基于主成分分析的桦川—集贤—友谊地区地下水水质评价

何金宝; 刘洪博; 孔繁鹏; 毛永新; 赵建

doi:10.19388/j.zgdzdc.2024.161

基于主成分分析的桦川—集贤—友谊地区地下水水质评价

1.
中国地质调查局牡丹江自然资源综合调查中心，吉林长春 130000

2.
东北地质科技创新中心, 辽宁沈阳 110019

基金项目:
中国地质调查局“三江平原黑土区水-土壤-植被耦合机制研究(编号：QCJJ2022-30)”“高强度利用下黑土地地表基质养分元素变化规律及机理研究(编号：KC20220002)”及“三江平原宝清地区黑土地地表基质层调查(编号：DD20211588)”项目联合资助

详细信息

作者简介: 何金宝(1992—)，男，工程师，主要从事自然资源调查评价工作。Email：jinbao92@yeah.net

通讯作者: 刘洪博(1991—)，男，工程师，主要从事自然资源调查评价工作。Email：2274496829@qq.com

中图分类号: P641.3;X824

收稿日期: 2024-03-11

修回日期: 2024-09-14

刊出日期: 2025-04-25

Groundwater quality evaluation in Huachuan-Jixian-Youyi area based on principal component analysis

1.
Mudanjiang Natural Resources Comprehensive Survey Center, China Geological Survey, Changchun Jilin 130000, China

2.
Northeast Geological S & T Innovation Center of China, Geological Survey, Shenyang Liaoning 110019, China

More Information

Corresponding author: LIU Hongbo, 2274496829@qq.com

Received Date: 11 March 2024

Revised Date: 14 September 2024

Publish Date: 25 April 2025

摘要

摘要:
三江平原桦川—集贤—友谊地区作为黑龙江省的关键粮食产区，其水资源状况直接关系到农业生产和生态安全。随着工农业的快速发展，水资源需求不断增加，导致研究区地下水位下降、水质恶化等一系列问题，厘清研究区地下水化学特征及影响因素，评估水体质量，对于保持农业稳定和可持续发展具有重要意义。通过野外采集地下水样，结合统计分析、Piper三线图、层次聚类分析、主成分分析、氯碱指数等方法对研究区地下水水化学特征及其成因进行分析，并对地下水水质进行评价。结果表明，钠吸附比(sodium adsorption ratio, S_AR)、钠百分比(soluble sodium percentage, Na%)、残留碳酸钠(residual sodium carbonate, R_SC)等均显示研究区的地下水灌溉适宜性较好。研究区地下水水化学类型主要为Ca²⁺-HCO₃^-型，局部为Ca²⁺-Cl^-型。地下水化学组分主要受岩石风化作用控制，主要离子来源于岩盐和方解石、白云石等可溶性碳酸盐的溶解，同时氯碱指数表明阳离子交换作用也影响着地下水化学组分的形成。水质评价结果显示，桦川县、集贤县部分地区地下水水质较差，NO₃^-浓度超标，除受自然因素影响外，还与化肥农药的使用、矿山开采等人为活动有关。研究结果对于地下水资源的合理开发和治理具有一定的参考价值。
- 三江平原 /
- 主成分分析 /
- 层次聚类分析 /
- 地下水 /
- 水质评价
Abstract:
Huachuan-Jixian-Youyi area in Sanjiang Plain is a key grain-producing area in Heilongjiang Province, and its water resources are directly related to agricultural production and ecological security. The demand for water resources continues to increase with the rapid development of industry and agriculture, leading to a series of problems such as declining groundwater levels and deteriorating water quality. The clarification of chemical characteristics, and the influencing factors of water quality, is of great significance to maintaining agricultural stability and sustainable development. Through collecting 15 groundwater samples in the field, the authors analgzed the groundwater chemical characteristics and causes by combining statistical analysis, piper trilinear diagram, hierarchical cluster analysis, principal component analysis, chlor-alkali index, etc., and evaluate the groundwater quality. Sodium adsorption ratio (S_AR), soluble sodium percentage (Na%), and residual sodium carbonate (R_SC) all showed good suitability for groundwater irrigation in the area. The main hydrochemical type was Ca²⁺-HCO₃^- type and locally Ca²⁺-Cl^- type. The chemical composition of groundwater was mainly controlled by rock weathering, with the main ions derived from the dissolution of rock salt and soluble carbonates such as calcite and dolomite. And the chlor-alkali index indicated that cation exchange also affected the formation of groundwater chemical components. The results of the water quality evaluation showed that the groundwater quality in Huachuan County and Jixian County was poor, and the NO₃^- concentration exceeded the standard seriously. The overstandard was not only affected by natural factors, but also related to the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, mining and other human activities. The study results could provide references for the rational development and management of groundwater resources.
- Sanjiang Plain /
- principal component analysis /
- hierarchical cluster analysis /
- groundwater /
- water quality evaluation

