2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.06.034
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Errors of flux integration methods for solutes in grab samples of runoff water, as compared to flow-proportional sampling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
33
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
3
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the control catchment, exports estimated by high-frequency samplings were higher than those by regular grab samplings in NO À 3 , and lower in other solutes. Some previous studies reported similar results (Schleppi et al, 2006;Ide et al, 2007). However, in the clear-cut catchment, chemical exports calculated from high-frequency sampling were significantly different from those calculated by regular grab samplings following clear-cutting.…”
Section: Differences In Solute Concentrations and Exports Between Regsupporting
confidence: 63%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In the control catchment, exports estimated by high-frequency samplings were higher than those by regular grab samplings in NO À 3 , and lower in other solutes. Some previous studies reported similar results (Schleppi et al, 2006;Ide et al, 2007). However, in the clear-cut catchment, chemical exports calculated from high-frequency sampling were significantly different from those calculated by regular grab samplings following clear-cutting.…”
Section: Differences In Solute Concentrations and Exports Between Regsupporting
confidence: 63%
“…First, the hourly concentrations were estimated. The regression method (Schleppi et al, 2006) was applied to estimate the hourly concentration because discharge was measured more frequently. The equation was expressed as follows:…”
Section: Methods Of Flux Calculationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Schleppi et al observed, that if concentrations were discharge dependent, methods (1) and (2) could generate strongly biased results towards under-or overestimation of nutrient export. According to Schleppi et al (2006), the regression-based calculation is the best approach. To be as accurate as possible in the export calculation we tested three possible concentration dependencies (time-, discharge-dependent, no relation) separately for all measured parameters (NO 3 , SO 4 , TOC, Ca, Mg, Na and K) and for each station.…”
Section: Nutrient Export Calculationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Release of soil and sediment particles and erosion also exhibit threshold-like behavior (Sichingabula 1998;Ternat et al 2008;Hicks et al 2000). Traditionally, univariate mathematical formulations of the relationship between concentration and discharge are used for the calculation of export coefficients and sediment yield (Walling 1977;Horowitz 2003;Schleppi et al 2006;Ide et al 2007). However, due to the complexity of processes affecting sediment dynamics, such univariate relationships (e.g., log-log rating curves between discharge and concentration) are in most situations insufficient and result in large scatter (Walling 1977;Wood 1977;Sichingabula 1998;Alexandrov et al 2007;Bača 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%