农业用水水质指数的系统性审查

IF 5.4 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental and Sustainability Indicators Pub Date : 2024-05-29 DOI:10.1016/j.indic.2024.100417
Nathan Johnston , John Rolfe , Nicole Flint
{"title":"农业用水水质指数的系统性审查","authors":"Nathan Johnston ,&nbsp;John Rolfe ,&nbsp;Nicole Flint","doi":"10.1016/j.indic.2024.100417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Water Quality Indices (WQIs) are increasingly being applied for reporting on the suitability of water for a variety of human uses including agriculture. This systematic review identified and compared 42 examples of Agricultural use Water Quality Indices (AgWQIs) for surface waters in published literature. The review confirmed the growing popularity in AgWQI reporting, particularly in the last six years. All studies incorporated the suitability of water for irrigated cropping into their AgWQI with three also addressing stock watering. The review confirmed that all parameter thresholds adopted by AgWQI studies originated from either the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations publication <em>Water quality for agriculture</em> publication or National Standards. An AgWQI common key was developed to overcome interstudy method variability and facilitate comparative assessment. This assessment determined that all study methods originated from two sources, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Water Quality Index, and the National Sanitation Foundation Water Quality Index. For studies adopting the latter method, a further three strategies for parameter weightings and eight functions for developing water quality ratings were identified. Our assessment also identified and explored limitations with some equations, including a method known as the proportionality constant. Significant variation in parameters, classes, thresholds, subindices, and weightings between studies was found, but also some areas of agreement. Based on the review findings, a guide has been developed to assist in future AgWQI development.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36171,"journal":{"name":"Environmental and Sustainability Indicators","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2665972724000850/pdfft?md5=ed6454d31e5801d41a998913ddbece3f&pid=1-s2.0-S2665972724000850-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A systematic review of agricultural use water quality indices\",\"authors\":\"Nathan Johnston ,&nbsp;John Rolfe ,&nbsp;Nicole Flint\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.indic.2024.100417\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Water Quality Indices (WQIs) are increasingly being applied for reporting on the suitability of water for a variety of human uses including agriculture. This systematic review identified and compared 42 examples of Agricultural use Water Quality Indices (AgWQIs) for surface waters in published literature. The review confirmed the growing popularity in AgWQI reporting, particularly in the last six years. All studies incorporated the suitability of water for irrigated cropping into their AgWQI with three also addressing stock watering. The review confirmed that all parameter thresholds adopted by AgWQI studies originated from either the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations publication <em>Water quality for agriculture</em> publication or National Standards. An AgWQI common key was developed to overcome interstudy method variability and facilitate comparative assessment. This assessment determined that all study methods originated from two sources, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Water Quality Index, and the National Sanitation Foundation Water Quality Index. For studies adopting the latter method, a further three strategies for parameter weightings and eight functions for developing water quality ratings were identified. Our assessment also identified and explored limitations with some equations, including a method known as the proportionality constant. Significant variation in parameters, classes, thresholds, subindices, and weightings between studies was found, but also some areas of agreement. Based on the review findings, a guide has been developed to assist in future AgWQI development.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36171,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental and Sustainability Indicators\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2665972724000850/pdfft?md5=ed6454d31e5801d41a998913ddbece3f&pid=1-s2.0-S2665972724000850-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental and Sustainability Indicators\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2665972724000850\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental and Sustainability Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2665972724000850","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

水质指数(WQIs)越来越多地被用于报告水对人类各种用途(包括农业)的适宜性。本系统性综述在已发表的文献中发现并比较了 42 个地表水农业用水水质指数(AgWQIs)实例。综述证实,农业用水水质指数报告越来越受欢迎,尤其是在过去六年中。所有研究都将灌溉作物用水的适宜性纳入了农业用水水质指数,其中三项研究还涉及到了牲畜饮水问题。审查证实,农业水质指数研究采用的所有参数阈值均来自联合国粮食及农业组织出版 的《农业水质》出版物或国家标准。为克服研究方法之间的差异并便于进行比较评估,制定了 AgWQI 通用密钥。这项评估确定,所有研究方法都源自两个来源,即加拿大环境部长理事会水质指数和国家卫生基金会水质指数。对于采用后一种方法的研究,还确定了另外三种参数加权策略和八种水质评级函数。我们的评估还发现并探讨了一些方程式的局限性,包括一种称为比例常数的方法。我们发现,不同研究之间的参数、等级、阈值、子指数和权重存在显著差异,但也存在一些一致之处。根据审查结果,我们制定了一份指南,以协助未来农业质量指数的制定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A systematic review of agricultural use water quality indices

Water Quality Indices (WQIs) are increasingly being applied for reporting on the suitability of water for a variety of human uses including agriculture. This systematic review identified and compared 42 examples of Agricultural use Water Quality Indices (AgWQIs) for surface waters in published literature. The review confirmed the growing popularity in AgWQI reporting, particularly in the last six years. All studies incorporated the suitability of water for irrigated cropping into their AgWQI with three also addressing stock watering. The review confirmed that all parameter thresholds adopted by AgWQI studies originated from either the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations publication Water quality for agriculture publication or National Standards. An AgWQI common key was developed to overcome interstudy method variability and facilitate comparative assessment. This assessment determined that all study methods originated from two sources, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Water Quality Index, and the National Sanitation Foundation Water Quality Index. For studies adopting the latter method, a further three strategies for parameter weightings and eight functions for developing water quality ratings were identified. Our assessment also identified and explored limitations with some equations, including a method known as the proportionality constant. Significant variation in parameters, classes, thresholds, subindices, and weightings between studies was found, but also some areas of agreement. Based on the review findings, a guide has been developed to assist in future AgWQI development.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental and Sustainability Indicators
Environmental and Sustainability Indicators Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
2.30%
发文量
49
审稿时长
57 days
期刊最新文献
Decoding the mystery of Bangladesh's jute decline: A climate crisis or plastic predicament Perceived accessibility matters: Unveiling key urban parameters through traditional and technology-driven participation methods Water provision benefits from karst ecosystems: An example for Watuputih groundwater basin, North Kendeng Mountain, Indonesia Towards net-zero carbon emissions: A systematic review of carbon sustainability reporting based on GHG protocol framework Ecosystem services driving factors and ecological conservation pattern construction, Qinghai-Tibet Plateau
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1