flow value and compensation of Guangzhong section in Weihe River. Xi’an University of Technology; 2013.

[7] Sang LH, Chen XQ, Huang W. Evolution of environmental flow methodologies for rivers. Advances in Water Science. 2006;17(5):754-760.

[8] Acreman M, Dunbar MJ. Defining environmental river flow requirements - A review. J. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. 2004;8(5):861-876.

[9] Halwatura D, Najim MMM. Application of the HEC-HMS model for runoff simulation in a tropical catchment. Environ Model Softw. 2013;46:155-62.

[10] Tennant DL. Instream flow regimens for fish, wildlife, recreation and related environmental resources. J. Fisheries. 1976;1(4):6-10.

[11] Karimi S, Salarijazi M, Ghorbani. River environmental flow assessment using Tennant, Tessman, FDC shifting and DRM hydrological methods. J. Ecohydrology. 2017;4(1):177-18.

[12] Karimi S, Yasi M, Yasi S. Use of Hydrological Methods for Assessment of Environmental Flow in a River Reach. J. of Environmental Science and Technology. 2012;9(3):549-558.

[13] Tian JH, Yu L, Zheng ZH. A study of ecological water use based on the improved tennant method. Advanced Materials Research. 2010 [citado 30 de enero de 2020]. Disponible en: https://www.scientific.net/AMR.113-116.1504.

[14] Santa-Cruz G, Aguilar M. Estimación de los caudales ecológicos en el Río Valles con el método Tennant. J. Hidrobiológica. 2009;19(1):25-32.

[15] Kumar R, Upadhyay A, Shekhar C, Singh P. The Yuman River Basin. Springer of Dordrecht Heidellberg; 2001.

[16] Davudirad, A.A., Sadeghi, S.H.R., Sadoddin, A. The impact of development plans on hydrological changes in the Shazand Watershed, Iran. J. Dev, Land Degrad. 2016;27(4):1236–1244.

[17] Hazbavi Z, Sadeghi SHR. Watershed health characterization using reliability resilience- vulnerability conceptual framework based on hydrological responses. Dev, Land Degrad. 2016;28(5):1528-1537.

[18] Biemans H, Haddeland I, Kabat P et al. Impact of reservoirs on river flow discharge and irrigation water supply during the 20th century. J. Water Resour. Res. 2011;47. W03509.

[19] Dai A. Historical and future changes in streamflow and continental runoff, in terrestrial water cycle and climate change: Natural and human- induced impacts. 2016;221:17-37.

[20] 17. Wu, J., Miao, C., Wang, Y., Duan, Q., Zhang, X. Contribution analysis of the long-term changes in seasonal runoff on the Loess Plateau, China, using eight Budyko-based methods. J. Hydrol. 2017;545:263-275.

[21] Yang D, Li C, Hu H et al. Analysis of water resources variability in the Yellow River of China during the last half century using historical data. J. Water Resour. Res. 2004;40(6):1-12.

[22] Gajbhiye S, Meshram C, Mirabbasi R, Sharma S. Trend analysis of rainfall time series for Sindh river watershed in India. J. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 2016;125(3):593–608.

[23] Milano M, Reynarda E, Köplin N, Weingartner R. Climatic and anthropogenic changes in Western Switzerland: Impacts on water stress. J. Sci. Total Environ. 2015;536:12–24.

[24] Nepal S. Impacts of climate change on the hydrological regime of the Koshi river basin in the Himalayan region. J. Hydro-Environ. Res. 2016;10:76–89.

[25] Wang D and Hejazi M. Quantifying the relative contribution of the climate and direct human impacts on mean annual streamflow in the contiguous United States. J. Water Resour. Res. 2011;47(10):47 -69.

[26] Tan X and Gan T. Contribution of human and climate change impacts to changes in streamflow of Canada. J. Sci. Rep. 2015;5:17767.

[27] Labat D, Ronchail J, Guyot J. Recent advances in wavelet analyses: Part 2—Amazon, Parana, Orinoco and Congo discharges time scale variability. J. Hydrol. 2005;314(1):289-311.

[28] Pasquini A and Depetris P. Discharge trends and flow dynamics of South American rivers draining the southern Atlantic seaboard: An overview. J. Hydrol. 2007;333(2):385-399.

