© 2024 The Author Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 89 doi: 10.2166/wqrj.2024.

002

Impacts of land use/land cover on water quality: A contemporary review for researchers
and policymakers

Kent Anson Locke

Department of Environmental & Geographical Science, University of Cape Town, Private Bag X3, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa
E-mail: [email protected]

KAL, 0000-0002-9016-8741

ABSTRACT

Few factors are as important in determining water quality as land use/land cover (LULC). Many land use activities, including agriculture, urban
development, mining, and commercial forestry, tend to be sources of diffuse pollution. By contrast, indigenous vegetation can act as a sink,
thus providing some protection from diffuse anthropogenic contamination. Notwithstanding the large body of research demonstrating these
facts, decision-makers require clear and accessible information to assist them in developing effective management plans that are fully cog-
nisant of the manifold impacts of LULC on water resources. Reviewing the available literature, this article offers a critical overview of the
typical impacts of LULC on water quality. An important strategy for managing water quality highlighted in this article is the maintenance
of a sufficient amount of unfragmented natural vegetation, not only within riparian zones but also across catchment areas. However, knowl-
edge gaps identified in this review indicate that further context-specific research is required to determine not only the types and minimum
amount of vegetative cover required to protect water resources from diffuse pollution but also the potential impact of landscape fragmenta-
tion on the ability of natural vegetation to protect water resources. A critical discussion of these factors is therefore provided.

Key words: diffuse pollution, integrated catchment management, land cover, land use, water quality

HIGHLIGHTS

• Improper land use management can have profound impacts on water quality.
• While most anthropogenic land use activities generate diffuse pollution, natural vegetation can protect water resources by acting as a sink
and biofilter.
• Maintaining sufficient areas of unfragmented natural vegetation in both riparian areas and across whole catchments is an important water
quality management strategy.
• Local research is essential for determining not only which types of vegetation will offer water resources the most efficacious protection,
but also for estimating the extent required to offer adequate levels of protection.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY 4.0), which permits copying, adaptation and
redistribution, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 90

GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT

1. INTRODUCTION
Anthropogenic land use/land cover (LULC) transformations are recognised as a force of global concern, causing environ-
mental degradation across various ecosystems (Gomes et al. 2021; Taylor & Rising 2021; Henderson & Christian 2022; Liu
et al. 2022; Richardson et al. 2023). In terms of aquatic ecosystem health and surface water quality, it seems almost imposs-
ible to overstate the significance of LULC within the surrounding landscape. There is, for instance, a large and growing body
of research that establishes, through the use of robust statistical approaches and complex process-based models, that LULC
has an unequivocal and decisive influence on water quality (Giri & Qiu 2016; Lintern et al. 2018; Ullah et al. 2018; Yuan
et al. 2020; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022; Cheng et al. 2022; Goodspeed et al. 2022; Aalipour et al. 2023; Mashala et al. 2023;
Qiu et al. 2023; Saeidi et al. 2023; Yao et al. 2023). It was with some prescience, therefore, that limnologist H.B.N. Hynes
observed in one early article that ‘in every respect, the valley rules the stream’ (Hynes 1975, p. 12). Wear et al. (1998,
pp. 619, 627) have since argued that the use and condition of land within catchment areas is ‘clearly one of the most impor-
tant factors determining water quality.’ Therefore, according to Harris (2002, p. 343), rivers and other water bodies are ‘the
ultimate integrators of our land use decisions’ (see also Falkenmark 2011, p. 13). However, some authors have cau-
tioned that, in practice, the impacts of land use have not been given due regard in the formulation of plans and
policies for the management and protection of water resources (Bandaragoda 2006; Falkenmark et al. 2014; Duda
2017). If this is the case, it is not for a lack of published research. Rather, it may be argued that the available research
is either unintelligible or inaccessible to stakeholders and policymakers, who need to be provided with clear, relevant,
and credible information that can guide their decision-making efforts (McDonnell 2008; Gooch & Stålnacke 2010;
Halbe et al. 2013; Grigg 2021). This article, therefore, draws from a wide range of literature – including reference
texts, academic reviews, and original research – to provide a concise contemporary overview of the typical impacts
of different classes of LULC on water quality. To undertake a review of this literature, potentially relevant publications
were initially identified by conducting searches on the Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science databases. The
results of these searches were further refined by manually reviewing document titles and abstracts for relevance. As
the review progressed, citations contained in these articles were checked to locate additional relevant material that
had not been identified in the original searches.

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 91

Based on this review, the present article highlights the specific negative impacts that agriculture, urban development,
mining operations, and commercial forestry may have on water resources. It also notes the ameliorative effect that natural
vegetation can have by intercepting and filtering contaminated surface runoff. It thus concludes that the maintenance
and/or restoration of natural vegetation cover across catchments and within riparian areas is one of several important inte-
grated management strategies that can help protect water resources from diffuse pollution. However, while this is a well-
established fact, there are several important considerations discussed in this article – including issues related to scale and
landscape configuration – that must guide the implementation of such a strategy. Consequently, local research is invaluable
for informing the development of specific integrated management guidelines, such as land use thresholds, which may be used
to protect water resources. After providing an overview of the impacts of anthropogenic land use activities on water quality,
the remainder of this article focusses on a discussion of the role and importance of natural vegetation in water quality man-
agement and provides a critical discussion of some important caveats that require further consideration and/or investigation.

2. ‘LAND USE’ VERSUS ‘LAND COVER’

Although the terms ‘land use’ and ‘land cover’ are related and often used interchangeably, a distinction can be made between
the two (Horning et al. 2010; Parece & Campbell 2015; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022). Strictly speaking, land cover refers only to
the natural (biotic) and artificial (abiotic) features that cover the Earth’s immediate surface in broad categories that may, for
example, include built-up land, cropland, forested land, or water (Anderson et al. 1976; Thompson 1996; Schulze 2000; Then-
kabail 2015; Heidkamp & Christian 2022). According to Giri (2012, pp. 9, 226), land cover refers to the ‘actual vegetative,
structural, or other surface cover resulting from a given land use’ and thus represents the visible evidence of the latter. By
contrast, land use refers to the human activities associated with a particular area of land in terms of utilisation, occupation,
and/or management (Anderson et al. 1976; Thompson 1996; Giri 2012; Thenkabail 2015; Heidkamp & Christian 2022). It
specifically refers to the manner in which the biophysical attributes of land are manipulated, managed, and exploited by
humans (Schulze 2000, p. 13). Jansen & Gregorio (2002, p. 98) have therefore defined land use as ‘the arrangements, activities
and inputs people undertake in a certain land cover type to produce, change or maintain it’ (see also Horning et al. 2010).
Concerning the relationship between LULC and water quality, Dabrowski et al. (2013, p. viii) have argued that ‘a distinc-
tion [can be] made between land use, associated with management practices influencing water quality, and land cover, which
can be observed and mapped through earth observation technologies.’ The authors further observe that although it may be
difficult to determine the details of specific land use practices (e.g., the amount or types of fertilisers applied to agricultural
land) from remotely sensed earth observation data (e.g., satellite imagery or thematic land cover maps), land cover data may
nevertheless serve as a general proxy for land use (ibid.). In any case, both land use (what people do on/with the land) and
land cover (the land surface itself) influence water quality by determining not only the types and amounts of contaminants
available for transport into receiving water bodies, but also how readily and by what pathways these contaminants may be
mobilised and transported (Saeidi et al. 2023). As such, the acronym LULC (i.e., land use/land cover) is frequently used
in the literature (as well as in this article) to encompass both.
Recent estimations suggest that humans have already transformed three-quarters of the Earth’s surface, driven largely by
expansions in urban and agricultural land use, and associated with significant losses of natural land cover in many regions
(Song et al. 2018; Winkler et al. 2021). Moreover, despite net gains in forested land in some regions, it is predicted that
urban and agricultural LULC will continue to expand into the future, with consequent impacts on many natural ecosystems
(Nelson et al. 2010; van Asselen & Verburg 2013; Richardson et al. 2023). As the following sections demonstrate, these
changes are likely to have significant impacts on freshwater systems and will therefore require careful integrated management
and strategic planning that focusses on the maintenance and/or restoration of natural land cover in river catchments.

3. LULC AS A SOURCE OF DIFFUSE POLLUTION

The impact of LULC on surface water quality is principally as a source of diffuse pollution (Chapman et al. 2020;
Kajitvichyanukul & D’Arcy 2022). Concomitantly, Xu et al. (2023b) have described surface waters as the primary sink of pol-
lutants in terrestrial ecosystems. It is this source/sink relationship, according to, D’Arcy et al. (2022a, p. 14), that inextricably
links land and water resources. Accordingly, there are a variety of complex pathways and processes by which diffuse pollution
enters water bodies from the land surface (Kajitvichyanukul & D’Arcy 2022; Zhang et al. 2023b). For instance, contaminants
may be naturally present on or within the land surface (as in the case of naturally occurring mineral salts and nutrients in the

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 92

soil) or later applied by humans (as in the application of fertilisers or pesticides). Various other land use activities may then
expose or mobilise these pollutants, which are eventually transported during precipitation events into receiving water bodies
through a variety of pathways (Lintern et al. 2018). Classes of LULC that are typically considered sources of diffuse pollution
include urban, industrial, and other built-up areas, agricultural land, mines, and commercial forestry plantations (Dallas &
Day 2004; Bosman & Kidd 2009; Falkenmark 2011; Chapman et al. 2020). As described in the following sections, each of
these land uses is typically associated with a specific suite of pollutants and associated water quality impacts (Dabrowski
et al. 2013; de Mello et al. 2020; Mirzaei et al. 2020; D’Arcy et al. 2022b).
Furthermore, landscape characteristics – especially the extent of impervious surfaces, the presence or absence of veg-
etation, and the spatial configuration of land cover within the landscape – will additionally influence the hydrological
response of a catchment (Falkenmark et al. 1999; Ding et al. 2016; Aalipour et al. 2022). Higher proportions of impervious
land cover, for example, will result in a ‘flashier’ hydrological response to precipitation events (i.e., reduced infiltration,
shorter surface residence time, increased overland flow rates, shorter lag-times, reduced baseflow, and increased peak
flow) (Schueler 1994; Paul & Meyer 2001; CWP 2003). This has associated impacts on water chemistry and pollution
rates. Increased overland flow, for instance, flushes contaminants that have accumulated on impervious surfaces directly
into receiving water bodies, resulting in higher pollutant loads (Day & Dallas 2011; Chapman et al. 2020). Initially, this
may be offset, to some degree, by increased streamflow in the receiving water body, resulting in greater dilution of the
received contaminants. However, in the longer term, reduced baseflow typical of streams in the urban environment will
increase the relative concentration of pollutants in the water (Nobre et al. 2020; Li et al. 2022; Deng et al. 2023; Roldán-
Arias et al. 2023).
Moreover, the spatial arrangement (i.e., configuration) of land cover within a landscape may influence its relationship with
water quality by modifying, among other hydrological processes, the nature, pathways, and quantity of surface runoff gener-
ated during precipitation events (which will, in turn, influence the contaminant loads mobilised and transported into
receiving water bodies from the land surface) (Shen et al. 2015; Song et al. 2021; Aalipour et al. 2023; Mo et al. 2023). It
is frequently assumed, for example, that as natural vegetation cover becomes more fragmented, its ability to intercept, assim-
ilate, and thus protect water resources from diffuse pollution will be reduced (Yirigui et al. 2019; Cole et al. 2020; Thomas
et al. 2020; Fernandes et al. 2021; de Mello et al. 2022; Bowes et al. 2023; Zhang et al. 2023a). It is also commonly assumed
that LULC directly adjacent to rivers and streams (i.e., riparian land use) is likely to have a more significant impact on water
quality than land use further afield (Gove et al. 2001; Waite et al. 2010; Miller et al. 2011; Ou et al. 2016; Ramião et al. 2020;
Han et al. 2023; Roldán-Arias et al. 2023; Xu et al. 2023b).

