<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">HESS</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Hydrology and Earth System Sciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">HESS</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1607-7938</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/hess-22-3421-2018</article-id><title-group><article-title>Hydroclimatic control on suspended sediment dynamics of a regulated Alpine
catchment: a conceptual approach</article-title><alt-title>Hydroclimatic control on suspended sediment dynamics</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Hydroclimatic control on suspended sediment dynamics}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{A. Costa et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Costa</surname><given-names>Anna</given-names></name>
          <email>costa@ifu.baug.ethz</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7307-0788</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Anghileri</surname><given-names>Daniela</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6220-8593</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Molnar</surname><given-names>Peter</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6437-4931</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><institution>Institute of Environmental Engineering, ETH Zurich, 8093 Zurich, Switzerland</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Anna Costa (costa@ifu.baug.ethz)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>22</day><month>June</month><year>2018</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>22</volume>
      <issue>6</issue>
      <fpage>3421</fpage><lpage>3434</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>7</day><month>January</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>9</day><month>January</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>26</day><month>May</month><year>2018</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        
        
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3421/2018/hess-22-3421-2018.html">This article is available from https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3421/2018/hess-22-3421-2018.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3421/2018/hess-22-3421-2018.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3421/2018/hess-22-3421-2018.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e92">We analyse the control of hydroclimatic factors on suspended
sediment concentration (SSC) in Alpine catchments by differentiating among
the potential contributions of erosion and suspended sediment transport
driven by erosive rainfall, defined as liquid precipitation over snow-free
surfaces, ice melt from glacierized areas, and snowmelt on hillslopes. We
account for the potential impact of hydropower by intercepting sediment
fluxes originated in areas diverted to hydropower reservoirs, and by
considering the contribution of hydropower releases to SSC. We obtain the
hydroclimatic variables from daily gridded datasets of precipitation and
temperature, implementing a degree-day model to simulate spatially
distributed snow accumulation and snow–ice melt. We estimate hydropower
releases by a conceptual approach with a unique virtual reservoir regulated
on the basis of a target-volume function, representing normal reservoir
operating conditions throughout a hydrological year. An Iterative Input
Selection algorithm is used to identify the variables with the highest
predictive power for SSC, their explained variance, and characteristic time
lags. On this basis, we develop a hydroclimatic multivariate rating curve
(HMRC) which accounts for the contributions of the most relevant
hydroclimatic input variables mentioned above. We calibrate the HMRC with a
gradient-based nonlinear optimization method and we compare its performance
with a traditional discharge-based rating curve. We apply the approach in the
upper Rhône Basin, a large Swiss Alpine catchment heavily regulated by
hydropower. Our results show that the three hydroclimatic processes –
erosive rainfall, ice melt, and snowmelt – are significant predictors of
mean daily SSC, while hydropower release does not have a significant
explanatory power for SSC. The characteristic time lags of the hydroclimatic
variables correspond to the typical flow concentration times of the basin.
Despite not including discharge, the HMRC performs better than the
traditional rating curve in reproducing SSC seasonality, especially during
validation at the daily scale. While erosive rainfall determines the daily
variability of SSC and extremes, ice melt generates the highest SSC per unit
of runoff and represents the largest contribution to total suspended sediment
yield. Finally, we show that the HMRC is capable of simulating climate-driven
changes in fine sediment dynamics in Alpine catchments. In fact, HMRC can
reproduce the changes in SSC in the past 40 years in the Rhône Basin
connected to air temperature rise, even though the simulated changes are more
gradual than those observed. The approach presented in this paper, based on
the analysis of the hydroclimatic control of suspended sediment
concentration, allows the exploration of climate-driven changes in fine
sediment dynamics in Alpine catchments. The approach can be applied to any
Alpine catchment with a pluvio-glacio-nival hydrological regime and adequate
hydroclimatic datasets.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e102">Climate plays a dominant role in erosional and sediment transfer processes in
Alpine catchments (e.g. Huggel et al., 2012; Micheletti and Lane, 2016;
Palazón and Navas, 2016). In such environments, three main hydroclimatic
forcings drive the processes that contribute to suspended sediment
concentration (SSC) along channels: erosive rainfall, glacial melt, and
snowmelt. Erosive rainfall (ER), defined here as liquid precipitation over
snow-free surfaces, is responsible for soil detachment and erosion along
hillslopes (Wischmeier, 1959; Wischmeier and Smith, 1978), triggering<?pagebreak page3422?> mass
wasting events such as debris flows and landslides (e.g. Caine, 1980; Dhakal
and Sidle, 2004; Guzzetti et al., 2008; Leonarduzzi et al., 2017), which can
mobilize large amounts of fine sediment (e.g. Korup et al., 2004; Bennett et
al., 2012) and result in very high suspended sediment concentrations in the
receiving streams. Together with erosional processes along hillslopes, which
are strongly related to rainfall intensity (e.g. Van Dijk et al., 2002),
precipitation events may also enhance channel and bank erosion through
increased discharge. Ice melt (IM) is responsible for high concentrations of
fine sediment produced with a variety of glacial erosion processes (Boulton,
1974). Ice melt may substantially increase suspended sediment concentration
in glacially fed streams by entraining and transporting fine sediment
previously stored in subglacial networks and paraglacial environments (Aas
and Bogen, 1988; Gurnell et al., 1996; Lawler and Dolan, 1992).
Snowmelt-driven overland flow (SM) generates hillslope erosion and
potentially affects channel and bank erosion by contributing to streamflow.
This hydroclimatic forcing is important in Alpine environments where snowmelt
can produce high hillslope runoff and be a major contributor to channel
discharge (e.g. Grønsten and Lundekvam, 2006; Ollesch et al., 2006; Konz
et al., 2012). Due to the diversity of the erosion and transport processes
(e.g. erosion driven by overland flow, mass wasting events) and the variety
of sediment sources involved (e.g. hillslopes, channels, glaciers), sediment
fluxes generated by these three hydroclimatic variables are expected to
contribute to suspended sediment dynamics in a complementary way, both in
terms of magnitude and timing.</p>
      <p id="d1e105">In addition to natural hydroclimatic forcings, human activities potentially
contribute to altering sediment dynamics, e.g. by changes in land use (e.g.
Foster et al., 2003) and sediment storage in reservoirs (e.g. Syvitski et
al., 2005). In Alpine environments,
it is water impoundment and flow regulation due to hydropower
production especially which may substantially influence the suspended sediment regime
(e.g. Anselmetti et al., 2007). The impacts of hydropower operations on
suspended sediment dynamics may vary substantially between catchments,
depending on the specific features of the hydropower system (e.g. reservoir
trapping efficiency, hydropower operations), and on the catchment
characteristics (e.g. amount and grain size distribution of the eroded
sediment, seasonal pattern of sediment production). Here, we focus on the two
main effects of hydropower operations: sediment trapping in reservoirs and
temporary sediment storage behind water diversion infrastructures (intakes),
which may substantially reduce the amount of sediment delivered to downstream
reaches and/or significantly alter the timing of sediment release to the
river network (e.g. Vörösmarty et al., 2003; Finger et al., 2006;
Gabbud and Lane, 2016; Bakker et al., 2018). Despite sediment trapping, water
released from hydropower (HP) reservoirs may carry suspended sediment either
previously stored in the reservoirs or entrained along the downstream
channels.</p>
      <p id="d1e108">In the context of environmental change, it is important to understand how the
sediment regime has changed and what the relative role of different
hydroclimatic forcings may have been. There are examples of studies which
demonstrated alterations in suspended sediment yields driven by changes in
land use, climate, or by disturbances such as wildfires, earthquakes, and
flow impoundments (e.g. Loizeau and Dominik, 2000; Foster et al., 2003;
Dadson et al., 2004; Yang et al., 2007; Horowitz, 2010; Costa et al., 2018).
These changes are normally addressed by calibrating different sediment rating
curve models, which express suspended sediment concentration as a power
function of discharge, for different sediment supply regimes and by making
the parameters of the rating curves time-dependent (e.g. Syvitski et al.,
2000; Yang, 2007; Hu et al., 2011; Huang and Montgomery, 2013; Warrick,
2015). However, these approaches do not explicitly address the sources of
sediment and their activation by different hydroclimatic forcings and are
limited to using discharge as a predictor. As a result the hydroclimatic
causality of changes in suspended sediment concentration in such analyses
remains elusive. The approach proposed in this paper accounts explicitly for
the hydroclimatic and hydropower activation and deactivation of different
sediment sources, with the aim to identify their predictive power in
estimating suspended concentration even without using discharge.</p>
      <p id="d1e111">Our main objectives are (1) to explore the role played by the hydroclimatic
variables erosive rainfall, ice melt, snow-melt, and the hydropower release, in
controlling suspended sediment concentration of an Alpine catchment, and
(2) to analyse long-term, climate-driven changes in suspended sediment
concentration on the basis of a conceptual, data-driven approach accounting
separately for the contribution of erosive rainfall, ice melt, snowmelt, and hydropower releases.</p>
      <p id="d1e115">The upper Rhône Basin in southern Switzerland is used as the study
catchment. The upper Rhône River contributes more than 65 % of the
total input of particulate matter into Lake Geneva, the largest lake in the
Alps (Loizeau et al., 1997), substantially influencing the morphology and
ecology of the river delta and the lake (Loizeau and Dominik, 2000; Loizeau
et al., 1997). The catchment is heavily regulated by hydropower
infrastructure. Several large hydropower reservoirs have been in operation
since 1960s, leading to a total retention capacity equal to roughly 20 %
of the total annual discharge of the catchment (Loizeau and Dominik, 2000;
Fatichi et al., 2015). In addition to reservoirs, a complex network of water
intakes and diversions extracts water from headwater streams and delivers it
either to the major reservoirs or directly to the hydropower plants. From a
detailed map of the hydropower scheme, including reservoirs and water
diversions (Fatichi et al., 2015), it is estimated that roughly 25 % of
the catchment is affected by hydropower: 8 % flows directly into the
reservoirs, and 17 % is diverted through tunnels and pumping stations.
Sediment fingerprinting conducted in the catchment in a recent study from
Stutenbecker et al. (2017) indicates that sediment originating in<?pagebreak page3423?> the
lithological unit more affected by hydropower is under-represented at the
outlet of the catchment, suggesting the impact of water impoundment on the
sediment budget of the basin. In addition, alterations of suspended sediment
concentration entering Lake Geneva have been observed in the recent past and
attributed to human impacts (Loizeau and Dominik, 2000; Loizeau et al., 1997)
and changes in climatic conditions (Costa et al., 2018).</p>
      <p id="d1e118">The paper is organized as follows: Sect. 2 describes the data pre-processing,
the hydrological modelling procedure to obtain the hydroclimatic variables
(ER, IM, SM), the approach to obtain the hydropower releases (HP), and the analysis performed to infer their link
to suspended sediment concentration; Sect. 3 presents the upper Rhône
Basin and the data used in our analysis; Sect. 4 reports the main results
which are discussed in Sect. 5; and Sect. 6 concludes the paper by
summarizing the main findings.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Methods</title>
      <p id="d1e127">To analyse the role of hydroclimate on the suspended sediment regime of a
catchment regulated by hydropower reservoirs, we first divide the catchment
into two distinct areas: (1) the area which contributes to the runoff
accumulated in hydropower reservoirs (regulated area), including the fraction
of the catchment draining directly into the reservoirs and the fraction
connected to the reservoirs through tunnels and pumping stations, and (2) the
remaining area, which naturally flows to the river network (unregulated
area). We assume that the sediment fluxes originated in the unregulated area
contribute directly to SSC at the outlet of the catchment, while sediment
fluxes generated in the regulated area are diverted into the reservoirs and
later totally or partially released according to hydropower operations.
Finally, we estimate the contribution to SSC at the outlet of the catchment
of sediment fluxes originated in the unregulated area by ER, IM, and SM, and
of sediment fluxes carried by water released from the reservoirs during
hydropower operations.</p>
      <p id="d1e130">Our methodology consists of four main steps:</p>
      <p id="d1e133"><list list-type="order">
          <list-item>

      <p id="d1e138">We derive mean daily
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>datasets. Mean daily
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the outlet of the catchment is derived from
continuous measurements of turbidity (Sect. 2.1), the hydroclimatic input
variables mean daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are derived from spatially distributed snowmelt and
ice melt models, and the mean daily water releases from hydropower reservoirs
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are derived by a conceptual approach based on a unique
virtual reservoir, which is intended to model the cumulative effect of
multiple reservoirs, when present in the catchment, and a target volume
function (Sect. 2.2).</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>

      <p id="d1e256">We use an Input Variable Selection algorithm to
identify the variables with the highest predictive power for
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and we estimate their characteristic time lags
(Sect. 2.3).</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>

      <p id="d1e273">We calibrate and validate a rating curve accounting for the
variables identified in the previous step (hydroclimatic multivariate rating
curve – HMRC), and we evaluate the contribution of each hydroclimatic and
hydropower component to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Sect. 2.4).</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>

      <p id="d1e290">We apply the
HMRC to simulate 40-year-long time series of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the
outlet of the catchment to investigate the impact of changes in climatic
conditions on suspended sediment dynamics, and we compare simulated values
with observations obtained with a traditional rating curve (RC) based on
discharge only (Sect. 2.5).</p>
          </list-item>
        </list></p>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Estimate of daily suspended sediment concentration</title>
      <p id="d1e311">The specific operations described in this and the following paragraphs
strongly depend on the data availability for the case study under
consideration. In the following, we describe the operations we carried out
for the upper Rhône Basin, but we also comment about the applicability of
these and alternative operations to other catchments.</p>
      <p id="d1e314">SSC sampling has been historically conducted manually, usually with low
frequency (e.g. a few samples a week) and fixed intervals, because manual
measurements are costly and time-consuming (e.g. Gippel, 1995; Pavanelli and
Pagliarani, 2002). This results in long but intermittent SSC datasets, which
are not suitable for data-driven modelling, because they might not be
representative of the entire range of possible suspended sediment
concentrations. On the other hand, automatic gauging stations with optical
turbidity sensors produce turbidity datasets which are continuous but usually
shorter, because of the recent widespread availability and installation of
such sensors. Because turbidity is strongly related to suspended sediment
concentration (e.g. Gippel, 1995; Lewis, 1996; Pavanelli and Pagliarani,
2002; Holliday et al., 2003; Lacour et al., 2009; Métadier and
Bertrand-Krajewski, 2012), the two datasets, when available at the same
location, can be combined to obtain a high-frequency SSC dataset. In our
case, punctual manual measurements of SSC are collected twice per week at the
outlet of the Rhône Basin and continuous measurements of Nephelometric
Turbidity Units (NTUs) are available for an overlapping period in 2013–2017
at the same location. To build a SSC–NTU relationship, we consider
simultaneous measurements of NTU and SSC (i.e. with a maximum time lag of
5 min), after removing observations greater than the 90th percentile
(corresponding to 2000 mg L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and 1000 NTU respectively) because we
are concerned about errors in observed high sediment concentration pulses due
to the punctual bottle-sampling procedure and known measurement errors at
high NTUs, and the fact that SSC and NTU measurements are not taken exactly
at the same location in space (and time) in the cross section. We use
least-squares regression to fit the model after a logarithmic transformation
of the variables:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M15" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NTU</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
         <?pagebreak page3424?> For the back-transformation from the logarithmic to the linear scale, we
applied the correction factor proposed by Duan (1983). Finally, we compute
mean daily NTU values from continuous measurements of turbidity, and we use
the SSC–NTU relation (Eq. 1) to estimate mean daily SSC.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>Hydroclimatic data modelling</title>
      <p id="d1e364">Datasets of the hydroclimatic variables ER, IM, and SM need to be derived by
hydrological modelling. The choice of the model should be driven by the data
availability for calibration and the required accuracy of the simulated
outputs. In our case, we use a conceptual and spatially distributed model of
snowmelt and ice melt driven by spatially distributed precipitation and
temperature (Costa et al., 2018). We use gridded datasets of mean daily
precipitation and mean, maximum, and minimum daily air temperature to divide
precipitation into rainfall and snowfall on the basis of a temperature
threshold. We model ice and snow accumulation and melting with a degree-day
approach (e.g. Hock, 2003). Ice melt occurs only on glacier cells that are
snow-free. Likewise, erosive rainfall occurs only on snow-free hillslope
cells. We set temperature thresholds for snow–rain division (1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C)
and for snowmelt and ice melt initiation (0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C) based on the
literature and on previous studies (e.g. Fatichi et al., 2015; Costa et al.,
2018), while we calibrate melt factors with satellite-derived snow cover
(Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer, MODIS) and with discharge
measured at different locations in the catchment. We first calibrate the
snowmelt rate from snow cover maps by spatial statistics that measure the
grid-to-grid matching of the model. Second, we calibrate the ice melt rate on
the basis of discharge measured at the outlet of two highly glaciated
subcatchments. For more details on the hydrological model description and
calibration see Costa et al. (2018). Finally, we sum the spatially
distributed hydroclimatic variables over the regulated and unregulated areas
and we obtain respectively mean daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
along with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e458">We represent all the hydropower reservoirs operating in the catchment with a
unique virtual reservoir, because data of water releases from individual
reservoirs are seldom available. The release from the virtual reservoir is
estimated on the basis of a target-volume function which represents the
reservoir operations in normal conditions. For each day of the year, the
hydropower release from the virtual reservoir <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> within
the interval from day <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to day <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is estimated as the difference in the
reservoir storage and the target volume, when positive, zero otherwise. The
reservoir storage <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is finally computed on the basis of
the mass balance:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M28" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the inflow into the virtual reservoir
within the interval from day <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> to day <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e597">To derive the capacity of the virtual reservoir, we consider the 13 largest
reservoirs operating in the Rhône catchment. A list of the reservoirs with
their retention capacity is reported in Table S1 of the Supplement, while
their spatial location is shown in Fig. 1. We compute the target-volume
functions of each individual reservoir by averaging observed storage time
series for reservoirs when observations are available and by adopting
normalized reference curves within the individual reservoir regulation range
otherwise (see Fatichi et al., 2015 for the full details). We then compute
the target-volume function of the virtual reservoir by adding the
target-volume functions of each individual reservoir and by scaling the sum
to the total annual inflow. We compute the daily inflow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in
Eq. (2) as the sum of the three hydroclimatic fluxes, erosive rainfall,
ice melt, and snowmelt, generated over the regulated area:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M33" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          It should be noted that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> represents direct potential runoff
from the regulated area without accounting for evapotranspiration and
infiltration losses. We therefore scale the capacity of the virtual
reservoir, to obtain reservoir seasonal dynamics resembling the available
observations. For the scaling, we assume the minimum volume of the virtual
reservoir equal to zero, and the maximum volume equal to 70 % of the
total annual inflow into the reservoirs, which roughly corresponds to the
average ratio between storage capacity and total annual inflow. The procedure
described above implies that all reservoirs of the catchment are regulated
following the same operational rule driven by the seasonality of inflow, i.e.
