uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
When should stream water be sampled to be most informative for event-based, multi-criteria model calibration?
Univ Zurich, Dept Geog, Winterthurerstr 190, CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland..
Univ Zurich, Dept Geog, Winterthurerstr 190, CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland..
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Earth Sciences, Department of Earth Sciences, LUVAL. Univ Zurich, Dept Geog, Zurich, Switzerland..ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6314-2124
2017 (English)In: Hydrology Research, ISSN 1998-9563, E-ISSN 2224-7955, Vol. 48, no 6, p. 1566-1584Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Isotope data from streamflow samples taken during rainfall or snowmelt events can be useful for model calibration, particularly to improve model consistency and to reduce parameter uncertainty. To reduce the costs associated with stream water sampling, it is important to choose sampling times with a high information content. We used the Birkenes model and synthetic rainfall, streamflow and isotope data to explore how many samples are needed to obtain a certain model fit and which sampling times are most informative for model calibration. Our results for nine model parameterizations and three events, representing different streamflow behaviours (e.g., fast and slow response, with and without overflow), show that the simulation performance of models calibrated with isotope data from two selected samples was comparable to simulations based on isotope data for all 100 time steps. Generally, samples taken on the falling limb were most informative for model calibration, although the exact timing of the most informative samples was dependent on the runoff response. Samples taken on the rising limb and at peakflow were less informative than expected. These model results highlight the value of a limited number of stream water samples and provide guidance for cost-effective event-based sampling strategies for model calibration.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
IWA PUBLISHING , 2017. Vol. 48, no 6, p. 1566-1584
Keywords [en]
information content, isotope data, model calibration, sampling frequency, sampling strategy, value of limited data
National Category
Oceanography, Hydrology and Water Resources
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-342661DOI: 10.2166/nh.2017.197ISI: 000416144600008OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-342661DiVA, id: diva2:1186172
Available from: 2018-02-27 Created: 2018-02-27 Last updated: 2018-02-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Seibert, Jan

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Seibert, Jan
By organisation
LUVAL
In the same journal
Hydrology Research
Oceanography, Hydrology and Water Resources

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 1 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf