[go: up one dir, main page]

 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Search Results (252)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = baseflow

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
14 pages, 5045 KiB  
Article
Analysis of the Effects of Securing Baseflow and Improving Water Quality through the Introduction of LID Techniques
by Jeongho Han and Seoro Lee
Sustainability 2024, 16(20), 8932; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16208932 - 15 Oct 2024
Viewed by 344
Abstract
Rapid climate change and increasing water use have led to various problems in small- and medium-sized urban streams during dry periods, such as stream drying, water pollution, and ecological degradation, reducing their physical and ecological functions. Ensuring adequate baseflow and improving water quality [...] Read more.
Rapid climate change and increasing water use have led to various problems in small- and medium-sized urban streams during dry periods, such as stream drying, water pollution, and ecological degradation, reducing their physical and ecological functions. Ensuring adequate baseflow and improving water quality during these critical periods are essential for maintaining urban stream health. While previous studies have explored the effects of Low Impact Development (LID) techniques (e.g., green roof, rainwater harvesting system, permeable pavement, infiltration trench) on infiltration and groundwater recharge, they have primarily focused on general flow regimes rather than dry and low-flow periods. This study specifically evaluates the effects of LID techniques on securing baseflow and improving water quality during dry periods, utilizing the SWAT-MODFLOW model and the Web-based Hydrograph Analysis Tool (WHAT) system. The results show that LID techniques reduce peak flow by an average of 27% and secure an additional 43% of baseflow during dry periods. Suspended solids (SS) and total phosphorus (T-P) concentrations were reduced by 15% and 41%, respectively. These findings demonstrate the effectiveness of LID techniques not only in managing stormwater runoff during flood events but also in maintaining baseflow and water quality during dry periods, thus providing valuable insights for sustainable urban watershed management. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Water Management in Rapid Urbanization)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The location map of the study area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>SWAT input data for the Sindun Stream watershed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>MODFLOW modeling area and input data for hydrogeological parameters.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Scatter plot of observed and simulated streamflow.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Time series of observed and simulated groundwater level.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Results of baseflow separation results considering (<b>a</b>) flow condition and (<b>b</b>) seasonal characteristics. ‘Previous separation’ in each plot refers to a conventional baseflow separation over the entire simulation period.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparison of baseflow and FDC before and after LID application.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Comparison of (<b>a</b>) BFI and (<b>b</b>) dry season baseflow before and after LID application.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 6609 KiB  
Article
Assessing the Impact of Urbanization and Climate Change on Hydrological Processes in a Suburban Catchment
by Sharon Bih Kimbi, Shin-ichi Onodera, Kunyang Wang, Ichirow Kaihotsu and Yuta Shimizu
Environments 2024, 11(10), 225; https://doi.org/10.3390/environments11100225 (registering DOI) - 15 Oct 2024
Viewed by 428
Abstract
Global urbanization, population growth, and climate change have considerably impacted water resources, making sustainable water resource management (WRM) essential. Understanding the changes in hydrological components is important for effective WRM, particularly in cities such as Higashi-Hiroshima, which is known for its saké brewing [...] Read more.
Global urbanization, population growth, and climate change have considerably impacted water resources, making sustainable water resource management (WRM) essential. Understanding the changes in hydrological components is important for effective WRM, particularly in cities such as Higashi-Hiroshima, which is known for its saké brewing industry. This study used the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) with Hydrological Response Units (HRUs) to achieve high spatial precision in assessing the impacts of land use change and climate variability on hydrological components in a suburban catchment in western Japan. Over the 30-year study period (1980s–2000s), land use change was the main driver of hydrological variability, whereas climate change played a minor role. Increased surface runoff, along with decrease in groundwater recharge, evapotranspiration, and baseflow, resulted in an overall reduction in water yield, with a 34.9% decrease in groundwater recharge attributed to the transformation of paddy fields into residential areas. Sustainable WRM practices, including water conservation, recharge zone protection, and green infrastructure, are recommended to balance urban development with water sustainability. These findings offer valuable insights into the strategies for managing water resources in rapidly urbanizing regions worldwide, emphasizing the need for an integrated WRM system that considers both land use and climate change impacts. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Hydrological Modeling and Sustainable Water Resources Management)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Location of the study area: (<b>a</b>) Japan, (<b>b</b>) Higashi-Hiroshima city, (<b>c</b>) Kurose River catchment showing the weather and gauging stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Land use classification in the Kurose River catchment for the years 1987 and 2009. The maps highlight notable land use transitions, with significant decreases in paddy fields and forested areas and an expansion of residential zones.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Mean annual water balance components for (<b>a</b>) the entire catchment and (<b>b</b>) specific land use types in the Kurose River catchment during the 1980s and 2000s. The bars indicate the relative contribution of each component as a percentage of mean annual rainfall, with absolute values (mm) displayed within the figure.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Scatter plot showing the relation between annual groundwater recharge and annual precipitation in (<b>a</b>) a residential area, (<b>b</b>) forest area, and (<b>c</b>) rice paddy for the 1980s and 2000s.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Groundwater recharge variation (mm/year) in the Kurose River Catchment. (<b>a</b>) In the 1980s, higher recharge was observed in the central and southern regions dominated by rice paddies. (<b>b</b>) In the 2000s, a significant decline in recharge occurred, especially in areas converted from rice paddies to residential zones. (<b>c</b>) Percentage change in recharge between the 1980s and 2000s, showing substantial decreases driven by urban expansion and land use changes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Spatial variation in catchment ET (mm/year) in the KRC showing (<b>a</b>) higher ET values during the 1980s, (<b>b</b>) indicating a decrease in ET values during the 2000s, and (<b>c</b>) the percentage change in catchment ET illustrating areas with decreases (yellow) and areas with little-to-no change or increases (green to blue).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Spatial variation in forest ET (mm/year) in the KRC: (<b>a</b>) 1980s ET values, (<b>b</b>) 2000s ET values showing increases likely due to forest growth and maturity, and (<b>c</b>) relative change in ET from the 1980s to 2000s, with green to blue indicating increased ET and yellow areas indicating decreased ET. White areas represent non-forest regions in the catchment area.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 17554 KiB  
Article
Hydrological Modeling to Unravel the Spatiotemporal Heterogeneity and Attribution of Baseflow in the Yangtze River Source Area, China
by Huazhun Ren, Guangdong Wu, Longcang Shu, Wenjian Tang, Chengpeng Lu, Bo Liu, Shuyao Niu, Yunliang Li and Yuxuan Wang
Water 2024, 16(20), 2892; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16202892 - 11 Oct 2024
Viewed by 445
Abstract
Revealing the spatiotemporal variation in baseflow and its underlying mechanisms is critical for preserving the health and ecological functions of alpine rivers, but this has rarely been conducted in the source region of the Yangtze River (SRYR). Our study employed the Soil and [...] Read more.
Revealing the spatiotemporal variation in baseflow and its underlying mechanisms is critical for preserving the health and ecological functions of alpine rivers, but this has rarely been conducted in the source region of the Yangtze River (SRYR). Our study employed the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model coupled with two-parameter digital filtering and geostatistical approaches to obtain a visual representation of the spatiotemporal heterogeneity characteristics of the baseflow and baseflow index (BFI) in the SRYR. The SWAT model and multiple linear regression model (MLR) were used to quantitatively estimate the contribution of climate change and human activities to baseflow and BFI changes. The results underscore the robust applicability of the SWAT model within the SRYR. Temporally, the precipitation, temperature, and baseflow exhibited significant upward trends, and the baseflow and BFI showed contrasting intra-annual distribution patterns, which were unimodal and bimodal distribution, respectively. Spatially, the baseflow increased from northwest to southeast, and from the watershed perspective, the Tongtian River exhibited higher baseflow values compared to other regions of the SRYR. The baseflow and BFI values of the Dangqu River were greater than those of other tributaries. More than 50% of the entire basin had an annual BFI value greater than 0.7, which indicates that baseflow was the major contributor to runoff generation. Moreover, the contributions of climate change and human activities to baseflow variability were 122% and −22%, and to BFI variability, 60% and 40%. Specifically, precipitation contributed 116% and 60% to the baseflow and BFI variations, while the temperature exhibited contributions of 6% and 8%, respectively. Overall, it was concluded that the spatiotemporal distributions of baseflow and the BFI are controlled by various factors, and climate change is the main factor of baseflow variation. Our study offers valuable insights for the management and quantitative assessment of groundwater resources within the SRYR amidst climate change. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Locations of the study area and meteorological and hydrological stations in the SRYR.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Spatial distribution of land use patterns in 1980 and 2020 in the SRYR (AL, FL, PL, WR, UL, BL, and SN denote arable land, woodland, grassland, waters, towns, bare land and glaciers, and permanent snow, respectively).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Comparison of observed and simulated runoff values in the calibration and validation period.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The sensitivity changes in the main parameters of the SWAT model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Annual variations in precipitation and temperature (<b>a</b>) and baseflow and BFI (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Mann−Kendall curve of baseflow (<b>a</b>), BFI (<b>b</b>), temperature (<b>c</b>), and precipitation (<b>d</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparison of baseflow and BFI in different months (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Spatial distribution of baseflow in spring (<b>a</b>), summer (<b>b</b>), fall (<b>c</b>), and winter (<b>d</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Spatial distribution of baseflow in cold months (<b>a</b>), warm months (<b>b</b>), and year (<b>c</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Spatial distribution of BFI in spring (<b>a</b>), summer (<b>b</b>), fall (<b>c</b>), and winter (<b>d</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Spatial distribution of BFI in cold months (<b>a</b>), warm months (<b>b</b>), and year (<b>c</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Comparison of baseflow and BFI in different subbasins (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Relative contribution rates of climate change and human activities to baseflow (<b>a</b>) and BFI (<b>b</b>) changes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Variations in streamflow and baseflow (<b>a</b>) and BFI (<b>b</b>) of the SRYR over the last 58 years.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Correlation analysis of precipitation, temperature, and baseflow and BFI drivers in different sub-basins. (<b>a</b>) The correlation coefficients among baseflow, precipitation, and temperature; (<b>b</b>) the correlation coefficients among BFI, precipitation, and temperature.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Vegetation photos taken in the upper reaches of the Dangqu River (<b>a</b>) and the Chumaer River (<b>b</b>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>The proportions of land use patterns in each sub-basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Spatial distribution maps of precipitation (<b>a</b>), temperature (<b>b</b>), and frozen soil (<b>c</b>) in the SRYR (SF and PF denote the seasonally frozen ground and permafrost).</p>
Full article ">
28 pages, 9045 KiB  
Article
Estimation of Groundwater Recharge in a Volcanic Aquifer System Using Soil Moisture Balance and Baseflow Separation Methods: The Case of Gilgel Gibe Catchment, Ethiopia
by Fayera Gudu Tufa, Fekadu Fufa Feyissa, Adisu Befekadu Kebede, Beekan Gurmessa Gudeta, Wagari Mosisa Kitessa, Seifu Kebede Debela, Bekan Chelkeba Tumsa, Alemu Yenehun, Marc Van Camp and Kristine Walraevens
Hydrology 2024, 11(7), 109; https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology11070109 - 22 Jul 2024
Viewed by 1131
Abstract
Understanding the recharge–discharge system of a catchment is key to the efficient use and effective management of groundwater resources. The present study focused on the estimation of groundwater recharge using Soil Moisture Balance (SMB) and Baseflow Separation (BFS) methods in the Gilgel Gibe [...] Read more.
Understanding the recharge–discharge system of a catchment is key to the efficient use and effective management of groundwater resources. The present study focused on the estimation of groundwater recharge using Soil Moisture Balance (SMB) and Baseflow Separation (BFS) methods in the Gilgel Gibe catchment where water demand for irrigation, domestic, and industrial purposes is dramatically increasing. The demand for groundwater and the existing ambitious plans to respond to this demand will put a strain on the groundwater resource in the catchment unless prompt intervention is undertaken to ensure its sustainability. Ground-based hydrometeorological 36-years data (1985 to 2020) from 17 stations and satellite products from CHIRPS and NASA/POWER were used for the SMB method. Six BFS methods were applied through the Web-based Hydrograph Analysis Tool (WHAT), SepHydro, BFLOW, and Automated Computer Programming (PART) to sub-catchments and the main catchment to estimate the groundwater recharge. The streamflow data (discharge) obtained from the Ministry of Water and Energy were the main input data for the BFS methods. The average annual recharge of groundwater was estimated to be 313 mm using SMB for the years 1985 to 2020 and 314 mm using BFS for the years 1986 to 2003. The results from the SMB method revealed geographical heterogeneity in annual groundwater recharge, varying from 209 to 442 mm. Significant spatial variation is also observed in the estimated annual groundwater recharge using the BFS methods, which varies from 181 to 411 mm for sub-catchments. Hydrogeological conditions of the catchment were observed, and the yielding capacity of existing wells was assessed to evaluate the validity of the results. The recharge values estimated using SMB and BFS methods are comparable and hydrologically reasonable. The findings remarkably provide insightful information for decision-makers to develop effective groundwater management strategies and to prioritize the sub-catchments for immediate intervention to ensure the sustainability of groundwater. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Location of Gilgel Gibe catchment: (<b>a</b>) Ethiopian river basins and (<b>b</b>) Gilgel Gibe catchment.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>(<b>a</b>) LULC type and (<b>b</b>) Soil type of Gilgel Gibe catchment.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Geological map of Gilgel Gibe catchment.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Map of gauged sub-basins and locations of meteorological stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The map of (<b>a</b>) rainfall and (<b>b</b>) potential evapotranspiration (PET).</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The effect of PAW, runoff coefficient, and initial soil moisture on the annual recharge.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Annual recharge of the catchment estimated for each Thiessen polygon.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Recharge percentage of annual rainfall and annual recharge trend: (<b>a</b>) Seka Chekorsa station and (<b>b</b>) Sekoru Station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Monthly RF, PET, AET, and recharge, (<b>a</b>) Seka Chekorsa and (<b>b</b>) Sekoru.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Percentage of annual recharge in catchments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Annual groundwater recharge of the main catchment and sub-catchments with corresponding baseflow index (BFI).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11 Cont.
<p>Annual groundwater recharge of the main catchment and sub-catchments with corresponding baseflow index (BFI).</p>
Full article ">Figure 11 Cont.
<p>Annual groundwater recharge of the main catchment and sub-catchments with corresponding baseflow index (BFI).</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Seasonal recharge estimated using SMB and BFS: (<b>a</b>) Seka Chekorsa and (<b>b</b>) Bidru Awana.</p>
Full article ">
25 pages, 8509 KiB  
Article
Modeling of Future Streamflow Hazards in Interior Alaska River Systems and Implications for Applied Planning
by Alec P. Bennett, Vladimir A. Alexeev and Peter A. Bieniek
Water 2024, 16(14), 1949; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16141949 - 10 Jul 2024
Viewed by 579
Abstract
There is a growing need for proactive planning for natural hazards in a changing climate. Computational modeling of climate hazards provides an opportunity to inform planning, particularly in areas approaching ecosystem state changes, such as Interior Alaska, where future hazards are expected to [...] Read more.
