Assessment of Groundwater Salinisation Risk Using Multivariate Geostatistics

  • A. Castrignanò
  • G. Buttafuoco
  • C. Giasi
Part of the Quantitative Geology and Geostatistics book series (QGAG, volume 15)


The risk assessment at regional scale requires modelling spatial variability of environmental variables. Traditional approach, based on estimating point environmental indicators, cannot be considered satisfactory for this purpose, because it does not take into account spatial dependence between variables. We propose the application of an approach to the problem of groundwater salinisation, in which multivariate geostatistics and GIS are combined to integrate primary information with exhaustive secondary information. The dataset consisted of 454 private wells used for irrigation and located in Apulia region (south Italy). Three variables were processed: concentration of chlorides and nitrates, as primary variables, and the distance from the coast, as auxiliary variable. The approach highlighted the widespread degradation of water resources in the Apulian groundwater. The maps of the global indicator allowed us to delineate the zones at high risk of groundwater contamination and also to identify those parameters most responsible for water degradation, so that a wiser management of water resources could be planned. This approach can be used as operational support to a wide range of activities and in decision making among several remediation alternatives.


Groundwater Quality Seawater Intrusion Ordinary Kriging Groundwater Salinisation Individual Indicator 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. APHA, AWWA, WPCF (1985) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater (16th edn), Washington, DC, American Public Health Association p 905Google Scholar
  2. Buttafuoco G, Castrignanò A, Stelluti M (2000) “Accounting for local un-certainty in agricultural management decision making”. 7th ICCTA – International congress for computer technology in agriculture. Florence, 15th – 18th November 1998, pp 510–517Google Scholar
  3. Castrignanò A, a>Buttafuoco G (2004) Geostatistical Stochastic Simulation of Soil Water Content in a Forested Area of South Italy. Biosystems Engineering 87:257–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Castrignanò A, Mazzoncini M, Giugliarini L (1998) Spatial characterization of soil properties. Adv GeoEcology 31:105–111Google Scholar
  5. Cotecchia V (1977) Studi e Ricerche sulle acque sotterranee e sull’intrusione marina in Puglia (Penisola Salentina). (Studies and Research on underground waters and on seawater intrusion in Apulia (Salentine Peninsula)) (in Italian) Quad 1st Ric Acque, Rome, XX. Water Research InstituteGoogle Scholar
  6. Cotecchia V, Limoni PP, M Polemio (1999) Identification of typical chemical and physical conditions in apulian groundwater (southern Italy) through well multi-parameter logs. XXXIX IAH Congress "Hydrogeology and land use management", Bratislava, 353–358Google Scholar
  7. Cotecchia V, Polemio M (1997) Salinization and pollution of main Apulian aquifers (Southern Italy). Proceedings International Conference: Water management, salinity and pollution control towards sustainable irrigation in the Mediterranean region. CIHEAM, Ist. Agronomico Mediterraneo, September 22–26, 1997. Bari, Italy, 2:211–214Google Scholar
  8. Géovariances (2006) Isatis Technical References, version 6.0.0. Geovariances & école Des Mines De Paris, Avon Cedex, FranceGoogle Scholar
  9. Goovaerts P (1997) Geostatistics for natural resources evaluation. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  10. Isaaks EH, Srivastava RM (1989) An introduction to applied geostatistics. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  11. Journel AG (1983) Non-parametric estimation of spatial distributions. Math Geol 15:445–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Journel AG (1988) Non-parametric geostatistics for risk and additional sampling assessment. In L. Kieth (Ed.), Principles of Environmental Sampling, Amer Chem Soc Publ, Washington, DC, pp 45–72Google Scholar
  13. Matheron G (1982) Pour une analyse krigeante des données régionalisées. Rapport N-732, Centro de Géostatistiques, école des Mines de Paris, FontainebleauGoogle Scholar
  14. Rivoirard J (2001) Which Models for Collocated Cokriging?: Math Geol 33(2):117–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rodale Institute (1991) Conference Report and Abstracts, International conference on the assessment and monitoring of soil quality. Rodale Press, Emmaus, PAGoogle Scholar
  16. Thiessen AH (1911) Precipitation average for large areas. Monthly Weather Review, 39:1082–1084Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Castrignanò
    • 1
  • G. Buttafuoco
  • C. Giasi
  1. 1.CRA - Agronomic Research InstituteBariItaly

Personalised recommendations