<?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-23-51-2019</article-id><title-group><article-title>Storage dynamics, hydrological connectivity and flux ages in a karst
catchment: conceptual modelling using stable isotopes</article-title><alt-title>Storage dynamics, hydrological connectivity and flux ages</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Storage dynamics, hydrological connectivity and flux ages}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{Z. Zhang et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2 aff4">
          <name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>Zhicai</given-names></name>
          <email>zhangzhicai_0@hhu.edu.cn</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>Xi</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3647-5617</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff4">
          <name><surname>Cheng</surname><given-names>Qinbo</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Soulsby</surname><given-names>Chris</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic
Engineering, Hohai University, <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>Nanjing 210098, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>School of Geosciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB24 3UF,
UK</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Institute of Surface-Earth System Science, Tianjin University,
Tianjin,
China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>College of Hydrology and Water Resources, Hohai University, Nanjing
210098, China</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Zhicai Zhang (zhangzhicai_0@hhu.edu.cn)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>7</day><month>January</month><year>2019</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>23</volume>
      <issue>1</issue>
      <fpage>51</fpage><lpage>71</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>15</day><month>April</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>2</day><month>May</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>1</day><month>December</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>5</day><month>December</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/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019.html">This article is available from https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e130">We developed a new tracer-aided hydrological model that disaggregates cockpit
karst terrain into the two dominant landscape units of hillslopes and
depressions (with fast and slow flow systems). The new model was calibrated
by using high temporal resolution hydrometric and isotope data in the outflow
of Chenqi catchment in Guizhou Province of south-western China. The model
could track hourly water and isotope fluxes through each landscape unit and
estimate the associated storage and water age dynamics. From the model
results we inferred that the fast flow reservoir in the depression had the
smallest water storage and the slow flow reservoir the largest, with the
hillslope intermediate. The estimated mean ages of water draining the
hillslope unit, and the fast and slow flow reservoirs during the study
period, were 137, 326 and 493 days, respectively. Distinct seasonal
variability in hydroclimatic conditions and associated water storage dynamics
(captured by the model) were the main drivers of non-stationary hydrological
connectivity between the hillslope and depression. During the dry season,
slow flow in the depression contributes the largest proportion (78.4 %)
of flow to the underground stream draining the catchment, resulting in weak
hydrological connectivity between the hillslope and depression. During the
wet period, with the resulting rapid increase in storage, the hillslope unit
contributes the largest proportion (57.5 %) of flow to the underground
stream due to the strong hydrological connectivity between the hillslope and
depression. Meanwhile, the tracer-aided model can be used to identify the
sources of uncertainty in the model results. Our analysis showed that the
model uncertainty of the hydrological variables in the different units relies
on their connectivity with the outlet when the calibration target uses only
the outlet information. The model uncertainty was much lower for the
“newer” water from the fast flow system in the depression and flow from the
hillslope unit during the wet season and higher for “older” water from the
slow flow system in the depression. This suggests that to constrain model
parameters further, increased high-resolution hydrometric and tracer data on
the internal dynamics of systems (e.g. groundwater responses during low flow
periods) could be used in calibration.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e140">Karst aquifers are characterized by complex heterogeneous and anisotropic
hydrogeological conditions which are very different to most other geological
formations (Bakalowicz, 2005; Ford and Williams, 2013). The hydrological
function of the critical zone in cockpit karst landscapes is consequently
dominated by the strong influence of this unique geomorphology and the
structure of carbonate rocks. Subsurface drainage networks in karst aquifers
form mixed-flow systems that integrate flow paths with markedly different
velocities, ranging from low in the matrix and small fractures to very high
in large fractures and conduits (which often form subterranean channel
networks), with associated transitions between states of laminar and
turbulent flow (White, 2007; Worthington, 2009). Connectivity is particularly
important in<?pagebreak page52?> karst areas as the complex subsurface hydrogeology results in
frequent and abrupt changes in hydrological connectivity. The system
alternates through periods of varying strengths of connection and
disconnection to create dynamic feedbacks, which in turn influence the
system's function. Thus, understanding hydrological connectivity dynamics can
provide key insights into the dominant processes governing water and solute
fluxes (Lexartza-Artza and Wainwright, 2009). In the south-western karst area
of China, the cockpit karst terrain encompasses flow paths sequencing in
runoff generation from “hillslope to depression to stream”. The generation
of hillslope runoff mostly drains into depression aquifers prior to
contribution to underground streamflow. The hydrological connectivity between
these units is related to not only the catchment topographic features that
affect water transmission (including slope length, gradient and flow
convergence, e.g. Reaney et al., 2014), but also the subsurface flow
connections between the fractures and conduits at any landscape units.</p>
      <p id="d1e143">Due to the high spatial variability of the hydrodynamic properties of the
karst critical zone, karst hydrological models are often conceptual, and are
generally lumped at the catchment scale (e.g. Rimmer and Salingar, 2006;
Fleury et al., 2007; Jukic and Denić-Jukić, 2009; Tritz et al., 2011,
Hartmann et al., 2013; Ladouche et al., 2014). Such lumped approaches, mostly
based on linear or non-linear relationships between storage and discharge,
conceptualize the physical processes at the scale of the whole catchment. In
karst aquifers, the solutional conduits connect with intergranular pores and
small fractures (often termed matrix porosity), showing dual or even triple
porosity zones (Worthington et al., 2017). Thus, karst aquifers are often
conceptualized as dual porosity systems as residence times in the matrix are
often several orders of magnitude longer than those in the conduits
(Goldscheider and Drew, 2007). Accordingly, the behaviour of karst spring
hydrographs is often conceptualized using a two-reservoir model to represent
the dual flow system of the karst aquifer: a low-permeability “slow flow”
reservoir captures the function of fractured matrix blocks of the aquifer,
whilst a highly permeable “fast flow” reservoir represents the larger karst
conduits (Rimmer and Hartmann, 2012; Hartmann et al., 2014; Zhang et al.,
2017). In addition, changing hydrological connectivity between different
landscape units (e.g. hillslopes and depressions in cockpit karst areas) is
often a key control on the non-linearity of the flow responses of karst
systems, though this is usually not explicitly represented in most conceptual
models. Consequently, developing semi-distributed lumped models is necessary
to adequately represent the hydrological function of different landscape
units and the hydrological connectivity between them. For example, a
conceptual model consisting of three regional phreatic aquifers (reservoirs)
was proposed as the sources of three baseflow components at Mt. Hermon in
Israel as the groundwater discharge patterns at the three sites (the Dan,
Snir and Hermon) are significantly different (Rimmer and Salingar, 2006).</p>
      <p id="d1e146">The utility of tracers in karst hydrology is well established and has given
insights into advection–dispersion processes, physical exchange between
conduits and smaller fractures/matrices, as well as identifying relevant
contaminant transport parameters (e.g. Field and Pinsky, 2000; Goldscheider
et al., 2008; Kübeck et al., 2013; Kogovsek and Petric, 2014). More
generally, integration of tracers into rainfall–runoff models is becoming
more common in hydrology and shows promise as such tracer-aided models can
provide useful learning tools in hypothesis testing regarding water and
solute transport (Birkel and Soulsby, 2015). Indeed, McDonnell and
Beven (2014) have argued that such models provide a basis for ensuring that
both the celerity (i.e. the speed) of the hydrological response and the
velocity of individual water particles (i.e. the travel times) can be
captured. Moreover, they identify this as one of the fundamental challenges
for contemporary hydrological modelling.</p>
      <p id="d1e149">In many studies, such tracer-aided models have helped to resolve this
celerity–velocity dichotomy known as the “old water paradox” (Kirchner,
2003). Such integration has helped to understand the functional influence of
heterogeneity in catchment landscapes, the importance of hydrological
connectivity between different landscape units and the mixing processes that
regulate solute transport and control water ages, as well as generation of
runoff responses (Jencso et al., 2010; Tetzlaff et al., 2014; Soulsby et al.,
2015). Tracer-aided models that conceptualize the transport of tracers
through karst systems via advection–dispersion, mixing, flow partitioning
through different conduits, and exchange of tracers with the matrix have been
widely used (Morales et al., 2010; Charlier et al., 2012; Mudarra et al.,
2014; Dewaide et al., 2016). Using such models to simulate storage dynamics,
transit times, and water ages can provide useful metrics to characterize the
karst critical zone. Additionally, incorporating isotope tracers into such
models facilitates multi-objective calibration, which provides the
opportunity to improve the rigour of model evaluation, constrain parameter
sets and potentially reduce uncertainty (Birkel et al., 2015; Ala-aho et al.,
2017a).</p>
      <p id="d1e153">The lumped models that use rather simple model structures and focus on key
karst processes deemed to be dominant at particular study sites can avoid
over-parameterization (Perrin et al., 2001; Beven, 2006). Nevertheless, they
have less skill in differentiating flow paths in a catchment. Whilst
tracer-aided models enhance our understanding of the hydrological
connectivity between different landscape units, and the associated mixing
processes, they increase model parameterization. Consequently, the
effectiveness of tracer-aided models used for flow simulation and
hydrological connection of the “hillslope-to-depression-to-stream” in the
cockpit karst catchment needs to be evaluated.</p>
      <p id="d1e156">The aim of this study is to develop a tracer-aided model that can simulate
storage dynamics, hydrological<?pagebreak page53?> connectivity and flux ages in a karst
catchment and evaluate the model uncertainty of the simulation results along
the “hillslope to depression to outlet stream” continuum. The model was
applied in the 1.25 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Chenqi catchment in Guizhou Province of
south-western China. This catchment has typical cockpit karst landscape and
associated karst critical zone architecture (Zhang et al., 2017). There are
detailed observations of hydrometrics and stable isotopies in hillslope
springs, depression wells and at the catchment outlet, which offers an
unusually rich catchment data set to evaluate model capability in karst
areas.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Study catchment and data</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Study catchment</title>
      <p id="d1e179">The study catchment of Chenqi, with an area of 1.25 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, is located in
the Puding Karst Ecohydrological Observation Station in Guizhou Province of
south-western China (Fig. 1). It is a typical cockpit karst landscape, with
surrounding conical hills separated by star-shaped valleys (Zhang et al.,
2011; Chen et al., 2018). The catchment, which is drained by a single
underground channel/conduit, can be divided into two units: depression areas
with low-elevation (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1340</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m) and steeper hillslopes with high
elevation ranging from 1340 to 1500 m. The spatial extent of the depression
and hillslopes is 0.37 and 0.88 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e213">Map of location, geology, geomorphology and hydrological
monitoring locations in Chenqi catchment. Discharge was measured at the
outlet and hillslope (HS). Water was sampled from the outlet, HS and four
depression wells.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-f01.jpg"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e222">Geological strata in the basin include dolostone, thick and thin limestone,
marlite and Quaternary soil profiles (see the cross sections of A-A' and B-B'
in Fig. 1). Limestone formations dominate the higher elevation areas with
150–200 m thickness, which lie above an impervious marlite formation.
Therefore, precipitation recharging can be perched on the impervious marlite
layers that discharge in the lower areas (mostly as hillslope springs). In
the hillslopes, Quaternary soils are thin (less than 30 cm) and irregularly
developed on carbonate rocks. Outcrops of carbonate rocks cover
10 %–30 % of the hillslope area. In the depression, soils are thick
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&gt;</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m deep). Dominant vegetation ranges from deciduous
broad-leaved forest on the upper and middle parts of the steep hillslopes to
corn and rice paddy in the lower gentle foot slopes and depressions, where
soils are also thicker. The paddy fields are often flooded for the summer
during the heavy rainfall period. Additionally, there are three sinkholes
outcropping in the depression where the surface and subsurface runoff can be
directly drained into the underground channel during heavy rainfall events.</p>
      <p id="d1e236">The catchment is located in a region with a subtropical wet monsoon climate
with a mean annual temperature of 20.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, highest in July and
lowest in January. Annual mean precipitation is 1140 mm, almost all falling
in a distinct wet season from May to September and a dry season from October
to April. Average monthly humidity is high, ranging from 74 % to
78 %.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>Hydrometric and isotopic data</title>
      <p id="d1e254">In Chenqi catchment, the discharges of a hillslope spring (HS) located at the
foot of the eastern steep hillslope and the underground channel at the
catchment outlet were measured with v-notch weirs (Fig. 1). Their water
levels were automatically recorded by a HOBO U20 water level logger (Onset
Corporation, USA) with a time interval of 15 min. Additionally, an automatic
weather station was established on the upper hillslope to record
precipitation, air temperature, wind, radiation, air humidity and pressure.
The data collection ran from 28 July 2016 to 30 October 2017. During the
drought period, there were a few times that flow discharges ceased (328 and
713 h of zero flow for outlet and HS, respectively). Although the hillslope
flow discharge was much smaller than the outlet discharge, their patterns in
temporal variability were similar in terms of flow duration curves (Fig. 2).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2"><caption><p id="d1e259">Flow duration curve at outlet and hillslope spring (HS) (28 July 2016–30 October 2017).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e268">For isotope analysis, precipitation, the hillslope spring and catchment
outlet flows were intensively sampled during eight rainfall events in the wet
season (May–October) using an autosampler set to hourly intervals (from
12 June to 14 August 2017). Groundwater in the low-elevation depressions was
also sampled from four wells (Fig. 1), with depth below the ground surface
ranging from 13 to 35 m, during four rainfall events. The well screening was
installed over the whole depth for each of the wells to reflect local flow
exchanges at various depths in the karst. In each event, groundwater samples
were collected before, during and after rainfall at each well from multiple
depths.</p>
      <p id="d1e271">All water samples were collected in 5 mL glass vials. The stable isotope
compositions of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>D) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratios were determined using a MAT 253
laser isotope analyser (instrument precision <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ‰ for
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ‰ for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Isotope
ratios are reported in the d-notation using the Vienna Standard Mean Ocean
Water standards. Statistical characteristics of isotope signature are
summarized in Table 1.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e358">Statistical summary of isotope data for rainfall, hillslope spring
(HS), catchment outlet and depression wells.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="12">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="10" colname="col10" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="11" colname="col11" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="12" colname="col12" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Obs</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col6" align="center" colsep="1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>D (‰) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col7" nameend="col11" align="center"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (‰) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">lc excess</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Max</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Range</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Cv</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Max</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Min</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">Range</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">Cv</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Rainfall</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">17.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">120.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">102.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">73.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">16.4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.29</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.59</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Outlet</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">46.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">73.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">26.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">61.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">5.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.09</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">1.13</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HS</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">51.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">77</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">25.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">64.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">4.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">2.91</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">W1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">65.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">60.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">3.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.05</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">1.72</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">W3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">56.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">73.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">17.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">62.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.06</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">0.66</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">W4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">55</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">70.2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.07</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">62.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.07</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">2.37</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">W5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">55.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">67.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">11.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.03</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">58.7</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9">2.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col10">0.04</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col11"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">8.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col12">2.39</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Methodology</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <title>Modelling approaches</title>
      <?pagebreak page55?><p id="d1e1106">The model used in this work was based on a simpler framework developed in a
previous study to simulate the catchment-scale water and solute transport (Mg
and Ca) in the dual flow system of the karst critical zone at daily time
steps (Zhang et al., 2017). The original model had no basis for spatially
disaggregating differences in flow and tracer dynamics from different
landscape units. Here we significantly improved the model structure by
separately conceptualizing the dominant hillslope and depression landscape
units (Fig. 3), and then used the high-resolution discharge and isotope data
to drive the modelling at hourly time steps. In addition, the new model has
the parameters to represent passive storage inferred by isotope damping and
the capacity to track the ages of water fluxes from various landscape units.
As shown in Fig. 3, Chenqi catchment was therefore sub-divided into two
spatially distinct units to represent the hillslope and depression. The
depression unit was further conceptualized into two flow systems, represented
by “fast” and “slow” flow reservoirs which could exchange water. In
contrast, the hillslope unit was conceptualized as a single reservoir because
of the dominant influence of the thin soil/epikarst on water movement.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1111">Structure of the coupled flow–tracer model (modified from Zhang et
al., 2017). Equations used to calculate state variables and storages are
presented in Appendix A.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS1">
  <title>Hydrological simulation</title>
      <p id="d1e1125">The water balance for each of the three reservoirs (hillslope unit, fast
flow and slow flow reservoirs in depression) in the catchment is expressed
as follows:

                  <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M58" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E1"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ET</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–s</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–f</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">for</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hillslope</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">unit</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E2"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ET</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–s</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">for</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">slow</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">flow</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">depression</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">unit</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">and</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E3"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ET</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–f</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">for</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">fast</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">flow</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">depression</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">unit</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

              where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is rainfall (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" 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>), ET is evapotranspiration
(m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" 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>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is flow discharge (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" 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 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mi>V</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is
storage (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>); subscripts of h, s and f represent the hillslope and slow
and fast flow reservoirs, respectively, the subscripts of h–s and h–f
represent from hillslope reservoir to slow and fast flow reservoirs,
respectively, and the subscript of e represents flow exchange between fast
and slow reservoirs. The hydrological connection and flow discharge routing
for the dual flow system in the depression was derived by Zhang et
al. (2017). Here, we further include the hydrological connectivity of the
hillslope flow discharging into the depression reservoirs (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–s</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–f</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in Eqs. 1–3).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS2">
  <title>Simulation of isotope ratios and estimation of water ages</title>
      <p id="d1e1481">The model tracks and simulates the isotope ratios for each reservoir
separately, in which the isotope ratios can be completely or partially mixed.
Experimental evidence suggests that the common complete mixing assumption is
overly simplistic, in particular for systems with pronounced switches between
rapid shallow subsurface flow (e.g. macropores) or overland flow on the one
hand and slow matrix flow on the other hand (Van Schaik et al., 2008; Legout
et al., 2009). Since the depression unit was divided into the connected fast
and slow reservoirs, complete mixing of the isotope ratios is assumed for
both reservoirs. Thus, the isotope mass balance in the slow and fast flow
reservoirs can be expressed as

                  <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M71" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E4"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mtext>p–d</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ET</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–s</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">for</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">slow</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">flow</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">reservoir</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">depression</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">and</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E5"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mtext>p–d</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ET</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–f</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">for</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">fast</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">flow</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">reservoir</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">depression</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

              where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> signature of the storage components
(‰); the subscript of p–d represents rainfall infiltration in
depression unit.</p>
      <p id="d1e1734">Hence, partial mixing was assumed for the hillslope (e.g. the upper active
storage <inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mixing with the lower passive storage <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
in Fig. 3 since the upper rock
fractures/conduits
reduce exponentially along the hillslope profile (Zhang et al., 2011)
according to

                  <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M76" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E6"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ET</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–s</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><?xmltex \hack{\quad}?><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–f</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">for</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">the</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">upper</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">active</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">storage</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hillslope</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">and</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E7"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.5}{9.5}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">for</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">the</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lower</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">passive</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">storage</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hillslope</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

              The additional volume <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) is the storage of a passive
reservoir in a hillslope which is available to determine isotope storage,
mixing, and transport in a way that does not affect the dynamics of water
flux volumes <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) is
water volume from the active store to the passive store. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) are the volumes of rainfall into active and
passive stores, respectively.</p>
      <p id="d1e2166">To further quantify how catchment functioning affects water partitioning,
storage and mixing, water ages are also tracked in the model. For water age
estimation in the fast and slow flow reservoirs in the depression unit,
complete mixing of the inputs is assumed and ages tracked accordingly<?pagebreak page56?> to
determine the dynamic storage volumes on an hourly time step:

                  <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M85" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E8"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ET</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–s</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">for</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">slow</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">flow</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">reservoir</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">depression</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">and</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E9"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ET</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–f</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">for</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">fast</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">flow</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">reservoir</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">depression</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

              where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the water age.</p>
      <p id="d1e2406">For the age of the hillslope reservoir, the partial mixing is used:

                  <disp-formula specific-use="align" content-type="numbered"><mml:math id="M87" display="block"><mml:mtable displaystyle="true"><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E10"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ET</mml:mi><mml:mi>h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi>h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>h</mml:mi><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><?xmltex \hack{\quad}?><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>h–f</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle class="stylechange" displaystyle="true"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">for</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">the</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">upper</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">active</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">storageand</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mlabeledtr id="Ch1.E11"><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{8.0}{8.0}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">p</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">_</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mlabeledtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true" class="stylechange"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">for</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">the</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lower</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">passive</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">storage</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">hillslope</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>