[29] Alkama R, Marchand L, Ribes A, Decharme B. Detection of global runoff changes: results from observations and CMIP5 experiments. J. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2013;17(7):2967-2979.

[30] MAGAP 2003. Sistemas de Información – Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería. Disponible en: https://www.agricultura.gob.ec/sipa/

[31] Guambo A, Arguello C, Romero J. El valor económico ambiental de los usuarios del servicio hidrológico de la Microcuenca del Río Cebadas, Provincia de Chimborazo. SATHIRI. 2016;11(1):206-219.

[32] Morán. Hidrología para estudiantes de ingeniería civil. CivilGeeks.com. 2011 February 9. Disponible en: https://civilgeeks.com/2011/02/09/hidrologia-para-estudiantes-de- ingenieria-civil/

[33] Caissie D, El-Jabi N. Comparison and regionalization of hydrologically based instream flow techniques in Atlantic Canada. J. Canadian of Civil Engineering. 1995;22(2):235-46.

[34] Ouyang W, Hao FH, Chen H, Wang X, Yang ST. Ecological Instream Flow Requirements Calculation of Pihe River by Montana Methodology in Sichuan Basin China. 2015;8.

[35] Kumar A, Mishra SK, Pandey RP. Prediction of environmental flow condition from rainfall using relationship between Tennant method and standardized precipitation index. 2017.

[36] Milhous, RT. Two 1970’s Methods for prescribing instream flow regimens. 2017;11.

[37] Karimi S, Yasi M, Eslamian S. Use of hydrological methods for assessment of environmental flow in a river reach. J. International of Environmental Science and Technology. 2012;9(3):549-58.

[38] Grayson R, Argent R. Estimation techniques in australian hydrology. J.Hydrological Recipes. 1996.

[39] Sneyers, R. On the statistical analysis of series of observations. Organización Meteorológica Mundial. 1990;415(1).

[40] Grayson R, Argent R. Estimation techniques in australian hydrology. J.Hydrological Recipes. 1996.

[41] Lauro C, Vich A, Moreiras SM. Detección de tendencias y saltos abruptos en variables hidrológicas de cuencas de la región de Cuyo. 18.

[42] Vich A, Norte F, Lauro C. Análisis Regional de Frecuencias de Caudales de ríos pertenecientes a cuencas con nacientes en la Cordillera de los Andes. J. Meteorológica. 2014.

[43] Villar JCE, Lavado W, Julio J et al. Regional evolution of discharge throughout the Amazon basin for the period 1974- 2004 and its relation to climate factors. :24. [44] Paoli CU, Malinow GV. Criterios para la determminación de crecidas de diseño en sistemas climáticos cambiantes. Argentina: Universidad Nacional del Litoral; 2010.

[45] Baeza D, García D. Cálculo de caudales de mantenimiento en ríos de la cuenca del Tajo a partir de variables climáticas y de sus cuencas. J. Limnética 1999;16:69-84.

[46] Karimi S, Salarijazi M, Ghorbani. River environmental flow assessment using Tennant, Tessman, FDC shifting and DRM hydrological methods. J. Ecohydrology. 2017;4(1):177-18.

[47] Santa-Cruz G, Aguilar M. Estimación de los caudales ecológicos en el Río Valles con el método Tennant. J. Hidrobiológica. 2009;19(1):25-32.

[48] Kumar R, Upadhyay A, Shekhar C, Singh P. The Yuman River Basin. Springer; 2001.

[49] King JM, Tharme RE, de Villiers MS. Environmental flow assessments for rivers: manual for the building block methodology (updated edition). WRC Report No TT 354/08; 2008. 364 pp.

[50] Dai A. Historical and future changes in streamflow and continental runoff, in terrestrial water cycle and climate change: Natural and human- induced impacts. 2016;221:17-37.

[51] Alkama R, Decharme B, Douville H, Ribes A. Trends in global and basin- scale runoff over the late twentieth century: Methodological issues and sources of uncertainty. J. Climate. 2011;24(12):3000-3014.

[52] Milliman JD, Farnsworth KL, Jones PD, Xu KH, Smith LC. Climatic and anthropogenic factors affecting river discharge to the global ocean, 1951– 2000. J. Glob. Planet. Change. 2008;62(3-4):187-194.