an annual cycle of drawdown during winter and refill during spring and
summer. Due to their geographical proximity, the similar elevation, and the
available observations, this assumption can be considered realistic. We
validate the hydropower operations model by comparing the mean daily
normalized values of simulated hydropower releases of the virtual reservoir
and observations from Mattmark, a reservoir with a volume capacity of
10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> located in the upper part of the catchment. Although our
hydropower operations model is relatively simple, the comparison shows a good
agreement with the observations (Fig. S1 of the Supplement).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <title>Input variable selection algorithm</title>
      <?pagebreak page3425?><p id="d1e686">We apply the Iterative Input Selection (IIS) algorithm (Galelli and
Castelletti, 2013) to (1) select which variables play a significant role in
predicting <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, (2) quantify their relative importance, and
(3) identify the time lags of the sediment flux associated with each selected
variable. The IIS algorithm selects the most relevant input variables, among
a set of candidate input variables (in our case mean daily
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at different time lags <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>), to predict a specific
output variable (in our case mean daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). It calibrates
and validates a series of regression models considering different sets of
input variables and selecting the ones that display the best model
performances. The algorithm adopts extremely randomized trees, or
“Extra-Trees” (Geurts et al., 2006), as regression models, because they allow
nonlinear relations between input and output variables to be dealt with in a
computationally efficient way. The Extra–Trees regression is based on a
recursive splitting procedure, which partitions the dataset into subsamples
containing a specified number of elements. This splitting procedure is
performed several times by randomizing both the input variable and the
cut-point used to split the sample, in order to minimize the bias of the
final regression (for more details see Geurts et al., 2006).</p>
      <p id="d1e783">The IIS algorithm is based on an iterative procedure, which allows for the
ranking of the candidate input variables according to their significance in
explaining the output variable on the basis of the coefficient of
determination <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of the underlying regression model. At the first
iteration, regression models are identified and the candidate variable
leading to the best model performance is selected. At subsequent iterations,
the original output variable (i.e. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is substituted with
the residual of the model computed at the previous iteration. This ensures
that candidate input variables that are highly correlated with the selected one are discarded and, thus, reinforces the ability of the IIS
algorithm against the selection of redundant and cross-correlated input
variables (Galelli and Castelletti, 2013). Because of the relatively short
duration of our dataset and the marked seasonal pattern that characterizes
the considered candidate input variables and output variable, we randomly
shuffle the dataset 100 times before running the IIS algorithm to ensure the
consistency of the selection. The shuffling is done on lagged variables and,
therefore, it does not affect the serial correlation in the variables. Among
the 100 runs of the algorithm, we choose the most frequently selected model
and the most frequently selected model including hydropower releases, if the
two do not correspond. We then analyse the selected input variables, their
characteristic time lags and the fraction of variance explained by each
selected variable.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><caption><p id="d1e810">Map of the upper Rhône Basin with topography, glacierized areas,
and river network. The measurement station Porte du Scex, located just upstream where the Rhône River enters the
Lake Geneva, is indicated with a red marker. The main 13 reservoirs
considered in this study are represented with black triangles and the
regulated fraction of the catchment is highlighted with a light grey shaded
area.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3421/2018/hess-22-3421-2018-f01.pdf"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <title>Relative contribution of hydroclimatic forcing to SSC</title>
      <p id="d1e825">To further investigate the contribution of hydroclimatic forcing to suspended
sediment dynamics, we propose a nonlinear multivariate rating curve
(HMRC), which relates
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to the hydroclimatic variables described above,
representing the main drivers for the suspended sediment regime of an Alpine
catchment:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M47" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are mean daily erosive rainfall, ice melt,
and snowmelt over unregulated areas, computed at time <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> respectively, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>is the daily release of water from the virtual
hydropower reservoir at time <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is
expressed in decigrams per litre (dg L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) while
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are
expressed as mean values over the catchment in millimetres per day
(mm day<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). The time lags, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, identified with the Input Variable Selection algorithm
(Sect. 2.3), represent the time necessary for sediment produced at a given
location in the catchment to reach the outlet. In principle, the travel time
depends on the sediment source location (i.e. distance from the outlet) and
the velocity of the transport (which is a function of runoff, topography, and
flow resistance). Here, we assume a characteristic travel time for each
hydroclimatic or hydropower component, i.e. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>l</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1, 2,
3, 4), which represents an average travel time in space
(i.e. over the
catchment) and time (i.e. over the hydrological year). We also assume that
coefficients <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1, 2, 3, 4) may vary
between the hydroclimatic or hydropower variables, because they express
sediment availability as well as the nonlinearity of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
production by each variable. The HMRC does not use discharge in the
estimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e1344">We calibrate the parameters of the nonlinear multivariate HMRC
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in Eq. (4),
by minimizing the mean squared error (MSE) between observed and simulated SSC
with a gradient-based optimization approach. We assume that each sediment
flux originates under supply-unlimited conditions, i.e. there is a positive
relation between sediment transport capacity and the load of sediment
mobilized and transported. Accordingly, the optimization is subject to the
following constraints: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1,
2, 3, 4); coefficients <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 1,  2, 3, 4) are instead not constrained, which allows for dilution
when <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> &lt; 0; and simulated
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. We repeat the optimization procedure 100 times,
starting from randomly generated initial values to reduce the risk of
detecting suboptimal parameter configurations.</p>
      <?pagebreak page3426?><p id="d1e1452">We evaluate the ability of the HMRC in reproducing mean daily
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> time series observed at the outlet of the upper Rhône Basin,
and we compare its performance with a traditional rating curve which
relates suspended sediment concentration to mean daily discharge
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> only:
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M88" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RC</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RC</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          We calibrate the parameters of the RC (Eq. 5) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RC</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RC</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by least-squares regression applied to the logarithm of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. As for the SSC–NTU relation, we apply
the smearing estimator of Duan (1973) to the back-transformed values of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to correct for the bias (e.g. De Girolamo et al., 2015).
The performance of the HMRC and RC models are evaluated by computing
goodness-of-fit measures such as coefficient of determination <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency NSE, and root mean squared error RMSE, over the
calibration and validation periods. We compare the simulated and observed
seasonal patterns of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by analysing mean monthly values.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5">
  <title>Long-term changes in SSC</title>
      <p id="d1e1594">Simultaneously with an abrupt rise in air temperature, the upper Rhône
Basin has experienced a statistically significant jump in mean annual SSC in
mid-1980s, which has been attributed to an increase of ice melt and rainfall
over snow-free surfaces (Costa et al., 2018). To analyse the impact of
changing climatic conditions on the long-term dynamics of suspended sediment,
we apply the rating curve based on hydroclimatic variables, HMRC, to simulate
the time series of mean daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the outlet of the upper
Rhône Basin for the 40-year period 1975–2015. We compare HMRC
simulations both to the twice-a-week observations of SSC and to the values
simulated with the traditional RC. We compare the three time series
(observed, simulated with HMRC, and simulated with traditional RC) on the
basis of mean annual values, computed by considering only simulations
corresponding to SSC measurement days to allow for a fair comparison with
observations. We apply statistical tests for equality of the means on time
series of mean annual SSC, simulated with the HMRC and the traditional RC, to
test if the models can reproduce the shift of SSC detected in the
observations.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Upper Rh\^{o}ne Basin: description and data availability}?><title>Upper Rhône Basin: description and data availability</title>
      <p id="d1e1616">We apply our approach to the upper Rhône Basin in the Swiss Alps (Fig. 1).
The total drainage area of the catchment is equal to 5338 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and about
10 % of the surface is covered by glaciers. The topography of the basin
which has been heavily preconditioned by uplift and glaciations (Stutenbecker
et al., 2016) is characterized by a wide elevation range (from 372 to 4634 m a.s.l.).
The Rhône River originates at the Rhône Glacier and flows for
roughly 170 km before entering Lake Geneva. The hydrological regime of the
catchment is dominated by snowmelt and ice melt with peak flows in summer and low
flows in winter. Mean discharge is equal to about 320 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in
summer and 120 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in winter, while the mean annual discharge is
around 180 m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> s<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. Basin-wide mean annual precipitation is about
1400 mm yr<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and mean annual temperature is about 1.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C,
estimated at basin mean elevation.</p>
      <p id="d1e1713">Porte du Scex is the measurement station at the outlet of the Rhône River
into Lake Geneva (Fig. 1), where the Swiss Federal Office of the Environment
(FOEN) collects discharge, SSC, and turbidity data. Mean daily discharge has
been
available since 1905, while SSC has been measured twice per week since October
1964. Quality-checked continuous measurements of NTU hve been available since
May 2013 (Grasso et al., 2012). SSC at the outlet is characterized by a
seasonal pattern typical of Alpine catchments (Fig. 2a). During winter
(December–March) sediment sources are limited because a large fraction of
the catchment is covered by snow and precipitation occurs in solid form.
Streamflow is mainly determined by baseflow and hydropower releases (Loizeau
and Dominik, 2000; Fatichi et al., 2015), and SSC assumes its minimum
values. In spring, SSC increases when snowmelt-driven runoff mobilizes
sediments along hillslopes and in channels. Simultaneously, snow cover
decreases and rainfall events over gradually increasing snow-free surfaces
erode and transport sediment downstream, resulting in SSC peaks. In July,
SSC reaches its highest values in conjunction with streamflow (Fig. 2a). In
late summer (August and September), when ice melt dominates, sediment-rich
fluxes coming from proglacial areas maintain high values of SSC although
discharge is decreasing (Fig. 2a). In terms of suspended sediment yield, low
SSC conditions do not play a relevant role compared to moderate and high SSC
conditions: more than 66 % of the total suspended sediment load entering
Lake Geneva during the 4-year period May 2013–April 2017 is estimated to
be due to SSC values greater than the 90th percentile (Fig. 2b).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1718"><bold>(a)</bold> Mean monthly values of discharge
measured at the outlet of the catchment (dash–dot grey line) and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  derived from
observations of NTU (solid blue line with circles). Coloured shaded areas
represent the range corresponding to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> standard error. Mean values and
standard errors are computed over the entire observation period. <bold>(b)</bold> Cumulative
suspended sediment load (SSL) transported at the outlet of the
upper Rhône Basin during the observation period as function of different
percentiles of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
(black line with circles). Bars represent the fraction of the total SSL
transported by the different percentiles of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (e.g. more than
66 % of total SSL is transported with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 90th percentile).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3421/2018/hess-22-3421-2018-f02.pdf"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><caption><p id="d1e1790">Scatter plot of NTU and SSC observed simultaneously (i.e. with a
maximum lag of 5 min) at the outlet of the catchment (grey circles), and
calibrated regression line of Eq. (1) (black line).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=170.716535pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3421/2018/hess-22-3421-2018-f03.pdf"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e1799">The linear relationship between the logarithm of NTU and SSC for the
overlapping period of measurement is statistically significant, with a
coefficient of determination <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.94 (Fig. 3). After applying the
correction factor for back-transforming from logarithmic to linear scale, the
calibrated parameters of the relation in Eq. (1) are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.56 and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>b</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.25. This relation was used to convert NTU observations to mean
daily SSC. We are aware that the relation between SSC and turbidity (1) is
site-specific, (2) may vary seasonally as function of discharge and
transported grain sizes, and (3) depends on sediment sources, because the
size, the shape, and the composition of suspended material may influence
values of turbidity (Gippel, 1995). For this reason, in this analysis (1) we
apply a site-specific SSC–NTU relation, (2) we calibrate the relation over a
wide range of NTUs and discharge conditions to account for the seasonal
variability in grain sizes transported by the flow, and (3) we derive the
SSC–NTU relation based on a relatively short period of time, in which there
is no evidence of changes in sediment sources.<?pagebreak page3427?> In addition, by allowing a
nonlinear relation between SSC and NTU, we partially take into account the
variability of turbidity with grain size. Higher suspended sediment
concentrations are expected to transport proportionally larger grains, and
the exponent in the SSC–NTU relation was expected to be greater than 1.</p>
      <p id="d1e1841">We estimate the hydroclimatic variables for the 40-year period 1975–2015
with the spatially distributed degree-day model of snowmelt and ice melt. The
model is implemented using a DEM with a spatial resolution of
250 m <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 250 m (Federal Office of Topography – Swisstopo). For
the climatic dataset, we use gridded mean daily precipitation and mean,
maximum, and minimum daily air temperature at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2 km <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2 km
resolution provided by the Swiss Federal Office of Meteorology and
Climatology (MeteoSwiss). These datasets are produced by spatial
interpolation of quality-checked measurements collected at meteorological
stations (Frei et al., 2006; Frei, 2014). Snow cover maps used for the
calibration of the snowmelt rate were derived for the period 2000–2008 in a
previous study (Fatichi et al., 2015) from the 8-day snow cover product
MOD10A2 retrieved from the (MODIS) (Dedieu et al., 2010). We consider the
GLIMS Glacier Database of 1991 to define the initial configuration of the ice
covered cells. To calibrate the ice melt rate, we use mean daily discharge
data measured at the outlet of two highly glacierized tributary catchments:
the Massa and the Lonza (Costa et al., 2018).</p>
      <p id="d1e1865">To separate sediment fluxes originated in regulated and unregulated areas of
the catchment (Fig. 1), we used a detailed map of the main hydropower
reservoirs and water uptakes and diversions, available from previous work of
Fatichi et al. (2015) and based on information included in the product
“Restwasserkarte”, available from the Swiss Federal Office for the
Environment (BAFU).</p>
      <p id="d1e1868">When applying the IIS algorithm (Sect. 2.3), we consider mean daily
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at time
lags <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mi>l</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> from 0 day to 7 days. This choice is driven by the size of the basin
and the expected flow concentration times in the basin. We calibrate the
HMRC on data from the period 1 May 2013–30 April 2015 (730 days) and
validate it over the period 1 May 2015–30 April 2017 (731 days). For the
sake of<?pagebreak page3428?> comparison, calibration and validation periods are also the same
when considering the RC.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <title>Control of hydroclimatic forcing on SSC</title>
      <p id="d1e1953">The IIS algorithm most frequently selects (56 % of the runs) a model with
erosive rainfall, ice melt, and snowmelt generated over the unregulated area
of the catchment at 1-day lag, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, as the most relevant
variables to predict mean daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 4a). We consider
only the first three selected variables because the cumulative explained
variance, expressed as the coefficient of determination <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, is greater
than 0.9 (Fig. 4a) and the contribution of additional variables is negligible
(the fourth selected variable <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> explains roughly
1 %). Pair-wise correlation coefficients between the selected input
variables are significantly low, equal to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.006 between IM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and
SM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, 0.2 between IM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and ER<inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, and 0.02 between
ER<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and SM<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> respectively. This confirms that cross-correlation
and redundancy are minimized. The IIS result is interesting for several
reasons. (1) It confirms our hypothesis that erosion and transport processes
driven by all three hydroclimatic variables ER, IM, and SM play a role in
determining the suspended sediment dynamics of the Rhône Basin, and
likely in most Alpine basins with pluvio-glacio-nival hydrological regimes.
(2) It gives an indication of the relative importance of the different
processes. In fact, the contribution of each hydroclimatic variable to the
overall <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> differs quite significantly. While <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
explains almost 75 % of the variability of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the
melting components <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are
responsible for a much lower fraction of the variance, i.e. 12 and 4 %
respectively (Fig. 4a). (3) The time lags selected for ER, IM, and SM, which
represent basin-averaged mean travel times of sediment from source to outlet,
also including the time required to produce runoff sufficient to entrain
sediment, are equal to 1 day, in agreement with the typical concentration
time of the catchment. (4) The most selected model does not include
hydropower releases (Fig. 4a), indicating that fluxes released from
hydropower reservoirs do not play a significant role in determining the
variability of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signal at the outlet of the basin at
the daily scale. When models including hydropower releases are considered
(8 % of the runs), the first three explanatory variables selected by the
IIS algorithm and their explained variance correspond to the ones of the most
selected model described above, while hydropower releases are selected at
time lag equal to 0 and represent less than 1.5 % of the variability of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 4b). This indicates the characteristic time lag at
which the variable HP is considered in the next steps and confirms that it
explains only a minor fraction of the variance of SSC. Nevertheless, we
include HP in the HMRC to assess its contribution to SSC in terms of
magnitude and seasonality.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2230">Results of the IIS algorithm: fraction of the variance of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> explained by the
selected explanatory variables, and cumulative explained variance (black
line with circles) of <bold>(a)</bold> the most frequently selected model
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and <bold>(b)</bold> the most
frequently selected model including hydropower releases
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3421/2018/hess-22-3421-2018-f04.pdf"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e2364">After the calibration of the parameters (Sect. 2.4), the rating curve based
on hydroclimatic variables HMRC and the traditional RC result respectively
in the following forms:

                <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M150" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo movablelimits="false">max⁡</mml:mo><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.70</mml:mn><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.14</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">11.21</mml:mn><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.22</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.12</mml:mn><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.14</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E6"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mspace width="1em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mspace width="1em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.93</mml:mn><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.47</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn><mml:mo>]</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E7"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.08</mml:mn><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.63</mml:mn></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is measured in decigrams per litre (dg L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), the hydroclimatic
variables <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are expressed in millimetres per day (mm
day<inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), and mean daily discharge <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is expressed in millimetres per day (mm
day<inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). The values of the parameters of the traditional RC are in
agreement with a previous study on the upper Rhône Basin (Loizeau and
Dominik, 2000).</p>
      <p id="d1e2618">Table 1 compares the performances of the HMRC and RC in reproducing mean
daily observed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as measured by the coefficient of
determination <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency, and root mean squared
error, over the calibration and validation periods. The HMRC and the RC
both show satisfactory performance over the calibration period, e.g. NSE
close to 0.6 in both cases, despite the fact that the HMRC does not use
observed discharge in the estimation of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. While the
performance of the RC drops in the validation period (e.g. NSE equal to
0.42), the HMRC retains satisfactory performance (e.g. NSE equal to 0.61 and
lower RMSE).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><caption><p id="d1e2658">Goodness of fit measures for the HMRC and the traditional
RC in calibration (left) and validation (right): coefficient of
determination (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE),
root mean squared error (RMSE).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="center"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="center"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col2" nameend="col3">Calibration </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col4" nameend="col5">Validation </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3">01.05.13–30.04.15 </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5">01.05.15–30.04.17 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">HMRC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">RC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">HMRC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">RC</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.59</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.42</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">NSE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.61</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.42</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">RMSE (dg L<inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3.25</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">2.66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.23</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e2808">Figure 5 contrasts the HMRC and the RC estimates of mean monthly SSC with
SSC derived from observations of NTU from Eq. (1). It is evident that HMRC
is more capable of reproducing the seasonal sediment dynamics in all seasons
except early spring (February–April). The traditional RC follows discharge
seasonality and significantly overestimates SSC in winter and June,
generates an early SSC peak, and underestimates SSC in summer
(July–September). Perhaps most importantly, mean monthly values of SSC
predicted by HMRC in summer, when the amount of sediment transported in
suspension is at its highest, are satisfactorily similar to observations.</p>
      <p id="d1e2811">The values of the parameters indicate that IM generates by far the greatest
contribution to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> per unit volume of water, followed by ER
and SM. The coefficient of the<?pagebreak page3429?> hydropower releases is negative, i.e. water
fluxes released from hydropower reservoirs, poor in sediment, reduce <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the downstream
river by dilution. Over the observation period, IM represents the largest
contribution to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with a mean annual relative contribution
equal to almost 40 %, followed by ER and SM contributing on average
respectively 34 and 26 % of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Figure 6 shows the mean
monthly contribution to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of ER, IM, and SM averaged over
the observations period. As expected, while IM contributes to
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> especially during summer months (July–September), the
fraction of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> carried by SM is higher in spring during the
snowmelt season (April–June). The effect of erosive rainfall is more evenly
distributed throughout the year, and intensified in summer (July–August)
when the fraction of the catchment free from snow is at its maximum and rain
intensities are high.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><caption><p id="d1e2894">Mean monthly values of discharge measured at the outlet of the catchment (dash–dot grey line),
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> derived from
observations of NTU (solid blue line with circles),
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> simulated with the
traditional RC (solid red line), and with the HMRC (solid black line with
dots). Coloured shaded areas represent the range corresponding to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> standard error. Mean values and standard errors are computed over the entire
observation period.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=227.622047pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3421/2018/hess-22-3421-2018-f05.pdf"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><caption><p id="d1e2934">Mean monthly values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> computed with HMRC
(black line with circles). Coloured areas represent the mean monthly
contribution to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">HP</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (dilution) averaged
over the observation period.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=227.622047pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3421/2018/hess-22-3421-2018-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <title>Long-term changes in SSC</title>
      <p id="d1e3031">We simulate the HMRC and the traditional RC over the 40-year period
1975–2015 at a daily resolution and compare the two simulations with
observations over the same period. We sample only SSC values on days when
real twice-a-week observations were taken, to make a fair comparison with
observed values which exhibited a jump in 1987. A two-sample two-sided
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> test for equality of the mean around this point does reveal a
statistically significant jump (5 % significance level) only in mean
annual SSC values simulated with HMRC and not with RC, if the actual time of
the change is known a priori. Also, if we assume that the time of change is
not exactly known, and we compute the probability distribution functions of
SSC in two separated periods before and after the observed rise in SSC
(namely 1975–1990 and 2000–2015), we conclude that the observations show
different distributions in the two periods (Fig. 7a) and that only the HMRC
simulation reproduce similar distributions (Fig. 7b) but not the traditional
RC (Fig. 7c).</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <title>Discussion</title>
      <p id="d1e3050">The robustness of the hydroclimatic predictors of SSC in this work depends on
the hypothesis that the hydroclimatic variables are independent drivers which
activate different sediment sources in Alpine catchments. Indeed the high
fraction of the daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> variance explained by the first
three hydroclimatic variables selected by the IIS algorithm,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, is in accordance with the physical processes
underlying the erosion and sediment transport<?pagebreak page3430?> dynamics in such environments.
