The Sosa wetland is a sensitive wetland, situated at the headwaters of the Jordan catchment in Maseru. Due to unregulated land use activities in the past decades (2010–2020), the Sosa wetland nearly dried up. Therefore, this study performed a wetland water balance of the Sosa wetland in Lesotho for the period of 1975–2020 using GIS and remote sensing. Landsat imageries of 1975–2020 were used for land use and land cover while the Penman -Monteith and Thornthwaite methods were used to estimate evapotranspiration. Results show that water/marsh, cultivation, settlements and bare-land increased by 2.04, 4.1, 5.82 and 28.71%, respectively, from 1975 to 2020. Forest and shrubs as well as grasslands decreased by 38.83 and 1.76%, respectively, from 1975 to 2020. Evapotranspiration estimates for the period 1984–2020 were in the range of 900 −1,071 mm/year which is substantially greater than the annual mean rainfall of the catchment which ranges from 550 to 850 mm/year. The most sensitive wetlands are found in the middle reach of the catchment and at the headwaters occupying about 16.03% of the catchment, whereas moderately sensitive wetlands occupy 39.75%. The water balance closure as a ratio of rainfall received ranged from −3.13 to −3.5.

  • Estimation of land use and land cover changes of the Jordan catchment.

  • Compares evapotranspiration estimates.

  • Identification of sensitive wetland areas and their conditions.

  • Improve water resources planning and sustainability through modeling.

  • This research assessed the water balance of the Jordan catchment.

Graphical Abstract

Graphical Abstract
Graphical Abstract

Wetlands are areas with marsh, fen, bog or water, either natural or man-made, temporary or permanent, with static or flowing water that is fresh, brackish or salty, involving areas of seawater with a maximum depth of 6 m at low tide (Ramsar 2016). Lesotho's wetlands are classified into three basic categories, namely palustrine, lacustrine and riverine (Olaleye 2019). The dominant form of the wetland is palustrine, which includes mires (bogs and fens), the majority of which are found at a high elevation (Olutayo 2012). Sosa wetland is a palustrine wetland.

In Lesotho, wetlands are under severe anthropogenic pressures due to overgrazing and the construction of housing (settlements) owing to the vastly growing population (Chatanga 2019). Wetland protection and restoration are critical for the planet's future sustainability, acting as safety nets for growing challenges such as climate change, food supply for an expanding global population, disturbance moderation, clean water and overall societal well-being (Zhang et al. 2021). Thus, comprehending land use change (LUC) and its spatiotemporal consequences for wetland ecosystems have become fundamental concerns in geography, ecology and sustainable science, all of which are critical for human well-being as well for regional sustainable development (Zhang et al. 2020). Wetlands supply important environmental services to the community and are surrounded by intensive farming that uses agro-chemicals and fertilizers in the management process (Moreira et al. 2021). Nowadays, drones are used to capture the extent of wetlands due to their high resolution (Bhatnagar et al. 2021). This method was found to improve the classification accuracy (87%) of the vegetation community compared to the unsupervised method (62%), which is the only option in the absence of ground truth (Bhatnagar et al. 2021).

The daily evapotranspiration capacity of the water area often exceeded that of the artificial wetland. Therefore, by comparing the water area and land use types (beach land, marsh and artificial wetland) in evapotranspiration, it was then concluded that water surface area is one of the driving factors influencing evapotranspiration (Wang et al. 2021). The wetland evapotranspiration partitioning and its relationship with abnormally low water levels were analyzed and results showed that the water evaporation rate was larger than the land evapotranspiration (Zhao & Liu 2016). Furthermore, it was found that the partition ratio increases up to 1 when the water level decreases showing that wetland evapotranspiration comes from surface land evapotranspiration than from water evaporation (Zhao & Liu 2016).

Wetland sensitivity varies with wetlands, size or productivity, which is caused by the variation in biophysical variables such as rainfall and evapotranspiration. Wetland condition describes the activities which are taking place within a wetland area. For most wetlands, the source of water is rainfall, hence their sensitivity depends mostly on the temperature and precipitation of the catchment. Wetlands are valuable ecosystems that provide many valuable services, yet many of these important ecosystems are at risk because of current land use and land cover (LULC) changes (Ouyang et al. 2014). In one of the studies based on regional climate sensitivity, a 1% increase in rainfall resulted in an increase of probable wetland area of 16.2%. While a 1% increase in temperature caused a negative impact on wetlands occurrence, reducing the probable wetland area by 37.9% (Nyandwi et al. 2016). Some studies conducted on wetland conditions showed that direct cultivation on wetlands, uncontrolled grazing or overgrazing, and aquaculture are common in areas extremely reliant on natural resources, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa (Sakané et al. 2013).

Estimation of the water balance of wetlands is critical for understanding how they function and the way they respond to factors affecting them. Water balance analyses serve as an important foundation for decision-making at the watershed level regarding agricultural and forest plantation investments, water resource management and planning, water and carbon accounting and impact evaluations (Chemura et al. 2020). Accurate water balance management is critical for both short and the long-term water resource management. Obtaining an exact wetland water balance is challenging, as it is uncommon for all variables to be correctly monitored in the field concurrently. Therefore, hydrological models are normally used to estimate the water balance of wetlands. According to Belete et al. (2018), the spatial distribution of the annual water yield of the Nile River indicated a higher amount at the upstream whereas the contribution of the downstream was insignificant. Water balance varies from negative to positive. The positive value implies that inflows (rainfall) are greater than outflows (discharge and evapotranspiration). Therefore, the catchment or wetland is storing enough water for its hydrological and biological functioning.