              where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>A</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">pas</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the passive reservoir in the hillslope. In the
model implementation, each age item at time <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> includes the age at the
previous time step <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" 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>. So, the results listed in this paper include the
“aging effect”.</p>
      <p id="d1e2743">Details of the modules within the model and related equations and parameters
(highlighting those calibrated) are given in Appendix A. In the equations of
each module shown in Appendix Table A1, fast and slow flow reservoir storages
in depression are drained by the calibrated linear rate parameters
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</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>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" 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 the exchange flow between
them is calculated using the parameters <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" 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 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
(Table A2). Hillslope storage is drained by the exponent parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mi>w</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>;
precipitation recharging to the slow flow reservoir is calculated by the
parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (and to the fast flow reservoir by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>); hillslope lateral
flow to the slow reservoir is calculated by the parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (to the fast
flow reservoir by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>); estimation of the effects of evaporative
fractionation is considered by the parameter Is; rainfall recharge to
active and passive stores in the hillslope is calculated by the parameters
KK and pp; exchange flow between active and passive stores in the
hillslope is calculated by the parameter con; and the weighted isotope
composition of rainfall input is calculated by the parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>.
Therefore, the model includes 12 calibrated parameters, 7 for flow routing
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mi>w</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>)
and 5 (Is, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">φ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) for
simulation of isotope ratios and estimation of water ages. The initial range
for each of the parameters is shown in Table 2.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e2957">Mean parameter values and fitness derived from the best 500
parameter sets after calibration.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="9">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="9" colname="col9" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">For flow</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" 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="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" 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="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" 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="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mi>W</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Initial range 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">40–168</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1–72</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">800–2200</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.005–0.025</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0–1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0–0.015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0–1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Initial range 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">40–150</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1–40</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">800–2200</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.008–0.025</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.47–1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0–0.015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.48–1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">92</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">11</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1549</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.68</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.005</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.54</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Range</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">48–120</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5–18</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">1000–2000</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.01–0.02</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.51–0.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.003–0.01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.5–0.62</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">For isotope</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Is</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">φ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Index</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">Mean (range)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Initial range 1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.8–1.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0–1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0–1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0–1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">KGE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.85 (0.81–0.87)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Initial range 2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0–0.8</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.8–1.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0–1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0–1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.5–1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">KGE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.56 (0.52–0.59)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Mean</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.24</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1.26</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.49</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.82</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">KGE</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.7 (0.72–0.66)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Range</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.002–0.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">1–1.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.02–0.95</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.04–0.97</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.71–0.93</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col9"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e3426">Additionally, lateral surface flow can directly recharge into the fast
reservoir through sinkholes in the depression in heavy rainfall events.
According to research at Chenqi by Peng and Wang (2012), the mean surface
runoff coefficient from the hillslopes is about 10 % when the hourly
rainfall amount exceeds 30 mm. Hence, 10 % of rainfall infiltration of
hillslopes will recharge to fast flow reservoir via sinkholes in this
situation (rainfall amount &gt; 30 mm h<inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" 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>).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <title>Modelling procedure</title>
      <p id="d1e3448">The modelling period started on 23 July 2016, but calibration was initiated
using available discharge data from 1<?pagebreak page57?> November 2016. The preceding 3 months
were therefore used as a spin-up period (the mean of precipitation isotope
signatures over the sampling period was used for the spin-up period) to fill
storages, initialize storage tracer concentrations, and minimize the effects
of initial conditions on water age calculations.</p>
      <p id="d1e3451">The modified Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE) criterion (Kling et al., 2012)
was used as the objective function for calibration. The KGE breaks the
goodness of fit into three components, and so is more representative of the
overall simulation than the traditionally used Nash–Sutcliffe metric which
focuses on flow peaks. This overcomes some limitations of the latter
(Schaefli and Gupta, 2007) and balances how well the model captures the
dynamics (correlation coefficient), bias (bias ratio) and variability
(variability ratio) of the actual response. Using flow and isotopic
composition as calibration targets, objective functions were combined to
formulate a single measure of goodness of fit: KGE <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> (KGE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> KGE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (where KGE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is discharge and
KGE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> is isotopic composition).</p>
      <p id="d1e3507">The time series of discharge and isotope data were different in length. The
high-resolution samples for stable isotope composition were collected over
eight events from 12 June to 13 August 2017, giving a total of 589 samples.
Hence, KGE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and KGE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> were each calculated using
all the available data for the outlet discharge and isotope ratios,
respectively. Additionally, available data such as the discharge and stable
isotope signatures of hillslope spring and isotopes in the depression wells
were used as qualitative “soft” data to aid model evaluation. A Monte Carlo
analysis was used to explore the parameter space during calibration
(Table A2) and the modelling uncertainty. In order to derive a constrained
parameter set, two iterations were carried out in the calibration. First, a
total of 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> different parameter combinations within the initial ranges
(initial range 1 in Table 2) were randomly generated as the possible
parameter combinations (Soulsby et al., 2015; Xie et al., 2017). After the
first calibration using KGE &gt; 0.3 as a threshold, the range of
each parameter was narrowed. Then, the narrowed ranges (initial range 2 in
Table 2) were used as for the second calibration. From the total of 10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
tested different parameter combinations, only the best (in terms of the
efficiency statistics) parameter populations (500 parameter sets) were
retained and used for further analysis, which included calculation of
simulation bounds representing posterior parameter uncertainty (Birkel et
al., 2015).</p>
      <p id="d1e3546">A regional sensitivity analysis (Freer et al., 1996) was further used to
identify the most important model parameters. The parameter sets were split
into 10 groups and ranked according to the selected objective function. For
each group the likelihoods were normalized by dividing by their total, and
the cumulative frequency distribution was calculated and plotted. If the
model performance is sensitive to a particular parameter there will be a
large difference between the cumulative frequency distributions compared to a
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> line.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <title>Line-conditioned excess (lc excess)</title>
      <p id="d1e3567">The lc excess describes the deviation of a water sample from the local
meteoric water line (LMWL) in dual-isotope space, which indicates
evaporation-driven kinetic fractionation of precipitation inputs (Sprenger et
al., 2016; McCutcheon et al., 2017). With a known LMWL of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, it was thus proposed by Landwehr and Coplen
(2004) that lc excess <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. As oxygen
has a higher atomic weight, non-equilibrium fractionation during the
liquid-to-vapour phase change will preferentially evaporate (in terms of
statistical expectation) <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">16</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> molecules. The isotopic
signature of a water sample affected by evaporation thus shows negative
lc-excess values, and plots under the LMWL in dual-isotope space (Landwehr et
al., 2014). The LMWL of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">7.77</mml:mn><mml:mo>⋅</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.88</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was
defined based on a daily value set of an isotope signature at precipitation
from August 2016 to September 2017 in Chenqi catchment. The calculated
lc-excess values were shown in Table 1.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page58?><sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <title> Simulating flow and tracer dynamics</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS1">
  <title>The simulated flow and tracer at catchment outlet</title>
      <p id="d1e3763">The model results show that the discharge and isotope dynamics were mostly
bracketed by the simulation ranges at the outlet, though some peak discharges
were underestimated (Fig. 4). The objective function values of the combined
KGE for flow and isotopes at the outlet were all greater than 0.65 for the
500 best parameter sets (Table 2). As is common in coupled flow–tracer
models, the performance in the simulation of isotopes was less satisfactory
and more uncertain than for discharge, KEG<inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.8</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> compared with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for
KEG<inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>. In general isotope values in rainfall events depleted as
the event progressed, and this also depressed values in the underground
stream, which the model generally reproduced (Fig. 4).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><caption><p id="d1e3801">Observed stream discharge and deuterium during the study period,
discharge and deuterium simulations for the best 500 parameter sets, and
lc-excess values of rainfall, outlet, hillslope spring and depression wells.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-f04.jpg"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e3810">The sensitivity analysis results shown in Fig. 5 indicate that the fast flow
reservoir constant (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), the precipitation recharge coefficient
for the slow flow (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and fast flow (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) reservoirs, the recharge
coefficient of the hillslope to the slow flow reservoir (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and to the fast
flow reservoir (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), the coefficient for evaporation fractionation (Is)
and the weighting constant (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) are generally most sensitive to the
combined simulation of flow and isotopic composition.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e3873">Sensitivity of 12 model parameters expressed as cumulative
distributions in 10 levels of likelihood values for the model simulations
from the lowest likelihood value (blue) to the highest likelihood value
(purple). Likelihood based on KEG and rejection of values &lt; 0.5.
(The parameters inside the grey dotted box are for flow routing, and the
outside parameters are for isotope routing.)</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-f05.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e3882">The results of isotope simulations showed that during events, the model
generally reproduces the depletion of isotopes in the outlet stream in
response to isotopically depleting rainfall inputs. However, the model
sometimes fails to capture some high isotope values during event peaks where
isotope values generally depleted (e.g. late June/early July 2017 in
Fig. 4b). In order to explore this further, the lc excess of samples was
calculated from samples. The results of lc-excess values are in Fig. 4b, with
the mean of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.59</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ‰ and 1.13 ‰ for rainfall and the
outlet, respectively (Table 1). There were a few samples which showed
markedly negative lc-excess values around event peaks (e.g. 22 June, 1 July,
and 5 August), indicating a strong
fractionation effect. These outliers correspond to the unexpected clusters of
enriched isotope values that the model fails to capture.</p>
      <p id="d1e3895">The lc excesses of the isotope time series of the hillslope spring and wells
in the depression were also calculated (Fig. 4b). The mean lc-excess values
for the hillslope spring, W1, W3, W4 and W5 for depression wells,
are shown in Table 1. While the mean is slightly
positive, negative values are common, indicating an evaporative fractionation
effect on recharge water. However, the underground streamflow (mainly
reflecting the response of “fast flow” reservoirs) with the unexpected
“outliers” with high isotope values could not be attributed to the
hillslope response or groundwater in the depression (the maximum of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>D less than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ‰ in Table 1), because the lc-excess values of
these sources were substantially less negative than the simultaneous values
of the underground stream (Fig. 4b) and the maximum of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>D (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">46.9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ‰) at the outlet was higher than that at hillslope spring and
depression wells (less than <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ‰) in Table 1. The most likely
explanation relates to flooded paddy fields which are extensively distributed
in the depression during the growing season. Consequently, significant
volumes of surface water are impounded in the paddy fields and exposed for
evaporative fractionation. Therefore the markedly enriched isotope signals at
the outlet around some event peaks would be consistent with fractionated
water being displaced from the paddy fields and entering the fast flow
system. This would explain the model's lack of skill in capturing such
effects of evaporative fractionation.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page59?><sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1.SSS2">
  <title>The simulated flow and tracer for hillslope spring and depression
wells</title>
      <p id="d1e3949">As a more qualitative indication of model performance, Fig. 6 shows the
normalized simulated discharge (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">n</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mean</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
of the hillslope unit had very similar seasonality and event-based dynamics
to the normalized observed discharge at the hillslope spring. The magnitude
of the modelled discharge fluxes is, of course, different to those observed
at the specific hillslope (e.g. HS at the eastern hillslope in Fig. 1)
because the simulation results represented the lumped outputs of the whole
hillslope unit. However, as a “soft” validation of the model it adds
confidence that the temporal dynamics of the hillslope response are
appropriately captured. Additionally, the measured flow duration curves
(Fig. 2) and isotopic values (the ranges of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>D and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">18</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> values in Table 1) of the hillslope spring are broadly
similar to those measured at the outlet. This perhaps explains why the model,
although using only flow and isotope data from the catchment outlet time
series for calibration, is able to capture the dynamics of the hillslope,
even though the hillslope drainage parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mi>w</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is insensitive.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><caption><p id="d1e4006">Observed discharge at hillslope spring (in Fig. 1) against the
simulated discharge of the hillslope unit (mean of the simulations for the
best 500 parameter sets). Note: values are normalized.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-f06.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e4015">This is further illustrated through an additional qualitative evaluation of
the model given by comparing the internal tracking of isotope dynamics in the
conceptual stores of the hillslope and slow flow reservoir with respective
data available from measured isotope values collected for the hillslope
spring and wells (Fig. 7). The sampling frequency of the hillslope spring was
the same as at the outlet; however, there were only 10 sampling occasions
from the depression wells over the dry and wet seasons, and the water samples
were collected across a range of depths of the well. Again, although these
point measurements are not strictly comparable with the tracked isotope
composition of conceptual stores, they do give an indication that the
internal states of the model are<?pagebreak page60?> being plausibly simulated in terms of the
mixing volumes which damp the isotope inputs in precipitation. These results
are again encouraging, showing that the model captures the general directions
of changes in the isotope dynamics of the hillslope spring, albeit with a
relatively high degree of uncertainty (Fig. 7a).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F7"><caption><p id="d1e4021">Modelled isotope signature at hillslope unit and slow reservoir vs.
observation at hillslope spring and depression wells (the red line represents
the mean of the simulations for the best 500 parameter sets).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-f07.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e4030">The modelled isotope composition in the depression in Fig. 7b shows the
release of water from the slow flow reservoir, representing a relatively
stable, well-mixed source. The uncertainty bands cover the limited
variability of the measured values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>D at W1 and W5 (blue and
yellow points in Fig. 7b) where the aquifer has much lower permeability (W5)
and is confined (W1) (cf. the geophysical survey reported by Chen et al.,
2018). This indicates that our tracer-aided model captures the general slow
flow dynamics in the depression even though the uncertainty is large. The
highly negative values of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>D at W3 and W4 (red and black points in
Fig. 7b) mostly plot below the uncertainty bands. This is reasonable as water
at W3 and W4 has been shown by Chen et al. (2018) to be mostly contributed
by faster flows (mixing with the young water) in high permeability areas,
particularly during rainfall events (e.g. 9 and 20 July in Fig. 7b).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <title>Storage dynamics of different reservoirs and source contributions of
underground streamflow</title>
      <p id="d1e4054">The storage dynamics of the catchment derived from the model in order to
simulate the concurrent flow and tracer response can be disaggregated
according to the conceptual stores (Fig. 8). The model structure dictates
that the main variability in the runoff response to precipitation is driven
by the storage dynamics, depending on hydrological connectivity between the
hillslope (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and slow (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and fast
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) flow reservoirs (Fig. 3). The modelled storage results show
that slow flow reservoir was the largest store in the catchment
(&gt; 100 mm with a mean of 245 mm), consistent with the wide
distribution of small fractures and matrix pores in the karst critical zone
(Zhang et al., 2011, 2017). The fast flow reservoir had the smallest storage
(the mean value was only 0.2 mm) because the underground river/conduit
volume represents only a very small proportion of the porosity of the entire
aquifer. Although the hillslopes cover a larger area than the depression, the
thin soil, shallow epikarst and rapid drainage resulted in a relatively small
dynamic storage reservoir, with a calibrated mean value of 23 mm. The
discharge over the study period showed clear seasonality, which reflects the
uneven distribution of precipitation throughout the year (Fig. 4a). This
seasonality is mirrored somewhat differently in the storage dynamics of each
reservoir (Fig. 8). The storage change in fast flow reservoir was very rapid,
especially in the wet season, reflecting rapid recharge and water release.
The rapid response of storage to rainfall was also evident in hillslope
