SWAT Literature Database for Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles

Title:
fiogf49gjkf0d
Sensitivity analysis, calibration, and validations for a multisite and multivariable SWAT model 
Authors:
fiogf49gjkf0d
White, K.L. and I. Chaubey 
Year:2005 
Journal:Journal of the American Water Resources Association 
Volume:41(5) 
Pages:1077-1089 
Article ID: 
DOI:10.1111/j.1752-1688.2005.tb03786.x 
URL (non-DOI journals): 
Model:SWAT 
Broad Application Category:hydrologic & pollutant 
Primary Application Category:calibration, sensitivity, and/or uncertainty analysis 
Secondary Application Category:pollutant cycling/loss and transport 
Watershed Description:
fiogf49gjkf0d
3,100 km^2 Beaver Reservoir (northwest Arkansas); calib./valid. was performed for 3 subwatersheds: 362 km^2 Richland Creek (RC), 681 km^2 War Eagle Creek (WEC), and 1,020 km^2 White River (WR). 
Calibration Summary:
fiogf49gjkf0d
Monthly (1999 or 2000) r2/E values: flow (6 years) = .41-91/.50-.89 sediment (4 years) = .45-.85/.23-.76 total P (4 years) = .50-.82/.40-.67 nitrate/nitrite (4 years) = .01-.84 /-2.36-.29 
Validation Summary:Monthly (2001 or 2002) r2/E values: flow (5 years) = .77-.91/.72-.87 sediment (2 years) = .69-.77/.32-.45 total P (2 years) = .58-.76/-.29-.76 nitrate/nitrite (2 years) = .59-.71 /.13-.49 
General Comments:A multisite & multivariable analysis using SWAT2000 was performed. A relative sensitivity analysis was performed to identify the most sensitive inputs that influenced both hydrologic and pollutant loss outputs. A multi-objective function was developed on the basis of 3 evaluation statistics: E, r2, & % relative error. SWAT was judged to be a very useful tool for simulating alternative management strategies focused on both hydrologic and water quality responses. However, calibration and validation are important for redcing uncertainity and improving accuracy. 
Language:English 
Keywords:modeling; water quality; nonpoint source pollution; nutrients; SWAT model; sensitivity analysis; agriculture