The higher intensity that characterizes rainfall events in comparison to the
melting components is more likely to generate peaks of SSC during heavy
rainfall and floods. In accordance, ER is responsible for a large fraction of
the process variability (75 %). Indeed, intense rainfall events can
detach and mobilize large amounts of sediment (Wischmeier, 1959; Wischmeier
and Smith, 1978; Meusburger et al., 2012). The sharp rise in streamflow,
which typically follows a precipitation event, results in an increase in
sediment transport capacity that may further entrain sediment previously
stored along channels. Precipitation is also one of the main triggering
factors of mass wasting events, like landslides and debris flow (e.g. Caine,
1980; Dhakal and Sidle, 2004; Guzzetti et al., 2008; Leonarduzzi et al.,
2017), in which large quantities of sediment may be instantly released to the
river network (e.g. Korup et al., 2004; Bennet et al., 2012). Conversely, the
physical processes of ice melt-driven erosion and sediment transport are more gradual and continuous.
Similarly, the slow and continuous effect of snowmelt-driven runoff on
hillslope and channel erosion contributes to the seasonal pattern of SSC and
plays a secondary role in explaining its daily variability and peaks in SSC.
Interestingly, hydropower releases do not influence significantly the
variance of SSC at the daily scale, despite the fact that the Rhône Basin
is heavily regulated by hydropower reservoirs. This is most likely related to
the fact that water fluxes downstream of Alpine hydropower dams have lower
concentrations of suspended sediment compared to fluxes entering the
reservoirs, due to sediment trapping in the reservoirs (Loizeau and Dominik,
2000; Anselmetti et al., 2007). This is in agreement with results of the
sediment fingerprinting analysis recently performed in the catchment, which
suggests the under-representation of sediments originated in the most highly
regulated lithological unit (Stutenbecker et al., 2017). This is also
indicated by the negative coefficient of HP, which suggests that hydropower
releases dilute suspended sediment in the HMRC model and therefore leads to a
reduction of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SSC</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> compared to natural flow. It should also be
noted that the effect of hydropower reservoirs on sediment storage is grain
size dependent (e.g. Anselmetti et al., 2007) and may be substantially
different for coarser grains transported as bedload. Moreover, it is
necessary to consider that this analysis focuses on the effects of hydropower
on daily suspended sediment dynamics at the basin scale, and neglects
potential effects at subdaily scale and localized in tributary catchments.
For example, the instantaneous and intermittent flushing of sediment
downstream of water diversions infrastructures, located at the most upstream
headwater streams, may have substantial effects locally.</p>
      <p id="d1e3123">We calibrate and validate a rating curve based on the hydroclimatic
variables selected by the IIS algorithm and hydropower releases and a
traditional rating curve based on discharge only. While both the HMRC
and the traditional RC show similar performance in calibration, the HMRC, by
taking into account the physical processes which govern SSC in a more direct
way, performs better in validation and simulates more accurately the seasonal
pattern of SSC, especially in summer when melting of snow and ice are active
and a large fraction of the catchment is snow-free and subject to erosion by
rainfall. The traditional RC overestimates SSC in winter because it relies
on streamflow only and does not account for the low concentration of
sediment coming from hydropower reservoirs.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3128">Empirical probability density functions of mean monthly
SSC computed on twice-a-week samples: <bold>(a)</bold> observed, <bold>(b)</bold> simulated with
HMRC, and <bold>(c)</bold> simulated with traditional RC for two 15-year periods 1975–1990
(blue) and 2000–2015 (grey).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3421/2018/hess-22-3421-2018-f07.pdf"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><caption><p id="d1e3149">Mean annual contribution to SSC of
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> simulated with the
HMRC.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/22/3421/2018/hess-22-3421-2018-f08.pdf"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e3206">On the basis of the HMRC parameters, we find that although ER is responsible
for the peaks of SSC and therefore contributes the most to the variance of
SSC, IM fluxes generate the highest SSC per unit volume of water. This is in
agreement with the fact that meltwater originated in glaciated areas is
characterized by very high sediment concentrations (Gurnell et al., 1996;
Lawler et al., 1992). For a catchment significantly glacierized such as the
upper Rhône Basin (roughly 10 % of the surface is covered by
glaciers) this implies also that among the hydroclimatic variables, IM
represents the greatest contribution to SSC and suspended sediment yield from
this Alpine catchment (as shown in Fig. 6). This supports the findings of
Costa et al. (2018) in which the authors show that the increase in SSC
observed at the outlet of the Rhône Basin in mid-1980s is most likely due
to a significant rise in ice melt fluxes due to the enhanced glacier retreat
associated with warmer temperatures. In concurrence with increasing ice melt,
the mean annual SSC at the outlet of the catchment generated by IM, as
simulated by the HMRC, increases after the mid-1980s (Fig. 8). This explains
why the<?pagebreak page3431?> HMRC is capable of simulating the observed shift in SSC, although the
simulation resembles more of a gradual increase than a sudden jump. The
results show that a more process-based rating curve accounting for the
different hydroclimatic forcing can not only separate the relative effects of
the different forcings on SSC, but also explain climate-driven changes in
suspended sediment dynamics, which is not possible by adopting a traditional
rating curve based on discharge alone.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e3215">In this paper, we analyse how hydroclimatic factors influence suspended
sediment concentration in Alpine catchments by differentiating among
the potential contributions of erosional and transport processes typical of
Alpine environments, driven by (1) erosive rainfall defined as liquid
precipitation over snow-free surfaces, (2) ice melt, and (3) snowmelt. For regulated catchments, we include the potential effect of
hydropower by considering the contribution to SSC of fluxes released from
reservoirs due to hydropower operations. We obtained the hydroclimatic
variables <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ER</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SM</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">IM</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> by using a conceptual
spatially distributed model of snow accumulation, snowmelt, and ice melt driven
by precipitation and temperature at a daily resolution and we computed HP
via a unique virtual reservoir which was operated on the basis of a target
volume function, which is aimed at reproducing the cumulated effect of the
historical operations of the several hydropower facilities. We then used the
Iterative Input Selection algorithm to select the variables that play
a significant role in predicting SSC and to quantify their relative
importance and predictive power in simulating observed changes in SSC in the
Rhône Basin over a period of 40 years. We tested our approach on the upper
Rhône Basin in Switzerland. Our main findings can be summarized as follows.</p>
      <p id="d1e3239"><list list-type="order">
          <list-item>

      <p id="d1e3244">The three hydroclimatic processes ER, IM, and SM are significant
predictors of mean daily SSC at the outlet of the upper Rhône Basin,
explaining respectively 75, 12, and 4 % of the total observed
variance; hydropower releases do not play a significant role in defining
the variance of SSC, most likely because fluxes released from reservoirs are
poor in sediment due to sediment trapping. The characteristic time lag of 1
day for the ER, IM, and SM fluxes, representing the time necessary to produce
sufficient runoff and to entrain and transport sediment from a given
location in the catchment to the outlet, are in agreement with typical
concentration times of the catchment; conversely for HP the time lag is
lower than 1 day.</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>

      <p id="d1e3250">Although ER is responsible for the greatest fraction of the variability
of SSC at a daily basis, coefficients of the HMRC indicate that IM generates
the greatest contribution to SSC per unit of water volume and contributes
the most in terms of mean annual sediment yield. This is in agreement with
the high suspended sediment concentration that characterizes ice melt fluxes
and with findings of previous studies that indicate the increase in ice melt
as most plausible explanation of changes in suspended sediment dynamics in
the catchment (Costa et al., 2018).</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>

      <p id="d1e3256">The HMRC is capable of reproducing the pattern of SSC even though it
does not include discharge as an input variable. Although the HMRC and
traditional discharge-based RC perform similarly in simulating observed SSC
over the calibration period, the HMRC performs better than the traditional
RC in validation at the daily scale, and in capturing seasonality,
especially in summer when SSC are highest. This is particularly relevant
because more than 66 % of the total suspended sediment load reaching the
outlet of the upper Rhône Basin in the observation period is transported by
SSC values larger than the 90th percentile.</p>
          </list-item>
          <list-item>

      <p id="d1e3262">With the HMRC approach we are able to reproduce changes in SSC in the
past 40 years that have occurred in the catchment due to a temperature
change, and we can demonstrate that the shift in SSC is most likely due to
the increase in ice melt fluxes.</p>
          </list-item>
        </list></p>
      <p id="d1e3267">In summary, our approach provides an insight into how hydroclimatic variables
control SSC dynamics in Alpine catchments, and the results suggest that a
more process- and data-informed approach in predicting suspended sediment
concentrations, which accounts for sediment sources and transport processes
driven by erosive rainfall, snowmelt, and ice melt, instead of only discharge,
allows climate-induced changes in sediment dynamics to be analysed. Although
these results are specific for the upper Rhône Basin only, the approach is
general and may be employed in other Alpine catchments with
pluvio-glacio-nival hydrological regimes where sufficient data are
available.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability">

      <p id="d1e3274">Data used in this study are available from the Swiss
Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN, discharge, suspended sediment
concentration and turbidity), the Swiss Federal Office for Topography
(Swisstopo, DEM), and the Swiss Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology
(MeteoSwiss, gridded datasets of temperature and precipitation).