HTML全文

图 1 研究区水文地质及采样点分布

Figure 1.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 不同灌溉指数箱线图

Figure 2.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 研究区地下水的Pipier三线图

Figure 3.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 研究区地下水的Gibbs分布图和氯碱指数

Figure 4.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 研究区地下水理化参数相关系数矩阵

Figure 5.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 研究区水样点及水化学参数的树状聚类热图

Figure 6.

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 地下水水化学参数统计分析

Table 1. Statistical analysis of groundwater hydrochemical parameters

指标	最小值	最大值	均值	标准差	变异系数
pH值	5.74	7.10	6.55	0.36	0.05
Ca²⁺/(mg·L^-1)	16.51	168.40	58.94	40.16	0.68
K⁺/(mg·L^-1)	0.67	11.02	2.08	2.55	1.22
SO₄^2-/(mg·L^-1)	1.87	127.00	28.59	37.32	1.31
Cl^-/(mg·L^-1)	2.49	78.50	23.16	26.97	1.16
Mg²⁺/(mg·L^-1)	5.30	37.70	15.30	9.36	0.61
Na⁺/(mg·L^-1)	9.86	86.67	26.17	20.34	0.78
TDS/(mg·L^-1)	128.00	910.00	323.40	207.39	0.64
NO₃^-/(mg·L^-1)	0.35	225.00	31.96	71.15	2.23
fCO₂/(mg·L^-1)	22.30	129.73	55.41	27.99	0.51
TH/(mg·L^-1)	60.59	579.63	212.13	138.62	0.65
HCO₃^-/(mg·L^-1)	38.07	501.85	225.43	148.38	0.66

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 主成分结果及载荷矩阵

Table 2. Principal component results and load matrix

指标	主成分F₁	主成分F₂	主成分F₃
Ca²⁺	0.964	-0.158	-0.040
K⁺	-0.123	-0.175	0.950
SO₄^2-	0.665	0.665	0.091
Cl^-	0.696	0.679	0.145
Mg²⁺	0.966	-0.074	0.016
Na⁺	0.892	-0.097	0.202
TDS	0.994	-0.011	0.068
NO₃^-	0.764	0.265	0.047
fCO₂	0.761	-0.09	-0.355
TH	0.975	-0.137	-0.022
HCO₃^-	0.621	0.721	-0.039
pH值	-0.195	0.861	-0.062
特征值	7.122	2.332	1.113
方差贡献率/%	59.353	19.433	9.272
累积贡献率/%	59.353	78.786	88.058

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 主成分得分系数矩阵及指标权重

Table 3. Principal component score coefficient matrix and index weight

指标	主成分F₁	主成分F₂	主成分F₃	综合得分系数F	权重
Ca²⁺	0.361	-0.104	-0.038	0.217	0.096
K⁺	-0.046	-0.114	0.900	0.039	0.017
SO₄^2-	0.249	0.435	0.086	0.273	0.121
Cl^-	0.261	0.445	0.137	0.288	0.128
Mg²⁺	0.362	-0.049	0.015	0.235	0.104
Na⁺	0.334	-0.064	0.192	0.231	0.102
TDS	0.372	-0.007	0.064	0.256	0.113
NO₃^-	0.286	0.174	0.044	0.236	0.104
fCO₂	0.285	-0.059	-0.337	0.144	0.064
TH	0.366	-0.090	-0.021	0.224	0.099
HCO₃^-	0.233	-0.472	-0.037	0.049	0.022
pH值	-0.073	0.564	-0.059	0.069	0.030

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 研究区水质分析结果

Table 4. Results of water quality analysis in the study area

点位	Ca²⁺	K⁺	SO₄^2-	Cl^-	Mg²⁺	Na⁺	TDS	NO₃^-	fCO₂	TH	HCO₃^-	pH值	综合得分	排名
HCS01	0.848	0.987	0.985	0.990	0.955	0.964	0.925	1.000	0.849	0.875	0.679	1.000	0.936	2
HCS02	0.681	0.800	1.000	1.000	0.694	0.898	0.776	1.000	0.547	0.677	0.388	1.000	0.823	9
HCS03	0.994	0.887	0.846	0.933	0.993	0.947	1.000	1.000	0.736	0.992	0.903	0.605	0.932	3
HCS04	0.795	0.863	0.192	0.099	0.639	0.908	0.772	0.989	0.736	0.747	1.000	0.001	0.619	13
HCS05	0.834	0.001	0.892	0.831	0.784	0.681	0.799	0.972	1.000	0.815	0.567	1.000	0.824	8
HCS06	1.000	0.959	0.806	0.801	1.000	0.931	0.990	0.996	0.717	1.000	0.955	0.421	0.905	4
JXS01	0.509	0.962	0.960	0.962	0.664	0.929	0.712	1.000	0.925	0.553	0.261	1.000	0.802	10
JXS02	0.930	1.000	0.975	0.919	0.970	0.942	0.963	1.000	0.717	0.938	0.784	1.000	0.938	1
JXS03	0.909	0.857	0.733	0.722	0.906	0.754	0.887	0.999	0.981	0.899	0.784	1.000	0.857	6
JXS04	0.893	0.990	0.854	0.762	0.871	1.000	0.895	0.770	0.868	0.877	0.925	0.711	0.861	5
JXS05	0.001	0.981	0.001	0.001	0.001	0.001	0.001	0.196	0.001	0.001	0.090	0.947	0.068	15
JXS06	0.429	0.943	0.686	0.091	0.306	0.677	0.377	0.010	0.736	0.395	0.761	0.961	0.427	14
YYS01	0.545	0.877	0.913	0.891	0.370	0.431	0.559	1.000	0.415	0.494	0.001	1.000	0.647	12
YYS02	0.756	0.947	0.985	0.998	0.617	0.873	0.824	0.969	0.736	0.708	0.470	1.000	0.840	7
YYS03	0.675	0.903	0.972	0.923	0.599	0.880	0.772	1.000	0.415	0.650	0.373	1.000	0.788	11

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(27)