There is a growing need for proactive planning for natural hazards in a changing climate. Computational modeling of climate hazards provides an opportunity to inform planning, particularly in areas approaching ecosystem state changes, such as Interior Alaska, where future hazards are expected to differ significantly from historical events in frequency and severity. This paper considers improved modeling approaches from a physical process perspective and contextualizes the results within the complexities and limitations of hazard planning efforts and management concerns. Therefore, the aim is not only to improve the understanding of potential climate impacts on streamflow within this region but also to further explore the steps needed to evaluate local-scale hazards from global drivers and the potential challenges that may be present. This study used dynamically downscaled climate forcing data from ERA-Interim reanalysis datasets and projected climate scenarios from two General Circulation Models under a single Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP 8.5) to simulate an observational gage-calibrated WRF-Hydro model to assess shifts in streamflow and flooding potential in three Interior Alaska rivers over a historical period (2008–2017) and two future periods (2038–2047 and 2068–2077). Outputs were assessed for seasonality, streamflow, extreme events, and the comparison between existing flood control infrastructure in the region. The results indicate that streamflow in this region is likely to experience increases in seasonal length and baseflow, while the potential for extreme events and variable short-term streamflow behavior is likely to see greater uncertainty, based on the divergence between the models. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map showing the three primary study areas. Chena (top left), Salcha (middle), and Goodpaster (bottom right) River basins. Gage locations are shown with yellow dots and their gage ID. Communities within the region are indicated by white dots. The orange line, near North Pole, Alaska, represents the extent of the Moose Creek Dam and Chena Flood Control project, including the reservoir and spillway into the Tanana River. The original Alaska IFSAR 5 m digital terrain model (DTM) is shown as a base layer in a green-to-blue gradient [<a href="#B25-water-16-01949" class="html-bibr">25</a>]. The inset map shows the state of Alaska, with the location of the study areas shown within a black rectangle.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Multi-model precipitation comparison. Three-month groupings of seasonal precipitation over the study area, with PRISM as the baseline, showing dynamically downscaled ERA-Interim and RCP 8.5 for GFDL and CCSM.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Model precipitation. Bias-corrected mean cumulative annual precipitation data for the full domain, CCSM (<b>top</b>), and GFDL (<b>bottom</b>). Bands represent annual minimums and maximums for each time period.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Comparison of observed gage data (gray) at Gage ID 15493400 (Chena below Hunts Creek) with simulated model runs (blue) for the 2001–2018 period, Jan–Dec, following calibration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparison of observed gage data (gray) at Gage ID 15484000 (Salcha) with simulated model runs (gold) for the 2001–2018 period, Jan–Dec, following calibration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Mean and max flow for Chena River basin. Annual mean flow (<b>left</b>) and maximum flow (<b>right</b>) for USGS Gage ID 15493400 (Chena River, below Hunts Creek) for the observed period (blue) and projected CCSM (purple) and GFDL (green) simulations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Mean and max flow for Salcha River basin. Annual mean flow (<b>left</b>) and maximum flow (<b>right</b>) for USGS Gage ID 15484000 (Salcha River) for the observed period (blue) and projected CCSM (purple) and GFDL (green) simulations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Mean and max flow for Goodpaster River basin. Annual mean flow (<b>left</b>) and maximum flow (<b>right</b>) for USGS Gage ID 15477740 (Goodpaster River) for the observed period (blue) and projected CCSM (purple) and GFDL (green) model runs.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Mean weekly streamflow averaged by decade. Mean weekly streamflow hydrograph by decade comparison for CCSM (<b>top</b>, purple shades) and GFDL (<b>bottom</b>, green shades) during the 2008–2017 (dark solid line), 2038–2047 (<b>medium</b> dashed line), and 2068–2077 (light dotted line) time frames for the Chena River below Hunts Creek, Salcha River near Salchaket, and Goodpaster River gage locations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Flooding events for CCSM. Events modeled under CCSM indicating the crossing of pre-established flood control thresholds. Dark purple represents the number of days where streamflow rates exceeded the 12,000 ft<sup>3</sup>/s (340 m<sup>3</sup>/s) threshold. Light purple represents the total number of events per year exceeding that rate. Each event represents one or more days where the streamflow continuously exceeded thresholds.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Flooding events for GFDL model. Events modeled under GFDL indicating the crossing of pre-established flood control thresholds. Dark green represents the number of days where streamflow rates exceeded the 12,000 ft<sup>3</sup>/s (340 m<sup>3</sup>/s) threshold. Light green represents the total number of events per year exceeding that rate. Each event represents one or more days where the streamflow continuously exceeded thresholds.</p>
Full article ">
13 pages, 10419 KiB  
Article
Baseflow from Snow and Rain in Mountain Watersheds
by Helen Flynn, Steven R. Fassnacht, Marin S. MacDonald and Anna K. D. Pfohl
Water 2024, 16(12), 1665; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16121665 - 12 Jun 2024
Viewed by 838
Abstract
After peak snowmelt, baseflow is the primary contributor to streamflow in snow-dominated watersheds. These low flows provide important water for municipal, agricultural, and recreational purposes once peak flows have been allocated. This study examines the correlation between peak snow water equivalent (SWE), post-peak [...] Read more.
After peak snowmelt, baseflow is the primary contributor to streamflow in snow-dominated watersheds. These low flows provide important water for municipal, agricultural, and recreational purposes once peak flows have been allocated. This study examines the correlation between peak snow water equivalent (SWE), post-peak SWE precipitation, and baseflow characteristics, including any yearly lag in baseflow. To reflect the hydrologic processes that are occurring in snow-dominated watersheds, we propose using a melt year (MY) beginning with the onset of snowmelt contributions (the first deviation from baseflow) and ending with the onset of the following year’s snowmelt contributions. We identified the beginning of an MY and extracted the subsequent baseflow values using flow duration curves (FDCs) for 12 watersheds of varying sizes across Colorado, USA. Based on the findings, peak SWE and summer rain both dictate baseflow, especially for the larger watersheds evaluated, as identified by higher correlations with the MY-derived baseflow. Lags in the correlation between baseflow and peak SWE are best identified when low-snow years are investigated separately from high-snow years. The MY is a different and more effective approach to calculating baseflow using FDCs in snow-dominated watersheds in Colorado. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Cold Region Hydrology and Hydraulics)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>A sample hydrograph from the Cabin Creek gauging station illustrating two traditional water years (WYs) and a melt year as proposed in this study (MY). The MY begins with the onset of melt on 1 May 2015, and it ends one day before the next onset of melt on 5 May 2016.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Mean annual peak SWE (gray), precipitation during melt (light blue), and summer precipitation (orange) in stacked bars for each station. Mean daily baseflow is represented by the blue line for each station.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Flow duration curves (FDCs) from (<b>a</b>) water years (WY) and (<b>b</b>) melt years (MY) 2014, 2015, and 2016 at the Cabin stream station. Baseflow is isolated in gray.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Comparison of the water year (WY) correlation coefficient versus the melt year (MY) correlation coefficient for the annual peak SWE (gray), precipitation during melt (light blue), and summer precipitation (orange). Only the two MY correlation coefficients greater than 0.4 were statistically significant at <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) Correlation coefficient and (<b>b</b>) multi-variate regression coefficients in the multi-variate regression. The solid line around a bar represents a significance of <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Coefficient of determination for each station with lag from 0 to 5 years for (<b>a</b>) all years, (<b>b</b>) high-snow years, and (<b>c</b>) low-snow years.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Example of interannual variability among (<b>a</b>) streamflow hydrographs, (<b>b</b>) ranked runoff for the Michigan River streamflow gauging station from 1980 to 2022 with a low (1980) and high (1995) flow year identified, and (<b>c</b>) annual time series of total runoff (dark blue) and runoff during snow accumulation (light blue).</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>Example of interannual variability of peak SWE at Cabin Creek SNOTEL station from 1980 to 2022 with peak SWE separated into low, average, and high years using 0.5 standard deviations from the mean of the time series.</p>
Full article ">Figure A3
<p>The variation in average baseflow for the 12 stations examined in this study in order of basin size from least to greatest [<a href="#B52-water-16-01665" class="html-bibr">52</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure A4
<p>Location map of the 12 study watersheds in the state of Colorado, U.S.A. (inset) illustrating the shape of each watershed.</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 3365 KiB  
Article
Enhancing Water Ecosystem Services Using Environmental Zoning in Land Use Planning
by Phelipe da Silva Anjinho, Mariana Abibi Guimarães Araujo Barbosa, Angeliki Peponi, Gonçalo Duarte, Paulo Branco, Maria Teresa Ferreira and Frederico Fábio Mauad
Sustainability 2024, 16(11), 4803; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114803 - 5 Jun 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1369
Abstract
Land use and land cover (LULC) changes alter the structure and functioning of natural ecosystems, impacting the potential and flow of ecosystem services. Ecological restoration projects aiming to enhance native vegetation have proven effective in mitigating the impacts of LULC changes on ecosystem [...] Read more.