Prolonged periods of low rainfall together with severe temperatures, and different land use types leading to land cover changes are hypothesized to contribute to the seasonal drying of wetlands, impairing their hydrological functioning, all over the world. Lesotho, like other countries, is not an exception to this problem. However, no study based on water balance assessment has been undertaken in Lesotho wetlands, and this study will focus on assessing the water balance of the Sosa wetland in the Jordan catchment. Specifically, this research sought to (i) estimate LULC changes in the upstream catchment of the Sosa wetland, (ii) compare site-specific evapotranspiration estimates using different methods, (iii) assess the sensitivity and conditions of the wetlands in the Jordan catchment and (iv) estimate the water balance of the Sosa wetland.

Description of the study area

Lesotho is a landlocked country, surrounded by the Free State, Kwazulu Natal and Eastern Cape Provinces of the Republic of South Africa. The country is divided into four geographical regions, namely the highlands, the foothills, the lowlands and the Senqu valley. The study area, which is the Sosa wetland, is found in the highlands, in the upper Senqu river basin, in the Jordan catchment, found in the Maseru District. The Jordan catchment is located between latitudes −29.39 and longitude of 28.02, at an elevation range of 1,815–2,995 feet, where temperatures are often cool, with mean daily temperature between 0 and 20.22 °C; and annual precipitation is typically between 550 and 850 mm. It has a coverage of 479.10 km2 and is about 83.4 km from Maseru, the capital city of Lesotho. On the other hand, the Sosa wetland is 0.12 km2 in size on the upper left bank of the Jordan River, which flows through eastern Lesotho supplying water to the Mohale dam. The Sosa wetland is the primary source of the Sosa River water, a major tributary of the Jordan River. In addition, the Sosa wetland has marked hydrological significance to the entire Jordan basin/catchment, and more specifically to the villages of Leropong, Sosa and Rapokolane (Figure 1). According to the Bureau of Statistics (2016) the Jordan catchment area has a population of 5,175 people comprising 2,640 males and 2,535 females.
Figure 1

Study area: the Sosa wetland in the Jordan catchment.

Figure 1

Study area: the Sosa wetland in the Jordan catchment.

Close modal

Estimation of LULC on the upstream catchment

Landsat images with less than 20% cloud cover were used to detect changes in land cover and were downloaded from the Landsat online data repository (http://glovis.usgs.gov/). All images were downloaded between August and September, which is Lesotho's dry season. LandsatMSS, ETM and TM from 1975 to 2020 were then imported into Integrated Land and Water Information System (ILWIS) via geo-gateway for digital image classification. For Landsat 5 TM and Landsat 7, this study used multispectral pseudo-natural color band combinations of 5, 4 and 3, and for Landsat 8, it used a combination of 6, 5 and 4. The pseudo-natural color scheme is excellent for detecting land cover activity (Dube et al. 2014). The wavelength ranges and applications of the bands are listed in Table 1. The Landsat images were classified into themed maps using the maximum likelihood classifier, the algorithm that serves as the parameter in the classification process. Six (6) classes were classified, namely bare-land, water and marsh, cultivation, shrubs, grassland, and settlements. Table 2 has a detailed description of each class. Following the discovery of the themed map, the classified map was resampled using the study area geo-reference and then cross-referenced with the study area raster map in order to produce the classified map of the study area's size.

Table 1

Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) image band description

SensorDate of acquisitionSpatial resolution (m)Bands usedCloud cover
Landsat MSS September 1975 60 5,4,3 
Landsat 5 TM September 1984 30 5,4,3 
Landsat 5 TM August 1994 30 5,4,3 10a 
Landsat 5 TM August 2004 30 5,4,3 10a 
Landsat 8 August 2014 30 6,5,4 
Landsat 8 August 2020 30 6,5,4 
SensorDate of acquisitionSpatial resolution (m)Bands usedCloud cover
Landsat MSS September 1975 60 5,4,3 
Landsat 5 TM September 1984 30 5,4,3 
Landsat 5 TM August 1994 30 5,4,3 10a 
Landsat 5 TM August 2004 30 5,4,3 10a 
Landsat 8 August 2014 30 6,5,4 
Landsat 8 August 2020 30 6,5,4 

Note:aAlthough the overall scene had 10% cloud cover, the study site had less than 5% cloud cover.