[1]	Nguyen T G, Phan K A, Huynh T H N. Application of integrated-weight water quality index in groundwater quality evaluation[J]. Civil Engineering Journal, 2022, 8(11): 2661-2674. doi: 10.28991/CEJ-2022-08-11-020
[2]	Kumar S, Sangeetha B. Assessment of ground water quality in Madurai city by using geospatial techniques[J]. Groundwater for Sustainable Development, 2020, 10: 100297. doi: 10.1016/j.gsd.2019.100297
[3]	孟瑞芳, 杨会峰, 白华, 等. 海河流域大清河平原区地下水化学特征及演化规律分析[J]. 岩矿测试, 2023, 42(2): 383-395. Meng R F, Yang H F, Bai H, et al. Chemical characteristics and evolutionary patterns of groundwater in the Daqing River Plain area of Haihe Basin[J]. Rock and Mineral Analysis, 2023, 42(2): 383-395.
[4]	王巧焕, 卢玉东. 内蒙古腰坝绿洲地下水化学特征及成因分析[J]. 华中农业大学学报, 2021, 40(5): 81-88. Wang Q H, Lu Y D. Hydrochemical characteristics and causes of groundwater in Yaoba Oasis of Inner Mongolia[J]. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University, 2021, 40(5): 81-88.
[5]	张浩, 张一丁, 黄彦, 等. 不同灌溉模式水稻耗水规律和生长特性研究[J]. 节水灌溉, 2023(4): 25-31. Zhang H, Zhang Y D, Huang Y, et al. Study on water consumption and growth characteristics of rice under different irrigation modes[J]. Water Saving Irrigation, 2023(4): 25-31.
[6]	李晨洋. 三江平原井渠结合灌区水资源可持续利用对策[J]. 节水灌溉, 2013(1): 41-43. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-4929.2013.01.011 Li C Y. Countermeasures for sustainable utilization of water resources in well & canal combination irrigation district of Sanjiang Plain[J]. Water Saving Irrigation, 2013(1): 41-43. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-4929.2013.01.011
[7]	吴泽新, 武瑶, 于叶翔, 等. 三江平原松花江流域地下水环境变化及其控制因素[J]. 水电能源科学, 2024, 42(9): 38-42. Wu Z X, Wu Y, Yu Y X, et al. Groundwater environment changes and control factors in Songhua River Basin of Sanjiang Plain[J]. Water Resources and Power, 2024, 42(9): 38-42.
[8]	毛飞剑, 何义亮, 徐智敏, 等. 基于单因子水质标识指数法的东江河源段水质评价[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2014, 14(5): 327-331. Mao F J, He Y L, Xu Z M, et al. Water quality evaluation of Heyuan reach of Dongjiang River based on the single factor water quality identification index[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2014, 14(5): 327-331.
[9]	傅金祥, 陈喆, 马兴冠, 等. 改良模糊综合评价法在水质评价中的应用[J]. 环境工程, 2011, 29(6): 120-123, 127. Fu J X, Chen Z, Ma X G, et al. Application of improved fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method in water quality assessment[J]. Environmental Engineering, 2011, 29(6): 120-123, 127.
[10]	高卫东. 基于主成分分析的矿区地下水水质评价[J]. 节水灌溉, 2009(4): 58-60. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-4929.2009.04.017 Gao W D. Water quality evaluation of groundwater in mining area based on principal component analysis[J]. Water Saving Irrigation, 2009(4): 58-60. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-4929.2009.04.017
[11]	杨磊磊, 卢文喜, 黄鹤, 等. 改进内梅罗污染指数法和模糊综合法在水质评价中的应用[J]. 水电能源科学, 2012, 30(6): 41-44. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-7709.2012.06.012 Yang L L, Lu W X, Huang H, et al. Application of improved Nemerow pollution exponential method and fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method used in water quality assessment[J]. Water Resources and Power, 2012, 30(6): 41-44. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-7709.2012.06.012
[12]	舒持恺, 杨侃, 王启明, 等. 河流健康评价中赋权方法的研究[J]. 水电能源科学, 2017, 35(2): 61-65. Shu C K, Yang K, Wang Q M, et al. Study on weighting method in river health evaluation[J]. Water Resources and Power, 2017, 35(2): 61-65.
[13]	尹喜霖, 柏钰春, 王勇, 等. 三江平原地下水资源潜力评价[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 2004, 31(6): 5-10. Yin X L, Bai Y C, Wang Y, et al. Potential evaluation of groundwater resources of Sanjiang Plain in Heilongjiang Province[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 2004, 31(6): 5-10.