reservoir because of the low capacity and short response time.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><caption><p id="d1e4092">Model-derived storage dynamics in hillslope (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and
slow (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and fast (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) conceptual reservoirs for the
best 500 parameter sets, and the lines represent the mean of simulations.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4134">Using flow and isotopes at the catchment outlet as calibration targets, the
uncertainty bands for the three storages increase in the order fast flow in
the depression &lt; hillslope flow &lt; slow flow in the
depression (Fig. 8). Additionally, the uncertainty bands become narrower in
the wetter period (Figs. 6 and 8). This indicates that the model structure
along with the calibration targets emphasizes the rapid flow component, and
the modelling uncertainty increases when flux components from storage units
are less closely correlated with the outlet discharge used as the calibration
target.</p>
      <p id="d1e4137">The relative contributions of the different sources to streamflow changed
with hydroclimatic conditions, and this could be estimated using the
calibrated model. Figure 9 shows that during the dry period (November 2016 to
April 2017), underground streamflow was mainly sustained<?pagebreak page61?> from the small
fractures (conceptualized as release from the slow flow reservoir). Overall,
this provided the largest proportion (78.4 %) of dry season flows,
followed by the hillslope unit contribution (16.8 %). During this period,
direct rainfall infiltration contributed only limited water to the
underground stream (4.8 %) due to the low rainfall and limited storage,
resulting in weak hydrological connectivity between the hillslope and
depression. During the wet period, with the resulting rapid increase in
storage, the hillslope unit contributes much more water to the underground
stream, accounting for the largest proportion (57.5 %) of overall flow,
due to the strong hydrological connectivity between the hillslope and
depression. Meanwhile, the contribution of direct rainfall infiltration to
the underground streamflow also increased (with an overall wet season
contribution of 35.6 %). This likely reflects the increased influence of
sinkholes and larger fractures as the catchment becomes wetter. In such
conditions, during storm events, overland flow and epikarst water were
collected by sinkholes and large fractures and recharged to underground
stream directly. The relative contribution of small fractures in the slow
reservoir decreased substantially (7 %), although the overall magnitude
of the water flux to the underground stream increased during the wet period.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9"><caption><p id="d1e4143">Source contributions to the underground streamflow (fast reservoir)
at the catchment outlet (mean of the simulations for the best 500 parameter
sets). The red dots above and under the dotted line represent transient
reverse water fluxes from the slow reservoir to fast reservoir and fast
reservoir to slow reservoir, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4152">The bi-directional exchange between the underground conduit and the
surrounding porous matrix is a characteristic feature of the karst critical
zone (Zhang et al., 2017). During the dry period, as water table levels in
the conduits drop more rapidly than in the matrix, water stored in the matrix
drains into conduits and underground channels as baseflow. In the wet season,
especially during the periods of highest flow, infiltrated water quickly
fills conduits where the water table is higher than the adjacent matrix.
Water is temporarily stored in the conduits, and hence induces recharge in
the matrix. These bi-directional exchange flows between the underground
channels and the matrix were captured by the model (represented by fast and
slow reservoirs, respectively) and are shown in Fig. 9, where the negative
values represent the flux from conduits to the adjacent matrix. This
bi-directional flow was affected by the wetness conditions, being evident in
the wet season and indicating both the seasonal and short-term temporal
change in hydrological connectivity between the fast and slow flow
reservoirs. Despite this, as the parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> that determines
the exchange between the fast and slow flow reservoirs is insensitive
(Fig. 5), the simulated exchange flux is more uncertain (red lines in Fig. 9)
compared with the water fluxes from the direct rainfall and hillslope flow.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <title>Simulated flux ages from different conceptual stores</title>
      <p id="d1e4172">The ages of water fluxes from the different landscape units were tracked
using the model. The simulated ages were linked to the size of storage in
each unit and the ages decreasing in the order of hillslope
reservoir &lt; fast flow reservoir &lt; slow flow reservoir,
with mean ages of 137, 326 and 493 days over the study period, respectively
(Fig. 10). The mean ages of water flux decreased between the dry and wet
seasons, ranging from 159, 466 and 528 days for the dry season to 115, 187
and 458 days for the wet season, hillslope, and fast flow and slow flow
reservoirs, respectively. The ages of fluxes from hillslope flow and fast
flow reservoirs change greatly for each of the rainfall events. For
short-term (event based) responses to the rainfall, the ages of water from
hillslope flow and fast reservoirs can be as short as 4 and 2 days,
respectively. There were 8 and 23 events for the fast flow when the ages of
water were less than 5 and 10 days, respectively (see the lowest values in
Fig. 10).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10"><caption><p id="d1e4177">Mean of water flux age of hillslope and fast and slow reservoirs
(for the 500 best parameter sets).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4186">The ages of fluxes from the fast flow reservoir in the underground stream
generally reflected the integration of younger<?pagebreak page62?> water fluxes from the
hillslope and older fluxes from the slow flow reservoir, as shown in the
time-variant flux ages shown in Fig. 10. Consequently, the water age dynamics
of the fast flow reservoir were relatively close to the slow flow reservoir
in the dry season and close to the hillslope reservoir in the wet season as
connectivity changed. This is consistent with the changing storage dynamics
shown above. However, a distinct feature in Fig. 10 is that the water ages in
the fast flow reservoir were younger than that from the hillslope reservoir
during some events in the wet period. This again most likely reflects the
role of sinkholes in collecting water with a high proportion of new rainfall
(young water) in intense wet season rain events and then recharging
underground stream rapidly due to the direct, transient connectivity.</p>
      <p id="d1e4189">Figure 10 also shows that uncertainty bands increase with age in the three
water fluxes, i.e. narrowest for the youngest hillslope flow and widest for
the oldest slow flow. However, the seasonal changes of uncertainty bands are
different for the three water fluxes. For the hillslope flow and the fast
flow in depression, the uncertainty bands reduce in the wet period as ages
decrease. In contrast, for the slow flow reservoir, uncertainty bands
increase during the wet period (Fig. 10). This underlines the resulting
uncertainty for the slow reservoir, reflecting the structural limitations
with the model for conceptualizing the flow dynamics of this heterogenous
zone during the rainfall season.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11"><caption><p id="d1e4195">Probability density functions of the simulated water ages for the
best 500 runs in fluxes for all three reservoirs.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4204">The probability density functions (PDFs) of the simulated flux ages from the
three reservoirs are shown in Fig. 11 (using the best 500 parameter sets).
The ages of fluxes from the fast flow reservoir varied from a few days to
over 600 days, and it is clearly evident that the PDF was bimodal, with peaks
corresponding to water ages of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">550</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> days. From the water
age dynamics in Fig. 10, it is equally clear that the bimodal distribution of
ages of underground streamflow reflected the seasonality of different water
source contributions in the wet and dry seasons. The underground streamflow
was dominated by older water from the matrix and small fractures during the
dry period and by younger hillslope fluxes during the wet period,
respectively. The water age distributions for the hillslope also showed
seasonal bimodality in flux ages, albeit less pronounced, though the model
has also produced a less smooth distribution of more transient younger ages.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5">
  <title>Discussion</title>
      <p id="d1e4235">In karst areas, complex subsurface flow systems, with high spatial
heterogeneity in porosity and structure, and marked temporal variations in
hydrological connectivity, dictate that the karst critical zone is a
particular challenge to hydrological modelling. Tracer-aided conceptual
modelling is helpful in understanding karst regions, because using isotope
tracers as “fingerprints” means that hydrological processes can be tracked
in a way that provides insights into storage dynamics and can resolve
“fast” and “slow” water fluxes and estimate their ages with different
units of a catchment. This supports other recent studies that water quality
data can help inform and constrain modelling in karst environments (e.g.
Hartmann et al., 2017).</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS1">
  <title>Hydrological connectivity between different landscape units</title>
      <p id="d1e4243">Since the hillslope depression is a typical landform with variable
hydrological connectivity in the karst catchments in the south-west of China
and elsewhere, the separation of the hillslope and depression in the new
model structure improved model performance and yielded more informative
results showing clearly the flow and tracer dynamics within different
landscape units, as well as tracking spatially distributed storages and ages
of water flux. The model was successfully calibrated to the flow and tracer
dynamics at the catchment outlet; the results also showed more qualitatively
consistent performance in terms of the dynamics
of the modelled hillslope fluxes compared with spring discharge and the
simulated isotopic composition of fluxes with measurements in the spring and
wells. Moreover, the modelling approach is potentially transferable to other
cockpit karst catchments with similar landscape organization.</p>
      <p id="d1e4246">The tracer-aided model supports general appropriateness of the model
structure which related connectivity dynamics to storage change within
different landscape units. During the dry period, there is weak hydrological
connectivity between the hillslope and depression due to the low hydraulic
gradients and/or hydraulic conductivity. In contrast, during the wet period,
hydrological connectivity between the hillslope and depression strengthens as
water storage increases. In the early recession, after heavy rain, large
fractures in the hillslope fill, leading to large water fluxes into the
depression. Then, as storage declines, fluxes decrease and the hydrological
connectivity weakens. Moreover, in each of the units, there is hydrological
connectivity and exchange<?pagebreak page63?> between dual porosity systems that were
conceptualized as the slow and fast flow reservoirs in this study. The
hydrological connectivity and exchange between the slow and fast flow
reservoirs is mainly controlled by the hydraulic gradients between two
mediums, rather than the storage. The flow directionality will change with
the hydraulic gradient between the two reservoirs. The bi-directional water
flux makes it fundamental to consider the directionality of connectivity
within the karst critical zone. Direct hydrological connectivity between the
surface and subsurface is also important in streamflow generation in karst
catchments. Besides infiltration through fractures and the matrix,
concentrated infiltration from surface to underground flow systems via
sinkholes is a distinct aspect of transient connectivity in karst catchments.
This influence is captured by the model conceptualization and shown in the
contribution of rainfall to the underground stream in Fig. 9. Although this
hydrological connection only occurs during heavy rain in the wet season, it
is one of the most distinct hydrological functions of the karst critical
zone. In this regard, it is similar to the cracks in soil leading to high
percolation via preferential flow paths under flooding conditions (Zhang et
al., 2015). In addition, flow paths
in urban areas, with transient connectivity of storm drains, have been
compared to karst (Bonneau et al., 2017), and whilst this gives similar short
response times and a dominance of young water (Soulsby et al., 2014), urban
systems are simpler and bi-directional connectivity is less significant.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS2">
  <title>Water ages of different conceptual stores</title>
      <p id="d1e4255">By characterizing the variable water ages of different landscape units, we
can deepen our understanding of the non-linear water storage dynamics and
runoff generation processes (Soulsby et al., 2015). Water ages reflect the
time variance and non-linearities of how different runoff sources are
connected and the dynamics of their relative contribution to runoff
generation (Birkel et al., 2012). Recent work has demonstrated the
controlling effect of hydrogeological conditions on water ages in karst areas
(Mueller et al., 2013). The underground stream water ages at the catchment
outlet can be viewed as the time-varying integration of spatially distributed
water fluxes from the hillslope unit and small fractures in the depression
aquifer, which each have their own age dynamics (Fig. 10). There is a
distinct pattern of bimodality in the age distribution of underground
streamflow (represented by the fast reservoir in Fig. 11), which reflects the
seasonality of the different water sources. Younger waters mainly come from
surface water recharge through sinkholes after heavy rain and drainage from
the hillslopes, whilst the slow flow reservoir dominates low flows. According
to the water age dynamics of different conceptual stores, it can be deduced
that storage-driven changes in hydrological connectivity and associated
mixing processes largely determine the non-stationary water age distribution
of the underground stream. In this sense, karst catchments seem to be subject
to the “inverse storage effect”, where periods of high storage facilitate
transit of younger water to drainage (Harman, 2015).</p>
      <p id="d1e4258">It should be noted that the ages derived from the modelling are based on
stable isotope tracers, which whilst well suited to characterizing the
influence of younger waters, are less well suited to constraining the age of
older waters (&gt;5 years) that may be present in deeper aquifers
and fine pores that contribute to the slow flow reservoir (e.g. Jasechko et
al., 2017). Thus further work is needed to assess the role of these older
waters and quantify their influence on the ages of water in the underground
channel (e.g. McDonnell and Beven, 2014). That said, the dominance of younger
water in the outflow of responsive karst catchments is consistent with recent
theoretical (Berghuijs and Kirchner, 2017), larger-scale (Jasechko et al.,
2016) and more local studies (Ala-aho et al., 2017b) which show that deeper,
oldest groundwater often makes insignificant or limited contributions to
streamflow.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS3">
  <title>High temporal resolution isotope data for karst area</title>
      <p id="d1e4267">There is a marked shift in the isotopic composition of storm event rainfall
which effects the short-term response of the catchment outlet; thus, weekly
or even daily isotope data would not adequately capture the variability of
rainfall isotope signatures at a resolution appropriate to the response times
of sub-tropical karst systems (Coplen et al., 2008). The assessment of water
ages in the critical zone is highly dependent on the temporal resolution of
tracer data in rainfall and streamflow for model conceptualization (Birkel et
al., 2012; McDonnell and Beven, 2014). The high-frequency measurements of
tracer behaviour enhanced our understanding of catchments' hydrological
function and the associated timescales of the celerity of the hydrological
response to rainfall inputs and the velocity of water particles. Also, the
high-resolution tracer data yielded novel insights into how the model
integrates and aggregates the intrinsic complexity and heterogeneity of
catchments, in order to reproduce behaviour adequately across a range of
timescales (Kirchner et al., 2004). However, it should be noted that in much
previous tracer-based modelling, the temporal resolution of hydrometric data
(typically hourly) is at a much finer temporal resolution than tracer data,
sampled more often at daily or even weekly resolution (Stets et al., 2010;
Birkel et al., 2010, 2011; McMillan et al., 2012; Soulsby et al., 2015;
Ala-aho et al., 2017a). Here, due to the marked heterogeneity of flow paths
in the karst critical zone, and the very rapid (i.e. sub-daily) streamflow
responses to high-intensity precipitation, the modelling of flow and tracer
dynamics, as well as flux age estimates, need to account for the rapid flow
velocities within the karst aquifer. The response time of streamflows/conduit
flows or groundwaters level to rainfall is very short in karst catchments,
e.g. typically a few hours in small catchments like Chenqi (Zhang et al.,
2013; Delbart et al., 2014; Labat and Mangin, 2015; Rathay et al., 2017).
Coarser-resolution<?pagebreak page64?> data would result in increased uncertainty in the
short-term components of travel times (Seeger and Weiler, 2014) and a likely
bias towards longer transit times (Heidbüchel et al., 2012). Thus a
significant advance of the new model used in this study was that observation
and model results captured the flashy (sub-daily) responses of flow and
isotope signatures at hourly timescales.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5.SS4">
  <title>Equifinality of model parameters and uncertainty of the modelled
results</title>
      <p id="d1e4277">The tracer-aided conceptual model used here provided an opportunity to
improve the basis for model evaluation and constrain parameter sets,
potentially reducing such uncertainty (Beven, 1993). However, high
uncertainty always accompanies modelling in such complex landscapes since the
tracer-aided model increases model parameterization for the tracer modules.
When we further compared the parameter sensitivities when the model was
separately calibrated against the outlet discharge and/or water isotopes,
using KGE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula> and KGE<inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, the trade-offs
associated with different calibration strategies became evident. The
sensitivity analysis (using plots similar to those in Fig. 5 and shown in the
Supplement) showed that increasing the two sensitive parameters in the
isotope module (the coefficient for evaporation fractionation Is and the
weighted isotope composition of rainfall input by the parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>)
results in three parameters in the flow module becoming insensitive when a
combined objective function is used. These are the slow reservoir constant
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), the exchange constant between the two reservoirs
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and the ratio of porosity of the quick to slow flow reservoir
(f). Consequently, equifinality remains for parameters in the trace-aided
model, as the former two sensitive parameters in the isotopic module take
functions in the outlet flow (being “old/new”), similar to the latter three
parameters in the flow module. The former two sensitive parameters in the
isotopic module emphasize atmospheric effects on the outlet flow (being
“old/new”). A higher Is indicates more evaporative effect on the stored
water, leading to the stored and released water being older, particularly
during the dry period. Increasing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> indicates newer rainfall recharge
(with more negative isotopic values) into an aquifer, resulting in the stored
and released water being newer during the rainfall period. Alternatively, the
latter three parameters in the flow module emphasize effects of fast (newer)
and slow (older) flows in aquifer on the outlet flow (being “old/new”).
More water release from the slow reservoir (larger <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and
greater release of the slow reservoir into the fast reservoir (larger
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) could lead to the released water being older in the dry
season; a high proportion of the fast flow storage (larger f) and a greater
exchange between the fast reservoir and the slow reservoir (larger
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) could lead to the released water being newer in the wet
season. The equifinality for these parameters might only be overcome when we
have additional field data to better constrain them (e.g. knowing the
evaporative effect on water Is and the weighted isotope composition of
rainfall input by the parameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>). Despite this, using tracers in the
model provides evidence of the mixing, flux and age relationships, which
would not be possible from flow-related calibration alone.</p>
      <p id="d1e4375">The modelling uncertainty of hydrological variables in different units relies
on connectivity of the units with the outlet if only the flow and isotopes at
the catchment outlet are used as calibration targets. For example, since
hydrological connectivity between the outlet and the catchment units
decreases in the order fast flow in the depression &lt; hillslope
flow &lt; slow flow in the depression, the uncertainty bands for the
three storages increase in the same order. Also, the modelling uncertainty
increases with ages of water sources, contributing into the catchment outlet
due to the decrease in variability of the tracer signal in the larger stores.
Some of the markedly enriched isotope signals at the outlet during the event
peaks are most likely explained by fractionated water being displaced from
the paddy fields during event peaks. Hence, the model skill in capturing the
effects of evaporative fractionation needs to be further investigated in the
model, in terms of both process-based parameterization of fractionation (e.g.
Kuppel et al., 2018) and possibly differentiating paddy fields as a separate
landscape unit, though of course this would be a trade-off with increased
parameterization and further equifinality.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S6" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e4385">We significantly enhanced a catchment-scale flow–tracer model for karst
systems developed by Zhang et al. (2017) by conceptualizing two main
hydrological response units: hillslope and depression, each containing fast
and slow flow reservoirs. With this framework, we could calibrate the model
using high temporal resolution hydrometric and isotopic data to track hourly
water and isotope fluxes through a 1.25 km<inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> karst catchment in
south-western China. The model captured the flow and tracer dynamics within
each landscape unit quite well, and we could estimate the storage, fluxes and
age of water within each. This inferred that the fast flow reservoir had the
smallest storage, the hillslope unit was intermediate, and the slow flow
reservoir had the largest. The estimated mean ages of the hillslope unit and
fast and slow flow reservoirs were 137, 326 and 493 days, respectively.
Marked seasonal variabilities in hydroclimate and associated water storage
dynamics were the main drivers of non-stationary hydrological connectivity
between the hillslope and depression. Meanwhile, the hydrological
connectivity between the slow and fast slow reservoirs had variable
directionality, which was determined by the hydraulic head within each
medium. Sinkholes can make an important hydrological connectivity between
surface water and underground streamflow after heavy rain. New water
recharges the underground stream via sinkholes, introducing younger<?pagebreak page65?> water
into the underground streamflow. Such tracer-aided models enhance our
understanding of the hydrological connectivity between different landscape
units and the mixing processes between various flow sources. Meanwhile, the
tracer-aided model can be used to identify uncertainty sources of the
modelled results, e.g. the modelling uncertainty of the hydrological
variables in any units in relation to their connectivity with the outlet and
ages of the flow components. Whist the model here needs further development
(e.g. the parameterization of isotopic fractionation in the paddy fields) and
further assessment and testing requires longer and more detailed (e.g. better
characterization of older waters) observation data, it is an encouraging step
forward in tracer-aided modelling of karst catchments.</p>
</sec>

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

      <p id="d1e4401">The isotope data as well as rainfall and flow measurements
used for this paper can be shared after the ending of our project (2019)
according to the project executive policy. Anyone who would like to use the
data can contact the corresponding author after signing the agreement. The
data were obtained through a purchasing agreement for this study. GIS data in
this study are available.</p>
  </notes><?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?><app-group>

<?pagebreak page66?><app id="App1.Ch1.S1">
  <title/>

<?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.T1"><?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?><caption><p id="d1e4416">Water/isotope/age flux equations of the model.</p></caption>
  <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?><?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-t03-part01.png"/>
</table-wrap>

<?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?><?xmltex \hack{\addtocounter{table}{-1}}?><?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.T2"><?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?><caption><p id="d1e4430">Continued.</p></caption>
  <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?><?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://hess.copernicus.org/articles/23/51/2019/hess-23-51-2019-t03-part02.png"/>
</table-wrap>

<?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?><?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="App1.Ch1.T3"><caption><p id="d1e4443">Description of the calibrated parameters.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="justify" colwidth="283pt"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Coefficient</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Units</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Descriptions</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">h</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">The slow flow reservoir constant</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">f</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">h</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">The fast flow reservoir constant</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>K</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">e</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">h</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Exchange constant between the two reservoirs</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">The ratio of porosity of the quick to slow flow reservoir</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Precipitation recharge coefficient for slow flow reservoir</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mi>w</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">The hillslope unit constant</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mi>b</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Recharge coefficient of hillslope to slow flow reservoir</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Is</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Coefficient for evaporation fractionation</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">α</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Constant for calculation of rainfall recharging the active store in hillslope</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">β</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">φ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Coefficient for exchange flow between active and passive stores in hillslope</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">τ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Weighting constant</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

<?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?><supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d1e4688">The supplement related to this article is available online at: <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-51-2019-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-23-51-2019-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
</app>
  </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution">

