Comparing statistical and process-based flow duration curve models in ungauged basins and changing rain regimes

Müller, M. F.; Thompson, S. E.

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-669-2016

Articles | Volume 20, issue 2

https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-669-2016

© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-669-2016

© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Articles | Volume 20, issue 2

Research article

|

11 Feb 2016

Research article |

| 11 Feb 2016

Comparing statistical and process-based flow duration curve models in ungauged basins and changing rain regimes

M. F. Müller and S. E. Thompson

Download

Final revised paper (published on 11 Feb 2016)
Supplement to the final revised paper
Preprint (discussion started on 25 Sep 2015)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC C4528: 'REVIEW of "Stochastic or statistic? Comparing flow duration curve model sin ungauged basins and changing climate” by Muller and Thompson', Anonymous Referee #1, 30 Oct 2015
- AC C4855: 'Response to Reviewer 1', Marc F. Muller, 14 Nov 2015
RC C4644: 'Review, Anonymous Referee #2', Anonymous Referee #2, 04 Nov 2015
- AC C4856: 'Response to reviewer 2', Marc F. Muller, 14 Nov 2015

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (Editor review) (07 Dec 2015) by Stacey Archfield

AR by Marc F. Muller on behalf of the Authors (31 Dec 2015) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (Editor review) (23 Jan 2016) by Stacey Archfield

I would like to thank the authors for this contribution to HESS. This is a well-written article and well-designed study. The review comments have further enhanced the paper and I found that the authors incorporated the review comments appropriately into the revised manuscript.

I did find a few minor edits:

1 - In the caption for Figure 1 and line 257 in the text, there is an inconsistency with how the units are represented. In units with a denominator, in some cases the denominators are expressed as a fraction with a "/" symbol while others denominators are expressed as a negative exponent. I believe the preferred requirement by HESS is to express the denominator as a negative exponent although I realize the guidelines are a bit confusing. I would look through the manuscript preparation guidelines for equations here (under Mathematical Requirements) and be consistent throughout with the convention you choose to use: http://www.hydrology-and-earth-system-sciences.net/for_authors/manuscript_preparation.html.

Please check other mathematical conventions with the HESS guidelines. For example, 'year' should be abbreviated 'yr' not 'y' (as you have in the Figure 1 caption).

2 - In the supplementary materials on the start of page 2, the first use of April 15th has only the 't' as an exponent and not the 'h'.

3 - line 443: 'Supplementary Materials' is capitalized in other places of the text (lines 458-459) and lower case here. This is one example where this term is not used consistently across the manuscript. I would prefer upper case throughout the text. Please make this consistent.

Aside from these minor revisions, I look forward to seeing the final paper published in HESS and I wish the authors all my best in this and their future research.

Hide

AR by Marc F. Muller on behalf of the Authors (25 Jan 2016) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (27 Jan 2016) by Stacey Archfield

AR by Marc F. Muller on behalf of the Authors (28 Jan 2016)

Short summary

We compare a stochastic (process-based) and statistical (data-based) method to predict flow duration curves in ungauged basins, under stationary and non-stationary conditions, and using Nepal as a case study. Both methods worked well in stationary conditions, with performances driven by the main source of runoff heterogeneity (climate vs. recession). The stochastic model worked better under change, and the performance of the statistical model was determined by the resilience of the flow regime.