Land use and land cover (LULC) changes alter the structure and functioning of natural ecosystems, impacting the potential and flow of ecosystem services. Ecological restoration projects aiming to enhance native vegetation have proven effective in mitigating the impacts of LULC changes on ecosystem services. A key element in implementing these projects has been identifying priority areas for restoration, considering that resources allocated to such projects are often limited. This study proposes a novel methodological framework to identify priority areas for restoration and guide LULC planning to increase the provision of water ecosystem services (WESs) in a watershed in southeastern Brazil. To do so, we combined biophysical models and multicriteria analysis to identify priority areas for ecological restoration, propose environmental zoning for the study area, and quantify the effects of LULC changes and of a planned LULC scenario (implemented environmental zoning) on WES indicators. Previous LULC changes, from 1985 to 2019, have resulted in a nearly 20% increase in annual surface runoff, a 50% increase in sediment export, a 22% increase in total nitrogen (TN) export, and a 53% increase in total phosphorus (TP) export. Simultaneously, they reduced the provision of WESs (baseflow −27%, TN retention −10%, and TP retention −16%), except for sediment retention, which increased by 35% during the analyzed period. The planned LULC scenario successfully increased the provision of WESs while reducing surface runoff and nutrient and sediment exports. The methodology employed in this study proved to be effective in guiding LULC planning for improving WES. The obtained results provide a scientific foundation for guiding the implementation of WES conservation policies in the studied watershed. This method is perceived to be applicable to other watersheds. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Methodological diagram of the proposed method.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Location of Jacaré-Guaçu River Basin using the Digital Elevation Model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Land use and land cover dynamics and planned scenario for Jacaré-Guaçu River Basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Spatial distribution of surface runoff and exports of sediments and nutrients in the Jacaré-Guaçu River Basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Spatial distribution of baseflow and sediment and nutrient retention in the Jacaré-Guaçú River Basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Potential degradation levels of water ecosystem services and proposed environmental zoning for the Jacaré-Guaçu River Basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Percentage changes in surface runoff, sediment export, nutrient export, baseflow, sediment retention, and nutrient retention between the planned scenario and the 2019 land use and land cover.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 25013 KiB  
Article
Assessment of Hydrological and Meteorological Composite Drought Characteristics Based on Baseflow and Precipitation
by Saihua Huang, Heshun Zhang, Yao Liu, Wenlong Liu, Fusen Wei, Chenggang Yang, Feiyue Ding, Jiandong Ye, Hui Nie, Yanlei Du and Yuting Chen
Water 2024, 16(11), 1466; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16111466 - 21 May 2024
Viewed by 791
Abstract
Traditional univariate drought indices may not be sufficient to reflect comprehensive information on drought. Therefore, this paper proposes a new composite drought index that can comprehensively characterize meteorological and hydrological drought. In this study, the new drought index was established by combining the [...] Read more.
Traditional univariate drought indices may not be sufficient to reflect comprehensive information on drought. Therefore, this paper proposes a new composite drought index that can comprehensively characterize meteorological and hydrological drought. In this study, the new drought index was established by combining the standardized precipitation index (SPI) and the standardized baseflow index (SBI) for the Jiaojiang River Basin (JRB) using the copula function. The prediction model was established by training random forests on past data, and the driving force behind the combined drought index was explored through the LIME algorithm. The results show that the established composite drought index combines the advantages of SPI and SBI in drought forecasting. The monthly and annual droughts in the JRB showed an increasing trend from 1991 to 2020, but the temporal characteristics of the changes in each subregion were different. The accuracies of the trained random forest model for heavy drought in Baizhiao (BZA) and Shaduan (SD) stations were 83% and 88%, respectively. Furthermore, the Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations (LIME) interpretation identified the essential precipitation, baseflow, and evapotranspiration features that affect drought. This study provides reliable and valid multivariate indicators for drought monitoring and can be applied to drought prediction in other regions. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Reservoir Control Operation and Water Resources Management)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Spatial distribution of meteorological and hydrological stations in the JRB.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Flow chart of this study.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Schematic diagram of run theory. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mn>0</mn> </msub> <mo>,</mo> <mo> </mo> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mn>1</mn> </msub> <mo>,</mo> <mo> </mo> <mi>and</mi> <mo> </mo> <msub> <mi>R</mi> <mn>2</mn> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> are the drought index equal to 0, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>−</mo> <mn>0.5</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>, and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>−</mo> <mn>1</mn> </mrow> </semantics></math>, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Structure of the drought story narrative.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Annual baseflow and streamflow from the (<b>a</b>) BZA and (<b>b</b>) SD stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The annual SPI, SBI, and CDI at the (<b>a</b>) BZA and (<b>b</b>) SD stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The monthly SPI, SBI, and CDI at the (<b>a</b>) BZA and (<b>b</b>) SD stations. The red line is the drought identification line.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Meteorological and hydrological drought: (<b>a</b>) BZA basin and (<b>b</b>) SD basin.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Correlation among indices in the random forest model at the (<b>a</b>) BZA and (<b>b</b>) SD stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Inversion point identification and process as oriented by LIME algorithm interpretation. The red line is the drought judgment line, and the blue line is the drought process line.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The importance of various variables for forecasting drought. The feature weights for (<b>a</b>) no drought, (<b>b</b>) normal drought, and (<b>c</b>) heavy drought prediction.</p>
Full article ">
18 pages, 9889 KiB  
Article
Spatial and Temporal Assessment of Baseflow Based on Monthly Water Balance Modeling and Baseflow Separation
by Huawei Xie, Haotian Hu, Donghui Xie, Bingjiao Xu, Yuting Chen, Zhengjie Zhou, Feizhen Zhang and Hui Nie
Water 2024, 16(10), 1437; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16101437 - 17 May 2024
Viewed by 890
Abstract
Baseflow is the part of streamflow that is mainly replenished by groundwater. The protection of the biological environment and the growth of its water resources greatly depend on the spatial and temporal evolution of baseflow. Therefore, the Baizhiao (BZA) and Shaduan (SD) catchments [...] Read more.
Baseflow is the part of streamflow that is mainly replenished by groundwater. The protection of the biological environment and the growth of its water resources greatly depend on the spatial and temporal evolution of baseflow. Therefore, the Baizhiao (BZA) and Shaduan (SD) catchments of the Jiaojiang River Basin (JRB) in the Zhejiang province of China were selected as study areas. The ABCD model and Eckhardt method were used to calculate baseflow and baseflow index (BFI). The temporal and spatial evolution patterns of baseflow were analyzed through statistical analysis and the Mann–Kendall test. The results showed that the ABCD model performs well in simulating overall hydrological processes on the monthly streamflow at BAZ and SD stations with NSE (Nash–Sutcliffe Efficiency) values of 0.82 and 0.83 and Pbias (Percentage Bias) values of 9.2% and 8.61%, respectively. The spatial–temporal distribution of the BFI indicates the higher baseflow contribution in upstream areas compared to downstream areas at both stations. The baseflow and BFI had significant upward trends at the BZA and SD stations in the dry season, while their trends were not uniform during the wet period. These findings are essential guidance for water resource management in the JRB regions. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Reservoir Control Operation and Water Resources Management)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Schematic of the study area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Study methodology flow chart.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Conceptual diagram of the ABCD model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Scatter plot of observed and simulated monthly streamflow in the (<b>a</b>) BZA and (<b>b</b>) SD stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Watershed observation and simulation of yearly Baseflow verification in the (<b>a</b>) BZA and (<b>b</b>) SD stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Monthly scale BFI changes at BZA and SD stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>A comparison of BFI between wet and dry seasons for (<b>a</b>) BAZ and (<b>b</b>) SD stations. The red (blue) color represents dry (wet) season.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The boxplots of baseflow and BFI for (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) BAZ and (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) SD stations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>BFI, baseflow modulus, and average annual baseflow distribution for all Sub-Watersheds in (<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>) all seasons, (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>) wet season, and (<b>g</b>–<b>i</b>) dry season.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The trend distribution of average baseflow discharge, BFI, and baseflow modulus for all sub-basins in (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) all seasons, (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) wet season, and (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>) dry season.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Correlation analysis between evaporation, precipitation, and baseflow for all sub-basins in (<b>a</b>–<b>d</b>) all seasons, (<b>e</b>–<b>h</b>) wet season, and (<b>i</b>–<b>l</b>) dry season.</p>
Full article ">
26 pages, 3798 KiB  
Article
Vulnerability Assessment of Groundwater Influenced Ecosystems in the Northeastern United States
by Shawn D. Snyder, Cynthia S. Loftin and Andrew S. Reeve
Water 2024, 16(10), 1366; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16101366 - 11 May 2024
Viewed by 844
Abstract
Groundwater-influenced ecosystems (GIEs) are increasingly vulnerable due to groundwater extraction, land-use practices, and climate change. These ecosystems receive groundwater inflow as a portion of their baseflow or water budget, which can maintain water levels, water temperature, and chemistry necessary to sustain the biodiversity [...] Read more.
Groundwater-influenced ecosystems (GIEs) are increasingly vulnerable due to groundwater extraction, land-use practices, and climate change. These ecosystems receive groundwater inflow as a portion of their baseflow or water budget, which can maintain water levels, water temperature, and chemistry necessary to sustain the biodiversity that they support. In some systems (e.g., springs, seeps, fens), this connection with groundwater is central to the system’s integrity and persistence. Groundwater management decisions for human use often do not consider the ecological effects of those actions on GIEs. This disparity can be attributed, in part, to a lack of information regarding the physical relationships these systems have with the surrounding landscape and climate, which may influence the environmental conditions and associated biodiversity. We estimate the vulnerability of areas predicted to be highly suitable for the presence of GIEs based on watershed (U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Unit Code 12 watersheds: 24–100 km2) and pixel (30 m × 30 m pixels) resolution in the Atlantic Highlands and Mixed Wood Plains EPA Level II Ecoregions in the northeastern United States. We represent vulnerability with variables describing adaptive capacity (topographic wetness index, hydric soil, physiographic diversity), exposure (climatic niche), and sensitivity (aquatic barriers, proportion urbanized or agriculture). Vulnerability scores indicate that ~26% of GIEs were within 30 m of areas with moderate vulnerability. Within these GIEs, climate exposure is an important contributor to vulnerability of 40% of the areas, followed by land use (19%, agriculture or urbanized). There are few areas predicted to be suitable for GIEs that are also predicted to be highly vulnerable, and of those, climate exposure is the most important contributor to their vulnerability. Persistence of GIEs in the northeastern United States may be challenged as changes in the amount and timing of precipitation and increasing air temperatures attributed to climate change affect the groundwater that sustains these systems. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Level II Ecoregions [<a href="#B37-water-16-01366" class="html-bibr">37</a>] (Atlantic Highlands, Mixed Woods) in the northeastern United States (source: <a href="https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/ecoregions-north-america" target="_blank">https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/ecoregions-north-america</a>; accessed on 27 January 2022). State abbreviations: Connecticut (CT), Delaware (DE), Maine (ME), Maryland (MD), Massachusetts (MA), New Hampshire (NH), New Jersey (NJ), New York (NY), Ohio (OH), Pennsylvania (PA), Rhode Island (RI), Vermont (VT), Virginia (VA), West Virginia (WV), District of Columbia (DC).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Vulnerability conceptual framework [<a href="#B34-water-16-01366" class="html-bibr">34</a>] and the framework used to estimate groundwater-influenced ecosystem (GIE) vulnerability across our study area. Orange boxes in the conceptual framework represent the core components of estimating vulnerability (tan boxes). Source data for the variables are listed in <a href="#water-16-01366-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>. Abbreviations: Topographic Wetness Index (TWI).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Estimated 30 m pixel and Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 12 watershed vulnerability across the northeastern United States study area (<a href="#water-16-01366-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a>). Grey lines in the lower frame indicate HUC12 watershed boundaries.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Scaled estimates of landscape adaptive capacity, sensitivity, and exposure calculated to estimate groundwater-influenced ecosystem (GIE) vulnerability in the study area (<a href="#water-16-01366-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a>). The conceptual framework for estimating vulnerability [<a href="#B34-water-16-01366" class="html-bibr">34</a>] is provided in <a href="#water-16-01366-f002" class="html-fig">Figure 2</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Proportion of land area vulnerability predicted in 30 m pixels summarized by states in the study area’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Level II Ecoregions (Atlantic Highlands, Mixed Woods) in the northeastern United States. EPA A Level III ecoregions in the study area are indicated in <a href="#water-16-01366-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a>. Values used to create pie charts can be found in <a href="#water-16-01366-t006" class="html-table">Table 6</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Proportion of the study area predicted to be highly vulnerable (≥0.75) owing to adaptive capacity, sensitivity (indicated by land use), and exposure (indicated by climate) within the Protected Areas Database for the United States (PAD-US), summarized by management type. High adaptive capacity does not appear on any pie charts because estimates are low or are 0 for those categories Management types: (1) managed for biodiversity—disturbance events proceed or are mimicked, (2) managed for biodiversity—disturbance events suppressed, (3) managed for multiple uses—subject to extractive (e.g., mining or logging) or OHV use, and (4) no known mandate for biodiversity protection (PAD-US Source: <a href="https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/602ffe50d34eb1203115c7ab" target="_blank">https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/602ffe50d34eb1203115c7ab</a>). Values used to create pie charts can be found in Table 12. Variables combined to estimate sensitivity and exposure are indicated in <a href="#water-16-01366-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Proportion of land area predicted to be highly vulnerable (≥0.75) owing to adaptive capacity, sensitivity (indicated by land use), and exposure (indicated by climate) within states in Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Level II Ecoregions (Atlantic Highlands, Mixed Woods) in the northeastern United States. High adaptive capacity and High sensitivity do not appear on any pie charts because estimates are low or are 0 for those categories. EPA Level III ecoregions in the study area are indicated in <a href="#water-16-01366-f001" class="html-fig">Figure 1</a>. Values used to create pie charts can be found in <a href="#water-16-01366-t008" class="html-table">Table 8</a>. Variables combined to estimate sensitivity and exposure are indicated in <a href="#water-16-01366-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Proportion of the study area predicted to be highly vulnerable (≥0.75) owing to adaptive capacity, sensitivity (indicated by land use), and exposure (indicated by climate) within the Protected Areas Database for the United States (PAD-US), summarized by land ownership type. High adaptive capacity and High sensitivity do not appear on any pie charts because estimates are low or are 0 for those categories. Ownership types are described in the Protected Areas Database for the United States (PAD-US; <a href="https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/science-analytics-and-synthesis/gap/science/protected-areas" target="_blank">https://www.usgs.gov/core-science-systems/science-analytics-and-synthesis/gap/science/protected-areas</a>). Non-Governmental Organization (NGO). Values used to create pie charts can be found in <a href="#water-16-01366-t013" class="html-table">Table 13</a>. Variables combined to estimate sensitivity and exposure are indicated in <a href="#water-16-01366-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>.</p>
Full article ">
21 pages, 7177 KiB  
Article
Applying a Holistic Approach to Environmental Flow Assessment in the Yen River Basin
by Tuan Phuc Tong, Son Thanh Hoang, Dung Quang Bui, Ngoc Trong Ha, Linh Ha Nguyen, Lan Minh Nguyen and Chau Kim Tran
Water 2024, 16(8), 1174; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16081174 - 20 Apr 2024
Viewed by 1295
Abstract
Environmental flow assessment is an essential tool in water resource management. This study employs a holistic approach to evaluate the environmental flow in the Yen Basin, Thanh Hoa, Vietnam. Based on information gathered from a field survey, the Yen River system is divided [...] Read more.