      <p id="d1e4699">ZZ, XC, and CS conducted the modelling work and data interpretation, ZZ and
QC conducted the field and laboratory work, and ZZ prepared the manuscript
with contributions from the co-authors.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e4705">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e4711">This research was supported by The UK-China Critical Zone Observatory (CZO)
Programme (41571130071), the National Natural Scientific Foundation of China
(41571020, 41601013), the National 973 Program of China (2015CB452701), the
National Key Research and development Program of China (2016YFC0502602), the
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2016B04814) and the
UK Natural Environment Research Council (NE/N007468/1). In addition, we thank
Sylvain Kuppel, the two anonymous reviewers, Thom Bogaard and the editor for
their constructive comments which significantly improved the
manuscript.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Edited by: Roberto Greco
<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Reviewed by: Thom Bogaard and two anonymous referees</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Ala-aho, P., Tetzlaff, D., McNamara, J. P., Laudon, H., and Soulsby, C.:
Using isotopes to constrain water flux and age estimates in snow-influenced
catchments using the STARR (Spatially distributed Tracer-Aided
Rainfall-Runoff) model, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 5089–5110,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5089-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-21-5089-2017</ext-link>, 2017a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Ala-aho, P., Soulsby, C., Wang, H., and Tetzlaff, D.: Integrated
surface-subsurface model to investigate the role of groundwater in headwater
catchment runoff generation: A minimalist approach to parameterisation, J.
Hydrol., 547, 664–677, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.02.023" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.02.023</ext-link>, 2017b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Bakalowicz, M.: Karst groundwater: A challenge for new resources, Hydrogeol.
J., 13, 148–160, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-004-0402-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10040-004-0402-9</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>Berghuijs, W. R. and Kirchner, J. W.: The relationship between contrasting
ages of groundwater and streamflow, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 8925–8935,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074962" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017GL074962</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>Beven, K.: Prophecy, reality and uncertainty in distributed hydrological
modelling, Adv. Water Resour., 16, 41–51,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0309-1708(93)90028-E" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/0309-1708(93)90028-E</ext-link>, 1993.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Beven, K.: A manifesto for the equifinality thesis,   J. Hydrol.,
320,  18–36, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Birkel, C. and Soulsby, C.: Advancing tracer-aided rainfall-runoff
modelling: A review of progress, problems and unrealised potential, Hydrol.
Process., 29, 5227–5240, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10594" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.10594</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Birkel, C., Tetzlaff, D., Dunn, S. M., and Soulsby, C.: Towards a simple
dynamic process conceptualization in rainfall-runoff models using
multi-criteria calibration and tracers in temperate, upland catchments,
Hydrol. Process., 24, 260–275, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7478" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.7478</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>Birkel, C., Tetzlaff, D., Dunn, S. M., and Soulsby, C.: Using time domain and
geographic source tracers to conceptualize streamflow generation processes
in lumped rainfall-runoff models, Water Resour. Res., 47, W02515,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010WR009547" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010WR009547</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>Birkel, C., Soulsby, C., Tetzlaff, D., Dunn, S., and Spezia, L.:
High-frequency storm event isotope sampling reveals time-variant transit
time distributions and influence of diurnal cycles, Hydrol. Process., 26,
308–316, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8210" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.8210</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>Birkel, C., Soulsby, C., and Tetzlaff, D.: Conceptual modelling to assess how
the interplay of hydrological connectivity, catchment storage and tracer
dynamics controls nonstationary water age estimates, Hydrol. Process.,
29, 2956–2969, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10414" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.10414</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Bonneau, J., Fletcher, T. D., Costelloe, J. F., and Burns, M. J.: Stormwater
infiltration and the “urban karst” – A review, J. Hydrol., 552, 141–150,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.06.043" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.06.043</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Charlier, J. B., Bertrand, C., and Mudry, J.: Conceptual hydrogeological
model of flow and transport of dissolved organic carbon in a small Jura
karst system, J. Hydrol., 460–461, 52–64,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.06.043" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.06.043</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Chen, X., Zhang, Z. C., Soulsby, C., Cheng, Q. B., Binley, A., Jiang, R., and
Tao, M.: Characterizing the heterogeneity of karst critical zone and its
hydrological function: an integrated approach, Hydrol. Process., 32, 1–15, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.13232" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.13232</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Coplen, T. B., Neiman, P. J., White, A. B., Landwehr, J. M., Ralph, F. M.,
and Dettinger, M. D.: Extreme changes in stable hydrogen isotopes and
precipitation characteristics in a landfalling Pacific storm, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 35, L21808, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL035481" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008GL035481</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Delbart, C., Valdes, D., Barbecot, F., Tognelli, A., Richon, P., and
Couchoux, L.: Temporal variability of karst aquifer response time
established by the sliding-windows cross-correlation method, J. Hydrol.,
511, 580–588, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.02.008" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.02.008</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Dewaide, L., Bonniver, I., Rochez, G., and Hallet, V.: Solute transport in
heterogeneous karst systems: Dimensioning and estimation of the transport
parameters via multi-sampling tracer-tests modelling using the OTIS
(One-dimensional Transport with Inflow and Storage) program, J. Hydrol.,
534, 567–578, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.01.049" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.01.049</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Field, M. S. and Pinsky, P. F.: A two-region nonequilibrium model for solute
transport in solution conduits in karstic aquifers, J. Contam. Hydrol.,
44, 329–351, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7722(00)00099-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0169-7722(00)00099-1</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Fleury, P., Plagnes, V., and Bakalowicz, M.: Modelling of the functioning of
karst aquifers with a reservoir model: Application to Fontaine de Vaucluse
(South of France), J. Hydrol., 345, 38–49,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.07.014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.07.014</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Ford, D. and Williams, P.: Karst Hydrogeology and Geomorphology,   John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118684986" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/9781118684986</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page70?><ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Freer, J., Beven, K., and Ambroise, B.: Bayesian estimation of uncertainty in
runoff prediction and the value of data: An application of the GLUE
approach, Water Resour. Res., 32, 2161–2173, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96WR03723" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/96WR03723</ext-link>,
1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Goldscheider, N. and Drew, D.: Methods in Karst Hydrogeology: IAH:
International Contributions to Hydrogeology, 26, Crc Press, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>Goldscheider, N., Meiman, J., Pronk, M., and Smart, C.: Tracer tests in karst
hydrogeology and speleology, Int. J. Speleol., 37, 27–40,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5038/1827-806X.37.1.3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5038/1827-806X.37.1.3</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Harman, C. J.: Time-variable transit time distributions and transport:
Theory and application to storage-dependent transport of chloride in a
watershed, Water Resour. Res., 51, 1–30, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>Hartmann, A., Wagener, T., Rimmer, A., Lange, J., Brielmann, H., and Weiler,
M.: Testing the realism of model structures to identify karst system
processes using water quality and quantity signatures, Water Resour. Res.,
49, 3345–3358, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20229" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/wrcr.20229</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Hartmann, A., Goldscheider, N., Wagener, T., Lange, J., and Weiler, M.: Karst
water resources in a changing world: Review of hydrological modeling
approaches, Rev. Geophys., 52, 218–242, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000443" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013RG000443</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Hartmann, A., Barberá, J. A., and Andreo, B.: On the value of water
quality data and informative flow states in karst modelling, Hydrol. Earth
Syst. Sci., 21, 5971–5985, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5971-2017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-21-5971-2017</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>Heidbüchel, I., Troch, P. A., Lyon, S. W., and Weiler, M.: The master
transit time distribution of variable flow systems, Water Resour. Res.,
48, W06520,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011293" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011WR011293</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>Jasechko, S., Kirchner, J. W., Welker, J. M., and McDonnell, J. J.:
Substantial proportion of global streamflow less than three months old, Nat.
Geosci., 9, 126–129, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2636" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ngeo2636</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>Jasechko, S., Perrone, D., Befus, K. M., Bayani Cardenas, M., Ferguson, G.,
Gleeson, T., Luijendijk, E., McDonnell, J. J., Taylor, R. G., Wada, Y., and
Kirchner, J. W.: Global aquifers dominated by fossil groundwaters but wells
vulnerable to modern contamination, Nat. Geosci., 10, 425–429,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2943" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ngeo2943</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>Jencso, K. G., McGlynn, B. L., Gooseff, M. N., Bencala, K. E., and Wondzell,
S. M.: Hillslope hydrologic connectivity controls riparian groundwater
turnover: Implications of catchment structure for riparian buffering and
stream water sources, Water Resour. Res., 46, W10524, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR008818" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009WR008818</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>Jukic, D. and Denić-Jukić, V.: Groundwater balance estimation in
karst by using a conceptual rainfall – runoff model, J. Hydrol., 373,
302–315, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.04.035" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.04.035</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Kirchner, J. W.: A double paradox in catchment hydrology and geochemistry,
Hydrol. Process., 17, 871–874, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.5108" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.5108</ext-link>, 2003.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>Kirchner, J. W., Feng, X., Neal, C., and Robson, A. J.: The fine structure of
water-quality dynamics: The (high-frequency) wave of the future, Hydrol.
Process., 18, 1353–1359, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.5537" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.5537</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>Kling, H., Fuchs, M., and Paulin, M.: Runoff conditions in the upper Danube
basin under an ensemble of climate change scenarios, J. Hydrol., 424–425,
264–277, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.01.011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.01.011</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Kogovsek, J. and Petric, M.: Solute transport processes in a karst vadose
zone characterized by long-term tracer tests (the cave system of Postojnska
Jama, Slovenia), J. Hydrol., 519, 1205–1213,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.08.047" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.08.047</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>Kübeck, C., Maloszewski, P. J., and Benischke, R.: Determination of the
conduit structure in a karst aquifer based on tracer data-Lurbach system,
Austria, Hydrol. Process., 27, 225–235, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9221" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.9221</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Kuppel, S., Tetzlaff, D., Maneta, M. P., and Soulsby, C.: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">EcH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-iso
1.0: water isotopes and age tracking in a process-based, distributed
ecohydrological model, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3045–3069,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3045-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-11-3045-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>Labat, D. and Mangin, A.: Transfer function approach for artificial tracer
test interpretation in karstic systems, J. Hydrol., 529, 866–871,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.09.011" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.09.011</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Ladouche, B., Marechal, J. C., and Dorfliger, N.: Semi-distributed lumped
model of a karst system under active management, J. Hydrol., 509, 215–230,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.11.017" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.11.017</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Landwehr, J. and Coplen, T.: Line-conditioned excess: a new method for
characterizing stable hydrogen and oxygen isotope ratios in hydrologic
systems, in: Aquatic Forum 2004: International conference on isotopes in
environmental studies, 132–134,
2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>Landwehr, J. M., Coplen, T. B., and Stewart, D. W.: Spatial, seasonal, and
source variability in the stable oxygen and hydrogen isotopic composition of
tap waters throughout the USA, Hydrol. Process., 28, 5382–5422,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10004" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.10004</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>Legout, A., Legout, C., Nys, C., and Dambrine, E.: Preferential flow and slow
convective chloride transport through the soil of a forested landscape
(Fougères, France), Geoderma, 151, 179–190,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2009.04.002" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.geoderma.2009.04.002</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>Lexartza-Artza, I. and Wainwright, J.: Hydrological connectivity: Linking
concepts with practical implications, Catena, 79, 146–152,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2009.07.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.catena.2009.07.001</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>McCutcheon, R. J., McNamara, J. P., Kohn, M. J., and Evans, S. L.: An
evaluation of the ecohydrological separation hypothesis in a semiarid
catchment, Hydrol. Process., 31, 783–799, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11052" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.11052</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>McDonnell, J. J. and Beven, K.: Debates – The future of hydrological
sciences: A (common) path forward? A call to action aimed at understanding
velocities, celerities and residence time distributions of the headwater
hydrograph, Water Resour. Res., 50, 5342–5350, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR015141" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013WR015141</ext-link>,
2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>McMillan, H., Tetzlaff, D., Clark, M., and Soulsby, C.: Do time-variable
tracers aid the evaluation of hydrological model structure? A multimodel
approach, Water Resour. Res., 48, W05501, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011688" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2011WR011688</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>Morales, T., Uriarte, J. A., Olazar, M., Antigüedad, I., and Angulo, B.:
Solute transport modelling in karst conduits with slow zones during different
hydrologic conditions, J. Hydrol., 390, 182–189,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.06.041" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.06.041</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>Mudarra, M., Andreo, B., Marín, A. I., Vadillo, I., and Barberá, J.
A.: Combined use of natural and artificial tracers to determine the
hydrogeological functioning of a karst aquifer: the Villanueva del<?pagebreak page71?> Rosario