[14]	刘伟朋, 崔虎群, 刘伟坡, 等. 三江平原地下水流场演化趋势及影响因素[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 2021, 48(1): 10-17. Liu W P, Cui H Q, Liu W P, et al. An analysis of the evolution trend and influencing factors of the groundwater flow field in the Sanjiang Plain[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 2021, 48(1): 10-17.
[15]	张伟, 陈文彬, 李健, 等. 广安市平行岭谷区地下水化学特征及控制因素分析[J]. 中国地质调查, 2024, 11(4): 72-81. doi: 10.19388/j.zgdzdc.2023.229 Zhang W, Chen W B, Li J, et al. Groundwater chemical characteristics and analysis of the controlling factors in parallel ridge valley area of Guang'an City[J]. Geological Survey of China, 2024, 11(4): 72-81. doi: 10.19388/j.zgdzdc.2023.229
[16]	李泽岩, 曹文庚, 王卓然, 等. 内蒙古河套灌区浅层地下水化学特征和灌溉适宜性分析[J]. 现代地质, 2022, 36(2): 418-426. Li Z Y, Cao W G, Wang Z R, et al. Hydrochemical characterization and irrigation suitability analysis of shallow groundwater in Hetao Irrigation District, Inner Mongolia[J]. Geoscience, 2022, 36(2): 418-426.
[17]	邹嘉文, 刘飞, 张靖坤. 南水北调典型受水区浅层地下水水化学特征及成因[J]. 中国环境科学, 2022, 42(5): 2260-2268. Zou J W, Liu F, Zhang J K. Hydrochemical characteristics and formation mechanism of shallow groundwater in typical water-receiving areas of the South-to-North Water Diversion Project[J]. China Environmental Science, 2022, 42(5): 2260-2268.
[18]	El-Rawy M, Fathi H, Abdalla F, et al. An integrated principal component and hierarchical cluster analysis approach for groundwater quality assessment in Jazan, Saudi Arabia[J]. Water, 2023, 15(8): 1466. http://openurl.ebsco.com/contentitem/doi:10.3390%2Fw15081466?sid=ebsco:plink:crawler&id=ebsco:doi:10.3390%2Fw15081466
[19]	杨芳, 杨盼, 卢路, 等. 基于主成分分析法的洞庭湖水质评价[J]. 人民长江, 2019, 50(S2): 42-45, 58. Yang F, Yang P, Lu L, et al. Water quality assessment of Dongting Lake based on principal component analysis[J]. Yangtze River, 2019, 50(S2): 42-45, 58.
[20]	高惠璇. 应用多元统计分析[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2005. Gao H X. Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis[M]. Beijing: Peking University Press, 2005.
[21]	Brindha K, Kavitha R. Hydrochemical assessment of surface water and groundwater quality along Uyyakondan channel, south India[J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2015, 73(9): 5383-5393. http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Brindha_Karthikeyan/publication/275585139_Hydrochemical_assessment_of_surface_water_and_groundwater_quality_along_Uyyakondan_channel_south_India/links/56d6774308aebabdb4005d12.pdf
[22]	文冬光, 孙继朝, 何江涛, 等. GB/T 14848—2017地下水质量标准[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2017. Wen D G, Sun J C, He J T, et al. GB/T 14848—2017 Standard for Groundwater Quality[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2017.
[23]	李晓波, 李杭, 杨宝萍, 等. 泰安市旧县水源地水化学特征及成因分析[J]. 环境工程技术学报, 2022, 12(6): 2002-2010. Li X B, Li H, Yang B P, et al. Hydrochemical characteristics and formation mechanism of water source area in Jiuxian County, Tai'an City[J]. Journal of Environmental Engineering Technology, 2022, 12(6): 2002-2010.
[24]	朱秀群, 蓝芙宁, 赵一, 等. 云南省南洞岩溶水系统水化学特征及其成因分析[J]. 人民长江, 2021, 52(5): 37-43. Zhu X Q, Lan F N, Zhao Y, et al. Hydrochemical characteristics and causes of Nandong karst water system in Yunnan Province[J]. Yangtze River, 2021, 52(5): 37-43.
[25]	王建国, 周卫, 高顺宝, 等. 水-土相互作用对浅层地下水硬度升高的影响[J]. 中国矿业, 2012, 21(3): 107-110. Wang J G, Zhou W, Gao S B, et al. Influence on increasing of shallow groundwater hardness with water-soil interaction[J]. China Mining Magazine, 2012, 21(3): 107-110.
[26]	刘潇, 薛莹, 纪毓鹏, 等. 基于主成分分析法的黄河口及其邻近水域水质评价[J]. 中国环境科学, 2015, 35(10): 3187-3192. Liu X, Xue Y, Ji Y P, et al. An assessment of water quality in the Yellow River estuary and its adjacent waters based on principal component analysis[J]. China Environmental Science, 2015, 35(10): 3187-3192.
[27]	Taşan M, Demir Y, Taşan S. Groundwater quality assessment using principal component analysis and hierarchical cluster analysis in Alaçam, Turkey[J]. Water Supply, 2022, 22(3): 3431-3447.