Basin-average daily values of the hydroclimatic variables simulated in this
analysis together with a detailed scheme of the hydropower system operating
in the catchment provided by Fatichi et al. (2015) are available from the
authors.</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e3277">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-3421-2018-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-3421-2018-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution">

      <p id="d1e3286">AC, DA, and PM designed the methodology. AC and
DA developed the code and carried out simulations and
computations. All co-authors contributed to the paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e3292">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e3298">We thank the Federal Office of the Environment (FOEN) for providing
discharge, suspended sediment concentration, and turbidity data. We also
thank Alessandro Grasso (FOEN) for the explanation on the SSC and turbidity
measurement procedures. This research was supported by the Swiss National
Science Foundation Sinergia grant 147689 (SEDFATE). Daniela Anghileri was
supported by the Swiss Competence Centre on Energy – Supply of Energy
(SCCER–SoE).<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Edited by: Matjaz Mikos<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Reviewed by: Tammo Steenhuis and one anonymous referee</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Aas, E. and Bogen, J.: Colors of Glacier Water, Water Resour. Res., 24,
561–565, 1988.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Anselmetti, F. S., Bühler, R., Finger, D., Girardclos, S., Lancini, A.,
Rellstab, C., and Sturm, M.: Effects of Alpine hydropower dams on particle
transport and lacustrine sedimentation, Aquat. Sci., 69, 179–198, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Bakker, M., Costa, A., Stutenbecker, L., Girardclos, S., Loizeau J.-L.,
Molnar P., Schlunegger, F., and Lane S. N.: Combined flow abstraction and climate
change impacts on an aggrading Alpine river, Water Resour. Res., 54,
223–242, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR021775" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017WR021775</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Bennett, G., Molnar, P., Eisenbeiss, H., and McArdell, B. W.: Erosional
power in the Swiss Alps: characterization of slope failure in the Illgraben,
Earth Surf. Proc. Land., 37, 1627–1640, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.3263" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/esp.3263</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Boulton, G. S.: Processes and patterns of glacial erosion, edited by: Coates,
D. R., Glacial Geomorphology, New York State University, 41–87, 1974.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Caine, N.: The rainfall intensity–duration control of shallow landslides
and debris flows, Geogr. Ann. A, 62, 23–27, 1980.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Costa, A., Molnar, P., Stutenbecker, L., Bakker, M., Silva, T. A.,
Schlunegger, F., Lane, S. N., Loizeau, J.-L., and Girardclos, S.: Temperature
signal in suspended sediment export from an Alpine catchment, Hydrol. Earth
Syst. Sci., 22, 509–528, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-509-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-22-509-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Dadson, S. J., Hovius, N., Chen, H., Dade, W. B., Lin, J.-C., Hsu, M.-L.,
Lin, C.-W., Horng, M.-J., Chen, T.-C., Milliman, J. D., and Stark, C. P.:
Earthquake–triggered increase in sediment delivery from an active mountain
belt, Geology, 32, 733–736, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Dedieu, J.-P., Boos, A., Kiage, W., and Pellegrini, M.: Snow cover retrieval
over Rhône and Po river basins from MODIS optical satellite data
(2000–2009), Geophys. Res. Abstracts, 12, 5532, EGU General Assembly 2010,
2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>De Girolamo, A. M., Pappagallo, G., and Lo Porto, A.: Temporal variability of
suspended sediment transport and rating curves in a Mediterranean river
basin: The Celone (SE Italy), Catena, 128, 135–143,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2014.09.020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.catena.2014.09.020</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Dhakal, A. S. and Sidle, R. C.: Distributed simulations of landslides for
different rainfall conditions, Hydrol. Process., 18, 757–776, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Duan, N.: Smearing estimate: a nonparametric retransformation method, J. Am.
Stat. Assoc., 78, 605–610, 1983.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page3433?><ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Fatichi, S., Rimkus, S., Burlando, P., Bordoy, R., and Molnar, P.:
High–resolution distributed analysis of climate and anthropogenic changes on
the hydrology of an Alpine catchment, J. Hydrol., 525, 362–382,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.03.036" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.03.036</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Finger, D., Schmid, M., and Wüest, A.: Effects of upstream hydropower
operation on riverine particle transport and turbidity in downstream lakes,
Water Resour. Res., 42, W08429, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004751" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005WR004751</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Foster, G. C., Dearing, R. A., Jones, R. T., Crook, D. S., Siddle, D. J.,
Harvey, A. M., James, P. A., Appleby, P. G., Thompson, R., Nicholson, J., and
Loizeau, J.-L: Meteorological and land use controls on past and present
hydro–geomorphic processes in the pre–alpine environment: an integrated
lake–catchment study at the Petit Lac d'Annecy, France, Hydrol. Process.,
17, 3287–3305, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Frei, C.: Interpolation of temperature in a mountainous region using
nonlinear profiles and non–Euclidean distances, Int. J. Climatol., 34,
1585–1605, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Frei, C., Schöll, R., Fukutome, S., Schmidli, J., and Vidale, P. L.:
Future change of precipitation extremes in Europe: An intercomparison of
scenarios from regional climate models, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D06105,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005965" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2005JD005965</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Gabbud, C. and Lane, S. N.: Ecosystem impacts of Alpine water intakes for
hydropower: the challenge of sediment management, Wiley Interdisciplinary
Reviews, Water, 3, 41–61, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1124" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/wat2.1124</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Galelli, S. and Castelletti, A.: Tree–based iterative input variable
selection for hydrological modeling, Water Resour. Res., 49, 4295–4310,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20339" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/wrcr.20339</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Geurts, P., Ernst, D., and Wehenkel, L.: Extremely randomized trees, Mach.