Environmental flow assessment is an essential tool in water resource management. This study employs a holistic approach to evaluate the environmental flow in the Yen Basin, Thanh Hoa, Vietnam. Based on information gathered from a field survey, the Yen River system is divided into five reaches, and environmental objectives and ecological assets are identified in each reach. Hydrological and hydraulic mathematical models are applied to simulate the flow regime in the river, demonstrating their potential to assess environmental flow, especially in basins with limited data. The detailed results from the mathematical model facilitate selecting environmental flow components to address specific objectives for each river reach. By analyzing and selecting the flow regime, this study aims to ensure environmental protection while also considering basin development requirements, laying the groundwork for defining prescribed flow regimes in basin water management. Full article
(This article belongs to the Topic Advances in Environmental Hydraulics)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The figure shows the research area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The figure shows the environmental flow assessment strategy.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The figure shows the structure of the NAM model (source [<a href="#B16-water-16-01174" class="html-bibr">16</a>]).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The figure shows the Yen River hydraulic model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>The figure shows river segments and representative locations.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>The figure shows the calculated and observed results of the hydrological model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The figure shows the calculated and observed results for the hydraulic model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>The figure shows a hydrograph of average daily flows at representative sites.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Water level data at Ngoc Tra station in 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>The figure shows an example of Song Muc reservoir operation data.</p>
Full article ">Figure A3
<p>The figure shows cross-section data at Ngoc Tra station.</p>
Full article ">Figure A4
<p>The figure shows the soil sample grain gradation curve.</p>
Full article ">Figure A5
<p>The figure shows an example questionnaire.</p>
Full article ">Figure A5 Cont.
<p>The figure shows an example questionnaire.</p>
Full article ">
40 pages, 18938 KiB  
Article
Assessing Climate Change Impacts on Streamflow and Baseflow in the Karnali River Basin, Nepal: A CMIP6 Multi-Model Ensemble Approach Using SWAT and Web-Based Hydrograph Analysis Tool
by Manoj Lamichhane, Sajal Phuyal, Rajnish Mahato, Anuska Shrestha, Usam Pudasaini, Sudeshma Dikshen Lama, Abin Raj Chapagain, Sushant Mehan and Dhurba Neupane
Sustainability 2024, 16(8), 3262; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16083262 - 13 Apr 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 3104
Abstract
Our study aims to understand how the hydrological cycle is affected by climate change in river basins. This study focused on the Karnali River Basin (KRB) to examine the impact of extreme weather events like floods and heat waves on water security and [...] Read more.
Our study aims to understand how the hydrological cycle is affected by climate change in river basins. This study focused on the Karnali River Basin (KRB) to examine the impact of extreme weather events like floods and heat waves on water security and sustainable environmental management. Our research incorporates precipitation and temperature projections from ten Global Circulation Models (GCMs) under the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). We applied thirteen statistical bias correction methods for precipitation and nine for temperatures to make future precipitation and temperature trend projections. The research study also utilized the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model at multi-sites to estimate future streamflow under the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenarios of SSP245 and SSP585. Additionally, the Web-based Hydrograph Analysis Tool (WHAT) was used to distinguish between baseflow and streamflow. Our findings, based on the Multi-Model Ensemble (MME), indicate that precipitation will increase by 7.79–16.25% under SSP245 (9.43–27.47% under SSP585) and maximum temperatures will rise at rates of 0.018, 0.048, and 0.064 °C/yr under SSP245 (0.022, 0.066, and 0.119 °C/yr under SSP585). We also anticipate that minimum temperatures will increase at rates of 0.049, 0.08, and 0.97 °C/yr under SSP245 (0.057, 0.115, and 0.187 °C/yr under SSP585) for near, mid, and far future periods, respectively. Our research predicts an increase in river discharge in the KRB by 27.12% to 54.88% under SSP245 and 45.4% to 93.3% under SSP585 in different future periods. Our finding also showed that the expected minimum monthly baseflow in future periods will occur earlier than in the historical period. Our study emphasizes the need for sustainable and adaptive management strategies to address the effects of climate change on water security in the KRB. By providing detailed insights into future hydrological conditions, this research serves as a critical resource for policymakers and stakeholders, facilitating informed decision-making for the sustainable management of water resources in the face of climate change. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Air, Climate Change and Sustainability)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Map of the KRB showcasing the extensive river network and the locations of rainfall, temperature, and discharge monitoring stations, superimposed on a 30 m resolution Digital Elevation Model (DEM) to highlight the topographical context.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Land cover map across the KRB shows that FRST (Forest), GRSV (Grassland), SNOV (Snow and Ice), AGRL (Agriculture), and BARR (Barren Land) are the major land use types present in the study area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Map showing the soil types present across the KRB, with Gelic LEPTOSOL, Eutric REGOSOLS, Humic CAMBISOLS, Eutric CAMBISOLS, and Chromic CAMBISOLS as the primary soil types present in the study area.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Flowchart illustrating the systematic methodology applied in this study, detailing the step-by-step investigative processes and analytical techniques.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>This map illustrates the KRB area, delineating five sub-watersheds with their corresponding hydrological stations: Karnali River at Asaraghat (Q240), Karnali River at Benighat (Q250), Thulo Bheri River at Rimna (Q265), Bheri River at Samaijighat (Q269.5), and Karnali River at Chisapani (Q280). The delineation includes elevation ranges and the river network for each sub-watershed, providing a comprehensive geographical overview.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Graph comparing observed with raw model, and bias-corrected average monthly precipitation during 1980 to 2014 for four selected GCCMs (INM-CM4-8, INM-CM5-0, MPI-ESM1-2-LR, and ACCESS-ESM1-5) for the hilly region of station 310.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Graph comparing observed with raw and bias-corrected average monthly maximum temperature during 1980 to 2014 for four selected GCCMs (ACCESS-CM2, INM-CM8-8, INM-CM5-0, and NorESM2-MM) for the mountainous region of station 311.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Graph comparing observed with raw and bias-corrected average monthly minimum temperature during 1980 to 2014 for four selected GCCMs (ACCESS-CM2, MPI-ESM2-LR, MRI-ESM2-0, and NorESM2-MM) for the plains region of station 406.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Average annual precipitation trends at the hilly region station (310), detailing historical records and future projections under the SSP245 scenario from four selected GCMs alongside a Multi-Model Ensemble (MME) synthesis.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Average annual maximum temperature trends at the mountainous region station (311), detailing historical records and future projections under the SSP245 scenario from four selected GCMs alongside a Multi-Model Ensemble (MME) synthesis.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Average annual minimum temperature trends at the plains region station (406), detailing historical records and future projections under the SSP245 scenario from four selected GCMs alongside a Multi-Model Ensemble (MME) synthesis.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Seasonal changes in precipitation at three representative (mountain, hilly, and plains) stations across the KRB under the SSP245 and SSP585 scenarios.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Seasonal changes in maximum temperature at three representative (mountain, hilly, and plains) stations across the KRB under SSP245 and SSP585 scenarios.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Seasonal changes in minimum temperature at three representative (mountain, hilly, and plains) stations across the KRB under SSP245 and SSP585 scenarios.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Comparison of simulated and observed flow at five gauge stations across the KRB, namely the Karnali River at Asaraghat (Q240), Karnali River at Benighat (Q250), Thulo Bheri River at Rimna (Q265), Bheri River at Samaijighat (Q269.5), and Karnali River at Chisapani (Q280).</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Scatter plot between observed and simulated discharge at five gauge stations across the KRB, namely the Karnali River at Asaraghat (Q240), Karnali River at Benighat (Q250), Thulo Bheri River at Rimna (Q265), Bheri River at Samaijighat (Q269.5), and Karnali River at Chisapani (Q280).</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Comparison of the average monthly observed discharge with projected discharge, maximum temperature, minimum temperature, and precipitation at five gauge stations within the KRB, analyzed under the SSP245 scenario across three future timeframes (NN, MF, and FF).</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Comparison of the average monthly observed discharge with projected discharge, maximum temperature, minimum temperature, and precipitation at five gauge stations within the KRB, analyzed under the SSP585 scenario across three future timeframes (NN, MF, and FF).</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Comparison of average monthly baseflow index, baseflow, and total streamflow at five gauge stations across the KRB under the baseline period and three different future periods (NN, MF, and FF) under the SSP245 scenario.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Comparison of average monthly baseflow index, baseflow, and total streamflow at five gauge stations across the KRB under in baseline period and three different future periods (NN, MF, and FF) under the SSP585 scenario.</p>
Full article ">
23 pages, 37784 KiB  
Article
Revealing the Spatial Interactions and Driving Factors of Ecosystem Services: Enlightenments under Vegetation Restoration
by Ting Li, Yu Ren, Zemin Ai, Zhihong Qiao, Yanjiao Ren, Liyang Ma and Yadong Yang
Land 2024, 13(4), 511; https://doi.org/10.3390/land13040511 - 13 Apr 2024
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1117
Abstract
Large-scale vegetation restoration has caused complex changes in ecosystem service (i.e., ES) interactions. However, current analysis on the spatial interactions of ESs and their driving mechanisms remains deficient, limiting the adaptive management in vegetation restoration areas. This study focused on a representative restoration [...] Read more.