4. THE TYPICAL IMPACTS OF ANTHROPOGENIC LULC ON SURFACE WATER QUALITY

The following paragraphs describe the particular water quality impacts commonly associated with agricultural land, urban/
built-up areas, mining operations, and commercial forestry plantations. A tabular summary of the major water quality par-
ameters and pollutants derived from and/or influenced by these categories of LULC, as well as their typical impacts on
aquatic ecosystems, is available in the Supplementary Material.

4.1. Agricultural land

There is an expansive body of literature documenting the manifold impacts of agricultural activities on water quality. These
impacts are said to be considerable, well-established, and a major concern worldwide (Haygarth & Jarvis 2002; Dallas & Day
2004; Day & Dallas 2011; Mateo-Sagasta et al. 2018; Chapman et al. 2020). Runoff from agricultural land has been described
by Dallas & Day (2004, p. 123) as a ‘complex effluent’ that typically contains elevated levels of nutrients, organic matter, dis-
solved salts, pesticides, sediments, and bacteria (see also Fraser 2002; Vigil 2003; Mateo-Sagasta et al. 2018; Chapman et al.
2020; Kronvang et al. 2020).
Perhaps the most widely reported impact of agriculture on water quality is the eutrophication of rivers and lakes due to the
excessive input of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous) which may be applied to fields in the form of inorganic fertilisers or
deposited in the excreta of grazing livestock (Haygarth & Jarvis 2002; Baker 2005; Meybeck et al. 2005; Mateo-Sagasta et al.
2018; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022). Nitrogen, when applied in excess of plant requirements, is highly mobile and easily leached
from agricultural land by irrigation and/or precipitation. When land is cleared for planting, nitrogen loss increases as there
are no plants to take up what is available in the soil (Haygarth & Jarvis 2002; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022). Phosphorous, while
more resistant to leaching than nitrogen, is commonly transported along with the sediment particles to which it is often

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 93

adsorbed, and even small amounts of phosphorous can have a significant impact on water quality (Haygarth & Jarvis 2002;
Chapman et al. 2020). The resulting nutrient enrichment promotes excessive algal and macrophyte growth. This can cause a
depletion of dissolved oxygen as these organisms respire, as well as when dead plant matter is decomposed by bacteria (Peters
et al. 2005). Furthermore, blooms of cyanobacteria – a common symptom of eutrophication – can be toxic (Bohenek & Sul-
liván 2022).
Another widely reported water quality impact associated with agricultural land (particularly when irrigated) is salinisation
(Dallas & Day 2004; Peters et al. 2005; Day & Dallas 2011; Bosman et al. 2018; Mateo-Sagasta et al. 2018; Chapman et al.
2020). Although irrigation water may not contain high concentrations of dissolved salts, any solutes it does contain will
remain in the soil when it evaporates. Over time, these salts build up in the soil profile and are eventually leached into
nearby water bodies when there is sufficient runoff (Dallas & Day 2004; Wepener et al. 2018). Additionally, irrigation
tends to cause an increase in the water table, which draws dissolved minerals into the surface layers of the soil profile.
These similarly accumulate in the soil as water evaporates and are eventually washed into receiving water bodies during pre-
cipitation events (Dallas & Day 2004). The clearing of land for cultivation may also increase groundwater recharge and raise
water tables, with similar results (ibid.).
Turbidity and sedimentation are additional water quality problems frequently associated with agricultural land (Haygarth
& Jarvis 2002; Dallas & Day 2004; Foley et al. 2005; Peters et al. 2005; Bosman et al. 2018; Mateo-Sagasta et al. 2018;
Chapman et al. 2020). Sediments originate from land disturbed by cultivation, as well as from cleared/harvested fields
where there is little or no vegetative cover to prevent erosion. Livestock may also promote erosion and the mobilisation of
sediments through overgrazing and hoof action. Sediments, apart from their primary physical impact on aquatic environ-
ments (for which, see the Supplementary Material), may also transport other contaminants that become affixed to soil
particles (including phosphorous, pathogens, and pesticides) (Day & Dallas 2011).
The application of toxic agrochemicals (including pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides) may further affect aquatic ecosys-
tems (Haygarth & Jarvis 2002; Dallas & Day 2004; Foley et al. 2005; Bosman et al. 2018; Mateo-Sagasta et al. 2018;
Chapman et al. 2020). These may enter water bodies through atmospheric deposition when they are applied to crops
(i.e., ‘spray drift’), via accidental spills or through improper disposal, or when pesticide residues are flushed by precipitation
or irrigation from the crops and/or fields to which they have been applied (Haygarth & Jarvis 2002; Dallas & Day 2004;
Bosman & Kidd 2009).
Organic and bacteriological contamination, derived primarily from animal waste, are two other common impacts of agri-
culture on water quality (Haygarth & Jarvis 2002; Dallas & Day 2004; Meybeck et al. 2005; Peters et al. 2005; Mateo-Sagasta
et al. 2018; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022). When organic matter in the water decomposes, potentially hypoxic conditions can
develop as oxygen demand increases. Some bacterial species are also pathogenic and can cause disease in animals and
humans. In some instances, animal waste may also contain traces of heavy metals which are added to animal feeds or
given as food supplements (Haygarth & Jarvis 2002; Mateo-Sagasta et al. 2018). Antibiotics, hormones, and steroids
(so called emerging pollutants or contaminants of emerging concern) may also be present in the excreta of treated livestock
(Peters et al. 2005; Day & Dallas 2011; Mateo-Sagasta et al. 2018; Chapman et al. 2020; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022). Finally,
reductions in flow from agricultural withdrawals can further influence water quality by reducing baseflow, thus increasing the
in-stream concentrations of contaminants (Bosman et al. 2018; Chapman et al. 2020).

4.2. Urban/built-up land

Urban/built-up land, which often has a disproportionately negative impact on water quality relative to the area it occupies, is
typically characterised by impervious surfaces and may include residential areas, informal settlements, commercial property,
and industrial zones (Paul & Meyer 2001; CWP 2003; Dallas & Day 2004; Chapman et al. 2020). It is frequently reported,
and with remarkable consistency, that water quality degradation typically occurs when urban/impervious cover in a catch-
ment reaches between 10 and 15% (e.g., Schueler 1994; Arnold & Gibbons 1996; Paul & Meyer 2001; Brabec et al. 2002;
Groffman et al. 2006; Tayyebi et al. 2015; Medupin et al. 2020; Song et al. 2020). Although urban land is often associated
with point-source pollution (such as end-of-pipe discharges from wastewater treatment plants or industrial works), built-up
areas can also be a significant source of diffuse pollution, which is arguably more difficult to regulate than discrete point-
source discharges (Loague & Corwin 2005; Peters et al. 2005; Crooks et al. 2021; Day & Davies 2023). The wide range of
contaminants found in urban runoff tend to accumulate on built-up surfaces through various deposition mechanisms and
are later flushed into receiving water bodies during precipitation events (Peters & Meybeck 2000; Dallas & Day 2004;

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 94

Chapman et al. 2020; Goodspeed et al. 2022). Diffuse urban pollution may also originate from leaks in sewerage systems or
wastewater treatment works, as well as from seepages or spills at industrial sites (CWP 2003; Vigil 2003; Chapman et al. 2020;
D’Arcy et al. 2022a). Leachate from landfills is another source of diffuse urban pollution (Bosman et al. 2018; Bohenek &
Sulliván 2022). Owing to this diverse range of sources, urban stormwater usually contains elevated levels of most contami-
nants (Paul & Meyer 2001; CWP 2003; Ahmed et al. 2022).
Elevated concentrations of nutrients, which can originate from a variety of urban sources, are often found in runoff derived
from built-up areas (Paul & Meyer 2001; CWP 2003; Meybeck et al. 2005; Chapman et al. 2020; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022).
Phosphorous contributions of urban areas are even said to rival those of agricultural land in some cases (Paul & Meyer 2001,
p. 342). High suspended solid and sediment loads are also common in urban runoff, and are derived especially from construc-
tion activities or the detritus that collects on roads and parking areas (CWP 2003; Vigil 2003; Dallas & Day 2004; Day &
Dallas 2011). In addition, elevated levels of dissolved salts are frequently found in urban stormwater (Paul & Meyer 2001;
Vigil 2003; Dabrowski et al. 2013; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022). Heavy metals, hydrocarbons, and a ‘whole suite’ of other per-
sistent organic compounds are likewise typically present in urban runoff (Paul & Meyer 2001, p. 345; CWP 2003; Vigil 2003;
Meybeck et al. 2005; Dabrowski et al. 2013; Chapman et al. 2020). Moreover, although pesticides are commonly associated
with agricultural activities, they are also used in urban and industrial settings and thus often present in urban stormwater
runoff (Paul & Meyer 2001; Gevao & Jones 2002; CWP 2003; Meybeck et al. 2005; Dabrowski et al. 2013; Chapman
et al. 2020; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022). Bacterial contamination is also common in urban stormwater, especially in effluents
derived from informal settlements where sanitation services are limited (Paul & Meyer 2001; CWP 2003; Dallas & Day 2004;
Meybeck et al. 2005; Day & Dallas 2011; Dabrowski et al. 2013; Chapman et al. 2020; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022). Acid rain,
a consequence of the atmospheric pollution often associated with urban and industrial areas, is another water quality concern
linked to urban land use (Bosman et al. 2018; Chapman et al. 2020). Finally, urban runoff may also include a range of so-
called emerging pollutants, including pharmaceuticals, hormones, solvents, and microplastics (Meybeck et al. 2005;
Chapman et al. 2020; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022). The combined impacts of these contaminants include salinisation, acidifi-
cation, turbidity, eutrophication, hypoxic conditions, and general toxicity. In addition, due to the increased proportion of
impervious surfaces (which reduce permeability and increase overland flow rates), the total load of harmful material flushed
into urban streams, especially during heavy rainfall events, is much increased (Paul & Meyer 2001; CWP 2003; Peters et al.
2005; Day & Dallas 2011; Parece & Campbell 2015; Chapman et al. 2020). This is compounded by generally reduced base-
flows, thus elevating the in-stream concentration of these contaminants (Bohenek & Sulliván 2022). Unsurprisingly then,
urban streams are some of the most seriously impacted in the world (Paul & Meyer 2001).

