Relationship of stream flow regime in the western Lake Superior basin to watershed type characteristics

Abstract

To test a conceptual model of non-linear response of hydrologic regimes to watershed characteristics, we selected 48 secondand third-order study sites on the North and South Shores of western Lake Superior, MN (USA) using a random-stratified design based on hydrogeomorphic region, fraction mature forest, and fraction watershed storage (lakeCwetland area/watershed area). We calculated several commonly used hydrologic indices from discharge and velocity estimates, including daily flow indices, overall flood indices, low flow variables, and ratios or ranges of flow percentiles reflecting the nature of cumulative frequency distributions. Four principal components (PCs) explained 85.9 and 88.6% of the variation of flow metrics among second-and third-order stream sites, respectively. Axes of variation corresponded to a runoff vs. baseflow axis, flow variability, mean flow, and contrasts between flood duration and frequency. Analysis of velocity metrics for third-order streams yielded four PCs corresponding to mean or maximum velocity, Froude number, and inferred shear velocity, as well as spate frequencies vs. intervals associated with different velocity ranges.Using discriminant function analysis, we could discriminate among watershed classes based on region, mature forest, or watershed storage as a function of flow metrics. For second-order streams, median flow (Qs 50 ) increased as watershed storage increased. North Shore streams showed a more skewed distribution and greater spread of discharge values than did South Shore streams for both stream orders, while third-order North Shore streams exhibited a higher frequency of spates. Independent of regional differences, loss of mature forest increased the range of variation between baseflow and peak flows, and depressed baseflow. Consistent with our initial model for watershed classification, Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analysis confirmed significant thresholds of change in flow metrics averaging between 0.506 and 0.636 for fraction mature forest and between 0.180 and 0.258 for fraction watershed storage. q

Diagnostic calibration of a hydrological model in a mountain area by hydrograph partitioning

“…Shamir et al (2005a) described a parameter estimation method based on hydrograph descriptors (total flow, range between the extreme values, monthly rising limb density (RLD) of the hydrograph, monthly maximum flow, and negative/positive change) that characterize dominant streamflow patterns at three timescales (monthly, yearly, and record extent). Detenbeck et al (2005) calculated several hydrologic indices including daily flow indices (mean, median, coefficient of variation, and skewness), overall flood indices (flood frequency, magnitude, duration, and flood timing of various levels), low flow variables (mean annual daily minimum), and ranges of flow percentiles to study the relationship of the streamflow regime to watershed characteristics. Shamir et al (2005b) presented two streamflow indices to describe the shape of the hydrograph (RLD and declining limb density -DLD) for parameter estimation in 19 basins of United States.…”

The role of climatic and terrain attributes in estimating baseflow recession in tropical catchments

“…Besides more detailed data, more robust methodologies could be used to include these attributes and the other catchment terrain attributes as covariates in regression equations. For example Detenbeck et al (2005) (Fig. 9).…”

Estudio comparativo de los componentes del balance hídrico en un bosque nativo y una pradera en el sur de Chile

“…A diferencia de la pradera o un terreno descubierto de vegetación, el bosque tiene un papel de regulador del agua: restituye menos agua pero de manera más regular. Esto hace que el bosque tenga una mayor importancia en regular los flujos en eventos de mayor cuantía (Detenbeck et al 2005, Giertz et al 2005. Al contrario, una pradera ubicada en zonas con pendiente puede producir más agua y con una respuesta más rápida e intensa a variaciones en precipitaciones, lo cual está asociado a un mayor arrastre de sedimentos y, por ende, una menor calidad del agua (Ward y Trimble 2004).…”