Large-scale vegetation restoration has caused complex changes in ecosystem service (i.e., ES) interactions. However, current analysis on the spatial interactions of ESs and their driving mechanisms remains deficient, limiting the adaptive management in vegetation restoration areas. This study focused on a representative restoration area (Yan’an) to analyze the relationships among carbon sequestration, water yield, baseflow regulation, and soil conservation from 1990 to 2020. Employing the bivariate boxplot and spatial autocorrelation methods, we identified the overall changes and spatial patterns of ES interactions. The geographically and temporally weighted regression (i.e., GTWR) model was applied to elucidate the driving factors of these spatial ES interactions. The results indicated the following: (1) Over the past three decades, synergies between carbon sequestration and water yield emerged as the joint results of spatial ‘low–low’ interactions and ‘high–high’ interactions between the two ESs, while other ES pairs generally exhibited comparatively weaker synergies, due to their spatial ‘low–high’ interactions in southern semi-humid areas. (2) In the northern semi-arid areas, both fractional vegetation cover (i.e., FVC) and climatic factors consistently exerted negative influences on all ‘low–low’ ES interactions, which caused a reduced area in synergies, while in the southern semi-humid areas, FVC suppressed the ‘low–high’ trade-offs between ESs, indicating the adaptability of grassland restoration efforts. (3) The impact of human activities on ES interactions has increased in the last 10 years, and exhibited positive effects on the ‘low–low’ ES interactions in northern semi-arid areas. However, the expansion of trade-off between soil conservation and carbon sequestration warrants attention. This study offers important insights into understanding the spatial interactions among carbon, water, and soil-related ESs in drylands. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Landscape Ecology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The overview of Yan’an: (<b>a</b>) location, (<b>b</b>) elevation and administrative units, (<b>c</b>) land use/cover and climate zone boundary.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>A working diagram of this study. Abbreviation description: C factor represents the vegetation cover factor; NDVI is normalized difference vegetation index; LS factor represents the slope-length factor; NL is Night-time light index; GDP is gross domestic product; FVC is fractional vegetation cover; AET is the actual evapotranspiration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Schematic diagram of driving factor ranking; X1 to X6 refers to the six driving factors, respectively.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Bagplots and Spearman correlation coefficients for ES pairs from 1990 to 2020. Bold font indicates a high correlation with |r| ≥ 0.5. Double asterisks (**) mean a significant trend at 0.01 level (2-tailed). Single asterisk (*) means a significant at trend 0.05 level (2-tailed). Un-marked number indicates a non-significant relationship.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>LISA cluster maps for the ES pairs from 1990 to 2020.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Changes in driving factors of ES pairs from 1990 to 2020. Abbreviation description: TEM—temperature, PRE-precipitation, and NL—night-time light index.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Spatial effects of the driving factors for (<b>a</b>) CS-WY, and for (<b>b</b>) BR-WY from 1990 to 2020. The red words indicate the area proportion of positive impacts, and the blue words indicate the area proportion of negative impacts. The ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ statuses are divided based on whether they exceed the mean values.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Spatial influences of the driving factors for (<b>a</b>) BR-CS, and for (<b>b</b>) SC-CS from 1990 to 2020. The red words indicate the area proportion of positive impacts, and the blue words indicate the area proportion of negative impacts. The ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ statuses are divided based on whether they exceed the mean values.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) Changes in land use/cover from 1990 to 2020. Field investigation on current status of re-vegetation and engineering measures: (<b>b</b>) restored vegetation status in the north; (<b>c</b>) industrial production; (<b>d</b>) fish scale pit management; (<b>e</b>) vegetation restoration status in central-southern areas; (<b>f</b>) native vegetation status; (<b>g</b>) thinning of forests in native vegetation areas; (<b>h</b>) check dam; (<b>i</b>) riverbank management. All photos (<b>b</b>–<b>i</b>) were collected during the same period of the vegetation growing season (May–June).</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 8056 KiB  
Article
The Relationship between Large Wood Export and the Long-Term Large Wood Budget on an Annual Scale in Japan, Using Storage Function with the Lumped Hydrological Method
by Yuta Abe, Sartsin Phakdimek and Daisuke Komori
Water 2024, 16(7), 920; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16070920 - 22 Mar 2024
Viewed by 1204
Abstract
In this study, we aimed to verify the two relationships on large wood export, as follows: (1) the relationship between large wood recruitment and landslides triggered by intense rainfalls and (2) the relationship between large wood export and the long-term large wood budget [...] Read more.