Table 2

Description of land cover classes used in the study

ClassDescription
Bare Areas with nothing grown on or not put to use 
Cultivation Areas that are used for farming 
Settlements Areas that are occupied by buildings and houses or any related structure. 
Grassland Areas occupied by grass for grazing 
Shrubs Areas that are occupied by woody species such as forest and shrubs 
Water and marsh Area occupied by water bodies either from rivers or dams and areas which includes wetlands or waterlogged areas 
ClassDescription
Bare Areas with nothing grown on or not put to use 
Cultivation Areas that are used for farming 
Settlements Areas that are occupied by buildings and houses or any related structure. 
Grassland Areas occupied by grass for grazing 
Shrubs Areas that are occupied by woody species such as forest and shrubs 
Water and marsh Area occupied by water bodies either from rivers or dams and areas which includes wetlands or waterlogged areas 

The accuracy of classification was assessed using 300 ground control points which were collected between January and April 2021 using a hand-held Global Positioning System (GPS) from various LULC classifications in order to validate the 2020 imagery. There were several classes, including bare-land, grassland, forest and shrubs, cultivation, settlements, and water and marsh areas. Additionally, coordinates were extracted from a Google Earth photograph of water bodies. The confusion matrix was utilized to quantify the error between the exact or real measurement on the ground, as well as to analyze the accuracy of the classification and identify areas of misclassification (Gumindoga et al. 2018). Additionally, the classification results were compared to ground truth data and the ones derived from Google Earth images. Each class received 50 control points in this trial. The areas were chosen based on their accessibility and concentration of the class of concern.

Estimating evapotranspiration for the period of 1984–2020

The meteorological data were provided by the Lesotho Highlands Development Authority (LHDA) from a weather station located in the Jordan catchment at Likalaneng Ha Mohale. The data comprised minimum and maximum temperatures, relative humidity, wind speed, solar radiation and atmospheric pressure. The daily evapotranspiration (ET) for the station was determined using the FAO Penman–Monteith method (Allen et al. 1998) as follows:
formula
(1)
where ETo is the evapotranspiration (mm day−1); Rn is the net radiation at the crop surface (MJ m−2 day−1), which was estimated according to the procedures outlined by Allen et al. (2015); G is the soil heat-flux density (MJ m−2 day−1), which can be assumed as zero for daily calculations according to Allen et al. (2015); T is the mean daily air temperature (°C) at a height of 2 m; u2 is the wind speed at a height of 2 m (m s−1); es is the saturation vapor pressure (kPa); ea is the actual vapor pressure (kPa), which is based on relative humidity measurements; Δ is the slope of the vapor pressure curve (kPa °C−1); γ is the psychrometric constant (kPa °C−1).
In order to prepare for the computation of potential evapotranspiration (PET) using the Thornthwaite method, the monthly Thornthwaite Heat Index (i) was first calculated using the following formula.
formula
(2)
where t is the mean monthly temperature.
Thereafter, the annual heat index (I) was derived by adding the Monthly Heat indices (i):
formula
(3)
Then, PET estimate was obtained for each month. Taking into account that a month consists of 30 days with 12 theoretical sunshine hours per day, the following formula was used:
formula
(4)
where
formula
(5)
To adjust the acquired values to the actual month length and theoretical sunshine hours for the latitude of the study area, the following equation was used:
formula
(6)
where d is the number of days for each month; N is the theoretical sunshine hours for each month.

Assessment of wetland sensitivity and condition

Since wetlands are hydro-morphological features, all wetlands of the Jordan catchment were described based on their position in the hydrological and terrain landscape. Then wetland sensitivity was determined using the twelve (12) biophysical variables, namely soil water content, bulk density, soil colour, soil texture, stream order, rainfall, soil pH, distance from dams, sediment transport index, evapotranspiration, topographic wetness index and flow accumulation according to Nyandwi et al. (2016). All the biophysical variables were resampled to a common 30 m spatial resolution using the nearest neighbor resampling technique in ILWIS-GIS. For each biophysical variable, weight was assigned based on their influence on wetlands formation. Furthermore, wetland condition, a feature that shows the status of the wetland in terms of anthropogenic activities within the wetland as well as at the catchment scale, was determined from the LULC map of 2020. It was determined by categorizing activities which were taking place in the Jordan catchment wetlands.

Estimating water balance

The water balance of the Sosa wetland was assessed using the Hydrologiska Byrans Vattenavdelning (HBV) model, which is named after the Hydrologiska Byrans Vattenavdelning unit at the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI), which is where its development started in the 1970s. The HBV model has become widely used and exists in several versions. The version HBV light was developed using Microsoft Visual Basic and has become widely used in education at several universities. Daily streamflow, temperature and precipitation are combined to form a precipitation, temperature and discharge file, which together with evapotranspiration were used as inputs into the model. Model warming-up was done for the period of 2000–2001 while manual calibration was done for the period 2001–2010. Calibration for all parameters was continued until reaching the acceptable efficiency, with the mean difference closer to zero. Subsequently, model validation was done using data of the period 2011–2020 whereby the model parameters from the calibration were used on different data without any parameter being changed to see whether the calibrated model can simulate discharge properly for catchments with no observed discharge.

Streamflow data, which were provided by the LHDA had been collected from the Marakabei River weir located at a latitude of −29.55 and a longitude of 28.16 (Figure 1), at a daily time step. The data had 6% gaps, which were filled using basic arithmetic averaging of flows on the same day of the same month in the preceding and succeeding 2 years of the year with missing data. Filling gaps were critical to ensure a longer time of continuous data. The data were further cleaned to reduce errors that might be caused by mistakes done in data collection.

