Applied Water Science (Jan 2024)

Modeling of geophysical derived parameters for groundwater potential zonation using GIS-based multi-criteria conceptual model

  • Sunday Bayode,
  • Kehinde Anthony Mogaji,
  • Olakunle Egbeyemi

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-023-02056-4
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 14, no. 2
pp. 1 – 26

Abstract

Read online

Abstract This study modeled geophysical derived parameters and multi-critically synthesized their themes based on geospatial and analytical hierarchy processes (AHP) approaches for groundwater potentiality prediction mapping. These methodologies were investigated in a typical hard rock geologic terrain, southwestern, Nigeria. Considering the spatially acquired 96 vertical electrical sounding (VES) data in the area, geoelectric sections revealing five subsurface layers including the topsoil, laterite, weathered layer, fractured basement and fresh basement rock were produced mindful of the 2-D resistivity structure subsurface imaging data interpreted results. The correlative results of the 2-D resistivity structure images and VES data interpretation results delineated major low resistivity vertical discontinuity typical of fractured zones characterized with width range of 25–40 m, while the depth vary from about 40 to > 60 m. Themes of groundwater potential conditioning factors (GPCFs), namely: regolith, bedrock relief, hydraulic head, coefficient of anisotropy, aquifer resistivity and aquifer thickness were prepared from the re-analyzed hydrogeological and geophysical data. The produced themes were appropriately weighted in the context of AHP data mining technique. The groundwater potential prediction index (GPPI) mathematical modeling equation for the area was established via applying the weight linear average algorithm involving the AHP weightage results. The synthesized results of the applied GPPI model equation on the GPCFs’ hydrogeologic themes give GPPI values in the range 1.59–3.65 for the study area. The geospatial modeling of the GPPI estimated values result produced groundwater potential prediction index map for the area. The produced GPPI model map zoned the area into low (1.59–2.30), medium (2.30–2.61), medium–high (2.61–3.02) and high (3.02–3.65) groundwater potential classes. The area analysis of the GPPI map indicates that more than 70% of the study area has ‘low to medium groundwater potential. The GPPI map result verification using reacting operating characteristics technique results gave 86% and 81% success and prediction rates, respectively. The findings of this study are useful to water managers and decision-makers for locating appropriate positions of new productive wells in the study area and other areas with similar geologic settings.

Keywords