Learn., 63, 3–42, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Gippel, C. J.: Potential of turbidity monitoring for measuring the transport
of suspended solids in streams, Hydrol. Processes, 9, 83–97, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Grasso, A., Bérod, D., and Hodel, H.: Messung und Analyse der Verteilung
von Schwebstoffkonzentrationen im Querprofil von Fliessgewässern,
“Wasser Energie Luft” – 104, Jahrgang, 2012, Heft 1, CH–5401 Baden, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Grønsten, H. A. and Lundekvam, H.: Prediction of surface runoff and soil
loss in southeastern Norway using the WEPP Hillslope model, Soil Till. Res.,
85, 186–199, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Gurnell, A., Hannah, D., and Lawler, D.: Suspended sediment yield from
glacier basins, Erosion and Sediment Yield: Global and Regional Perspectives,
Proceedings of the Exeter Symposium, July 1996, IAHS Publ. no. 236, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Guzzetti, F., Peruccacci, S., Rossi, M., and Stark, C. P.: The rainfall
intensity–duration control of shallow landslides and debris flows: an
update, Landslides, 5, 3–17, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Hock, R.: Temperature index melt modelling in mountain areas, J. Hydrol.,
282, 104–115, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Holliday, C. P., Rasmussen, T. C., and Miller, W. P.: Establishing the
relationship between turbidity and total suspended sediment concentration,
Georgia Water Resources Conference, Athens, GA: Georgia Water Science Center
Publications, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Horowitz, A. J.: A quarter century of declining suspended sediment fluxes in
the Mississippi River and the effect of the 1993 flood, Hydrol. Process., 24,
13–34, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Hu, B., Wang, H., Yang, Z., and Sun, X.: Temporal and spatial variations of
sediment rating curves in the Changjiang (Yangtze River) basin and their
implications, Quatern. Int., 230, 34–43, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, M. Y.-F. and Montgomery, D. R.: Altered regional sediment transport
regime after a large typhoon, southern, Taiwan, Geology, 41, 1223–1226,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Huggel, C., Clague, J. J., and Korup, O.: Is climate change responsible for
changing landslide activity in high mountains?, Earth Surf. Proc. Land., 37,
77–91, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Konz, N., Prasuhn, V., and Alewell, C.: On the measurement of alpine soil
erosion, Catena, 91, 63–71, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Korup, O., McSaveney, M. J., and Davies, T. R. H.: Sediment generation and
delivery from large historic landslides in the Southern Alps, New Zealand,
Geomorphology, 61, 189–207, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Lacour, C., Joannis, C., and Chebbo, G.: Assessment of annual pollutant loads
in combined sewers from continuous turbidity measurements: sensitivity to
calibration data, Water Res., 43, 2179–2190, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Lawler, D. M. and Dolan, M.: Temporal variability of suspended sediment flux
from a subarctic glacial river, southern Iceland, Erosion and Sediment
Transport Monitoring Programmes in River Basins, Proceedings of the Oslo
Symposium, August 1992, IAHS Publ. no. 210, 1992.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Leonarduzzi, E., Molnar, P., and McArdell, B. W.: Predictive performance of
rainfall thresholds for shallow landslides in Switzerland from gridded daily
data, Water Resour. Res.,53, 6612–6625, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR021044" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017WR021044</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Lewis, J.: Turbidity–controlled suspended sediment sampling for runoff-event
load estimation, Water Resour. Res., 32, 2299–2310, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Loizeau, J.-L. and Dominik, J.: Evolution of the Upper Rhone River discharge
and suspended sediment load during the last 80 years and some implications
for Lake Geneva, Aquat. Sci., 62, 54–67, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Loizeau, J.-L., Dominik J., Luzzi, T., and Vernet J.-P.: Sediment Core
Correlation and Mapping of Sediment Accumulation Rates in Lake Geneva
(Switzerland, France) Using Volume Magnetic Susceptibility, J. Great Lakes
Res., 23, 391–402, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Métadier, M. and Bertrand-Krajewski, J.-L.: The use of long–term
on–line turbidity measurements for the calculation of urban stormwater
pollutant concentrations, loads, pollutographs and intra–event fluxes, Water
Res., 46, 6836–6856, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>Meusburger, K., Steel, A., Panagos, P., Montanarella, L., and Alewell, C.:
Spatial and temporal variability of rainfall erosivity factor for
Switzerland, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 167–177,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-167-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-16-167-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>Micheletti, N. and Lane, S. N.: Water yield and sediment export in small,
partially glacierized Alpine watersheds in a 25 warming climate, Water
Resour. Res., 52, 4924–4943, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR018774" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016WR018774</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Ollesch, G., Kistner, I., Meissner, R., and Lindenschmidt, K.-E.: Modelling
of snowmelt erosion and sediment yield in a small low-mountain catchment in
Germany, Catena, 68, 161–176, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Palazón, L. and Navas, A.: Land use sediment production response under
different climatic conditions in an alpine–prealpine catchment, Catena,
137, 244–255, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page3434?><ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Pavanelli, D. and Pagliarani, A.: Monitoring water flow, turbidity and
suspended sediment load, from an Apennine catchment basin, Italy, Biosyst.
Eng., 83, 463–468, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>Stutenbecker, L., Costa, A., and Schlunegger, F.: Lithological control on the
landscape form of the upper Rhone Basin, Central Swiss Alps, Earth Surf.
Dynam., 4, 253–272 <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-4-253-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/esurf-4-253-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>Stutenbecker, L., Delunel, R., Schlunegger, F., Silva, T. A., Šegvić,
B., Girardclos, S., Bakker M., Costa, A., Lane, S. N., Loizeau, J.-L.,
Molnar, P., Akar, N., and Christl, M.: Reduced sediment supply in a fast
eroding landscape? A multi-proxy sediment budget of the upper Rhône
basin, Central Alps, Sediment. Geol., <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2017.12.013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.sedgeo.2017.12.013</ext-link>, in
press, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Syvitski, J. P. M., Morehead, M. D., Bahr, D. B., and Mulder, T.: Estimating
fluvial sediment transport: the rating parameters, Water Resour. Res., 36,
2747–2760, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>Syvitski, J. P. M., Vörösmarty, C. J., Kettner, A. J., and Green, P.:
Impact of Humans on the Flux of Terrestrial Sediment to the Global Coastal
Ocean, Science, 308, 376–380, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1109454" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1109454</ext-link>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Van Dijk, A. I. J. M., Bruijnzeel, L. A., and Rosewell, C. J.: Rainfall
intensity–kinetic energy relationship: A critical literature appraisal, J.
Hydrol., 261, 1–23, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Vörösmarty, C. J., Meybeck, M., Fekete, B., Sharma, K., Green, P.,
and Syvitski, J. P. M.: Anthropogenic sediment retention: major global impact
from registered river impoundments, Global Planet. Change 39, 169–190, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Warrick, J. A.: Trend analyses with river sediment rating curves, Hydrol.
Process., 29, 936–949, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Wischmeier, W. H.: Rainfall erosion index for universal soil loss equation,
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Pro., 23, 246–249, 1959.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Wischmeier, W. H. and Smith, D. D.: Predicting Rainfall Erosion Losses – A
Guide to Conservation Planning, Agric. Handbook, No. 537, Washington D.C.,
58, 1978.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, G., Chen, Z., Yu, F., Wang, Z., Zhao, Y., and Wang, Z.: Sediment rating
parameters and their implications: Yangtze River, China, Geomorphology, 85,
166–175, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Hydroclimatic control on suspended sediment dynamics of a regulated Alpine catchment: a conceptual approach</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>We analyse the control of hydroclimatic factors on suspended
sediment concentration (SSC) in Alpine catchments by differentiating among
the potential contributions of erosion and suspended sediment transport
driven by erosive rainfall, defined as liquid precipitation over snow-free
surfaces, ice melt from glacierized areas, and snowmelt on hillslopes. We
account for the potential impact of hydropower by intercepting sediment
fluxes originated in areas diverted to hydropower reservoirs, and by
considering the contribution of hydropower releases to SSC. We obtain the
hydroclimatic variables from daily gridded datasets of precipitation and
temperature, implementing a degree-day model to simulate spatially
distributed snow accumulation and snow–ice melt. We estimate hydropower
releases by a conceptual approach with a unique virtual reservoir regulated
on the basis of a target-volume function, representing normal reservoir
operating conditions throughout a hydrological year. An Iterative Input
Selection algorithm is used to identify the variables with the highest
predictive power for SSC, their explained variance, and characteristic time
lags. On this basis, we develop a hydroclimatic multivariate rating curve
(HMRC) which accounts for the contributions of the most relevant
hydroclimatic input variables mentioned above. We calibrate the HMRC with a
gradient-based nonlinear optimization method and we compare its performance
with a traditional discharge-based rating curve. We apply the approach in the
upper Rhône Basin, a large Swiss Alpine catchment heavily regulated by
hydropower. Our results show that the three hydroclimatic processes –
erosive rainfall, ice melt, and snowmelt – are significant predictors of
mean daily SSC, while hydropower release does not have a significant
explanatory power for SSC. The characteristic time lags of the hydroclimatic
variables correspond to the typical flow concentration times of the basin.
Despite not including discharge, the HMRC performs better than the
traditional rating curve in reproducing SSC seasonality, especially during
validation at the daily scale. While erosive rainfall determines the daily
variability of SSC and extremes, ice melt generates the highest SSC per unit
of runoff and represents the largest contribution to total suspended sediment
yield. Finally, we show that the HMRC is capable of simulating climate-driven
changes in fine sediment dynamics in Alpine catchments. In fact, HMRC can
reproduce the changes in SSC in the past 40 years in the Rhône Basin
connected to air temperature rise, even though the simulated changes are more
gradual than those observed. The approach presented in this paper, based on
the analysis of the hydroclimatic control of suspended sediment
concentration, allows the exploration of climate-driven changes in fine
sediment dynamics in Alpine catchments. The approach can be applied to any
Alpine catchment with a pluvio-glacio-nival hydrological regime and adequate
hydroclimatic datasets.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Aas, E. and Bogen, J.: Colors of Glacier Water, Water Resour. Res., 24,
561–565, 1988.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Anselmetti, F. S., Bühler, R., Finger, D., Girardclos, S., Lancini, A.,
Rellstab, C., and Sturm, M.: Effects of Alpine hydropower dams on particle
transport and lacustrine sedimentation, Aquat. Sci., 69, 179–198, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Bakker, M., Costa, A., Stutenbecker, L., Girardclos, S., Loizeau J.-L.,
Molnar P., Schlunegger, F., and Lane S. N.: Combined flow abstraction and climate
change impacts on an aggrading Alpine river, Water Resour. Res., 54,
223–242, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR021775" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR021775</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Bennett, G., Molnar, P., Eisenbeiss, H., and McArdell, B. W.: Erosional
power in the Swiss Alps: characterization of slope failure in the Illgraben,
Earth Surf. Proc. Land., 37, 1627–1640, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.3263" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.3263</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Boulton, G. S.: Processes and patterns of glacial erosion, edited by: Coates,
D. R., Glacial Geomorphology, New York State University, 41–87, 1974.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Caine, N.: The rainfall intensity–duration control of shallow landslides
and debris flows, Geogr. Ann. A, 62, 23–27, 1980.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Costa, A., Molnar, P., Stutenbecker, L., Bakker, M., Silva, T. A.,
Schlunegger, F., Lane, S. N., Loizeau, J.-L., and Girardclos, S.: Temperature
signal in suspended sediment export from an Alpine catchment, Hydrol. Earth
Syst. Sci., 22, 509–528, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-509-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-509-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Dadson, S. J., Hovius, N., Chen, H., Dade, W. B., Lin, J.-C., Hsu, M.-L.,
Lin, C.-W., Horng, M.-J., Chen, T.-C., Milliman, J. D., and Stark, C. P.:
Earthquake–triggered increase in sediment delivery from an active mountain
belt, Geology, 32, 733–736, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Dedieu, J.-P., Boos, A., Kiage, W., and Pellegrini, M.: Snow cover retrieval
over Rhône and Po river basins from MODIS optical satellite data
(2000–2009), Geophys. Res. Abstracts, 12, 5532, EGU General Assembly 2010,
2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
De Girolamo, A. M., Pappagallo, G., and Lo Porto, A.: Temporal variability of
suspended sediment transport and rating curves in a Mediterranean river
basin: The Celone (SE Italy), Catena, 128, 135–143,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2014.09.020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2014.09.020</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Dhakal, A. S. and Sidle, R. C.: Distributed simulations of landslides for
different rainfall conditions, Hydrol. Process., 18, 757–776, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Duan, N.: Smearing estimate: a nonparametric retransformation method, J. Am.
Stat. Assoc., 78, 605–610, 1983.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Fatichi, S., Rimkus, S., Burlando, P., Bordoy, R., and Molnar, P.:
High–resolution distributed analysis of climate and anthropogenic changes on
the hydrology of an Alpine catchment, J. Hydrol., 525, 362–382,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.03.036" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.03.036</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Finger, D., Schmid, M., and Wüest, A.: Effects of upstream hydropower
operation on riverine particle transport and turbidity in downstream lakes,
Water Resour. Res., 42, W08429, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004751" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004751</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Foster, G. C., Dearing, R. A., Jones, R. T., Crook, D. S., Siddle, D. J.,
Harvey, A. M., James, P. A., Appleby, P. G., Thompson, R., Nicholson, J., and
Loizeau, J.-L: Meteorological and land use controls on past and present
hydro–geomorphic processes in the pre–alpine environment: an integrated
lake–catchment study at the Petit Lac d'Annecy, France, Hydrol. Process.,
17, 3287–3305, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Frei, C.: Interpolation of temperature in a mountainous region using
nonlinear profiles and non–Euclidean distances, Int. J. Climatol., 34,
1585–1605, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Frei, C., Schöll, R., Fukutome, S., Schmidli, J., and Vidale, P. L.:
Future change of precipitation extremes in Europe: An intercomparison of
scenarios from regional climate models, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D06105,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005965" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JD005965</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Gabbud, C. and Lane, S. N.: Ecosystem impacts of Alpine water intakes for
hydropower: the challenge of sediment management, Wiley Interdisciplinary
Reviews, Water, 3, 41–61, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1124" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1124</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Galelli, S. and Castelletti, A.: Tree–based iterative input variable
selection for hydrological modeling, Water Resour. Res., 49, 4295–4310,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20339" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20339</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Geurts, P., Ernst, D., and Wehenkel, L.: Extremely randomized trees, Mach.
Learn., 63, 3–42, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Gippel, C. J.: Potential of turbidity monitoring for measuring the transport
of suspended solids in streams, Hydrol. Processes, 9, 83–97, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Grasso, A., Bérod, D., and Hodel, H.: Messung und Analyse der Verteilung
von Schwebstoffkonzentrationen im Querprofil von Fliessgewässern,
“Wasser Energie Luft” – 104, Jahrgang, 2012, Heft 1, CH–5401 Baden, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Grønsten, H. A. and Lundekvam, H.: Prediction of surface runoff and soil
loss in southeastern Norway using the WEPP Hillslope model, Soil Till. Res.,
85, 186–199, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Gurnell, A., Hannah, D., and Lawler, D.: Suspended sediment yield from
glacier basins, Erosion and Sediment Yield: Global and Regional Perspectives,
Proceedings of the Exeter Symposium, July 1996, IAHS Publ. no. 236, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Guzzetti, F., Peruccacci, S., Rossi, M., and Stark, C. P.: The rainfall
intensity–duration control of shallow landslides and debris flows: an
update, Landslides, 5, 3–17, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Hock, R.: Temperature index melt modelling in mountain areas, J. Hydrol.,
282, 104–115, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Holliday, C. P., Rasmussen, T. C., and Miller, W. P.: Establishing the
relationship between turbidity and total suspended sediment concentration,
Georgia Water Resources Conference, Athens, GA: Georgia Water Science Center
Publications, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Horowitz, A. J.: A quarter century of declining suspended sediment fluxes in
the Mississippi River and the effect of the 1993 flood, Hydrol. Process., 24,
13–34, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Hu, B., Wang, H., Yang, Z., and Sun, X.: Temporal and spatial variations of
sediment rating curves in the Changjiang (Yangtze River) basin and their
implications, Quatern. Int., 230, 34–43, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, M. Y.-F. and Montgomery, D. R.: Altered regional sediment transport
regime after a large typhoon, southern, Taiwan, Geology, 41, 1223–1226,
2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Huggel, C., Clague, J. J., and Korup, O.: Is climate change responsible for
changing landslide activity in high mountains?, Earth Surf. Proc. Land., 37,
77–91, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Konz, N., Prasuhn, V., and Alewell, C.: On the measurement of alpine soil
erosion, Catena, 91, 63–71, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Korup, O., McSaveney, M. J., and Davies, T. R. H.: Sediment generation and
delivery from large historic landslides in the Southern Alps, New Zealand,
Geomorphology, 61, 189–207, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Lacour, C., Joannis, C., and Chebbo, G.: Assessment of annual pollutant loads
in combined sewers from continuous turbidity measurements: sensitivity to
calibration data, Water Res., 43, 2179–2190, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Lawler, D. M. and Dolan, M.: Temporal variability of suspended sediment flux
from a subarctic glacial river, southern Iceland, Erosion and Sediment
Transport Monitoring Programmes in River Basins, Proceedings of the Oslo
Symposium, August 1992, IAHS Publ. no. 210, 1992.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Leonarduzzi, E., Molnar, P., and McArdell, B. W.: Predictive performance of
rainfall thresholds for shallow landslides in Switzerland from gridded daily
data, Water Resour. Res.,53, 6612–6625, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR021044" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR021044</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Lewis, J.: Turbidity–controlled suspended sediment sampling for runoff-event
load estimation, Water Resour. Res., 32, 2299–2310, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Loizeau, J.-L. and Dominik, J.: Evolution of the Upper Rhone River discharge
and suspended sediment load during the last 80 years and some implications
for Lake Geneva, Aquat. Sci., 62, 54–67, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Loizeau, J.-L., Dominik J., Luzzi, T., and Vernet J.-P.: Sediment Core
Correlation and Mapping of Sediment Accumulation Rates in Lake Geneva
(Switzerland, France) Using Volume Magnetic Susceptibility, J. Great Lakes
Res., 23, 391–402, 1997.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Métadier, M. and Bertrand-Krajewski, J.-L.: The use of long–term
on–line turbidity measurements for the calculation of urban stormwater
pollutant concentrations, loads, pollutographs and intra–event fluxes, Water
Res., 46, 6836–6856, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Meusburger, K., Steel, A., Panagos, P., Montanarella, L., and Alewell, C.:
Spatial and temporal variability of rainfall erosivity factor for
Switzerland, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 167–177,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-167-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-167-2012</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Micheletti, N. and Lane, S. N.: Water yield and sediment export in small,
partially glacierized Alpine watersheds in a 25 warming climate, Water
Resour. Res., 52, 4924–4943, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR018774" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR018774</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Ollesch, G., Kistner, I., Meissner, R., and Lindenschmidt, K.-E.: Modelling
of snowmelt erosion and sediment yield in a small low-mountain catchment in
Germany, Catena, 68, 161–176, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Palazón, L. and Navas, A.: Land use sediment production response under
different climatic conditions in an alpine–prealpine catchment, Catena,
137, 244–255, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Pavanelli, D. and Pagliarani, A.: Monitoring water flow, turbidity and
suspended sediment load, from an Apennine catchment basin, Italy, Biosyst.
Eng., 83, 463–468, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Stutenbecker, L., Costa, A., and Schlunegger, F.: Lithological control on the
landscape form of the upper Rhone Basin, Central Swiss Alps, Earth Surf.
Dynam., 4, 253–272 <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-4-253-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-4-253-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Stutenbecker, L., Delunel, R., Schlunegger, F., Silva, T. A., Šegvić,
B., Girardclos, S., Bakker M., Costa, A., Lane, S. N., Loizeau, J.-L.,
Molnar, P., Akar, N., and Christl, M.: Reduced sediment supply in a fast
eroding landscape? A multi-proxy sediment budget of the upper Rhône
basin, Central Alps, Sediment. Geol., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2017.12.013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2017.12.013</a>, in
press, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Syvitski, J. P. M., Morehead, M. D., Bahr, D. B., and Mulder, T.: Estimating
fluvial sediment transport: the rating parameters, Water Resour. Res., 36,
2747–2760, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Syvitski, J. P. M., Vörösmarty, C. J., Kettner, A. J., and Green, P.:
Impact of Humans on the Flux of Terrestrial Sediment to the Global Coastal
Ocean, Science, 308, 376–380, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1109454" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1109454</a>, 2005.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Van Dijk, A. I. J. M., Bruijnzeel, L. A., and Rosewell, C. J.: Rainfall
intensity–kinetic energy relationship: A critical literature appraisal, J.
Hydrol., 261, 1–23, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Vörösmarty, C. J., Meybeck, M., Fekete, B., Sharma, K., Green, P.,
and Syvitski, J. P. M.: Anthropogenic sediment retention: major global impact
from registered river impoundments, Global Planet. Change 39, 169–190, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Warrick, J. A.: Trend analyses with river sediment rating curves, Hydrol.
Process., 29, 936–949, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Wischmeier, W. H.: Rainfall erosion index for universal soil loss equation,
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Pro., 23, 246–249, 1959.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Wischmeier, W. H. and Smith, D. D.: Predicting Rainfall Erosion Losses – A
Guide to Conservation Planning, Agric. Handbook, No. 537, Washington D.C.,
58, 1978.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Yang, G., Chen, Z., Yu, F., Wang, Z., Zhao, Y., and Wang, Z.: Sediment rating
parameters and their implications: Yangtze River, China, Geomorphology, 85,
166–175, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
