Water quality modelling for ephemeral rivers: Model development and parameter assessment

River water quality models can be valuable tools for the assessment and management of receiving water body quality. However, such water quality models require accurate model calibration in order to specify model parameters. Reliable model calibration requires an extensive array of water quality data that are generally rare and resource-intensive, both economically and in terms of human resources, to collect. In the case of small rivers, such data are scarce due to the fact that these rivers are generally considered too insignificant, from a practical and economic viewpoint, to justify the investment of such considerable time and resources. As a consequence, the literature contains very few studies on the water quality modelling for small rivers, and such studies as have been published are fairly limited in scope. In this paper, a simplified river water quality model is presented. The model is an extension of the Streeter–Phelps model and takes into account the physico-chemical and biological processes most relevant to modelling the quality of receiving water bodies (i.e., degradation of dissolved carbonaceous substances, ammonium oxidation, algal uptake and denitrification, dissolved oxygen balance, including depletion by degradation processes and supply by physical reaeration and photosynthetic production). The model has been applied to an Italian case study, the Oreto river (IT), which has been the object of an Italian research project aimed at assessing the river’s water quality. For this reason, several monitoring campaigns have been previously carried out in order to collect water quantity and quality data on this river system. In particular, twelve river cross sections were monitored, and both flow and water quality data were collected for each cross section. The results of the calibrated model show satisfactory agreement with the measured data and results reveal important differences between the parameters used to model small rivers as compared to those for large rivers. Additionally, these results appear related to the different roles played by physical–chemical–biological processes in small rivers as compared to larger systems.