system (Andalusia, southern Spain), Hydrogeol. J., 22, 1027–1039,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-014-1117-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10040-014-1117-1</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>Mueller, M. H., Weingartner, R., and Alewell, C.: Importance of vegetation,
topography and flow paths for water transit times of base flow in alpine
headwater catchments, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 1661–1679,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-1661-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-17-1661-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>Peng, T. and Wang, S.: Effects of land use, land cover and rainfall regimes
on the surface runoff and soil loss on karst slopes in southwest China,
Catena, 90, 53–62, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2011.11.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.catena.2011.11.001</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>Perrin, C., Michel, C., and Andréassian, V.: Does a large number of
parameters enhance model performance? Comparative assessment of common
catchment model structures on 429 catchments, J. Hydrol., 242, 275–301,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00393-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00393-0</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>Rathay, S. Y., Allen, D. M., and Kirste, D.: Response of a fractured bedrock
aquifer to recharge from heavy rainfall events, J. Hydrol., 561, 1048–1062,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.07.042" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.07.042</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>Reaney, S. M., Bracken, L. J., and Kirkby, M. J.: The importance of surface
controls on overland flow connectivity in semi-arid environments: Results
from a numerical experimental approach, Hydrol. Process., 28,  2116–2128, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9769" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.9769</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>Rimmer, A. and Hartmann, A.: Simplified Conceptual Structures and Analytical
Solutions for Groundwater Discharge Using Reservoir Equations, Water Resour.
Manag. Model., 2, 217–238, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5772/34803" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5772/34803</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>Rimmer, A. and Salingar, Y.: Modelling precipitation-streamflow processes in
karst basin: The case of the Jordan River sources, Israel, J. Hydrol., 331,
524–542, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.06.003" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.06.003</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>Schaefli, B. and Gupta, H. V.: Do Nash values have value?, Hydrol. Process.,
21, 2075–2080, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6825" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.6825</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>Seeger, S. and Weiler, M.: Reevaluation of transit time distributions, mean
transit times and their relation to catchment topography, Hydrol. Earth Syst.
Sci., 18, 4751–4771, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-4751-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/hess-18-4751-2014</ext-link>,
2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>Soulsby, C., Birkel, C., and Tetzlaff, D.: Assessing urbanization impacts on
catchment transit times, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 442–448,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL058716" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013GL058716</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>Soulsby, C., Birkel, C., Geris, J., Dick, J., Tunaley, C., and Tetzlaff, D.:
Stream water age distributions controlled by storage dynamics and nonlinear
hydrologic connectivity: Modeling with high-resolution isotope data, Water
Resour. Res., 51, 7759–7776, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017888" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015WR017888</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>Sprenger, M., Leistert, H., Gimbel, K., and Weiler, M.: Illuminating
hydrological processes at the soil-vegetation-atmosphere interface with water
stable isotopes, Rev. Geophys., 54, 674–704, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015RG000515" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015RG000515</ext-link>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>Stets, E. G., Winter, T. C., Rosenberry, D. O., and Striegl, R. G.:
Quantification of surface water and groundwater flows to open – and
closed-basin lakes in a headwaters watershed using a descriptive oxygen
stable isotope model, Water Resour. Res., 46, W03515, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR007793" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2009WR007793</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>Tetzlaff, D., Birkel, C., Dick, J., Geris, J., and Soulsby, C.: Storage
dynamics in hydropedological units control hillslope connectivity, runoff
generation, and the evolution of catchment transit time distributions, Water
Resour. Res., 50, 969–985, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR014147" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013WR014147</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>Tritz, S., Guinot, V., and Jourde, H.: Modelling the behaviour of a karst
system catchment using non-linear hysteretic conceptual model, J. Hydrol.,
397, 250–262, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.12.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.12.001</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>van Schaik, N. L. M. B., Schnabel, S., and Jetten, V. G.: The influence of
preferential flow on hillslope hydrology in a semi-arid watershed (in the
Spanish Dehesas), Hydrol. Process., 22, 3844–3855, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6998" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.6998</ext-link>,
2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
White, W. B.: A brief history of karst hydrogeology: contributions of the
NSS, J. Cave Karst Stud., 69, 13–26, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>Worthington, S. R. H.: Diagnostic hydrogeologic characteristics of a karst
aquifer (Kentucky, USA), Hydrogeol. J., 17, 1665–1678,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-009-0489-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10040-009-0489-0</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>Worthington, S. R. H., Jeannin, P.-Y., Alexander, E. C., Davies, G. J., and
Schindel, G. M.: Contrasting definitions for the term “karst aquifer”,
Hydrogeol. J., 25, 1237–1240, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-017-1628-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10040-017-1628-7</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>Xie, Y., Cook, P. G., Simmons, C. T., Partington, D., Crosbie, R., and
Batelaan, O.: Uncertainty of groundwater recharge estimated from a water and
energy balance model, J. Hydrol., 561, 1081–1093, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.08.010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.08.010</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, Z., Chen, X., Ghadouani, A., and Shi, P.: Modelling hydrological
processes influenced by soil, rock and vegetation in a small karst basin of
southwest China, Hydrol. Process., 25, 2456–2470, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.8022</ext-link>,
2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, Z., Chen, X., Chen, X., and Shi, P.: Quantifying time lag of
epikarst-spring hydrograph response to rainfall using correlation and
spectral analyses, Hydrogeol. J., 21, 1619–1631,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-013-1041-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10040-013-1041-9</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, Z., Chen, X., and Soulsby C.: Catchment-scale conceptual modelling of
water and solute transport in the dual flow system of the karst critical
zone, Hydrol. Process., 31, 3421–3436, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11268" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/hyp.11268</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, Z. B., Peng, X., Zhou, H., Lin, H., and Sun, H.: Characterizing
preferential flow in cracked paddy soils using computed tomography and
breakthrough curve, Soil Till. Res., 146, 53–65, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2014.05.016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.still.2014.05.016</ext-link>,
2015.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Storage dynamics, hydrological connectivity and flux ages in a karst catchment: conceptual modelling using stable isotopes</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>We developed a new tracer-aided hydrological model that disaggregates cockpit
karst terrain into the two dominant landscape units of hillslopes and
depressions (with fast and slow flow systems). The new model was calibrated
by using high temporal resolution hydrometric and isotope data in the outflow
of Chenqi catchment in Guizhou Province of south-western China. The model
could track hourly water and isotope fluxes through each landscape unit and
estimate the associated storage and water age dynamics. From the model
results we inferred that the fast flow reservoir in the depression had the
smallest water storage and the slow flow reservoir the largest, with the
hillslope intermediate. The estimated mean ages of water draining the
hillslope unit, and the fast and slow flow reservoirs during the study
period, were 137, 326 and 493 days, respectively. Distinct seasonal
variability in hydroclimatic conditions and associated water storage dynamics
(captured by the model) were the main drivers of non-stationary hydrological
connectivity between the hillslope and depression. During the dry season,
slow flow in the depression contributes the largest proportion (78.4&thinsp;%)
of flow to the underground stream draining the catchment, resulting in weak
hydrological connectivity between the hillslope and depression. During the
wet period, with the resulting rapid increase in storage, the hillslope unit
contributes the largest proportion (57.5&thinsp;%) of flow to the underground
stream due to the strong hydrological connectivity between the hillslope and
depression. Meanwhile, the tracer-aided model can be used to identify the
sources of uncertainty in the model results. Our analysis showed that the
model uncertainty of the hydrological variables in the different units relies
on their connectivity with the outlet when the calibration target uses only
the outlet information. The model uncertainty was much lower for the
<q>newer</q> water from the fast flow system in the depression and flow from the
hillslope unit during the wet season and higher for <q>older</q> water from the
slow flow system in the depression. This suggests that to constrain model
parameters further, increased high-resolution hydrometric and tracer data on
the internal dynamics of systems (e.g. groundwater responses during low flow
periods) could be used in calibration.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Ala-aho, P., Tetzlaff, D., McNamara, J. P., Laudon, H., and Soulsby, C.:
Using isotopes to constrain water flux and age estimates in snow-influenced
catchments using the STARR (Spatially distributed Tracer-Aided
Rainfall-Runoff) model, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 5089–5110,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5089-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5089-2017</a>, 2017a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Ala-aho, P., Soulsby, C., Wang, H., and Tetzlaff, D.: Integrated
surface-subsurface model to investigate the role of groundwater in headwater
catchment runoff generation: A minimalist approach to parameterisation, J.
Hydrol., 547, 664–677, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.02.023" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.02.023</a>, 2017b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Bakalowicz, M.: Karst groundwater: A challenge for new resources, Hydrogeol.
J., 13, 148–160, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-004-0402-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-004-0402-9</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Berghuijs, W. R. and Kirchner, J. W.: The relationship between contrasting
ages of groundwater and streamflow, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 8925–8935,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074962" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL074962</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Beven, K.: Prophecy, reality and uncertainty in distributed hydrological
modelling, Adv. Water Resour., 16, 41–51,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0309-1708(93)90028-E" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/0309-1708(93)90028-E</a>, 1993.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Beven, K.: A manifesto for the equifinality thesis,   J. Hydrol.,
320,  18–36, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Birkel, C. and Soulsby, C.: Advancing tracer-aided rainfall-runoff
modelling: A review of progress, problems and unrealised potential, Hydrol.
Process., 29, 5227–5240, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10594" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10594</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Birkel, C., Tetzlaff, D., Dunn, S. M., and Soulsby, C.: Towards a simple
dynamic process conceptualization in rainfall-runoff models using
multi-criteria calibration and tracers in temperate, upland catchments,
Hydrol. Process., 24, 260–275, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7478" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7478</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Birkel, C., Tetzlaff, D., Dunn, S. M., and Soulsby, C.: Using time domain and
geographic source tracers to conceptualize streamflow generation processes
in lumped rainfall-runoff models, Water Resour. Res., 47, W02515,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010WR009547" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010WR009547</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Birkel, C., Soulsby, C., Tetzlaff, D., Dunn, S., and Spezia, L.:
High-frequency storm event isotope sampling reveals time-variant transit
time distributions and influence of diurnal cycles, Hydrol. Process., 26,
308–316, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8210" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8210</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Birkel, C., Soulsby, C., and Tetzlaff, D.: Conceptual modelling to assess how
the interplay of hydrological connectivity, catchment storage and tracer
dynamics controls nonstationary water age estimates, Hydrol. Process.,
29, 2956–2969, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10414" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10414</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Bonneau, J., Fletcher, T. D., Costelloe, J. F., and Burns, M. J.: Stormwater
infiltration and the “urban karst” – A review, J. Hydrol., 552, 141–150,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.06.043" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.06.043</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Charlier, J. B., Bertrand, C., and Mudry, J.: Conceptual hydrogeological
model of flow and transport of dissolved organic carbon in a small Jura
karst system, J. Hydrol., 460–461, 52–64,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.06.043" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.06.043</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Chen, X., Zhang, Z. C., Soulsby, C., Cheng, Q. B., Binley, A., Jiang, R., and
Tao, M.: Characterizing the heterogeneity of karst critical zone and its
hydrological function: an integrated approach, Hydrol. Process., 32, 1–15, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.13232" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.13232</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Coplen, T. B., Neiman, P. J., White, A. B., Landwehr, J. M., Ralph, F. M.,
and Dettinger, M. D.: Extreme changes in stable hydrogen isotopes and
precipitation characteristics in a landfalling Pacific storm, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 35, L21808, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL035481" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GL035481</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Delbart, C., Valdes, D., Barbecot, F., Tognelli, A., Richon, P., and
Couchoux, L.: Temporal variability of karst aquifer response time
established by the sliding-windows cross-correlation method, J. Hydrol.,
511, 580–588, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.02.008" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.02.008</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Dewaide, L., Bonniver, I., Rochez, G., and Hallet, V.: Solute transport in
heterogeneous karst systems: Dimensioning and estimation of the transport
parameters via multi-sampling tracer-tests modelling using the OTIS
(One-dimensional Transport with Inflow and Storage) program, J. Hydrol.,
534, 567–578, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.01.049" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.01.049</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Field, M. S. and Pinsky, P. F.: A two-region nonequilibrium model for solute
transport in solution conduits in karstic aquifers, J. Contam. Hydrol.,
44, 329–351, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7722(00)00099-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7722(00)00099-1</a>, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Fleury, P., Plagnes, V., and Bakalowicz, M.: Modelling of the functioning of
karst aquifers with a reservoir model: Application to Fontaine de Vaucluse
(South of France), J. Hydrol., 345, 38–49,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.07.014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.07.014</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Ford, D. and Williams, P.: Karst Hydrogeology and Geomorphology,   John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118684986" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118684986</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Freer, J., Beven, K., and Ambroise, B.: Bayesian estimation of uncertainty in
runoff prediction and the value of data: An application of the GLUE
approach, Water Resour. Res., 32, 2161–2173, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/96WR03723" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/96WR03723</a>,
1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Goldscheider, N. and Drew, D.: Methods in Karst Hydrogeology: IAH:
International Contributions to Hydrogeology, 26, Crc Press, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Goldscheider, N., Meiman, J., Pronk, M., and Smart, C.: Tracer tests in karst
hydrogeology and speleology, Int. J. Speleol., 37, 27–40,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5038/1827-806X.37.1.3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5038/1827-806X.37.1.3</a>, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Harman, C. J.: Time-variable transit time distributions and transport:
Theory and application to storage-dependent transport of chloride in a
watershed, Water Resour. Res., 51, 1–30, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Hartmann, A., Wagener, T., Rimmer, A., Lange, J., Brielmann, H., and Weiler,
M.: Testing the realism of model structures to identify karst system
processes using water quality and quantity signatures, Water Resour. Res.,
49, 3345–3358, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20229" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20229</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
Hartmann, A., Goldscheider, N., Wagener, T., Lange, J., and Weiler, M.: Karst
water resources in a changing world: Review of hydrological modeling
approaches, Rev. Geophys., 52, 218–242, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000443" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000443</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Hartmann, A., Barberá, J. A., and Andreo, B.: On the value of water
quality data and informative flow states in karst modelling, Hydrol. Earth
Syst. Sci., 21, 5971–5985, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5971-2017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-21-5971-2017</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Heidbüchel, I., Troch, P. A., Lyon, S. W., and Weiler, M.: The master
transit time distribution of variable flow systems, Water Resour. Res.,
48, W06520,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011293" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011293</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Jasechko, S., Kirchner, J. W., Welker, J. M., and McDonnell, J. J.:
Substantial proportion of global streamflow less than three months old, Nat.
Geosci., 9, 126–129, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2636" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2636</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Jasechko, S., Perrone, D., Befus, K. M., Bayani Cardenas, M., Ferguson, G.,
Gleeson, T., Luijendijk, E., McDonnell, J. J., Taylor, R. G., Wada, Y., and
Kirchner, J. W.: Global aquifers dominated by fossil groundwaters but wells
vulnerable to modern contamination, Nat. Geosci., 10, 425–429,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2943" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2943</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Jencso, K. G., McGlynn, B. L., Gooseff, M. N., Bencala, K. E., and Wondzell,
S. M.: Hillslope hydrologic connectivity controls riparian groundwater
turnover: Implications of catchment structure for riparian buffering and
stream water sources, Water Resour. Res., 46, W10524, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR008818" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR008818</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Jukic, D. and Denić-Jukić, V.: Groundwater balance estimation in
karst by using a conceptual rainfall – runoff model, J. Hydrol., 373,
302–315, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.04.035" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.04.035</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Kirchner, J. W.: A double paradox in catchment hydrology and geochemistry,
Hydrol. Process., 17, 871–874, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.5108" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.5108</a>, 2003.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Kirchner, J. W., Feng, X., Neal, C., and Robson, A. J.: The fine structure of
water-quality dynamics: The (high-frequency) wave of the future, Hydrol.
Process., 18, 1353–1359, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.5537" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.5537</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Kling, H., Fuchs, M., and Paulin, M.: Runoff conditions in the upper Danube
basin under an ensemble of climate change scenarios, J. Hydrol., 424–425,
264–277, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.01.011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.01.011</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Kogovsek, J. and Petric, M.: Solute transport processes in a karst vadose
zone characterized by long-term tracer tests (the cave system of Postojnska
Jama, Slovenia), J. Hydrol., 519, 1205–1213,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.08.047" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.08.047</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Kübeck, C., Maloszewski, P. J., and Benischke, R.: Determination of the
conduit structure in a karst aquifer based on tracer data-Lurbach system,
Austria, Hydrol. Process., 27, 225–235, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9221" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9221</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Kuppel, S., Tetzlaff, D., Maneta, M. P., and Soulsby, C.: EcH<sub>2</sub>O-iso
1.0: water isotopes and age tracking in a process-based, distributed
ecohydrological model, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 3045–3069,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3045-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-3045-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Labat, D. and Mangin, A.: Transfer function approach for artificial tracer
test interpretation in karstic systems, J. Hydrol., 529, 866–871,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.09.011" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.09.011</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Ladouche, B., Marechal, J. C., and Dorfliger, N.: Semi-distributed lumped
model of a karst system under active management, J. Hydrol., 509, 215–230,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.11.017" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.11.017</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Landwehr, J. and Coplen, T.: Line-conditioned excess: a new method for
characterizing stable hydrogen and oxygen isotope ratios in hydrologic
systems, in: Aquatic Forum 2004: International conference on isotopes in
environmental studies, 132–134,
2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Landwehr, J. M., Coplen, T. B., and Stewart, D. W.: Spatial, seasonal, and
source variability in the stable oxygen and hydrogen isotopic composition of
tap waters throughout the USA, Hydrol. Process., 28, 5382–5422,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10004" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10004</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Legout, A., Legout, C., Nys, C., and Dambrine, E.: Preferential flow and slow
convective chloride transport through the soil of a forested landscape
(Fougères, France), Geoderma, 151, 179–190,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2009.04.002" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2009.04.002</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Lexartza-Artza, I. and Wainwright, J.: Hydrological connectivity: Linking
concepts with practical implications, Catena, 79, 146–152,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2009.07.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2009.07.001</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
McCutcheon, R. J., McNamara, J. P., Kohn, M. J., and Evans, S. L.: An
evaluation of the ecohydrological separation hypothesis in a semiarid
catchment, Hydrol. Process., 31, 783–799, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11052" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11052</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
McDonnell, J. J. and Beven, K.: Debates – The future of hydrological
sciences: A (common) path forward? A call to action aimed at understanding
velocities, celerities and residence time distributions of the headwater
hydrograph, Water Resour. Res., 50, 5342–5350, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR015141" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR015141</a>,
2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
McMillan, H., Tetzlaff, D., Clark, M., and Soulsby, C.: Do time-variable
tracers aid the evaluation of hydrological model structure? A multimodel
approach, Water Resour. Res., 48, W05501, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011688" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011688</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Morales, T., Uriarte, J. A., Olazar, M., Antigüedad, I., and Angulo, B.:
Solute transport modelling in karst conduits with slow zones during different
hydrologic conditions, J. Hydrol., 390, 182–189,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.06.041" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.06.041</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Mudarra, M., Andreo, B., Marín, A. I., Vadillo, I., and Barberá, J.
A.: Combined use of natural and artificial tracers to determine the
hydrogeological functioning of a karst aquifer: the Villanueva del Rosario
system (Andalusia, southern Spain), Hydrogeol. J., 22, 1027–1039,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-014-1117-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-014-1117-1</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Mueller, M. H., Weingartner, R., and Alewell, C.: Importance of vegetation,
topography and flow paths for water transit times of base flow in alpine
headwater catchments, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 1661–1679,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-1661-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-1661-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Peng, T. and Wang, S.: Effects of land use, land cover and rainfall regimes
on the surface runoff and soil loss on karst slopes in southwest China,
Catena, 90, 53–62, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2011.11.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2011.11.001</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Perrin, C., Michel, C., and Andréassian, V.: Does a large number of
parameters enhance model performance? Comparative assessment of common
catchment model structures on 429 catchments, J. Hydrol., 242, 275–301,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00393-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00393-0</a>, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Rathay, S. Y., Allen, D. M., and Kirste, D.: Response of a fractured bedrock
aquifer to recharge from heavy rainfall events, J. Hydrol., 561, 1048–1062,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.07.042" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.07.042</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Reaney, S. M., Bracken, L. J., and Kirkby, M. J.: The importance of surface
controls on overland flow connectivity in semi-arid environments: Results
from a numerical experimental approach, Hydrol. Process., 28,  2116–2128, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9769" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9769</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Rimmer, A. and Hartmann, A.: Simplified Conceptual Structures and Analytical
Solutions for Groundwater Discharge Using Reservoir Equations, Water Resour.
Manag. Model., 2, 217–238, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5772/34803" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5772/34803</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Rimmer, A. and Salingar, Y.: Modelling precipitation-streamflow processes in
karst basin: The case of the Jordan River sources, Israel, J. Hydrol., 331,
524–542, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.06.003" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.06.003</a>, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Schaefli, B. and Gupta, H. V.: Do Nash values have value?, Hydrol. Process.,
21, 2075–2080, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6825" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6825</a>, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Seeger, S. and Weiler, M.: Reevaluation of transit time distributions, mean
transit times and their relation to catchment topography, Hydrol. Earth Syst.
Sci., 18, 4751–4771, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-4751-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-4751-2014</a>,
2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Soulsby, C., Birkel, C., and Tetzlaff, D.: Assessing urbanization impacts on
catchment transit times, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 442–448,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL058716" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL058716</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Soulsby, C., Birkel, C., Geris, J., Dick, J., Tunaley, C., and Tetzlaff, D.:
Stream water age distributions controlled by storage dynamics and nonlinear
hydrologic connectivity: Modeling with high-resolution isotope data, Water
Resour. Res., 51, 7759–7776, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017888" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017888</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Sprenger, M., Leistert, H., Gimbel, K., and Weiler, M.: Illuminating
hydrological processes at the soil-vegetation-atmosphere interface with water
stable isotopes, Rev. Geophys., 54, 674–704, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015RG000515" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015RG000515</a>, 2016.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Stets, E. G., Winter, T. C., Rosenberry, D. O., and Striegl, R. G.:
Quantification of surface water and groundwater flows to open – and
closed-basin lakes in a headwaters watershed using a descriptive oxygen
stable isotope model, Water Resour. Res., 46, W03515, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR007793" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR007793</a>, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Tetzlaff, D., Birkel, C., Dick, J., Geris, J., and Soulsby, C.: Storage
dynamics in hydropedological units control hillslope connectivity, runoff
generation, and the evolution of catchment transit time distributions, Water
Resour. Res., 50, 969–985, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR014147" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR014147</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Tritz, S., Guinot, V., and Jourde, H.: Modelling the behaviour of a karst
system catchment using non-linear hysteretic conceptual model, J. Hydrol.,
397, 250–262, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.12.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.12.001</a>, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
van Schaik, N. L. M. B., Schnabel, S., and Jetten, V. G.: The influence of
preferential flow on hillslope hydrology in a semi-arid watershed (in the
Spanish Dehesas), Hydrol. Process., 22, 3844–3855, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6998" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6998</a>,
2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
White, W. B.: A brief history of karst hydrogeology: contributions of the
NSS, J. Cave Karst Stud., 69, 13–26, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Worthington, S. R. H.: Diagnostic hydrogeologic characteristics of a karst
aquifer (Kentucky, USA), Hydrogeol. J., 17, 1665–1678,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-009-0489-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-009-0489-0</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Worthington, S. R. H., Jeannin, P.-Y., Alexander, E. C., Davies, G. J., and
Schindel, G. M.: Contrasting definitions for the term “karst aquifer”,
Hydrogeol. J., 25, 1237–1240, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-017-1628-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-017-1628-7</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Xie, Y., Cook, P. G., Simmons, C. T., Partington, D., Crosbie, R., and
Batelaan, O.: Uncertainty of groundwater recharge estimated from a water and
energy balance model, J. Hydrol., 561, 1081–1093, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.08.010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2017.08.010</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Z., Chen, X., Ghadouani, A., and Shi, P.: Modelling hydrological
processes influenced by soil, rock and vegetation in a small karst basin of
southwest China, Hydrol. Process., 25, 2456–2470, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8022</a>,
2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Z., Chen, X., Chen, X., and Shi, P.: Quantifying time lag of
epikarst-spring hydrograph response to rainfall using correlation and
spectral analyses, Hydrogeol. J., 21, 1619–1631,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-013-1041-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-013-1041-9</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Z., Chen, X., and Soulsby C.: Catchment-scale conceptual modelling of
water and solute transport in the dual flow system of the karst critical
zone, Hydrol. Process., 31, 3421–3436, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11268" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11268</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, Z. B., Peng, X., Zhou, H., Lin, H., and Sun, H.: Characterizing
preferential flow in cracked paddy soils using computed tomography and
breakthrough curve, Soil Till. Res., 146, 53–65, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2014.05.016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2014.05.016</a>,
2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