On the other hand, precipitation data for the period 1975–2020, were acquired from the department of meteorological services and LHDA. The data were collected from three stations in the Jordan catchment area, namely St. John's Marakabei, Mohale, and Thaba-Putsoa. Similarly, the gaps were filled by the arithmetic mean method to provide consistent and continuous data. The Jordan catchment was delineated into six subcatchments. Due to the fact that not all subcatchments contain stations, the influence of each station on each subcatchment was analyzed, and the mean area daily precipitation was calculated using the Thiessen polygon, Equation (7).
formula
(7)
where P is the mean area daily precipitation; Ai is the polygon area for each station; Pi is the precipitation for each polygon; A is the total polygon area.

Furthermore, daily maximum and minimum temperature that were collected from the Mohale hydrological station for the period of 1975–2020, were obtained from LHDA. The daily temperature was then calculated as the average of the maximum and minimum temperatures. The average monthly evapotranspiration estimated from the Penman–Monteith method was used. Finally, hydrologic signatures, namely runoff ratio (RR), evapotranspiration ratio (ETR), the slope of the flow duration curve, baseflow index (BFI) and elasticity of streamflow (ESF) were also estimated for each subcatchment. The formulae used to calculate the respective hydrologic signatures were as follows (Sawicz et al. 2011):

  • (i)
    RR
    formula
    (8)
    where Q is the total average discharge; P is the total average precipitation.
  • (ii)
    ETR
    formula
    (9)
    where ETa is the total evapotranspiration; P is the total average precipitation.
  • (iii)
    Slope of flow duration curve (SFDC)
    formula
    (10)
    where Q33 is the 33rd quantile streamflow value; Q66 is the 66th quantile streamflow value.
  • (iv)
    BFI
    formula
    (11)
    where Q90% is the 90th percentile streamflow value; Q50% is the 50th percentile streamflow value.
  • (v)
    ESF
    formula
    (12)
    where dQ is the difference in the streamflow between the previous and current years; dP is the difference in precipitation between the previous and current years; P is the mean annual precipitation; Q is the mean annual streamflow; median is a robust value (measure), used to eliminate outliers that have a substantial effect on the mean (Sawicz et al. 2011).

LULC changes in the Jordan catchment

From the digital supervised imagery classification of 1975, 1984, 1994, 2004, 2014 and 2020, the following LULC classes were obtained: bare, cultivation, grassland, settlements, water and marsh and shrubs/forest. Figure 2 shows the thematic maps created from the LULC classes and Table 3 shows statistics of areas occupied by the same LULC classes. Results show that water and marsh, cultivation, settlements and bare-land increased by 2.04, 4.1, 5.82 and 28.71% respectively while grassland and shrubs/forest decreased by 1.76 and 38.83%, respectively, from 1975 to 2020 On the other hand, results of digital image classification showed that most of the Nyazvidzi catchment is characterized by cultivated land (48.5) and grassland with (31.3%) and very scarce water occupying only 0.5% (Gumindoga et al. 2018).
Table 3

Statistics of areal coverage (in square kilometres) of the land use and land cover classes of the Jordan Wetland, from 1975 to 2020; figures in parentheses () are areal coverage in percentage

Time periodAreal coverage of the six LULC classes (km2)
GrasslandBareCultivationWater and marshSettlementsShrubs/forest
Sep 1975 106.26 6.47 57.68 0.14 1.15 307.06 
(22.18) (1.35) (12.04) (0.03) (0.24) (64.09) 
Sep 1984 118.49 68.52 61.07 0.87 25.71 204.10 
(24.75) (14.31) (12.76) (0.18) (5.37) (42.26) 
Aug 1994 120.80 25.30 63.52 0.10 28.36 241.94 
(25.23) (5.28) (13.27) (0.02) (5.92) (50.53) 
Aug 2004 191.23 28.04 73.06 5.79 40.31 140.66 
(39.94) (5.86) (15.26) (1.21) (8.42) (29.38) 
Aug 2014 125.30 81.64 98.80 27.40 18.05 127.91 
(26.15) (17.04) (20.62) (5.72) (3.77) (26.70) 
Aug 2020 97.84 144.01 77.31 9.90 29.03 121.01 
(20.42) (30.06) (16.14) (2.07) (6.06) (25.26) 
Time periodAreal coverage of the six LULC classes (km2)
GrasslandBareCultivationWater and marshSettlementsShrubs/forest
Sep 1975 106.26 6.47 57.68 0.14 1.15 307.06 
(22.18) (1.35) (12.04) (0.03) (0.24) (64.09) 
Sep 1984 118.49 68.52 61.07 0.87 25.71 204.10 
(24.75) (14.31) (12.76) (0.18) (5.37) (42.26) 
Aug 1994 120.80 25.30 63.52 0.10 28.36 241.94 
(25.23) (5.28) (13.27) (0.02) (5.92) (50.53) 
Aug 2004 191.23 28.04 73.06 5.79 40.31 140.66 
(39.94) (5.86) (15.26) (1.21) (8.42) (29.38) 
Aug 2014 125.30 81.64 98.80 27.40 18.05 127.91 
(26.15) (17.04) (20.62) (5.72) (3.77) (26.70) 
Aug 2020 97.84 144.01 77.31 9.90 29.03 121.01 
(20.42) (30.06) (16.14) (2.07) (6.06) (25.26) 
Table 4