4.3. Mining operations

Pollution from mining operations is a worldwide problem that can have a significant impact on surface water quality (Dallas
& Day 2004; Dabrowski et al. 2013; García et al. 2016; Chapman et al. 2020; de Mello et al. 2020). While working mines are
undoubtedly a source of pollution, Chapman et al. (2020, p. 129) argue that decommissioned or abandoned mines tend to
have a greater impact on water quality. This is due to the cessation of pumping operations and the resurgence and ingress
of groundwater, which floods the exposed mine workings and becomes contaminated. When this contaminated water reaches
the surface, it may flow into nearby water bodies. Leaks and spills from tailings dams are another common source of sediment
and other contaminants (Peters et al. 2005). The nature of the effluent derived from mining activities logically depends on the
type of mine, as well as the underlying geology of the area being mined. Ore-extracting substances such as cyanide, for
example, may be present in runoff derived from gold mines (Dallas & Day 2004), whereas elevated concentrations of sulphate
are a well-known impact of coal mining (Dabrowski et al. 2013). However, waters impacted by mining typically have low pH,
high levels of suspended solids, and contain a variety of heavy metals (Dallas & Day 2004; Meybeck et al. 2005; Day & Dallas
2011; Bosman et al. 2018; Chapman et al. 2020). This leads to an increase in acidity, turbidity, sedimentation, and heavy
metal concentrations in receiving waters. Contaminants may also precipitate out as a yellow or orange-brown flocculate
(Chapman et al. 2020; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022). The most frequently documented water quality impact of mining is
acid mine drainage (AMD) (Dallas & Day 2004; Weiner 2013; Bosman et al. 2018; Wepener et al. 2018; Boyd 2020;
Chapman et al. 2020; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022). The very low pH levels that result from AMD are not only directly harmful
to aquatic ecosystems but can also have additional impacts by increasing the availability and/or toxicity of other chemicals
(a phenomenon known as synergism) (Dallas & Day 2004; Peters et al. 2005; Boyd 2020; Chapman et al. 2020; Bohenek &
Sulliván 2022).

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 95

4.4. Commercial forestry

The impacts of commercial forestry operations on water quality are varied (Fulton & West 2002; Duffy et al. 2020). The dis-
turbance of land by clearing, planting, and harvesting often results in increased erosion and the mobilisation of several
contaminants, including eroded soil and sediments, nutrients, organic matter, and other debris (Vigil 2003; Dallas & Day
2004; Peters et al. 2005; Day & Dallas 2011; Dabrowski et al. 2013; Duffy et al. 2020). Increased nutrient loading is
common, usually following the application of fertilisers to plantations, as well as through the leaching of soils disturbed
during clearing, planting, or harvesting processes (Dallas & Day 2004; Peters et al. 2005; Day & Dallas 2011; Dabrowski
et al. 2013; Duffy et al. 2020). The application of pesticides to commercial forestry plantations may also impact nearby receiv-
ing waters (Dabrowski et al. 2013). The clearing of stands can also result in an increase in the water table owing to reduced
water uptake by plants. As this water evaporates from the surface soil layers, salts are left behind which may subsequently be
flushed into streams when it rains. As such, common water quality impacts associated with commercial forestry plantations
include turbidity and sedimentation, salinisation, nutrient loading, and pesticide toxicity.
Forestry operations also influence local hydrology and flow dynamics. Due to changes in the interception of precipitation,
as well as in groundwater abstraction rates, streamflow may be reduced during afforestation and conversely increased during
harvesting (Dallas & Day 2004). Plantations of non-indigenous trees can present a major threat to water resources by using
more water than the natural vegetation they replace, reducing streamflow levels by up to 50% in some cases (Jewitt 2005). As
indicated earlier, reduced flows may elevate the in-stream concentrations of many contaminants (Peters et al. 2005). Reduced
interception due to clearing may also increase overland flow rates, thereby increasing the pollutant load of overland runoff.
Notwithstanding the above, there is evidence which suggests that commercial forestry plantations, if managed properly, can
offer beneficial ecosystem services – including buffering, erosion control, water quality maintenance, and flow regulation –
and thereby have positive impacts on water quality in the long-term (Ide et al. 2019; Malherbe et al. 2019; Duffy et al.
2020). It would therefore appear that the impact of commercial forestry depends largely on factors such as the species
grown and the manner in which plantations are managed (de Mello et al. 2020).

5. THE ROLE AND IMPORTANCE OF NATURAL VEGETATION

While most anthropogenic classes of LULC are sources of diffuse pollution (see above), areas of natural vegetation
(e.g., native forests, grasslands, shrublands, and wetlands) act as sinks by filtering, assimilating, and transforming pollutants
before they enter receiving water bodies (de Mello et al. 2017; Brogna et al. 2018; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022; Cheng et al.
2022; Feng et al. 2023; Qiu et al. 2023; Woznicki et al. 2023). Natural vegetation also plays an important role in regulating
overland flow rates, thereby reducing erosion and the overall pollutant load of surface runoff (Malherbe et al. 2019; Yirigui
et al. 2019; Sun et al. 2020; Caldwell et al. 2023). Riparian vegetation additionally helps to shade water, keep it cool, and so
regulate dissolved oxygen concentrations (Vigil 2003). It is therefore widely acknowledged that while increased proportions
of urban and agricultural land cover tend to be correlated with negative water quality impacts, undeveloped areas of natural
vegetation are generally associated with improved water quality (de Mello et al. 2017, 2022; Brogna et al. 2018; Fernandes
et al. 2021; Piffer et al. 2021; Wang et al. 2021; Cheng et al. 2022; Li et al. 2022; Qiu et al. 2023). The clearing of natural
vegetation, and its transformation into other pollution-generating land uses, is therefore singularly detrimental to water qual-
ity (Harris 2002; Waite 2014; Parece & Campbell 2015; Brogna et al. 2017; Caldwell et al. 2023). This makes the preservation
and/or restoration of natural vegetation within catchments and riparian zones an important water quality management strat-
egy (Norris 1993; Haycock et al. 2001; Stutter et al. 2012; de Mello et al. 2017; Sun et al. 2020; Cheng et al. 2022; Cooke et al.
2022). Pengelly & Fishburn (2002, p. 409) conclude that ‘native vegetation is a valuable resource and an important key to
maintaining the health of the land and waterways,’ while Piffer et al. (2021, p. 1) similarly suggest that ‘maintaining or restor-
ing native vegetation cover is a promising intervention to sustain adequate water quality.’
A common strategy for protecting water quality from diffuse pollution is the establishment and maintenance of ‘buffer
zones’ of riparian vegetation that can intercept overland flow before it reaches receiving waters (Norris 1993; Haycock
et al. 2001; Stutter et al. 2012; Sweeney & Newbold 2014; Cole et al. 2020; Petersen et al. 2020). Cooke et al. (2022,
p. 183) summarise: ‘From reducing erosion and flood damage to maintaining cool water temperatures, filtering pollutants,
protecting critical habitats, and enabling lateral connectivity, intact riparian zones mitigate many of the threats that degrade
freshwater ecosystems.’ While it is generally recommended that vegetated buffers should be at least 30 m wide, it is arguable
that the greater the width of the buffer, the greater the benefit provided (Haycock et al. 2001; Sweeney & Newbold 2014).

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 96

Nonetheless, while the maintenance and/or restoration of natural vegetation within catchment areas and riparian zones is a
critical water quality management strategy, there are a number of important conceptual, methodological, and practical issues
that require consideration. These are discussed in turn in the sections that follow.

5.1. Defining and classifying ‘natural vegetation’

In most of the studies in which the impacts of LULC on water quality have been investigated using remotely sensed land cover
data, forests are typically assumed, whether implicitly or explicitly, to be representative of natural vegetation (e.g., Omernik
et al. 1981; Maloney & Weller 2011; Yu et al. 2013; Piffer et al. 2021; Zhang et al. 2021; Allafta & Opp 2022; de Mello et al.
2022; Caldwell et al. 2023; Qiu et al. 2023). This assumption may be reflective of the fact that most published studies have
been conducted in temperate regions of the United States and Europe, where forests are the dominant natural biome (Baker
2005; Tromboni & Dodds 2017; Kronvang et al. 2020; Bohenek & Sulliván 2022; Prakoso et al. 2023). Thus, many studies
emphasise the need to maintain sufficient areas of forested land within catchments in order to protect water quality
(e.g., Caldwell et al. 2023). However, in ecologically and climatically disparate regions (such as savannas, grasslands, and
scrublands), the extent of forested land may not be the most appropriate land cover metric by which to estimate the condition
of catchments. For this reason, perhaps, other studies have broadened their classification of natural land cover to include an
aggregation of other classes of indigenous vegetation, including woodland, shrubland, grassland, and wetlands (Sponseller
et al. 2001; Tiner 2004; Shiels 2010; Bierschenk et al. 2012; Pandey et al. 2012; Iñiguez-Armijos et al. 2014). However,
while aggregating all locally-occurring types of natural vegetation into a single land cover class may seem more appropriate
(not to mention convenient), Cole et al. (2020, p. 3) have noted that the morphological and functional traits of different plant
species can influence their impact on water resources. Thus, depending on their physiological, structural, and life-cycle
characteristics, different types of vegetation may be more or less effective at intercepting and removing contaminants from
overland flow, and thus at protecting water resources from diffuse pollution (ibid.). For instance, while grassland is typically
expected to act as a detention medium by trapping contaminants in overland flow before they reach receiving waters, there is
evidence which suggests that grassland may not consistently serve as an effective buffer against diffuse pollution (Ahearn et al.
2005; Amiri & Nakane 2006; Xiao & Ji 2007; Ding et al. 2013; Shen et al. 2014; Chen et al. 2016, 2021; Vrebos et al. 2017;
Lacher et al. 2019; Dymek et al. 2021; Zhou et al. 2022). Given these complexities, it is essential for researchers and prac-
titioners to consider the most appropriate land cover metric by which the extent and condition of natural vegetation within
catchment areas may assessed, and to do so on a case-by-case basis, taking both local ecological conditions and the specific
aims/objectives of the study (or management strategy) into account.

5.2. The importance of a multiscale approach

While vegetated riparian buffer zones are indisputably important for maintaining water quality, the cumulative effects of
LULC across the entire catchment may be too great to be effectively mitigated or offset by riparian land use (Allan 2004a,
2004b; Brabec 2009; Tran et al. 2010; Tromboni & Dodds 2017; Ramião et al. 2020; Thomas et al. 2020). Thus, despite
the logical importance of managing LULC within riparian areas, land use decisions across the entire catchment may be
equally as important – if not more important – as those made within riparian zones (Brabec et al. 2002; de Mello et al.
2020; Ramião et al. 2020). In support of this, several studies which have compared the relative influence of LULC at different
scales have reported that LULC at the whole-catchment scale was more significant, in terms of water quality impacts, than
riparian LULC (Sliva & Williams 2001; Sponseller et al. 2001; Buck et al. 2004; Magierowski et al. 2012; Nielsen et al. 2012;
Pratt & Chang 2012; Ding et al. 2016; Clément et al. 2017; de Mello et al. 2018; Park & Lee 2020; Łaszewski et al. 2022;
Deng et al. 2023). Several authors have thus emphasised the necessity of taking a multiscale approach when researching
and managing the impacts of LULC on water quality (Strayer et al. 2003; Schiff & Benoit 2007; Zhou et al. 2012; Ding
et al. 2016; de Mello et al. 2018; Park & Lee 2020; Song et al. 2021; Pei et al. 2023; Siqueira et al. 2023). According to
Nobre et al. (2020, p. 7) for example, ‘the finding that land use in the buffer area, as well as in the catchment as a whole,
can modulate water quality has implications for water management.’ As such, it would be inappropriate to focus on managing
land use at one spatial scale (e.g., within riparian areas) while ignoring land use at other scales (e.g., across whole catchments)
(see also Cole et al. 2020, p. 8).

5.3. Landscape configuration

While the proportion of a landscape occupied by different classes of LULC (i.e., landscape composition) will naturally
have an impact on water quality, it has also been suggested (and subsequently demonstrated in several studies) that

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 97

the spatial arrangement, position, and/or distribution of LULC (i.e., landscape configuration) may also significantly influ-
ence its impact on water quality (Lintern et al. 2018; Zhang et al. 2019; de Mello et al. 2020; Dymek et al. 2021; Aalipour
et al. 2022; Cheng et al. 2022; Xu et al. 2023a). Specifically, as noted earlier, it is often assumed that as patches of natural
vegetation cover become more fragmented (a typical consequence of human development) their ability to intercept and
protect water resources from diffuse pollution is reduced. Several studies have investigated the influence of landscape
configuration on water quality, and many have found that increased fragmentation, especially of natural vegetation
such as forests, is associated with poorer water quality (Lee et al. 2009; Bateni et al. 2013; Shen et al. 2014; Ye et al.
2014; Ding et al. 2016; Liu & Yang 2018; Yirigui et al. 2019; Zhang et al. 2019; Liu et al. 2021; Wu & Lu 2021; de
Mello et al. 2022; Zhong et al. 2022; Qiu et al. 2023). According to Lintern et al. (2018, p. 15), for example, ‘small
and fragmented forests’ are ‘not as effective at reducing the contaminants contained in runoff from other sources (e.g.,
urban, agricultural land uses) within the catchment.’ Xu et al. (2023a, p. 10) have thus emphasised the necessity of main-
taining ‘large and intact’ areas of forest to protect water resources. Logically, however, the scale at which fragmentation
is likely to have the most significant effect on vegetation’s ability to protect water resources from diffuse pollution is
within riparian buffer zones, where natural vegetation functions as a ‘last line of defence’ for water resources (Song
et al. 2021, p. 1).

5.4. Thresholds of natural vegetation

Several studies have demonstrated that aquatic ecosystems may experience abrupt and/or undesirable changes in response to
transformations of their surrounding landscapes (Brabec et al. 2002; Allan 2004b; Dodds et al. 2010; Tromboni & Dodds
2017; D’Amario et al. 2019; Li et al. 2021; Zhong et al. 2022; Mo et al. 2023). Tayyebi et al. (2015, p. 103), for instance,
have observed that ‘research has demonstrated that land use tipping points in water quality and aquatic health occur
when a certain percentage of watershed or catchment exceeds a certain amount of urban and agricultural land use’
(see also Capon et al. 2015; Grimstead et al. 2018; Liu et al. 2021). Provided that they are accurately estimated, such
thresholds may provide policymakers with important insights about, and objective targets for, the protection of water
resources (Wang et al. 2023; Xu et al. 2023b).
While thresholds of urban and agricultural land are most frequently reported, Nash et al. (2009, pp. 358–359) have argued
that ‘maintaining and preserving natural land cover by a certain level may help in providing healthier surface water quality’
(emphasis added). In addition, both Attua et al. (2014, p. 66) and Cecílio et al. (2019, p. 49) have argued that maintaining an
‘adequate’ level of natural vegetation in catchments can improve water quality. However, what ‘certain level’ of natural veg-
etation may be considered ‘adequate’ for the protection of water quality is a question that requires further study (Brabec et al.
2002; Death & Collier 2010; Iñiguez-Armijos et al. 2014; Hanna et al. 2021). The research conducted to date, for instance,
seems to indicate that the answer is dependent on several contextual factors, with estimated thresholds ranging from 40 to
90% (likely owing to differences in the methods and metrics used, as well as local environmental factors). Table 1 lists
examples of publications in which these findings have been reported.
A review of the literature published by the Open Space Institute concludes that water quality tends to deteriorate when the
proportion of forested land falls below 60–90% of the total catchment area, while observing that a threshold of at least 70%
forest cover appears to represent the consensus (Morse et al. 2018). However, the review acknowledges that threshold values
will largely depend on other site-specific factors (including local ecology, climate, and geology), as well as on the nature and
intensity of nearby anthropogenic land uses. This underlines the necessity of estimating thresholds by conducting localised
studies that can account for the influence of these variables.
In addition, as the relationship between land use and water quality is complex, it is important to note that no single LULC
metric, nor any threshold based on these metrics, can fully account for the potential impacts that LULC may have on water
quality in a given landscape (Klein 1979; Brabec et al. 2002; Zampella et al. 2007; Brabec 2009; Dabrowski & de Klerk 2013;
Shen et al. 2015). As such, thresholds of natural vegetation should not be regarded as a water quality management panacea.
Xu et al. (2023a, p. 1), for instance, observe that, ‘due to the many causes and complicated processes causing water quality
changes, controlling and preventing stream water quality degradation remains challenging.’ It must therefore be borne in
mind that there are several other potential sources and/or causes of impairment that cannot be addressed through land
use management alone. An integrated management approach, which considers other potential sources of diffuse pollution
and strategies by which these may be mitigated, is thus essential.

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 98

Table 1 | Publications in which thresholds of natural vegetation have been reported

Publication Study region Finding

Black et al. (2004) Pacific Northwest, United Health of in-stream macroinvertebrate communities began to decline rapidly when
States forest cover across the catchment fell below 70–80%
Sheeder & Evans Pennsylvania, United States When considering nutrient concentrations and sediment loads, ‘unimpaired’
(2007) catchments had an average of 78% forest cover
Death & Collier Waikato Region, New Catchments with 80–90% indigenous vegetation cover were associated with fauna
(2010) Zealand indicative of ‘clean’ water quality, while streams draining catchments with 40–60%
vegetation cover retained 80% of the biodiversity found in pristine streams
Iñiguez-Armijos Southern Andes, Ecuador The ecological condition and macroinvertebrate biodiversity of streams were found
et al. (2014) to be ‘good’ when the vegetative cover was above 70%
Clément et al. Eastern Canada In areas dominated by agriculture, eutrophication was prevalent in catchments with
(2017) less than 47% forest cover
Kändler et al. River Nisa, Czech Republic Catchments with more than 70% forest cover tended to have the lowest
(2017) and Germany concentrations of nutrients and heavy metals
Pond et al. (2017) West Virginia, United States When evaluating both physiochemical and biological indicators, impairment
occurred when catchment-scale forest cover fell below 60%
Ding et al. (2021) Liaoning Province, China A significant decline in in-stream taxa abundance was observed when catchment
vegetation fell below approximately 60%
Zhong et al. (2022) Dianchi Lake Basin, China A minimum of 45% natural vegetation cover was required to maintain nitrogen
concentrations within acceptable levels

6. CONCLUSION
From an integrated catchment management perspective, few factors are as important for determining the quality and con-
dition of surface waters as LULC. Although direct ‘point-source’ inputs (such as end-of-pipe discharges from wastewater
treatment works) can have major impacts on water quality if not properly regulated, it is often the diffuse pollution derived
from anthropogenic land use transformations (including agriculture, urban development, mining, and commercial forestry)
that has the most profound impact on water resources. Natural vegetation, by contrast, offers important ecosystem services
by intercepting and remediating contaminated surface runoff before it reaches receiving waters. Acknowledging, therefore,
that anthropogenic land uses tend to have a detrimental impact on water quality, and that the preservation and/or restoration
of natural vegetation can help to mitigate these impacts, it follows that, in order to protect water resources, land use must be
carefully managed by limiting potentially harmful land use transformations. This involves, as part of a broader integrated
management strategy, ensuring that sufficient areas of unfragmented natural vegetation are maintained across catchment
areas and within riparian zones. It is vital, therefore, for legislators and policymakers to require the protection and/or restor-
ation of undisturbed natural areas as part of integrated catchment management plans. However, owing to the additional
influence of local ecological and environmental conditions, determining the appropriate types and/or requisite amount of
natural vegetation necessary to protect water resources in any given region requires context-specific local research that
can inform such policy directives.

FUNDING
The author is grateful to the University of Cape Town for funding the doctoral study from which this article emanates.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

All relevant data are included in the paper or its Supplementary Information.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare there is no conflict.

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 99

REFERENCES

Aalipour, M., Antczak, E., Dostál, T. & Jabbarian Amiri, B. 2022 Influences of landscape configuration on river water quality. Forests 13 (2),
222. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13020222.
Aalipour, M., Wu, N., Fohrer, N., Kianpoor Kalkhajeh, Y. & Jabbarian Amiri, B. 2023 Examining the influence of landscape patch shapes on
river water quality. Land 12 (5), 1011. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12051011.
Ahearn, D. S., Sheibley, R. W., Dahlgren, R. A., Anderson, M., Johnson, J. & Tate, K. W. 2005 Land use and land cover influence on water
quality in the last free-flowing river draining the western Sierra Nevada, California. Journal of Hydrology 313 (3), 234–247. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.02.038.
Ahmed, J., Thakur, A. & Goyal, A. 2022 Industrial wastewater and its toxic effects. In: Biological Treatment of Industrial Wastewater. The
Royal Society of Chemistry, pp. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1039/9781839165399-00001.
Allafta, H. & Opp, C. 2022 Understanding the combined effects of land cover, precipitation and catchment size on nitrogen and discharge – a
case study of the Mississippi River Basin. Water 14 (6). https://doi.org/10.3390/w14060865.
Allan, J. D. 2004a Influence of land use and landscape setting on the ecological status of rivers. Limnetica 23 (3–4), 187–197. Available from:
https://ddd.uab.cat/record/26087
Allan, J. D. 2004b Landscapes and riverscapes: The influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and
Systematics 35 (1), 257–284. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.120202.110122.
Amiri, B. J. & Nakane, K. 2006 Modeling the relationship between land cover and river water quality in the Yamaguchi Prefecture of Japan.
Journal of Ecology and Environment 29 (4), 343–352. https://doi.org/10.5141/JEFB.2006.29.4.343.
Anderson, J. R., Hardy, E. E., Roach, J. T. & Witmer, R. E. 1976 A Land Use and Land Cover Classification System for Use with Remote Sensor Data,
Vol. 964. US Government Printing Office, Washington DC, USA.
Arnold, C. L. & Gibbons, C. J. 1996 Impervious surface coverage – the emergence of a key environmental indicator. Journal of the American
Planning Association 62 (2), 243–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369608975688.
Attua, E. M., Ayamga, J. & Pabi, O. 2014 Relating land use and land cover to surface water quality in the Densu River basin, Ghana.
International Journal of River Basin Management 12 (1), 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2014.880711.
Baker, A., 2005 Land use and water quality. In: Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences (Anderson, M. G. & McDonnell, J. J., eds). John Wiley
& Sons Ltd., pp. 2925–2930. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470848944.hsa195.
Bandaragoda, D., 2006 Water-land linkages: A relatively neglected issue in IWRM. In: Integrated Water Resources Management. Global
Theory, Emerging Practices and Local Needs (Mollinga, P. P., Dixit, A. & Athukorala, K., eds). Sage, London, pp. 172–185.
Bateni, F., Fakheran, S. & Soffianian, A. 2013 Assessment of land cover changes & water quality changes in the Zayandehroud River
Basin between 1997–2008. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 185 (12), 10511–10519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-013-
3348-3.
Bierschenk, A. M., Savage, C., Townsend, C. R. & Matthaei, C. D. 2012 Intensity of land use in the catchment influences ecosystem
functioning along a freshwater-marine continuum. Ecosystems 15 (4), 637–651. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-012-9536-0.
Black, R. W., Munn, M. D. & Plotnikoff, R. W. 2004 Using macroinvertebrates to identify biota–land cover optima at multiple scales in the
Pacific Northwest, USA. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 23 (2), 340–362. https://doi.org/10.1899/0887-3593(2004)
023<0340:Umtibc . 2.0.Co;2.
Bohenek, J. R., Sulliván, S. M. P., 2022 Inland waters – rivers: Land use and water quality. In: Encyclopedia of Inland Waters, 2nd edn. (Mehner,
T. & Tockner, K., eds). Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 453–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819166-8.00167-5
Bosman, C., Kidd, M., 2009 Water pollution. In: Environmental Management in South Africa, 2nd edn. (Strydom, H. A., King, N. D., Fuggle,
R. F. & Rabie, M. A., eds). Juta, Cape Town, pp. 630–698.
Bosman, C., Kidd, M., Alberts, R., 2018 Water quality management. In: Environmental Management in South Africa, 3rd edn. (King, N.,
Strydom, H. & Retief, F., eds). Juta, Cape Town, pp. 995–1054.
Bowes, R. E., Bergman, E., Donadi, S., Greenberg, L., Sandin, L. & Lind, L. 2023 Landscape features control river’s confluences water quality
and tributary fish composition. River Research and Applications. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.4133.
Boyd, C. E. 2020 Water Quality: An Introduction, 3rd edn. Springer Nature, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23335-8
Brabec, E. A. 2009 Imperviousness and land-use policy: Toward an effective approach to watershed planning. Journal of Hydrologic
Engineering 14 (4), 425–433. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2009)14:4(425).
Brabec, E., Schulte, S. & Richards, P. L. 2002 Impervious surfaces and water quality: A review of current literature and its implications for
watershed planning. Journal of Planning Literature 16 (4), 499–514. https://doi.org/10.1177/088541202400903563.
Brogna, D., Michez, A., Jacobs, S., Dufrêne, M., Vincke, C. & Dendoncker, N. 2017 Linking forest cover to water quality: A multivariate
analysis of large monitoring datasets. Water 9 (3), 176. https://doi.org/10.3390/w9030176.
Brogna, D., Dufrêne, M., Michez, A., Latli, A., Jacobs, S., Vincke, C. & Dendoncker, N. 2018 Forest cover correlates with good biological
water quality. Insights from a regional study (Wallonia, Belgium). Journal of Environmental Management 211, 9–21. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jenvman.2018.01.017.
Buck, O., Niyogi, D. K. & Townsend, C. R. 2004 Scale-dependence of land use effects on water quality of streams in agricultural catchments.
Environmental Pollution 130 (2), 287–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2003.10.018.

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 100

Caldwell, P. V., Martin, K. L., Vose, J. M., Baker, J. S., Warziniack, T. W., Costanza, J. K., Frey, G. E., Nehra, A. & Mihiar, C. M. 2023 Forested
watersheds provide the highest water quality among all land cover types, but the benefit of this ecosystem service depends on landscape
context. Science of the Total Environment 882, 163550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163550.
Capon, S. J., Lynch, A. J. J., Bond, N., Chessman, B. C., Davis, J., Davidson, N., Finlayson, M., Gell, P. A., Hohnberg, D., Humphrey, C.,
Kingsford, R. T., Nielsen, D., Thomson, J. R., Ward, K. & Nally, R. M. 2015 Regime shifts, thresholds and multiple stable states in
freshwater ecosystems; a critical appraisal of the evidence. Science of the Total Environment 534, 122–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2015.02.045.
Cecílio, R. A., Pimentel, S. M. & Zanetti, S. S. 2019 Modeling the influence of forest cover on streamflows by different approaches. CATENA
178, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2019.03.006.
Chapman, P., Kay, P., Mitchell, G. & Pitts, C., 2020 Surface water quality. In: Water Resources: An Integrated Approach, 2nd edn. (Holden, J.,
ed.). Routledge, pp. 99–150. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429448270.
Chen, X., Zhou, W., Pickett, S. T. A., Li, W. & Han, L. 2016 Spatial-temporal variations of water quality and its relationship to land use and
land cover in Beijing, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 13 (5), 449. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph13050449.
Chen, W., Wang, J., Cao, X., Ran, H., Teng, D., Chen, J., He, X. & Zheng, X. 2021 Possibility of using multiscale normalized difference
vegetation index data for the assessment of total suspended solids (TSS) concentrations in surface water: A specific case of scale issues in
remote sensing. Environmental Research 194, 110636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.110636.
Cheng, C., Zhang, F., Shi, J. & Kung, H.-T. 2022 What is the relationship between land use and surface water quality? A review and prospects
from remote sensing perspective. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 29 (38), 56887–56907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-
022-21348-x.
Clément, F., Ruiz, J., Rodríguez, M. A., Blais, D. & Campeau, S. 2017 Landscape diversity and forest edge density regulate stream water
quality in agricultural catchments. Ecological Indicators 72, 627–639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.09.001.
Cole, L. J., Stockan, J. & Helliwell, R. 2020 Managing riparian buffer strips to optimise ecosystem services: A review. Agriculture, Ecosystems
& Environment 296, 106891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2020.106891.
Cooke, S. J., Vermaire, J. C., Baulch, H. M., Birnie-Gauvin, K., Twardek, W. M. & Richardson, J. S. 2022 Our failure to protect the stream and
its valley: A call to back off from riparian development. Freshwater Science 41 (2), 183–194. https://doi.org/10.1086/719958.
Crooks, E. C., Harris, I. M. & Patil, S. D. 2021 Influence of land use land cover on river water quality in Rural North Wales, UK. JAWRA
Journal of the American Water Resources Association 57 (3), 357–373. https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12904.
CWP 2003 Impacts of Impervious Cover on Aquatic Systems [Watershed Protection Research Monograph No. 1]. Centre for Watershed
Protection, Ellicott City, MD, USA.
Dabrowski, J. M. & de Klerk, L. 2013 An assessment of the impact of different land use activities on water quality in the upper Olifants River
catchment. Water SA 39 (2), 231–244. https://doi.org/10.4314/wsa.v39i2.6.
Dabrowski, J. M., Bruton, S., Dent, M., Graham, M., Hill, T., Murray, K., Rivers-Moore, N. & van Deventer, H. 2013 Linking Land Use to Water
Quality for Effective Water Resource and Ecosystem Management [WRC Report No. 1984/1/13]. South African Water Research Commission.
Dallas, H. & Day, J. 2004 The Effect of Water Quality Variables on Aquatic Ecosystems: A Review [WRC Report No. TT 224/04]. Water
Research Commission.
D’Amario, S. C., Rearick, D. C., Fasching, C., Kembel, S. W., Porter-Goff, E., Spooner, D. E., Williams, C. J., Wilson, H. F. & Xenopoulos,
M. A. 2019 The prevalence of nonlinearity and detection of ecological breakpoints across a land use gradient in streams. Scientific
Reports 9 (1), 3878. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40349-4.
D’Arcy, B. J., Kay, D., Napier, F., Haygarth, P., Sun, Y. Y., Wada, K., 2022a Land use and diffuse pollution: Are perceptions part of the
problem? In: Land Use and Water Quality: The Impacts of Diffuse Pollution (Kajitvichyanukul, P. & D’Arcy, B., eds). IWA Publishing,
pp. 1–23. https://doi.org/10.2166/9781789061123_001.
D’Arcy, B. J., Morison, P., Braskerud, B. C., Kajitvichyanukul, P., 2022b Landscapes for pollution risk management. In: Land Use and Water
Quality: The Impacts of Diffuse Pollution (Kajitvichyanukul, P. & D’Arcy, B., eds). IWA Publishing. https://doi.org/10.2166/
9781789061123_265.
Day, J., Dallas, H., 2011 Understanding the basics of water quality. In: Water Resources Planning and Management (Hussey, K. & Grafton,
R. Q., eds). Cambridge University Press, pp. 68–89. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511974304.007.
Day, J. & Davies, B. 2023 Vanishing Waters, 3rd Revised edn. South African Water Research Commission, Geznia.
Death, R. G. & Collier, K. J. 2010 Measuring stream macroinvertebrate responses to gradients of vegetation cover: When is enough enough?
Freshwater Biology 55 (7), 1447–1464. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02233.x.
de Mello, K., Randhir, T. O., Valente, R. A. & Vettorazzi, C. A. 2017 Riparian restoration for protecting water quality in tropical agricultural
watersheds. Ecological Engineering 108, 514–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2017.06.049.
de Mello, K., Valente, R. A., Randhir, T. O., dos Santos, A. C. A. & Vettorazzi, C. A. 2018 Effects of land use and land cover on water quality
of low-order streams in Southeastern Brazil: Watershed versus riparian zone. CATENA 167, 130–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.
2018.04.027.
de Mello, K., Taniwaki, R. H., Paula, F. R. d., Valente, R. A., Randhir, T. O., Macedo, D. R., Leal, C. G., Rodrigues, C. B. & Hughes, R. M. 2020
Multiscale land use impacts on water quality: Assessment, planning, and future perspectives in Brazil. Journal of Environmental
Management 270, 110879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110879.

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 101

de Mello, K., Valente, R. A., Ribeiro, M. P. & Randhir, T. 2022 Effects of forest cover pattern on water quality of low-order streams in an
agricultural landscape in the Pirapora river basin, Brazil. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 194 (3), 189. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10661-022-09854-4.
Deng, L., Li, W., Liu, X., Wang, Y. & Wang, L. 2023 Landscape patterns and topographic features affect seasonal river water quality at
catchment and buffer scales. Remote Sensing 15 (5), 1438. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15051438.
Ding, S., Zhang, Y., Liu, B., Kong, W. & Meng, W. 2013 Effects of riparian land use on water quality and fish communities in the headwater
stream of the Taizi River in China. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering 7 (5), 699–708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-
013-0528-x.
Ding, J., Jiang, Y., Liu, Q., Hou, Z., Liao, J., Fu, L. & Peng, Q. 2016 Influences of the land use pattern on water quality in low-order streams of
the Dongjiang River basin, China: A multi-scale analysis. Science of the Total Environment 551-552, 205–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2016.01.162.
Ding, S., Li, F., Lin, J., Zhang, Y. & Jia, X. 2021 Assessing limitation factors and thresholds for macroinvertebrate communities in response to
land use gradients. E3S Web Conf. 259, 01007. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202125901007.
Dodds, W. K., Clements, W. H., Gido, K., Hilderbrand, R. H. & King, R. S. 2010 Thresholds, breakpoints, and nonlinearity in freshwaters as
related to management. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 29 (3), 988–997. https://doi.org/10.1899/09-148.1.
Duda, A. M. 2017 Co-Managing Land and Water for Sustainable Development [Global Land Outlook Working Paper]. United Nations
Convention to Combat Desertification. Available from: https://www.unccd.int/resources/publications/co-managing-land-and-water-
sustainable-development
Duffy, C., O’Donoghue, C., Ryan, M., Kilcline, K., Upton, V. & Spillane, C. 2020 The impact of forestry as a land use on water quality
outcomes: An integrated analysis. Forest Policy and Economics 116, 102185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102185.
Dymek, D., Zgłobicki, W. & Baran-Zgłobicka, B. 2021 The impact of mosaic land use and land cover on the quality of river waters (Case
study: Lubelskie Province, E Poland). Land 10 (12), 1318. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10121318.
Falkenmark, M. 2011 Water – A reflection of land Use: understanding of water pathways and quality genesis. International Journal of Water
Resources Development 27 (1), 13–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2010.536943.
Falkenmark, M., Andersson, L., Castensson, R., Sundblad, K., Batchelor, C., Gardiner, J., Lyle, C., Peters, N., Pettersen, B., Quinn, P.,
Rockström, J. & Yapijakis, C. 1999 Water: A Reflection of Land Use. Swedish Natural Science Research Council, Stockholm.
Falkenmark, M., Jägerskog, A. & Schneider, K. 2014 Overcoming the land–water disconnect in water-scarce regions: Time for IWRM to go
contemporary. International Journal of Water Resources Development 30 (3), 391–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2014.897157.
Feng, Z., Xu, C., Zuo, Y., Luo, X., Wang, L., Chen, H., Xie, X., Yan, D. & Liang, T. 2023 Analysis of water quality indexes and their
relationships with vegetation using self-organizing map and geographically and temporally weighted regression. Environmental Research
216, 114587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.114587.
Fernandes, A. C. P., de Oliveira Martins, L. M., Pacheco, F. A. L. & Fernandes, L. F. S. 2021 The consequences for stream water quality of
long-term changes in landscape patterns: Implications for land use management and policies. Land Use Policy 109, 105679. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105679.
Foley, J. A., DeFries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S. R., Chapin, F. S., Coe, M. T., Daily, G. C., Gibbs, H. K., Helkowski,
J. H., Holloway, T., Howard, E. A., Kucharik, C. J., Monfreda, C., Patz, J. A., Prentice, I. C., Ramankutty, N. & Snyder, P. K. 2005 Global
consequences of land use. Science 309 (5734), 570–574. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1111772.
Fraser, A. I., 2002 Development of geographical information systems for assessing hydrological aspects of diffuse nutrient and sediment
transfer from agriculture. In: Agriculture, Hydrology and Water Quality (Haygarth, P. M. & Jarvis, S. C., eds). CABI. https://doi.org/
10.1079/9780851995458.0303.
Fulton, S. & West, B. 2002 Forestry impacts on water quality. Southern Forest Resource Assessment 21, 635.
García, L., Rodríguez, D., Wijnen, M. & Pakulski, I. 2016 Earth Observation for Water Resources Management: Current Use and Future
Opportunities for the Water Sector. World Bank Group. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0475-5.
Gevao, B., Jones, K. C., 2002 Pesticides and persistent organic pollutants. In: Agriculture, Hydrology and Water Quality (Haygarth, P. M. &
Jarvis, S. C., eds). CABI, pp. 83–106. https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851995458.0083.
Giri, C. P. 2012 Remote Sensing of Land Use and Land Cover: Principles and Applications. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b11964.
Giri, S. & Qiu, Z. 2016 Understanding the relationship of land uses and water quality in twenty first century: A review. Journal of
Environmental Management 173, 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.02.029.
Gomes, E., Inácio, M., Bogdzevič, K., Kalinauskas, M., Karnauskaitė, D. & Pereira, P. 2021 Future land-use changes and its impacts on terrestrial
ecosystem services: A review. Science of the Total Environment 781. Article 146716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146716.
Gooch, G. D. & Stålnacke, P. 2010 Science, Policy and Stakeholders in Water Management: An Integrated Approach to River Basin
Management. Earthscan. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849775151.
Goodspeed, R., Wang, R., Lizundia, C., Du, L. & Jaipuria, S. 2022 Incorporating water quality into land use scenario analysis with random
forest models. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/23998083221138842.
Gove, N. E., Edwards, R. T. & Conquest, L. L. 2001 Effects of scale on land use and water quality relationships: A longitudinal basin-wide
perspective. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 37 (6), 1721–1734. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.
2001.tb03672.x.

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 102

Grigg, N. S. 2021 Fifty years of water research: Has it made a difference? Water International 46 (7-8), 1087–1098. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02508060.2021.1996968.
Grimstead, J. P., Krynak, E. M. & Yates, A. G. 2018 Scale-specific land cover thresholds for conservation of stream invertebrate communities
in agricultural landscapes. Landscape Ecology 33 (12), 2239–2252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-018-0738-5.
Groffman, P. M., Baron, J. S., Blett, T., Gold, A. J., Goodman, I., Gunderson, L. H., Levinson, B. M., Palmer, M. A., Paerl, H. W., Peterson,
G. D., Poff, N. L., Rejeski, D. W., Reynolds, J. F., Turner, M. G., Weathers, K. C. & Wiens, J. 2006 Ecological thresholds: The key to
successful environmental management or an important concept with no practical application? Ecosystems 9 (1), 1–13. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10021-003-0142-z.
Halbe, J., Pahl-Wostl, C., Sendzimir, J. & Adamowski, J. 2013 Towards adaptive and integrated management paradigms to meet the
challenges of water governance. Water Science and Technology 67 (11), 2651–2660. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2013.146.
Han, H., Yan, X., Xie, H., Qiu, J., Li, X., Zhao, D., Li, X., Yan, X. & Xia, Y. 2023 Incorporating a new landscape intensity indicator into
landscape metrics to better understand controls of water quality and optimal width of riparian buffer zone. Journal of Hydrology 625,
130088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.130088.
Hanna, D. E. L., Lehner, B., Taranu, Z. E., Solomon, C. T. & Bennett, E. M. 2021 The relationship between watershed protection and water
quality: The case of Québec, Canada. Freshwater Science 40 (2), 382–396. https://doi.org/10.1086/714598.
Harris, G., 2002 Impacts of agriculture on water quality around the world. In: Agriculture, Hydrology and Water Quality (Haygarth, P. M. &
Jarvis, S. C., eds). CABI International, Wallingford, pp. 342–343.
Haycock, N., Burt, T., Goulding, K. & Pinay, G. 2001 Buffer Zones: Their Processes and Potential in Water Protection [Electronic Version].
Haycock Associated Limited, St Albans.
Haygarth, P. M. & Jarvis, S. C. 2002 Agriculture, Hydrology and Water Quality. CABI, Wallingford. https://doi.org/10.1079/
9780851995458.0000.
Heidkamp, L. C. & Christian, A. D. 2022 A case study evaluating water quality and reach-, buffer-, and watershed-scale explanatory variables
of an urban coastal watershed. Urban Science 6 (1), 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci6010017.
Henderson, N. D. & Christian, A. D. 2022 Freshwater invertebrate assemblage composition and water quality assessment of an urban coastal
watershed in the context of land-use land-cover and reach-scale physical habitat. Ecologies 3 (3), 376–394. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ecologies3030028.
Horning, N., Robinson, J. A., Sterling, E. J., Turner, W. & Spector, S. 2010 Remote Sensing for Ecology and Conservation: A Handbook of
Techniques. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199219940.001.0001.
Hynes, H. B. N. 1975 The stream and its valley. Internationale Vereinigung für Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie: Verhandlungen 19,
1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/03680770.1974.11896033.
Ide, J., Takeda, I., Somura, H., Mori, Y., Sakuno, Y., Yone, Y. & Takahashi, E. 2019 Impacts of hydrological changes on nutrient transport
from diffuse sources in a rural river basin, western Japan. Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences 124 (8), 2565–2581. https://
doi.org/10.1029/2018JG004513.
Iñiguez-Armijos, C., Leiva, A., Frede, H.-G., Hampel, H. & Breuer, L. 2014 Deforestation and benthic indicators: How much vegetation cover
is needed to sustain healthy Andean streams? PLOS ONE 9 (8), e105869. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105869.
Jansen, L. J. M. & Gregorio, A. D. 2002 Parametric land cover and land-use classifications as tools for environmental change detection.
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 91 (1), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00243-2.
Jewitt, G., 2005 Water and forests. In: Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences (Anderson, M. G. & McDonnell, J. J., eds). John Wiley & Sons
Ltd., pp. 2894–2909. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470848944.hsa192.
Kajitvichyanukul, P. & D’Arcy, B. 2022 Land Use and Water Quality: The Impacts of Diffuse Pollution. IWA Publishing, London. https://
doi.org/10.2166/9781789061123.
Kändler, M., Blechinger, K., Seidler, C., Pavlů , V., Šanda, M., Dostál, T., Krása, J., Vitvar, T. & Štich, M. 2017 Impact of land use on water
quality in the upper Nisa catchment in the Czech Republic and in Germany. Science of the Total Environment 586, 1316–1325. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.221.
Klein, R. D. 1979 Urbanization and stream quality impairment. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 15 (4),
948–963. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1979.tb01074.x.
Kronvang, B., Wendland, F., Kovar, K. & Fraters, D. 2020 Land use and water quality. Water 12 (9), 2412. https://doi.org/10.3390/
w12092412.
Lacher, I. L., Ahmadisharaf, E., Fergus, C., Akre, T., McShea, W. J., Benham, B. L. & Kline, K. S. 2019 Scale-dependent impacts of urban and
agricultural land use on nutrients, sediment, and runoff. Science of the Total Environment 652, 611–622. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.scitotenv.2018.09.370.
Łaszewski, M., Fedorczyk, M. & Stępniewski, K. 2022 The impact of land cover on selected water quality parameters in Polish lowland
streams during the non-vegetative period. Water 14 (20), 3295. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14203295.
Lee, S.-W., Hwang, S.-J., Lee, S.-B., Hwang, H.-S. & Sung, H.-C. 2009 Landscape ecological approach to the relationships of land use patterns in
watersheds to water quality characteristics. Landscape and Urban Planning 92 (2), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.02.008.
Li, Y., Boswell, E. & Thompson, A. 2021 Correlations between land use and stream nitrate-nitrite concentrations in the Yahara River
Watershed in south-central Wisconsin. Journal of Environmental Management 278 (2), 111535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.
2020.111535.

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 103

Li, S., Zhang, J., Jiang, P. & Zhang, L. 2022 Linking land use with riverine water quality: A multi-spatial scale analysis relating to various
riparian strips [Article]. Frontiers in Environmental Science 10. Article 1013318. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.1013318.
Lintern, A., Webb, J. A., Ryu, D., Liu, S., Bende-Michl, U., Waters, D., Leahy, P., Wilson, P. & Western, A. W. 2018 Key factors influencing
differences in stream water quality across space. WIREs Water 5 (1), e1260. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1260.
Liu, Z. & Yang, H. 2018 The impacts of spatiotemporal landscape changes on water quality in Shenzhen, China. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health 15 (5), 1038. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15051038.
Liu, J., Xu, J., Zhang, X., Liang, Z. & Rao, K. 2021 Nonlinearity and threshold effects of landscape pattern on water quality in a rapidly
urbanized headwater watershed in China. Ecological Indicators 124, 107389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107389.
Liu, M., Wei, H., Dong, X., Wang, X. C., Zhao, B. & Zhang, Y. 2022 Integrating land use, ecosystem service, and human well-being: A
systematic review [Review]. Sustainability (Switzerland) 14 (11). Article 6926. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116926.
Loague, K., Corwin, D. L., 2005 Point and nonpoint source pollution. In: Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences (Anderson, M. G. &
McDonnell, J. J., eds). John Wiley & Sons Ltd., pp. 1427–1440. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470848944.hsa195.
Magierowski, R. H., Davies, P. E., Read, S. M. & Horrigan, N. 2012 Impacts of land use on the structure of river macroinvertebrate
communities across Tasmania, Australia: Spatial scales and thresholds. Marine and Freshwater Research 63 (9), 762–776. https://doi.
org/10.1071/MF11267.
Malherbe, H., Pauleit, S. & Lorz, C. 2019 Mapping the loss of ecosystem services in a region under intensive land use along the southern
coast of South Africa. Land 8 (3), 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/land8030051.
Maloney, K. O. & Weller, D. E. 2011 Anthropogenic disturbance and streams: Land use and land-use change affect stream ecosystems via
multiple pathways. Freshwater Biology 56 (3), 611–626. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2010.02522.x.
Mashala, M. J., Dube, T., Mudereri, B. T., Ayisi, K. K. & Ramudzuli, M. R. 2023 A systematic review on advancements in remote sensing for
assessing and monitoring land use and land cover changes impacts on surface water resources in semi-arid tropical environments.
Remote Sensing 15 (16), 3926. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs15163926.
Mateo-Sagasta, J., Zadeh, S. M. & Turral, H. 2018 More People, More Food, Worse Water? A Global Review of Water Pollution From
Agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the International Water Management Institute on behalf of
the Water Land and Ecosystems research program of the CGIAR. Available from: http://www.fao.org/3/ca0146en/CA0146EN.pdf
McDonnell, R. A. 2008 Challenges for integrated water resources management: How do we provide the knowledge to support truly integrated
thinking? International Journal of Water Resources Development 24 (1), 131–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/07900620701723240.
Medupin, C., Bark, R. & Owusu, K. 2020 Land cover and water quality patterns in an urban river: A case study of river Medlock, Greater
Manchester, UK. Water 12 (3), 848. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12030848.
Meybeck, M., Peters, N. E., Chapman, D. V., 2005 Water quality. In: Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences (Anderson, M. G. & McDonnell,
J. J., eds). John Wiley & Sons Ltd., pp. 1373–1385. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470848944.hsa195.
Miller, J. D., Schoonover, J. E., Williard, K. W. J. & Hwang, C. R. 2011 Whole catchment land cover effects on water quality in the lower
Kaskaskia River watershed. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution 221 (1), 337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-011-0794-9.
Mirzaei, M., Jafari, A., Gholamalifard, M., Azadi, H., Shooshtari, S. J., Moghaddam, S. M., Gebrehiwot, K. & Witlox, F. 2020 Mitigating
environmental risks: Modeling the interaction of water quality parameters and land use cover. Land Use Policy 95, 103766. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.12.014.
Mo, W., Yang, N., Zhao, Y. & Xu, Z. 2023 Impacts of land use patterns on river water quality: The case of Dongjiang Lake Basin, China.
Ecological Informatics 75, 102083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2023.102083.
Morse, J., Welch, J. N., Weinberg, A. & Szabo, P. 2018 Literature Review: Forest Cover & Water Quality–Implications for Land Conservation.
Open Space Institute. Available from: https://www.openspaceinstitute.org/what/land-for-clean-water
Nash, M. S., Heggem, D. T., Ebert, D., Wade, T. G. & Hall, R. K. 2009 Multi-scale landscape factors influencing stream water quality in the
state of Oregon. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 156 (1), 343–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0489-x.
Nelson, E., Sander, H., Hawthorne, P., Conte, M., Ennaanay, D., Wolny, S., Manson, S. & Polasky, S. 2010 Projecting global land-use change
and its effect on ecosystem service provision and biodiversity with simple models. PLOS ONE 5 (12), e14327. https://doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pone.0014327.
Nielsen, A., Trolle, D., Sondergaard, M., Lauridsen, T. L., Bjerring, R., Olesen, J. E. & Jeppensen, E. 2012 Watershed land use effects on lake
water quality in Denmark. Ecological Applications 22 (4), 1187–1200. https://doi.org/10.1890/11-1831.1.
Nobre, R. L. G., Caliman, A., Cabral, C. R., Araújo, F. d. C., Guérin, J., Dantas, F. d. C. C., Quesado, L. B., Venticinque, E. M., Guariento, R. D.,
Amado, A. M., Kelly, P., Vanni, M. J. & Carneiro, L. S. 2020 Precipitation, landscape properties and land use interactively affect water
quality of tropical freshwaters. Science of the Total Environment 716, 137044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137044.
Norris, V. 1993 The use of buffer zones to protect water quality: A review. Water Resources Management 7 (4), 257–272. https://doi.org/10.
1007/BF00872284.
Omernik, J. M., Abernathy, A. R. & Male, L. M. 1981 Stream nutrient levels and proximity of agricultural and forest land to streams: Some
relationships. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 36 (4), 227–231. Available from: https://www.jswconline.org/
Ou, Y., Wang, X., Wang, L. & Rousseau, A. N. 2016 Landscape influences on water quality in riparian buffer zone of drinking water source
area, Northern China. Environmental Earth Sciences 75 (2), 114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4884-7.
Pandey, P. K., Soupir, M. L., Haddad, M. & Rothwell, J. J. 2012 Assessing the impacts of watershed indexes and precipitation on spatial in-
stream E. coli concentrations. Ecological Indicators 23, 641–652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.05.023.

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 104

Parece, T. E., Campbell, J. B., 2015 Land use/land cover monitoring and geospatial technologies: An overview. In: Advances in Watershed Science
and Assessment (Younos, T. & Parece, T. E., eds). Springer International Publishing, pp. 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14212-8_1.
Park, S.-R. & Lee, S.-W. 2020 Spatially varying and scale-dependent relationships of land use types with stream water quality. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17 (5), 1673. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17051673.
Paul, M. J. & Meyer, J. L. 2001 Streams in the urban landscape. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 32 (1), 333–365. https://doi.org/
10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.32.081501.114040.
Pei, W., Lei, Q., Zhao, Y., Xu, Q., Du, X., Luo, J., An, M., Ma, H., Fan, B., Qiu, W. & Liu, H. 2023 Effect of landscape pattern on river water
quality under different regional delineation methods: A case study of Northwest Section of the Yellow River in China. Journal of
Hydrology: Regional Studies 50, 101536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2023.101536.
Pengelly, S., Fishburn, G., 2002 Land, water and people: Complex interactions in the Murrumbidgee River Catchment, New South Wales,
Australia. In: Agriculture, Hydrology and Water Quality (Haygarth, P. M. & Jarvis, S. C., eds). CABI, pp. 395–416. https://doi.org/
10.1079/9780851995458.0395.
Peters, N. E. & Meybeck, M. 2000 Water quality degradation effects on freshwater availability: Impacts of human activities. Water
International 25 (2), 185–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060008686817.
Peters, N. E., Meybeck, M., Chapman, D. V., 2005 Effects of human activities on water quality. In: Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences
(Anderson, M. G. & McDonnell, J. J., eds). John Wiley & Sons Ltd., pp. 1409–1425. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470848944.hsa195.
Petersen, C. R., Jovanovic, N. Z. & Grenfell, M. C. 2020 The effectiveness of riparian zones in mitigating water quality impacts in an
agriculturally dominated river system in South Africa. African Journal of Aquatic Science 45 (3), 336–349. https://doi.org/10.2989/
16085914.2019.1685451.
Piffer, P. R. T., Reverberi, L., Ferraz, S. F. d. B., Metzger, J. P. & Uriarte, M. 2021 Native forest cover safeguards stream water quality under a
changing climate. Ecological Applications 31 (7), e02414. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2414.
Pond, G. J., Krock, K. J. G., Cruz, J. V. & Ettema, L. F. 2017 Effort-based predictors of headwater stream conditions: Comparing the proximity
of land use pressures and instream stressors on macroinvertebrate assemblages. Aquatic Sciences 79 (3), 765–781. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s00027-017-0534-3.
Prakoso, S. B., Miyake, Y., Ueda, W. & Suryatmojo, H. 2023 Impact of land use on water quality and invertebrate assemblages in Indonesian
streams. Limnologica 101, 126082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.limno.2023.126082.
Pratt, B. & Chang, H. 2012 Effects of land cover, topography, and built structure on seasonal water quality at multiple spatial scales. Journal
of Hazardous Materials 209-210, 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.12.068.
Qiu, M., Wei, X., Hou, Y., Spencer, S. A. & Hui, J. 2023 Forest cover, landscape patterns, and water quality: A meta-analysis. Landscape
Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-023-01593-2.
Ramião, J. P., Cássio, F. & Pascoal, C. 2020 Riparian land use and stream habitat regulate water quality. Limnologica 82, 125762. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.limno.2020.125762.
Richardson, K., Steffen, W., Lucht, W., Bendtsen, J., Cornell, S. E., Donges, J. F., Drüke, M., Fetzer, I., Bala, G., von Bloh, W., Feulner, G.,
Fiedler, S., Gerten, D., Gleeson, T., Hofmann, M., Huiskamp, W., Kummu, M., Mohan, C., Nogués-Bravo, D., Petri, S., Porkka, M.,
Rahmstorf, S., Schaphoff, S., Thonicke, K., Tobian, A., Virkki, V., Wang-Erlandsson, L., Weber, L. & Rockström, J. 2023 Earth beyond
six of nine planetary boundaries. Science Advances 9 (37), eadh2458. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adh2458.
Roldán-Arias, A., García-Ávila, F., Pesántez-Quintuña, K., Cabello-Torres, R. & Valdiviezo-Gonzales, L. 2023 Spatiotemporal dynamics of a
peri-urban stream water quality and its relationship with land use. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 8, 100420.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscee.2023.100420.
Saeidi, S., Mosallaei, A., Imani Harsini, J., Grósz, J. & Waltner, I. 2023 Assessing the impact of land use and land cover on water quality: A
case study of the Rákos catchment in Hungary. ARPHA Conference Abstracts 6. https://doi.org/10.3897/aca.6.e108160.
Schiff, R. & Benoit, G. 2007 Effects of impervious cover at multiple spatial scales on coastal watershed streams. Journal of the American
Planning Association 43 (3), 712–730. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2007.00057.x.
Schueler, T. 1994 The importance of imperviousness. Watershed Protection Techniques 1 (3), 100–101. Available from: https://owl.cwp.org/
mdocs-posts/elc_pwp1/
Schulze, R. E. 2000 Modelling hydrological responses to land use and climate change: A southern African perspective. Ambio 29 (1), 12–22.
Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4314988
Sheeder, S. A. & Evans, B. M. 2007 Estimating nutrient and sediment threshold criteria for biological impairment In Pennsylvania
watersheds. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 40 (4), 881–888. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1752-1688.2004.tb01052.x.
Shen, Z., Hou, X., Li, W. & Aini, G. 2014 Relating landscape characteristics to non-point source pollution in a typical urbanized watershed in
the municipality of Beijing. Landscape and Urban Planning 123, 96–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.12.007.
Shen, Z., Hou, X., Li, W., Aini, G., Chen, L. & Gong, Y. 2015 Impact of landscape pattern at multiple spatial scales on water quality: A case
study in a typical urbanised watershed in China. Ecological Indicators 48, 417–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.08.019.
Shiels, D. R. 2010 Implementing landscape indices to predict stream water quality in an agricultural setting: An assessment of the Lake and
River Enhancement (LARE) protocol in the Mississinewa River watershed, East-Central Indiana. Ecological Indicators 10 (6),
1102–1110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.03.007.

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 105

Siqueira, T. d. S., Pessoa, L. A., Vieira, L., Cionek, V. d. M., Singh, S. K., Benedito, E. & do Couto, E. V. 2023 Evaluating land use impacts on
water quality: Perspectives for watershed management. Sustainable Water Resources Management 9 (6), 192. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s40899-023-00968-2.
Sliva, L. & Williams, D. D. 2001 Buffer zone versus whole catchment approaches to studying land use impact on river water quality. Water
Research 35 (14), 3462–3472. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1354(01)00062-8.
Song, X.-P., Hansen, M. C., Stehman, S. V., Potapov, P. V., Tyukavina, A., Vermote, E. F. & Townshend, J. R. 2018 Global land change from
1982 to 2016. Nature 560 (7720), 639–643. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0411-9.
Song, Y., Song, X., Shao, G. & Hu, T. 2020 Effects of land use on stream water quality in the rapidly urbanized areas: A multiscale analysis.
Water 12 (4), 1123. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12041123.
Song, M., Jiang, Y., Liu, Q., Tian, Y., Liu, Y., Xu, X. & Kang, M. 2021 Catchment versus riparian buffers: which land use spatial scales have the
greatest ability to explain water quality changes in a typical temperate watershed? Water 13 (13), 1758. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13131758.
Sponseller, R. A., Benfield, E. F. & Valett, H. M. 2001 Relationships between land use, spatial scale and stream macroinvertebrate
communities. Freshwater Biology 46 (10), 1409–1424. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2427.2001.00758.x.
Strayer, D. L., Beighley, R. E., Thompson, L. C., Brooks, S., Nilsson, C., Pinay, G. & Naiman, R. J. 2003 Effects of land cover on stream
ecosystems: roles of empirical models and scaling issues. Ecosystems 6 (5), 407–423. https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00021506.
Stutter, M. I., Chardon, W. J. & Kronvang, B. 2012 Riparian buffer strips as a multifunctional management tool in agricultural landscapes:
Introduction. Journal of Environmental Quality 41 (2), 297–303. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2011.0439.
Sun, G., Bishop, K., Ferraz, S. & Jones, J. 2020 Managing forests and water for people under a changing environment. Forests 11 (3), 331.
https://doi.org/10.3390/f11030331.
Sweeney, B. W. & Newbold, J. D. 2014 Streamside forest buffer width needed to protect stream water quality, habitat, and organisms: A
literature review. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 50 (3), 560–584. https://doi.org/10.1111/jawr.12203.
Taylor, C. A. & Rising, J. 2021 Tipping point dynamics in global land use. Environmental Research Letters 16 (12), 125012. https://doi.org/10.
1088/1748-9326/ac3c6d.
Tayyebi, A., Pijanowski, B. C. & Pekin, B. K. 2015 Land use legacies of the Ohio River Basin: Using a spatially explicit land use change model
to assess past and future impacts on aquatic resources. Applied Geography 57, 100–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.12.020.
Thenkabail, P. S. 2015 Remote Sensing Handbook: Remote Sensing of Water Resources, Disasters, and Urban Studies. CRC Press. https://
doi.org/10.1201/b19321.
Thomas, A., Masante, D., Jackson, B., Cosby, B., Emmett, B. & Jones, L. 2020 Fragmentation and thresholds in hydrological flow-based
ecosystem services. Ecological Applications 30 (2), e02046. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2046.
Thompson, M. 1996 A standard land-cover classification scheme for remote-sensing applications in South Africa. South African Journal of
Science 92 (1), 34–42. https://doi.org/doi:10.10520/AJA00382353_7698.
Tiner, R. W. 2004 Remotely-sensed indicators for monitoring the general condition of ‘natural habitat’ in watersheds: An application for
Delaware’s Nanticoke River watershed. Ecological Indicators 4 (4), 227–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2004.04.002.
Tran, C. P., Bode, R. W., Smith, A. J. & Kleppel, G. S. 2010 Land-use proximity as a basis for assessing stream water quality in New York State
(USA). Ecological Indicators 10 (3), 727–733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.12.002.
Tromboni, F. & Dodds, W. K. 2017 Relationships between land use and stream nutrient concentrations in a highly urbanized tropical region
of Brazil: Thresholds and riparian zones. Environmental Management 60 (1), 30–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-017-0858-8.
Ullah, K. A., Jiang, J. & Wang, P. 2018 Land use impacts on surface water quality by statistical approaches. Global Journal of Environmental
Science and Management 4 (2), 231–250. https://doi.org/10.22034/gjesm.2018.04.02.010.
van Asselen, S. & Verburg, P. H. 2013 Land cover change or land-use intensification: Simulating land system change with a global-scale land
change model. Global Change Biology 19 (12), 3648–3667. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12331.
Vigil, K. M. 2003 Clean Water: An Introduction to Water Quality and Water Pollution Control. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis.
Vrebos, D., Beauchard, O. & Meire, P. 2017 The impact of land use and spatial mediated processes on the water quality in a river system.
Science of the Total Environment 601–602, 365–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.05.217.
Waite, I. R. 2014 Agricultural disturbance response models for invertebrate and algal metrics from streams at two spatial scales within the
U.S. Hydrobiologia 726 (1), 285–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-013-1774-4.
Waite, I. R., Brown, L. R., Kennen, J. G., May, J. T., Cuffney, T. F., Orlando, J. L. & Jones, K. A. 2010 Comparison of watershed disturbance
predictive models for stream benthic macroinvertebrates for three distinct ecoregions in western US. Ecological Indicators 10 (6),
1125–1136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.03.011.
Wang, Y., Liu, X., Wang, T., Zhang, X., Feng, Y., Yang, G. & Zhen, W. 2021 Relating land-use/land-cover patterns to water quality in
watersheds based on the structural equation modeling. CATENA 206, 105566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2021.105566.
Wang, H., Wang, J., Ni, J., Cui, Y. & Yan, S. 2023 Spatial scale effects of integrated landscape indicators on river water quality in Chaohu
Lake basin, China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-29482-w.
Wear, D. N., Turner, M. G. & Naiman, R. J. 1998 Land cover along an urban-rural gradient: implications for water quality. Ecological
Applications 8 (3), 619–630. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(1998)008[0619:LCAAUR]2.0.CO;2.
Weiner, E. R. 2013 Applications of Environmental Aquatic Chemistry, 3rd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton. https://doi.org/10.1201/b12963
Wepener, V., Malherbe, W., Smit, N. J., 2018 Water Resources in South Africa. In: Environmental Management in South Africa, 3rd edn.
(King, N., Strydom, H. & Retief, F., eds). Juta, Cape Town, pp. 351–400.

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest
 Water Quality Research Journal Vol 59 No 2, 106

Winkler, K., Fuchs, R., Rounsevell, M. & Herold, M. 2021 Global land use changes are four times greater than previously estimated. Nature
Communications 12 (1), 2501. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22702-2.
Woznicki, S. A., Kraynick, G., Wickham, J., Nash, M. & Sohl, T. 2023 Modeling future land cover and water quality change in Minneapolis,
MN, USA to support drinking water source protection decisions. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 59 (4),
726–742. https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.13109.
Wu, J. & Lu, J. 2021 Spatial scale effects of landscape metrics on stream water quality and their seasonal changes. Water Research 191,
116811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2021.116811.
Xiao, H. & Ji, W. 2007 Relating landscape characteristics to non-point source pollution in mine waste-located watersheds using geospatial
techniques. Journal of Environmental Management 82 (1), 111–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.12.009.
Xu, M., Xu, G., Li, Z., Dang, Y., Li, Q., Min, Z., Gu, F., Wang, B., Liu, S. & Zhang, Y. 2023a Effects of comprehensive landscape patterns on
water quality and identification of key metrics thresholds causing its abrupt changes. Environmental Pollution 333, 122097. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.122097.
Xu, Q., Yan, T., Wang, C., Hua, L. & Zhai, L. 2023b Managing landscape patterns at the riparian zone and sub-basin scale is equally
important for water quality protection. Water Research 229, 119280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2022.119280.
Yao, S., Chen, C., He, M., Cui, Z., Mo, K., Pang, R. & Chen, Q. 2023 Land use as an important indicator for water quality prediction in a
region under rapid urbanization. Ecological Indicators 146, 109768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.109768.
Ye, Y., Xingyuan, H., Wei, C., Jing, Y., Shuai, Y. & Lian, J. 2014 Seasonal water quality upstream of Dahuofang Reservoir, China – the effects
of land use type at various spatial scales. Clean – Soil, Air, Water 42 (10), 1423–1432. https://doi.org/10.1002/clen.201300600.
Yirigui, Y., Lee, S.-W., Nejadhashemi, A. P., Herman, M. R. & Lee, J.-W. 2019 Relationships between riparian forest fragmentation and
biological indicators of streams. Sustainability 11 (10), 2870. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11102870.
Yu, D., Shi, P., Liu, Y. & Xun, B. 2013 Detecting land use-water quality relationships from the viewpoint of ecological restoration in an urban
area. Ecological Engineering 53, 205–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2012.12.045.
Yuan, L., Sinshaw, T. & Forshay, K. J. 2020 Review of watershed-scale water quality and nonpoint source pollution models. Geosciences
10 (1), 25. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences10010025.
Zampella, R. A., Procopio, N. A., Lathrop, R. G. & Dow, C. L. 2007 Relationship of land-use/land-cover patterns and surface-water quality in
The Mullica River Basin. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 43 (3), 594–604. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-
1688.2007.00045.x.
Zhang, J., Li, S., Dong, R., Jiang, C. & Ni, M. 2019 Influences of land use metrics at multi-spatial scales on seasonal water quality: A case study
of river systems in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China. Journal of Cleaner Production 206, 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.
2018.09.179.
Zhang, Z., Zhang, F., Du, J., Chen, D. & Zhang, W. 2021 Impacts of land use at multiple buffer scales on seasonal water quality in a reticular
river network area. PLOS ONE 16 (1), e0244606. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0244606.
Zhang, Y., Zhao, Y., Zhang, H., Cao, J., Chen, J., Su, C. & Chen, Y. 2023a The impact of land-use composition and landscape pattern on water
quality at different spatial scales in the Dan River Basin, Qin Ling Mountains. Water 15 (18), 3276. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15183276.
Zhang, Z., Li, J., Hu, Z., Zhang, W., Ge, H. & Li, X. 2023b Impact of land use/land cover and landscape pattern on water quality in Dianchi
Lake Basin, Southwest of China. Sustainability 15 (4), 3145. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043145.
Zhong, X., Xu, Q., Yi, J. & Jin, L. 2022 Study on the threshold relationship between landscape pattern and water quality considering spatial
scale effect – a case study of Dianchi Lake Basin in China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 29 (29), 44103–44118. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-18970-0.
Zhou, T., Wu, J. & Peng, S. 2012 Assessing the effects of landscape pattern on river water quality at multiple scales: A case study of the
Dongjiang River watershed, China. Ecological Indicators 23, 166–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.03.013.
Zhou, J., Chuyu, L., Ma, D., Shi, W., Lanying, W., Guo, Z., Tang, H., Wang, X., Wang, J., Chunfang, L., Wei, W. & Wang, C. 2022 The impact
of land use landscape pattern on river hydrochemistry at multi-scale in an Inland River Basin, China. Ecological Indicators 143, 109334.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.109334.

First received 26 January 2024; accepted in revised form 8 April 2024. Available online 22 April 2024

Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/wqrj/article-pdf/59/2/89/1427413/wqrjc0590089.pdf

by guest