 |
| Titel |
Are streamflow recession characteristics really characteristic? |
| VerfasserIn |
M. Stoelzle, K. Stahl, M. Weiler |
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
Englisch
|
| ISSN |
1027-5606
|
| Digitales Dokument |
URL |
| Erschienen |
In: Hydrology and Earth System Sciences ; 17, no. 2 ; Nr. 17, no. 2 (2013-02-27), S.817-828 |
| Datensatznummer |
250018805
|
| Publikation (Nr.) |
 copernicus.org/hess-17-817-2013.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
| Streamflow recession has been investigated by a variety of methods, often
involving the fit of a model to empirical recession plots to parameterize a
non-linear storage–outflow relationship based on the dQ/dt−Q method. Such
recession analysis methods (RAMs) are used to estimate hydraulic
conductivity, storage capacity, or aquifer thickness and to model streamflow
recession curves for regionalization and prediction at the catchment scale.
Numerous RAMs have been published, but little is known about how comparably
the resulting recession models distinguish characteristic catchment
behavior. In this study we combined three established recession extraction
methods with three different parameter-fitting methods to the power-law
storage–outflow model to compare the range of recession characteristics that
result from the application of these different RAMs. Resulting recession
characteristics including recession time and corresponding storage depletion
were evaluated for 20 meso-scale catchments in Germany. We found plausible
ranges for model parameterization; however, calculated recession
characteristics varied over two orders of magnitude. While recession
characteristics of the 20 catchments derived with the different methods
correlate strongly, particularly for the RAMs that use the same extraction
method, not all rank the catchments consistently, and the differences
among some of the methods are larger than among the catchments. To elucidate
this variability we discuss the ambiguous roles of recession extraction
procedures and the parameterization of the storage–outflow model and the
limitations of the presented recession plots. The results suggest strong
limitations to the comparability of recession characteristics derived with
different methods, not only in the model parameters but also in the relative
characterization of different catchments. A multiple-methods approach to
investigating streamflow recession characteristics should be considered for
applications whenever possible. |
| |
|
| Teil von |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|