Sensitivity of streamflow from a Himalayan catchment to plausible changes in land cover and climate

Ma, Xieyao; Xu, Jianchu; Noordwijk, Meine van

doi:10.1002/hyp.7602

Cited by 34 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Assessing the impacts of climate and LUC changes on runoff process has been an important research focusing on hydrological studies [8][9][10][11]. Methods used to assess the impact of climate change on runoff can be classified into two categories [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Runoff Responses to Climate and Land Use/Cover Changes under Future Scenarios

Pan

Liu

Wang

et al. 2017

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate and land use/cover (LUC) are the two most significant factors that directly affect the runoff process. However, most research on runoff response has focused mainly on projected climate variation, while future LUC variability has been neglected. Therefore, the objective of this study is to examine the impacts of projected climate and LUC changes on runoff. -2020, 2021-2030, 2031-2040 and 2041-2050 period, abbreviated S3). These three scenarios are then input into the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model to assess runoff responses. Beijiang River Basin, located in southern China, is used in this case study. The results obtained from S1, S2 and S3 show that runoff change in this basin is mainly caused by climate change; warmer temperatures and greater precipitation increase runoff. LUC change has little influence on runoff at the whole-basin scale, but changes in runoff components are more notable in the urban area than in the natural region at the sub-watershed level. The impact of LUC change in urbanized region on runoff components differ obviously among the wet, normal and dry years, and surface runoff and groundwater are found to be more sensitive to urbanization. Runoff depth is predicted to increase in this basin under the impacts of both climate and LUC changes in the future. Climate change brings greater increase in water yield and surface runoff, whereas LUC change leads to changes in allocation between surface runoff and groundwater in the urban region.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Runoff Responses to Climate and Land Use/Cover Changes under Future Scenarios

Pan

Liu

Wang

et al. 2017

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies have consistently stated that changes in land cover/land use and climatic changes significantly govern the hydrological regimes (i.e., pattern, magnitude, frequency, timing, duration, and rate of change) [9][10][11][12][13][14]. Forest disturbance, as one of the causes driving severe land cover change, has major impacts on interception, evapotranspiration, surface soil hydraulic conductivity, and soil storage, which may lead to changes in the water yield [15,16], the runoff formation process [17,18], snow hydrology [19,20], floods [9,21], and the low-flow regime [22,23].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Runoff Response to Climate Warming and Forest Disturbance in a Mid-Mountain Basin

Langhammer

Bernsteinová

2015

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A headwater basin in the Sumava Mountains (Czech Republic), the upper Vydra basin, has undergone forest disturbance as a result of repeated windstorms, a bark beetle outbreak, and forest management. This study analyzed the long-term hydro-climatic changes by using a combination of statistical analyses, including Mann-Kendall tests, CUSUM analysis, Buishand's and Petitt's homogeneity tests, and Kriging. Although the runoff balance over the study period experienced no apparent changes due to climate warming and forest disturbance, significant changes were detected in the share of direct runoff and baseflow, intra-annual variability of the runoff regime, seasonal runoff patterns, and the distribution of peak and low flow events. The seasonal runoff substantially shifted from summers (decreased from 40% to 28%) to springs (increased by 10%). The occurrence of peak flow events has doubled since the 1980s, with a seasonal shift from late spring towards the early spring, while the occurrence of low-flow days decreased by two-thirds. By 1990, these changes were followed by a seasonal shift in runoff from autumn to mid-winter. The changes in hydrological regime in the mid-mountain basin indicate the sensitivity of its hydrological system and the complexity of its feedback with the changing environment. OPEN ACCESSWater 2015, 7 3321

show abstract

“…Forest disturbance and climatic variability are viewed as two major drivers interactively influencing streamflow in large forested watersheds (Buttle and Metcalfe, 2000;Sharma et al, 2000;Blöschl et al, 2007;Ma et al, 2010;Wei and Zhang, 2010b). The greatest challenge is how to separate their relative contributions to hydrology (Zhang et al, 2008;Wang et al, 2009;Zheng et al, 2009;Wei and Zhang, 2010b).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of cumulative forest disturbance on streamflow in a large watershed in the central interior of British Columbia, Canada

Zhang

Wei

2012

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The Baker Creek watershed (1570 km 2 ), situated in the central interior of British Columbia, Canada, has been severely disturbed by both logging and natural disturbance, particularly by a recent large-scale mountain pine beetle (MPB) infestation (up to 2009, 70.2 % of the watershed area had been attacked by MPB) and subsequent salvage logging. The concept of equivalent clear-cut area (ECA) was used to indicate the magnitude of forest disturbance, with consideration of hydrological recovery following various types of disturbance (wildfire, logging and MPB infestation), cumulated over space and time in the watershed. The cumulative ECA peaked at 62.2 % in 2009. A combined approach of statistical analysis (i.e. time series analysis) and graphic method (modified double mass curve) was employed to evaluate the impacts of forest disturbance on hydrology. Our results showed that severe forest disturbance significantly increased annual mean flow. The average increment in annual mean flow caused by forest disturbance was 48.4 mm yr −1 , while the average decrease in annual mean flow caused by climatic variability during the same disturbance period was 35.5 mm yr −1 . The opposite changes in directions and magnitudes clearly suggest an offsetting effect between forest disturbance and climatic variability, with the absolute influential strength of forest disturbance (57.7 %) overriding that from climate variability (42.3 %). Forest disturbance also produced significant positive effects on low flow and dry season (fall and winter) mean flow. Implications of our findings for future forest and water resources management are discussed in the context of long-term watershed sustainability.

show abstract

Sensitivity of streamflow from a Himalayan catchment to plausible changes in land cover and climate

Cited by 34 publications

References 56 publications

Runoff Responses to Climate and Land Use/Cover Changes under Future Scenarios

Runoff Responses to Climate and Land Use/Cover Changes under Future Scenarios

Runoff Response to Climate Warming and Forest Disturbance in a Mid-Mountain Basin

The effects of cumulative forest disturbance on streamflow in a large watershed in the central interior of British Columbia, Canada

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About