Confusion matrix for validation of classified map

Bare-landCultivationGrasslandSettlementShrubsWater and marshProducer's accuracy
Bare 15 60 
Cultivation 10 42 
Grassland 16 64 
Settlement 20 80 
Shrubs 14 64 
Water and marsh 17 68 
User's accuracy 52 53 62 65 67 85  
Overall accuracy (%) 61       
Average reliability (%) 64       
Bare-landCultivationGrasslandSettlementShrubsWater and marshProducer's accuracy
Bare 15 60 
Cultivation 10 42 
Grassland 16 64 
Settlement 20 80 
Shrubs 14 64 
Water and marsh 17 68 
User's accuracy 52 53 62 65 67 85  
Overall accuracy (%) 61       
Average reliability (%) 64       
Figure 2

Thematic maps of the Jordan catchment from 1975 to 2020.

Figure 2

Thematic maps of the Jordan catchment from 1975 to 2020.

Close modal

Table 4 shows the confusion matrix for validation of the classified map. The accuracy was calculated for the year 2020 for all six classes and the results revealed that the accuracy, in percentage, for all the six LULC classes was in the order of 42:60:64:64:68:80 for cultivation, bare-land, grassland, shrubs/forest, water and marsh and settlement, respectively. In this study, the classified 2020 map for the Jordan catchment and the sum of 150 ground truth points were used to calculate a confusion matrix that was used for accuracy assessment. The average reliability was found to be 64% and the overall accuracy of 61%, which is an acceptable accuracy.

Evapotranspiration estimates for the period of 1984–2020

Figure 3 shows the monthly evapotranspiration of the Jordan catchment estimated from the Penman–Monteith and Thornthwaite method. Using Penman–Monteith, it was then realized that evapotranspiration for almost every year changes with the change in seasons. In summer (December–February) evapotranspiration increased and then started to decrease as autumn approaches (March–May). Then it reaches its maximum decrease in winter (June–August) and then increases as spring (September–November) begins. The Thornthwaite evapotranspiration seemed to increase mostly in summer (December–February) and spring (September–November), due to an increase in vegetation cover, it is then decreased constantly and becomes very low in autumn (March–May) and winter (June–August). According to Lang et al. (2017), the PET value of Thornthwaite was much lower than the Penman–Monteith due to the lowest percentage bias 67.02% and the highest percentage bias value even up to 92.18%. The spatial average annual Penman–Monteith estimates are ∼ 80 mm/year greater than the Thornthwaite estimation for the whole Carpathian region. Moreover, these results are similar to the one obtained by Fisher et al. (2011) where they found that evapotranspiration from Penman Monteith was greater than that of the Thornthwaite method by 11 mm/year for Africa. The sig (2tailed) value was found to be 0.001 which is less than the test value (0.05) showing that there is a significant difference between evapotranspiration estimated from Penman–Monteith and Thornthwaite method.
Figure 3

Evapotranspiration estimates from 1984 to 2020 using the Penman–Monteith and Thornthwaite method.

Figure 3

Evapotranspiration estimates from 1984 to 2020 using the Penman–Monteith and Thornthwaite method.

Close modal

The conductance of the stomata of any plant determines the maximum water loss during transpiration and this is considered an important factor in worldwide wetlands (Buckley 2019). Plants such as Neptunia natans and Eichhornia crasipes are floating macrophytes, having leaves that are located close to water surfaces, this keeps plants in a more saturated condition reducing water loss through evaporation, also these floating macrophytes reduces water loss through the shadow effect (Sikorska et al. 2017). Mulching of wetlands is also one of the best practices as it provides a creation of area to provide wetland vegetation, organic matter and soil organisms resulting in the reduction of water loss and an increase in wetland productivity (Denzler 2017).

Sensitivity and conditions of the wetlands in the Jordan catchment

Figure 4 shows the sensitivity of wetlands in the Jordan catchment. The areal extent covered by each class is shown in Table 5. The dominant class covers 39.75%, which is moderately sensitive while 37.93, 16.03 and 6.28% are low sensitivity, sensitive and not sensitive respectively. Based on rainfall and evapotranspiration as the most contributing factors for wetlands occurrence, it was observed that an increase in rainfall results in a high probability of wetlands' occurrence while an increase in evapotranspiration results in the reduction of wetlands. In one of the studies based on regional climate sensitivity, a 1% increase in rainfall resulted in an increase of probable wetland area of 16.2% and it was also found that a 1% increase in temperature has a negative impact on wetlands occurrence as it reduces the probable wetland area by 37.9% (Nyandwi et al. 2016).
Table 5

Sensitivity of the wetlands in the Jordan catchment

ClassArea covered (km2)% Area covered
Not sensitive 30.11 6.28 
Low sensitivity 181.75 37.93 
Moderately sensitive 190.46 39.75 
Sensitive 76.79 16.03 
ClassArea covered (km2)% Area covered
Not sensitive 30.11 6.28 
Low sensitivity 181.75 37.93 
Moderately sensitive 190.46 39.75 
Sensitive 76.79 16.03 
Figure 4

Sensitivity of the wetlands in the Jordan catchment.

Figure 4

Sensitivity of the wetlands in the Jordan catchment.

Close modal

According to Ouyang et al. (2014) the linear model was developed based on the current and historical climate data and this was used to determine the wetland sensitivity due to change in climate. The Palmer drought severity index (PDSI) of the current year and 2 previous years explains the annual wetland variation hence suggesting high wetland sensitivity to change in climate.

Figure 5 shows Jordan catchment wetlands condition whereby the area is dominated by grassland and shrubs which constitutes 60.42% of the total area, followed by cultivation and bare-land with 31.99% showing that wetlands in this area are highly subjected to degradation. Settlements also cover a total area of 4.36% and the least being 3.23% that is occupied by water and marsh. The areal extent covered by each class is shown in Table 6.
Table 6

Conditions of the wetlands in the Jordan catchment

ClassArea covered (km2)% Area covered
Settlements 20.91 4.36 
Cultivation and bare-land 153.27 31.99 
Grassland and shrubs 289.46 60.42 
Water and marsh 15.47 3.23 
ClassArea covered (km2)% Area covered
Settlements 20.91 4.36 
Cultivation and bare-land 153.27 31.99 
Grassland and shrubs 289.46 60.42 
Water and marsh 15.47 3.23 
Figure 5

Conditions of the wetlands in the Jordan catchment.

Figure 5

Conditions of the wetlands in the Jordan catchment.

Close modal

In the assessment of wetland sensitivity using remote sensing data, the area under vegetation was found to decrease in the wetland from 0.13 to 0.07 km2, whereas the area under water declined by 0.85 km2. On top of that, non-vegetated areas were also found to be increased by about 97% for the duration of the study (Ndlala & Dube 2021). The various wetlands and micro-catchments were transformed from naturally vegetative areas to agricultural land for the production of crops and grazing.

Water balance of the Sosa wetland

The water balance of the Jordan catchment was estimated using products of the HBV model and precipitation from the stations. Table 7 shows the annual water balance components simulated in the Jordan catchment. Annual water balance closure error, which is the change in storage for the Sosa wetland and Jordan catchment ranged between −3.13 for the 2020 water year and −3.51 for the 2004 water year. The annual mean water balance closure error is −3.34 compared to 0.15 km3/year, which was obtained in a water balance for a tropical lake in volcanic highlands (Alemu et al. 2020). This shows that the Sosa wetland and Jordan catchment receive less water than they release as discharge and evapotranspiration. Moreover, a decrease in storage change is due to vegetation which draws water from the stored water during the dry periods and uses it for photosynthesis and to meet transpiration demand.

Table 7

Annual simulated water balance components of the Sosa wetland in the Jordan catchment

Water yearDischarge (mm/year)Precipitation (mm/year)ETa (mm/year)ΔStorage or Residual (mm/year)Residual/Precipitation
1980 1,021.25 498.20 1,072.49 −1,595.54 −3.20 
1994 1,389.43 782.80 2,016.78 −2,623.41 −3.35 
2004 1,537.77 928.70 2,497.52 −3,257.60 −3.51 
2014 1,397.08 820.20 2,213.73 −2,790.61 −3.40 
2020 1,175.04 685.80 1,659.14 −2,148.38 −3.13 
Mean 1,304.11 743.14 1,891.93 −2,483.11 −3.34 
Standard deviation 182.86 145.07 492.25 568.14  
Water yearDischarge (mm/year)Precipitation (mm/year)ETa (mm/year)ΔStorage or Residual (mm/year)Residual/Precipitation
1980 1,021.25 498.20 1,072.49 −1,595.54 −3.20 
1994 1,389.43 782.80 2,016.78 −2,623.41 −3.35 
2004 1,537.77 928.70 2,497.52 −3,257.60 −3.51 
2014 1,397.08 820.20 2,213.73 −2,790.61 −3.40 
2020 1,175.04 685.80 1,659.14 −2,148.38 −3.13 
Mean 1,304.11 743.14 1,891.93 −2,483.11 −3.34 
Standard deviation 182.86 145.07 492.25 568.14  

Hydrologic signatures of the Jordan catchment

Since this study is based on assessing the water balance variation within different years, therefore, the model output was used to calculate several signatures of the catchment response which increase the understanding of catchment functioning. Invoked signatures include: RR, SFDC, the BFI and ESF. Figure 6 shows the spatial variation of those signatures. The RR ranges from 1.98 to 2.04 and this shows that the catchment has less amount of water as streamflow and high evapotranspiration while the slope of the flow duration curve for the whole Jordan catchment was found to range from −4.10 to −3.97 indicating the limited variability of flow which is caused by rainfall or dominant contribution of water from groundwater to streamflow. Moreover, the BFI ranges from 2.96 to 3.03 for the whole catchment showing that the Jordan catchment has a moderate baseflow contribution whereas the ESF reflects values ranging from 0.73 to 0.75 which means that the catchment is sensitive to change in precipitation. On the other hand, the ETR ranges from 2.1 to 2.34 showing that a significant amount of water in the catchment is released through evapotranspiration. According to Jillo et al. (2017) values of RR, SFDC, BFI and ESF respectively, were ranging from 0.29–0.64, 1.90–9.26, 0.003–0.31 and 1.22–2.29.
Figure 6

Signatures of the catchment response in the Jordan catchment: (a) elasticity of streamflow (ESF), (b) baseflow index (BFI), (c) slope of the flow duration curve (SFDC), (d) runoff ratio (RR), and (e) evapotranspiration ratio (ETR).

Figure 6

Signatures of the catchment response in the Jordan catchment: (a) elasticity of streamflow (ESF), (b) baseflow index (BFI), (c) slope of the flow duration curve (SFDC), (d) runoff ratio (RR), and (e) evapotranspiration ratio (ETR).

Close modal

Digital classification confirmed that the Jordan catchment is dominated by bare-land which subjects the catchment to loss of soil through erosion. Settlements are increasing at a lower rate, on the other hand, agriculture is not constant due to climate variability as well as soil erosion while forests and shrubs are decreasing at a high rate. Water and marsh, settlements, cultivation and bare-land increased by 2.04, 5.82, 4.1 and 28.71%, respectively, while forest and shrubs and grassland decreased by 38.83 and 1.76%, respectively, from 1975 to 2020.

There is a significant difference in evapotranspiration obtained from Penman–Monteith and Thornthwaite for the period of 1984–2020. Evapotranspiration from Penman–Monteith is by far the most reliable method that can be used in the absence of pan evaporation. This was proved by a test of difference between two methods which showed the sig(twotailed) value of 0.001, which is less than α of 0.05.

Rainfall and evapotranspiration affect the sensitivity of the wetland. Topographic variables such as Strahler order, flow accumulation, slope, topographic wetness index, sediment transport index and distance to water bodies as well as biophysical properties of the catchment being soil water content, soil porosity, bulk density and soil pH also affect the sensitivity of the wetland. The most sensitive wetlands are found at the headwaters and at the middle reach of the catchment.

The HBV light model shows effectiveness in simulating streamflow in the Jordan catchment based on model efficiency, mean difference and coefficient of determination performance indicators. The knowledge of catchment characteristics is very important in the process of calibration and also the quality of measurable data is of great importance in modeling. There is a negative water balance between components of Sosa wetland and this was proven by input (rainfall) being less than output (actual evapotranspiration and discharge), with water balance closure error ranging from −3.13 to −3.51. It is, therefore, not surprising that water bodies in the Jordan catchment including Sosa wetlands itself are at risk of drying up during prolonged drought spells due to very high water loss.

For the Sosa wetland revolution, the Green Revolution is advocated for. The Revolution where it has been practiced globally, led to high productivity within wetland systems through the addition of nutrients that encouraged the growth of phytoplankton and aquatic plant growth within these wetland systems. The above may reverse the risk of drying and the high risk of water loss.

Data cannot be made publicly available; readers should contact the corresponding author for details.

The authors declare there is no conflict.

Alemu
M. L.
,
Worqlul
A. W.
,
Zimale
F. A.
,
Tilahun
S. A.
&
Steenhuis
T. S.
2020
Water balance for a tropical lake in the volcanic highlands: Lake tana, ethiopia
.
Water (Switzerland)
12
.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w12102737.
Allen
R. G.
,
Pereira
L. S.
,
Raes
D.
,
Smith
M.
&
Ab
W.
1998
Crop Evapotranspiration – Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements – FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56
.
Food and Agriculture Organization
,
Rome
. pp.
1
15
.
Allen
R. G.
,
Pereira
L. S.
,
Raes
D.
&
Smith
M.
2015
FAO. 1998. Crop Evapotranspiration : Guidelines FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper Crop Evapotranspiration, Irrigation and Drainage
.
Belete
M.
,
Deng
J.
,
Zhou
M.
,
Wang
K.
,
You
S.
&
Hong
Y.
2018
A new approach to modeling water balance in Nile River Basin, Africa
.
10
,
1
14
.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030810
.
Bhatnagar
S.
,
Gill
L.
,
Regan
S.
,
Waldren
S.
&
Ghosh
B.
2021
ISPRS journal of photogrammetry and remote sensing A nested drone-satellite approach to monitoring the ecological conditions of wetlands
.
ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing
174
,
151
165
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2021.01.012
.
Buckley
T. N.
2019
How do stomata respond to water status?
New Phytologist
224
,
21
36
.
https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.15899
.
Bureau of Statistics
2016
Lesotho Population and Housing Census Village List
. pp.
1
567
.
Chatanga
P.
2019
Ecology of palustrine wetlands in Lesotho : vegetation classification, description and environmental factors
.
African Protected Area Conservation and Science
61
,
1
16
.
Chemura
A.
,
Rwasoka
D.
,
Mutanga
O.
,
Dube
T.
&
Mushore
T.
2020
The impact of land-use/land cover changes on water balance of the heterogeneous Buzi sub-catchment, Zimbabwe
.
Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment
18
,
1
11
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2020.100292
.
Denzler
A.
2017
Hydromulching in tidally influenced wetlands: testing methods to alleviate seed wash-away and revegetate native plant communities
. Masters Thesis,
The Evergreen State College
. p.
1
83
.
Dube
T.
,
Gumindoga
W.
&
Chawira
M.
2014
Detection of land cover changes around Lake Mutirikwi, Zimbabwe, based on traditional remote sensing image classification techniques
.
African Journal of Aquatic Science
39
,
89
95
.
https://doi.org/10.2989/16085914.2013.870068
.
Fisher
J. B.
,
Whittaker
R. J.
&
Malhi
Y.
2011
ET come home: potential evapotranspiration in geographical ecology
.
Global Ecology and Biogeography
20
,
1
18
.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-8238.2010.00578.x
.
Gumindoga
W.
,
Rwasoka
D. T.
,
Ncube
N.
,
Kaseke
E.
&
Dube
T.
2018
Effect of landcover/land-use changes on water availability in and around ruti dam in nyazvidzi catchment, Zimbabwe
.
Water SA
44
,
136
145
.
https://doi.org/10.4314/wsa.v44i1.16
.
Jillo
A. Y.
,
Demissie
S. S.
,
Viglione
A.
,
Asfaw
D. H.
&
Sivapalan
M.
2017
Characterization of regional variability of seasonal water balance within Omo-Ghibe River Basin, Ethiopia
.
Hydrological Sciences Journal
62
,
1
17
.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2017.1313419
.
Lang
D.
,
Zheng
J.
,
Shi
J.
,
Liao
F.
,
Ma
X.
,
Wang
W.
,
Chen
X.
&
Zhang
M.
2017
A comparative study of potential evapotranspiration estimation by eight methods with FAO Penman–Monteith method in southwestern China
.
Water (Switzerland)
9
,
1
18
.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w9100734
.
Moreira
L.
,
Vania
F.
,
César
R.
,
Moreira
A.
,
Taitson
G.
&
Ferreira
M. E.
2021
The interactive pedological - hydrological processes and environmental sensitivity of a tropical isolated wetland in the Brazilian Cerrado
.
SN Applied Sciences
3
,
1
15
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-021-04174-7
.
Ndlala
N. C.
&
Dube
T.
2021
Use of remotely sensed derived metrics to assess wetland vegetation responses to climate variability induced drought at the Soetendalsvlei wetland system in the Western Cape province of South Africa
.
Research Sqaure
01,
1
18
.
Nyandwi
E.
,
Veldkamp
T.
&
Amer
S.
2016
Regional climate sensitivity of wetland environments in Rwanda: the need for a location-specific approach
.
Regional Environmental Change
16
,
1635
1647
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-015-0905-z
.
Olaleye
O. A.
2019
Isotopic signatures(δ13 13 C and δ15 15 N) and characteristics of two wetland soils in Lesotho, Southern Africa
.
Wetlands Management Assessing Risk and Sustainable Solutions
6
,
1
14
.
Olutayo
O. A.
2012
Mountain watershed in Lesotho: water quality, anthropogenic impacts and challenges
.
Management of Mountain Watersheds
1
,
139
149
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2476-1_11
.
Ouyang
Z.
,
Becker
R.
,
Shaver
W.
&
Chen
J.
2014
Evaluating the sensitivity of wetlands to climate change with remote sensing techniques
.
Hydrological Processes
28
,
1703
1712
.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9685
.
Ramsar Convention Secretariat
2016
An Introduction to the Convention on Wetlands, 7th ed. (Previously The Ramsar Convention Manual)
, Vol.
1
.
Ramsar Convention Secretariat, Gland
,
Switzerland
, p.
107
.
Sakané
N.
,
Becker
M.
,
Langensiepen
M.
&
van Wijk
M. T.
2013
Typology of smallholder production systems in small East-African Wetlands
.
Wetlands
33
,
101
116
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-012-0355-z
.
Sawicz
K.
,
Wagener
T.
,
Sivapalan
M.
,
Troch
P. A.
&
Carrillo
G.
2011
Catchment classification: empirical analysis of hydrologic similarity based on catchment function in the eastern USA
.
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
15
,
2895
2911
.
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-2895-2011
.
Sikorska
D.
,
Papierowska
E.
,
Szatyłowicz
J.
,
Sikorski
P.
,
Suprun
K.
&
Hopkins
R. J.
2017
Variation in leaf surface hydrophobicity of wetland plants: the role of plant traits in water retention
.
Wetlands
37
,
997
1002
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-017-0924-2
.
Wang
S.
,
Liu
C.
,
Tan
Y.
,
Wang
J.
,
Du
F.
,
Han
Z.
,
Jiang
Z.
&
Wang
L.
2021
Uncorrected proof remote sensing inversion characteristic and driving factor analysis of wetland evapotranspiration in the Sanmenxia Reservoir area
.
China Uncorrected Proof
00
,
1
13
.
https://doi.org/10.2166/wcc.2021.247
.
Zhang
Y.
,
Jin
R.
,
Zhu
W.
,
Zhang
D.
&
Zhang
X.
2020
Impacts of land use changes on wetland ecosystem services in the tumen river basin
.
Sustainability (Switzerland)
12
,
1
15
.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12239821
.
Zhang
J.
,
Liu
B.
,
Yang
L.
,
He
L.
,
Cao
X.
&
Shao
G.
2021
Ecological drought and its state assessment : a case study in the Yellow River estuary
.
00
,
1
13
.
https://doi.org/10.2166/wcc.2021.175
.
Zhao
X.
&
Liu
Y.
2016
Evapotranspiration partitioning and response to abnormally low water levels in a floodplain wetland in China
. Advances in Meteorology
10
,
1
12
.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits copying and redistribution for non-commercial purposes with no derivatives, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).