In this study, we aimed to verify the two relationships on large wood export, as follows: (1) the relationship between large wood recruitment and landslides triggered by intense rainfalls and (2) the relationship between large wood export and the long-term large wood budget on an annual scale, based on the direct export of large wood caused by an increase in large wood recruitment with extreme rainfall events, as well as the baseflow of large wood, which is mainly old large wood recruitment stored at the slopes and in the stream. To reproduce these two relationships, the model consisted of two frameworks, as follows: (1) the rainfall-induced analytical shallow landslide model, with 30 m spatial resolution for large wood recruitment and (2) the double/triple storage function, with the lumped hydrological method at a watershed scale for large wood entrainment. Application of the model to 212 dam reservoir watersheds across Japan resulted in reproducibility in the estimation of large wood export volumes in 134 of the target dam reservoir watersheds, which contribute 63.2% of the target basins. This indicated that our results verified these two relationships as primary relationships. To analyse the difference in large wood export systems, a frequency analysis was conducted using correlation analysis based on large wood export volume and the cumulative values of six patterns of large wood recruitment volumes. The results indicated that there might be differences in large wood export systems between the watersheds represented by the double storage function model and those represented by the triple storage function model. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Challenges to Interdisciplinary Application of Hydrodynamic Models)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Field survey of landslide disaster (in both 2016 and 2023) with LW at the Omoto River Basin due to the 2016 rainstorms. Some stored LW after seven years had decayed and re-greened, but the stored capacity had not changed.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>The deposition of LW at bridges due to Typhoon Etau, which hit Hokkaido in 2003. (Source: the website of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Field survey of landslide disaster with large wood at the Nomura Dam reservoir watershed in the Hiji River Basin due to the 2018 West Japan rainstorms.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>The dynamics of LW in a forested river watershed are illustrated as a cycle, in which LW recruitment from wood sources might be transported and/or stored (adapted from Ruiz-Villanueva et al. (2016)) [<a href="#B1-water-16-00920" class="html-bibr">1</a>]. The nonlinearity of these processes is shown as t<sub>0</sub>–t<sub>3</sub>, with steady and episodic disturbances potentially triggering recruitment and transport. The time between the processes (t<sub>0</sub>–t<sub>3</sub>) may vary among different watersheds and this defines the residence time of LW in the system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>A schematic diagram of LW-Budget [<a href="#B34-water-16-00920" class="html-bibr">34</a>,<a href="#B43-water-16-00920" class="html-bibr">43</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Distribution of study sites.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>A conceptual scheme of the double storage function model (<b>a</b>) and the triple storage function model (<b>b</b>) (modified from Komori et al., 2021) [<a href="#B43-water-16-00920" class="html-bibr">43</a>].</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p><math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> <mi>S</mi> <mi>E</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> for a combination of parameters <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>Z</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>b</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> when the parameters <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>k</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>p</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> were 0.0151 and 0.51, respectively, as an example of parameter recognition at a dam reservoir watershed. The red circle was the parameter combinations for which the <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> <mi>S</mi> <mi>E</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> was the highest in this condition.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Plots of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>q</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>o</mi> <mi>b</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>q</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>s</mi> <mi>i</mi> <mi>m</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, and the <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> <mi>S</mi> <mi>E</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> for annual LW export simulation using the double (<b>a</b>) and triple (<b>b</b>) storage function models at a dam reservoir watershed as a case of satisfactory and unsatisfactory results in Group 1.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Plots of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>q</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>o</mi> <mi>b</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>q</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>s</mi> <mi>i</mi> <mi>m</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, and the <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> <mi>S</mi> <mi>E</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> for annual LW export simulation using the double (<b>a</b>) and triple (<b>b</b>) storage function models at a dam reservoir watershed as a case of satisfactory and unsatisfactory results in Group 2.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Plots of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>q</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>o</mi> <mi>b</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>q</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>s</mi> <mi>i</mi> <mi>m</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, and the <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> <mi>S</mi> <mi>E</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> for annual LW export simulation using the double (<b>a</b>) and triple (<b>b</b>) storage function models at a dam reservoir watershed as a case of satisfactory results in Group 3.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Plots of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>q</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>o</mi> <mi>b</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>q</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>s</mi> <mi>i</mi> <mi>m</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, and the <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> <mi>S</mi> <mi>E</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> for annual LW export simulation using the double (<b>a</b>) and triple (<b>b</b>) storage function models at a dam reservoir watershed as a case of unsatisfactory results.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Plots of <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>q</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>o</mi> <mi>b</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>P</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mi>q</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>s</mi> <mi>i</mi> <mi>m</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, and the <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>N</mi> <mi>S</mi> <mi>E</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> for annual LW export simulation using the double (<b>a</b>) and triple (<b>b</b>) storage function models at a dam reservoir watershed as a case of unsatisfactory results.</p>
Full article ">
24 pages, 7818 KiB  
Article
Application and Evaluation of Stage–Storage–Discharge Methodology in Hydrological Study of the Southern Phosphate Mining Model Domain in Southwest Florida
by Fahad Alshehri and Mark Ross
Water 2024, 16(6), 842; https://doi.org/10.3390/w16060842 - 14 Mar 2024
Viewed by 987
Abstract
This hydrological study investigated a combined rating methodology tested on a 14,090 km2 area in Southwest Florida. The approach applied the Hydrological Simulation Program-Fortran (HSPF) over a 23-year period and was validated by 28 stream gauging stations. The regional hydrological complexity includes [...] Read more.
This hydrological study investigated a combined rating methodology tested on a 14,090 km2 area in Southwest Florida. The approach applied the Hydrological Simulation Program-Fortran (HSPF) over a 23-year period and was validated by 28 stream gauging stations. The regional hydrological complexity includes natural and agricultural areas, as well as extensive phosphate mining and urbanizing areas. This application is a novel and efficient methodology for generating stage–storage–discharge relationships using a geographic information system (GIS), empirical equations, and spreadsheets for 148,000 isolated and connected alluvial wetlands within the model domain. The validation metrics used to evaluate the applied methodology for populating the stage–storage–discharge relationship demonstrated the model effectiveness in simulating a range of hydrological events across various regions. For discharge prediction, the Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency values surpassed 0.7 at most stations, with an average of 0.67, and the average R squared was 0.74. This methodology, when applied, achieved a root-mean-square error of 4 m3/s for discharge prediction and 0.47 m for stage prediction. However, limitations emerged in simulating baseflow (low flows), highlighting the need for integrated modeling approaches to accurately capture groundwater–surface water interactions. The research provides an improved means for modeling regional water resources and lays the groundwork for enhanced hydrological modeling in watersheds with complex alluvial and isolated wetland systems. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Hydrology)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>The southern phosphate mining model domain (SMD), Southwest Florida, United States.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Comparison of model predictions and observed discharge and stage data, with (<b>a</b>) a box plot of R<sup>2</sup> for discharge data, (<b>b</b>) a box plot of the Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) for discharge data, (<b>c</b>) a box plot of the root-mean-square error (RMSE) for discharge data, (<b>d</b>) a box plot of the mean error (ME) for discharge data, (<b>e</b>) a box plot of the RMSE for stage data, and (<b>f</b>) a box plot of the ME for stage data. Diamond points represent data points that reside beyond the whiskers. These whiskers extend to the maximum data point within 1.5 times the interquartile range from both the first and third quartiles. These limits are used to categorize extreme values that deviate from the most common range of the data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Comparison of model predictions and observed stage data for three different locations: (<b>a</b>) North Prong Alafia River at Keysville, (<b>b</b>) Horse Creek near Arcadia, (<b>c</b>) Peace River at Bartow.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Comparison of modeled and observed discharge hydrographs at two locations (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) with good performance according to NSE and R<sup>2</sup> results. The solid red line represents the modeled discharges, while the solid blue line represents the observed discharges. The dotted red line illustrates the cumulative modeled discharges, and the dotted blue line depicts the cumulative observed discharges throughout the simulation period.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Comparison of modeled and observed discharge hydrographs at two locations (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) with poorer model performance according to NSE and R<sup>2</sup> results. The solid red line represents the modeled discharges, while the solid blue line represents the observed discharges. The dotted red line illustrates the cumulative modeled discharges, and the dotted blue line depicts the cumulative observed discharges throughout the simulation period.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Scatter plots comparing predicted and observed baseflows and streamflows. Baseflow was separated from streamflow using an approach by Perry [<a href="#B35-water-16-00842" class="html-bibr">35</a>]. Graphs (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>) display the baseflow comparisons at locations where the model performed well, (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) present the streamflow comparisons at locations where the model performed well, (<b>e</b>,<b>g</b>) illustrate the baseflow comparisons at locations where the model performance was poor, and (<b>f</b>,<b>h</b>) depict the streamflow comparisons at locations where the model performance was poor.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparison of observed and predicted discharge values for different quantiles (m<sup>3</sup>/s), (<b>a</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>Q</mi> <mrow> <mn>0.01</mn> </mrow> </msub> </semantics></math>, (<b>b</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>Q</mi> <mn>1</mn> </msub> </semantics></math>, (<b>c</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>Q</mi> <mn>10</mn> </msub> </semantics></math>, (<b>d</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>Q</mi> <mn>50</mn> </msub> </semantics></math>, (<b>e</b>) <math display="inline"><semantics> <msub> <mi>Q</mi> <mn>90</mn> </msub> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Box plots of (<b>a</b>) discharge error as a water budget per year, and (<b>b</b>) the relative discharge error per year.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop