Articles | Volume 25, issue 2
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-527-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Special issue:
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-527-2021
© Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Review article
| 
02 Feb 2021
Review article |
| 02 Feb 2021
| 02 Feb 2021
A history of TOPMODEL
Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
Mike J. Kirkby
School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Jim E. Freer
University of Saskatchewan, Centre for Hydrology, Canmore, Canada
School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
JBA Trust, Broughton, UK
Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
Related authors
Elizabeth Follett, Keith Beven, Barry Hankin, David Mindham, and Nick Chappell
Proc. IAHS, 385, 197–201, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-385-197-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-385-197-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents a spreadsheet design tool for barriers in streams used for natural flood management. Retention times in such barriers should neither be too short (they fill and empty too quickly) or too long (they might already be full when a flood occurs). Previous work has shown the order of 10 h to be effective. The tool is freely available for download at https://www.jbatrust.org/how-we-help/publications-resources/rivers-and-coasts/nfm-leaky-barrier-retention-times.
Keith Beven, Trevor Page, Paul Smith, Ann Kretzschmar, Barry Hankin, and Nick Chappell
Proc. IAHS, 385, 129–134, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-385-129-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-385-129-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents a method of deciding when a hydrological model might be fit for purpose given the limitations of the data that are available for model evaluation. In this case the purpose is to reproduce the peak flows for an application that is concerned with evaluating the effect of natural flood management measures on flood peaks. It is shown that while all the models fail to pass the test at all time steps, there is an ensemble of models that pass for the hydrograph peaks.
Trevor Page, Paul Smith, Keith Beven, Francesca Pianosi, Fanny Sarrazin, Susana Almeida, Liz Holcombe, Jim Freer, Nick Chappell, and Thorsten Wagener
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 2523–2534, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-2523-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-2523-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This publication provides an introduction to the CREDIBLE Uncertainty Estimation (CURE) toolbox. CURE offers workflows for a variety of uncertainty estimation methods. One of its most important features is the requirement that all of the assumptions on which a workflow analysis depends be defined. This facilitates communication with potential users of an analysis. An audit trail log is produced automatically from a workflow for future reference.
Antonio Capponi, Natalie J. Harvey, Helen F. Dacre, Keith Beven, Cameron Saint, Cathie Wells, and Mike R. James
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 6115–6134, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-6115-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-6115-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Forecasts of the dispersal of volcanic ash in the atmosphere are hampered by uncertainties in parameters describing the characteristics of volcanic plumes. Uncertainty quantification is vital for making robust flight-planning decisions. We present a method using satellite data to refine a series of volcanic ash dispersion forecasts and quantify these uncertainties. We show how we can improve forecast accuracy and potentially reduce the regions of high risk of volcanic ash relevant to aviation.
Paul C. Astagneau, Guillaume Thirel, Olivier Delaigue, Joseph H. A. Guillaume, Juraj Parajka, Claudia C. Brauer, Alberto Viglione, Wouter Buytaert, and Keith J. Beven
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 3937–3973, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3937-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3937-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The R programming language has become an important tool for many applications in hydrology. In this study, we provide an analysis of some of the R tools providing hydrological models. In total, two aspects are uniformly investigated, namely the conceptualisation of the models and the practicality of their implementation for end-users. These comparisons aim at easing the choice of R tools for users and at improving their usability for hydrology modelling to support more transferable research.
Keith Beven
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 851–866, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-851-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-851-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Inspired by a quotation from Howard Cook in 1946, this paper traces the evolution of the infiltration theory of runoff from the work of Robert Horton and LeRoy Sherman in the 1930s to the early digital computer models of the 1970s and 1980s. Reconsideration of the perceptual model for many catchments, partly as a result of the greater appreciation of the contribution of subsurface flows to the hydrograph indicated by tracer studies, suggests a reconsideration of hydrological nomenclature.
Francesca Pianosi, Georgios Sarailidis, Kirsty Styles, Philip Oldham, Stephen Hutchings, Rob Lamb, and Thorsten Wagener
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3310, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-3310, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS).
Short summary
Short summary
Flood risk models are essential to support risk management. As they simulate complex interactions between climate, the natural and the built environment, they unavoidably embed a range of simplifying assumptions. In this paper, we propose a more rigorous approach to analyse the impact of uncertain assumptions on modelling results. This is important to improve model transparency and set priorities for improving models.
Shervan Gharari, Paul H. Whitfield, Alain Pietroniro, Jim Freer, Hongli Liu, and Martyn P. Clark
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4383–4405, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4383-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4383-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This study provides insight into the practices that are incorporated into discharge estimation across the national Canadian hydrometric network operated by the Water Survey of Canada (WSC). The procedures used to estimate and correct discharge values are not always understood by end-users. Factors such as ice cover and sedimentation limit accurate discharge estimation. Highlighting these challenges sheds light on difficulties in discharge estimation and the associated uncertainty.
Saskia Salwey, Gemma Coxon, Francesca Pianosi, Rosanna Lane, Chris Hutton, Michael Bliss Singer, Hilary McMillan, and Jim Freer
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 28, 4203–4218, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4203-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-28-4203-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Reservoirs are essential for water resource management and can significantly impact downstream flow. However, representing reservoirs in hydrological models can be challenging, particularly across large scales. We design a new and simple method for simulating river flow downstream of water supply reservoirs using only open-access data. We demonstrate the approach in 264 reservoir catchments across Great Britain, where we can significantly improve the simulation of reservoir-impacted flow.
Elizabeth Follett, Keith Beven, Barry Hankin, David Mindham, and Nick Chappell
Proc. IAHS, 385, 197–201, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-385-197-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-385-197-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents a spreadsheet design tool for barriers in streams used for natural flood management. Retention times in such barriers should neither be too short (they fill and empty too quickly) or too long (they might already be full when a flood occurs). Previous work has shown the order of 10 h to be effective. The tool is freely available for download at https://www.jbatrust.org/how-we-help/publications-resources/rivers-and-coasts/nfm-leaky-barrier-retention-times.
Keith Beven, Trevor Page, Paul Smith, Ann Kretzschmar, Barry Hankin, and Nick Chappell
Proc. IAHS, 385, 129–134, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-385-129-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/piahs-385-129-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
This paper presents a method of deciding when a hydrological model might be fit for purpose given the limitations of the data that are available for model evaluation. In this case the purpose is to reproduce the peak flows for an application that is concerned with evaluating the effect of natural flood management measures on flood peaks. It is shown that while all the models fail to pass the test at all time steps, there is an ensemble of models that pass for the hydrograph peaks.
Trevor Page, Paul Smith, Keith Beven, Francesca Pianosi, Fanny Sarrazin, Susana Almeida, Liz Holcombe, Jim Freer, Nick Chappell, and Thorsten Wagener
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 2523–2534, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-2523-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-2523-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
This publication provides an introduction to the CREDIBLE Uncertainty Estimation (CURE) toolbox. CURE offers workflows for a variety of uncertainty estimation methods. One of its most important features is the requirement that all of the assumptions on which a workflow analysis depends be defined. This facilitates communication with potential users of an analysis. An audit trail log is produced automatically from a workflow for future reference.
Heidi Kreibich, Kai Schröter, Giuliano Di Baldassarre, Anne F. Van Loon, Maurizio Mazzoleni, Guta Wakbulcho Abeshu, Svetlana Agafonova, Amir AghaKouchak, Hafzullah Aksoy, Camila Alvarez-Garreton, Blanca Aznar, Laila Balkhi, Marlies H. Barendrecht, Sylvain Biancamaria, Liduin Bos-Burgering, Chris Bradley, Yus Budiyono, Wouter Buytaert, Lucinda Capewell, Hayley Carlson, Yonca Cavus, Anaïs Couasnon, Gemma Coxon, Ioannis Daliakopoulos, Marleen C. de Ruiter, Claire Delus, Mathilde Erfurt, Giuseppe Esposito, Didier François, Frédéric Frappart, Jim Freer, Natalia Frolova, Animesh K. Gain, Manolis Grillakis, Jordi Oriol Grima, Diego A. Guzmán, Laurie S. Huning, Monica Ionita, Maxim Kharlamov, Dao Nguyen Khoi, Natalie Kieboom, Maria Kireeva, Aristeidis Koutroulis, Waldo Lavado-Casimiro, Hong-Yi Li, Maria Carmen LLasat, David Macdonald, Johanna Mård, Hannah Mathew-Richards, Andrew McKenzie, Alfonso Mejia, Eduardo Mario Mendiondo, Marjolein Mens, Shifteh Mobini, Guilherme Samprogna Mohor, Viorica Nagavciuc, Thanh Ngo-Duc, Huynh Thi Thao Nguyen, Pham Thi Thao Nhi, Olga Petrucci, Nguyen Hong Quan, Pere Quintana-Seguí, Saman Razavi, Elena Ridolfi, Jannik Riegel, Md Shibly Sadik, Nivedita Sairam, Elisa Savelli, Alexey Sazonov, Sanjib Sharma, Johanna Sörensen, Felipe Augusto Arguello Souza, Kerstin Stahl, Max Steinhausen, Michael Stoelzle, Wiwiana Szalińska, Qiuhong Tang, Fuqiang Tian, Tamara Tokarczyk, Carolina Tovar, Thi Van Thu Tran, Marjolein H. J. van Huijgevoort, Michelle T. H. van Vliet, Sergiy Vorogushyn, Thorsten Wagener, Yueling Wang, Doris E. Wendt, Elliot Wickham, Long Yang, Mauricio Zambrano-Bigiarini, and Philip J. Ward
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 15, 2009–2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2009-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-15-2009-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
As the adverse impacts of hydrological extremes increase in many regions of the world, a better understanding of the drivers of changes in risk and impacts is essential for effective flood and drought risk management. We present a dataset containing data of paired events, i.e. two floods or two droughts that occurred in the same area. The dataset enables comparative analyses and allows detailed context-specific assessments. Additionally, it supports the testing of socio-hydrological models.
Louisa D. Oldham, Jim Freer, Gemma Coxon, Nicholas Howden, John P. Bloomfield, and Christopher Jackson
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 27, 761–781, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-761-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-27-761-2023, 2023
Short summary
Short summary
Water can move between river catchments via the subsurface, termed intercatchment groundwater flow (IGF). We show how a perceptual model of IGF can be developed with relatively simple geological interpretation and data requirements. We find that IGF dynamics vary in space, correlated to the dominant underlying geology. We recommend that IGF
loss functionsmay be used in conceptual rainfall–runoff models but should be supported by perceptualisation of IGF processes and connectivities.
Antonio Capponi, Natalie J. Harvey, Helen F. Dacre, Keith Beven, Cameron Saint, Cathie Wells, and Mike R. James
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 22, 6115–6134, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-6115-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-6115-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Forecasts of the dispersal of volcanic ash in the atmosphere are hampered by uncertainties in parameters describing the characteristics of volcanic plumes. Uncertainty quantification is vital for making robust flight-planning decisions. We present a method using satellite data to refine a series of volcanic ash dispersion forecasts and quantify these uncertainties. We show how we can improve forecast accuracy and potentially reduce the regions of high risk of volcanic ash relevant to aviation.
Enrico Tubaldi, Christopher J. White, Edoardo Patelli, Stergios Aristoteles Mitoulis, Gustavo de Almeida, Jim Brown, Michael Cranston, Martin Hardman, Eftychia Koursari, Rob Lamb, Hazel McDonald, Richard Mathews, Richard Newell, Alonso Pizarro, Marta Roca, and Daniele Zonta
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 795–812, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-795-2022, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-795-2022, 2022
Short summary
Short summary
Bridges are critical infrastructure components of transport networks. A large number of these critical assets cross or are adjacent to waterways and are therefore exposed to the potentially devastating impact of floods. This paper discusses a series of issues and areas where improvements in research and practice are required in the context of risk assessment and management of bridges exposed to flood hazard, with the ultimate goal of guiding future efforts in improving bridge flood resilience.
Paul C. Astagneau, Guillaume Thirel, Olivier Delaigue, Joseph H. A. Guillaume, Juraj Parajka, Claudia C. Brauer, Alberto Viglione, Wouter Buytaert, and Keith J. Beven
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 3937–3973, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3937-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-3937-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
The R programming language has become an important tool for many applications in hydrology. In this study, we provide an analysis of some of the R tools providing hydrological models. In total, two aspects are uniformly investigated, namely the conceptualisation of the models and the practicality of their implementation for end-users. These comparisons aim at easing the choice of R tools for users and at improving their usability for hydrology modelling to support more transferable research.
Keith Beven
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 851–866, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-851-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-851-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Inspired by a quotation from Howard Cook in 1946, this paper traces the evolution of the infiltration theory of runoff from the work of Robert Horton and LeRoy Sherman in the 1930s to the early digital computer models of the 1970s and 1980s. Reconsideration of the perceptual model for many catchments, partly as a result of the greater appreciation of the contribution of subsurface flows to the hydrograph indicated by tracer studies, suggests a reconsideration of hydrological nomenclature.
Gemma Coxon, Nans Addor, John P. Bloomfield, Jim Freer, Matt Fry, Jamie Hannaford, Nicholas J. K. Howden, Rosanna Lane, Melinda Lewis, Emma L. Robinson, Thorsten Wagener, and Ross Woods
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 12, 2459–2483, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2459-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-12-2459-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
We present the first large-sample catchment hydrology dataset for Great Britain. The dataset collates river flows, catchment attributes, and catchment boundaries for 671 catchments across Great Britain. We characterise the topography, climate, streamflow, land cover, soils, hydrogeology, human influence, and discharge uncertainty of each catchment. The dataset is publicly available for the community to use in a wide range of environmental and modelling analyses.
Barry Hankin, Ian Hewitt, Graham Sander, Federico Danieli, Giuseppe Formetta, Alissa Kamilova, Ann Kretzschmar, Kris Kiradjiev, Clint Wong, Sam Pegler, and Rob Lamb
Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 2567–2584, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2567-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-2567-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
With growing support for nature-based solutions to reduce flooding by local communities, government authorities and international organisations, it is still important to improve how we assess risk reduction. We demonstrate an efficient, simplified 1D network model that allows us to explore the
whole-systemresponse of numerous leaky barriers placed in different stream networks, whilst considering utilisation, synchronisation effects and cascade failure, and we provide advice on their siting.
Cited articles
Adriance, A., Pantoja, M., and Lupo, C.: September. Acceleration of Hydrology
Simulations Using DHSVM for Multi-thousand Runs and Uncertainty Assessment,
in: Latin American High Performance Computing Conference, Springer, Cham, 179–193, 2018.
Ambroise, B., Beven, K. J., and Freer, J.: Towards a generalisation of the
TOPMODEL concepts: topographic indices of hydrological similarity, Water Resour. Res., 32, 2135–2145, 1996a.
Ambroise, B., Freer, J., and Beven, K. J.: Application of a generalised TOPMODEL to the small Ringelbach catchment, Vosges, France, Water Resour. Res., 32, 2147–2159, 1996b.
Aryal, S. K., O'Loughlin, E. M., and Mein, R. G.: A similarity approach to
determine response times to steady-state saturation in landscapes, Adv. Water Res., 28, 99–115, 2005.
Band, L. E., Patterson, P., Nemani, R., and Running, S. W.: Forest ecosystem
processes at the watershed scale: incorporating hillslope
hydrology, Agr. For. Meteorol., 63, 93–126, 1993.
Barling, R. D., Moore, I. D., and Grayson, R. B.: A quasi-dynamic wetness
index for characterizing the spatial distribution of zones of surface
saturation and soil water contents, Water Resour. Res., 30, 1029–1044,
https://doi.org/10.1029/93WR03346, 1994.
Bergstrom, A., Jencso, K., and McGlynn, B.: Spatiotemporal processes that
contribute to hydrologic exchange between hillslopes, valley bottoms, and
streams, Water Resour. Res., 52, 4628–4645, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017972, 2016.
Berne, A., Uijlenhoet, R., and Troch, P. A.: Similarity analysis of
subsurface flow response of hillslopes with complex geometry, Water Resour. Res., 41, 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004WR003629, 2005.
Best, M. J., Pryor, M., Clark, D. B., Rooney, G. G., Essery, R. L. H., Ménard, C. B., Edwards, J. M., Hendry, M. A., Porson, A., Gedney, N., Mercado, L. M., Sitch, S., Blyth, E., Boucher, O., Cox, P. M., Grimmond, C. S. B., and Harding, R. J.: The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 1: Energy and water fluxes, Geosci. Model Dev., 4, 677–699, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-4-677-2011, 2011.
Betson, R. P.: What is watershed runoff, J. Geophys. Res., 69, 1541–1551, 1964.
Beven, K. J.: The hydrological response of headwater and sideslope areas,
Hydrol. Sci. B., 23, 419–437, 1978.
Beven, K. J.: On the generalised kinematic routing method, Water Resour. Res., 15, 1238–1242, 1979.
Beven, K. J.: On Subsurface Stormflow: an analysis of response times,
Hydrol. Sci. J., 27, 505–521, 1982a.
Beven, K. J.: Introducing spatially variable conductivities into Topmodel,
Unpublished Research Report, Department of Environmental Sciences,
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, 1982b.
Beven, K. J.: Infiltration into a class of vertically non-uniform soils,
Hydrol. Sci. J., 29, 425–434, 1984.
Beven, K. J.: Hillslope runoff processes and flood frequency characteristics,
in: Hillslope Processes, edited by: Abrahams, A. D., Allen and Unwin, Boston, 187–202, 1986a.
Beven K. J.: Runoff production and flood frequency in catchments of order n:
an alternative approach, in: Scale Problems in Hydrology, edited by: Gupta, V. K., Rodriguez-lturbe, I., and Wood, E. F., Reidel, Dordrecht, 117–131, 1986b.
Beven, K. J.: Towards the use of catchment geomorphology in flood frequency
predictions, Earth Surf. Process. Landf., 12, 69–82., 1987.
Beven, K. J.: Prophecy, reality and uncertainty in distributed hydrological
modelling, Adv. Water Res., 16, 41–51, 1993.
Beven, K. J.: TOPMODEL: a critique, Hydrol. Process., 11, 1069–1086, 1997.
Beven, K. J.: Robert Horton and abrupt rises of groundwater, Hydrol. Process., 18, 3687–3696, 2004.
Beven, K. J.: Searching for the Holy Grail of scientific hydrology:
Beven, K. J.: Towards integrated environmental models of everywhere: uncertainty, data and modelling as a learning process, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 460–467, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-11-460-2007, 2007.
Beven, K. J.: I believe in climate change but how precautionary do we need
to be in planning for the future?, Hydrol. Process., 25, 1517–1520, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7939, 2011.
Beven, K. J.: Rainfall-Runoff Modelling: The Primer, 2nd edition, Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, 2012
Beven, K. J.: EGU Leonardo Lecture: Facets of Hydrology – epistemic error, non-stationarity, likelihood, hypothesis testing, and communication, Hydrol. Sci. J., 61, 1652–1665, https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2015.1031761, 2016.
Beven, K. J.: Towards a methodology for testing models as hypotheses in the
inexact sciences, P. Roy. Soc. A-Math. Phy., 475, 20180862, https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2018.0862, 2019a.
Beven, K. J.: How to make advances in hydrological modelling, Hydrol. Res., 50, 1481–1494, https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2019.134, 2019b
Beven, K. J.: A history of the concept of time of concentration, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 2655–2670, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-2655-2020, 2020.
Beven, K. J. and Alcock, R.: Modelling everything everywhere: a new approach
to decision making for water management under uncertainty, Freshwater Biol., 56, 124–132, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2011.02592.x, 2012.
Beven, K. J. and Binley, A. M.: The future of distributed models: model
calibration and uncertainty prediction, Hydrol. Process., 6, 279–298, 1992.
Beven, K. J. and Binley, A. M.: GLUE, 20 years on, Hydrol. Process., 28, 5897–5918, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10082, 2014.
Beven, K. J. and Blazkova, S.: Estimating changes in flood frequency under
climate change by continuous simulation (with uncertainty), in: RIBAMOD, River Basin Modelling, Management and Flood Mitigation, edited by: Balbanis, P., Bronstert, A., Casale. R., and Samuels, P., EU Publication EUR 18287,
269–285, 1999.
Beven, K. J. and Callen, J. L.: HYDRODAT: A system of FORTRAN computer programs for the preparation and analysis of hydrological data from charts, British Geomorphological Research Group, Technical Bulletin, 23, 1979.
Beven, K. J. and Chappell, N. A.: Perceptual perplexity and parameter
parsimony, WIRES Water, submitted, 2020.
Beven, K. J. and Freer, J.: A Dynamic TOPMODEL, Hydrol. Process., 15, 1993–2011, 2001.
Beven, K. J. and Germann, P. F.: Macropores and water flow in soils, Water Resour. Res., 18, 1311–1325, 1982.
Beven, K. J. and Germann, P. F.: Macropores and water flow in soils
revisited, Water Resour. Res., 49, 3071–3092, https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20156, 2013.
Beven, K. J. and Kirkby, M. J.: A physically-based variable contributing area
model of basin hydrology, Hydrol. Sci. Bull., 24, 43–69, 1979.
Beven, K. J. and Quinn, P. F.: Similarity and scale effects in the water
balance of heterogeneous areas, in: The balance of Water – present and future, edited by: Keane, T. and Daly, E., AGMET, Dublin, 69–86 1994.
Beven, K. J. and Wood, E. F.: Catchment geomorphology and the dynamics of
runoff contributing areas, J. Hydrol., 65, 139–158, 1983.
Beven, K. J., Kirkby, M. J., Schofield, N., and Tagg, A.: Testing a
physically-based flood forecasting model (TOPMODEL) for three UK catchments,
J. Hydrol., 69, 119–143, 1984.
Beven, K. J., Lamb, R., Quinn, P., Romanowicz, R., and Freer, J.: TOPMODEL, in: Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, edited by: Singh, V. P., Water Resource Publications, Colorado, 627–668, 1995.
Beven, K. J., Smith, P. J., and Freer, J. E.: So just why would a modeller choose to be incoherent?, J. Hydrol., 354, 15–32, 2008.
Beven, K. J., Asadullah, A., Bates, P. D., Blyth, E., Chappell, N. A.,
Child, S., Cloke, H., Dadson, S., Everard, N., Fowler, H. J., Freer,
J., Hannah, D. M., Heppell, C., Holden, J., Lamb, R., Lewis, H., Morgan, G.,
Parry. L., and Wagener, T.: Developing observational methods to drive future
hydrological science: can we make a start as a community?, Hydrol. Process., 34, 868–873, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.13622, 2020.
Blair, G. S., Beven, K. J., Lamb, R., Bassett, R., Cauwenberghs, K., Hankin,
B., Dean, G., Hunter, N., Edwards, E., Nundloll, V., Samreen, F., Simm, W., and Towe, R.: Models of Everywhere Revisited: A Technological Perspective,
Environ. Modell. Softw., 122, 104521, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2019.104521, 2019.
Blazkova, S. and Beven, K. J.: Flood Frequency Prediction for data limited
catchments in the Czech Republic using a stochastic rainfall model and
TOPMODEL, J. Hydrol., 195, 256–278, 1997.
Blazkova, S., Beven, K., Tacheci, P., and Kulasova, A.: Testing the distributed water table predictions of TOPMODEL (allowing for uncertainty in model calibration): the death of TOPMODEL?, Water Resour. Res., 38, W01257,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2001WR000912, 2002.
Blazkova, S. and Beven, K. J.: Flood Frequency Estimation by Continuous
Simulation for a Catchment treated as Ungauged (with Uncertainty), Water Resour. Res., 38, 14.1–14.14, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001WR000500, 2002.
Blazkova, S. and Beven, K. J.: Flood frequency estimation by continuous
simulation of subcatchment rainfalls and discharges with the aim of
improving dam safety assessment in a large basin in the Czech Republic, J. Hydrol., 292, 153–172, 2004.
Blazkova, S. and Beven, K. J.: A limits of acceptability approach to model
evaluation and uncertainty estimation in flood frequency estimation by
continuous simulation: Skalka catchment, Czech Republic, Water Resour. Res., 45, W00B16, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006726, 2009a.
Blazkova, S. and Beven, K. J.: Uncertainty in Flood Estimation, Struct. Infrastruct. E., 5, 325–332, https://doi.org/10.1080/15732470701189514, 2009b.
Buytaert, W.: topmodel: Implementation of the Hydrological Model TOPMODEL in
R, Rpackage version 0.7.3, available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=topmodel (last access: 21 January 2021), 2018.
Calder, I. R., Harding, R. J., and Rosier, P. T. W.: An objective assessment of soil moisture deficit models, J. Hydrol, 185, 363–378, 1983.
Calver, A. and Lamb, R.: Flood frequency estimation using continuous
rainfall-runoff modelling, Phys. Chem. Earth, 20, 479–483, 1995.
Cameron, D., Beven, K. J., Tawn, J., Blazkova, S., and Naden, P.: Flood frequency estimation by continuous simulation for a gauged upland catchment (with uncertainty), J. Hydrol., 219, 169–187, 1999.
Cameron, D., Beven, K., Tawn, J., and Naden, P.: Flood frequency estimation by continuous simulation (with likelihood based uncertainty estimation), Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 4, 23–34, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-4-23-2000, 2000a.
Cameron, D., Beven, K., and Naden, P.: Flood frequency estimation by continuous simulation under climate change (with uncertainty), Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 4, 393–405, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-4-393-2000, 2000b.
Cameron, D., Beven, K. J., and Tawn, J.: An evaluation of three stochastic
rainfall models, J. Hydrol., 228, 130–149, 2000c.
Chaney, N. W., Metcalfe, P., and Wood, E. F.: HydroBlocks: a field-scale
resolving land surface model for application over continental
extents, Hydrol. Process., 30, 3543–3559, 2016.
Chirico, G. B., Grayson, R. B., and Western, A. W.: On the computation of the
quasi-dynamic wetness index with multiple-flow-direction algorithms, Water Resour. Res., 39, 1115, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002WR001754, 2003.
Choi, H. T. and Beven, K. J.: Multi-period and Multi-criteria Model
Conditioning to Reduce Prediction Uncertainty in Distributed Rainfall-Runoff
Modelling within GLUE framework, J. Hydrol, 332, 316–336, 2007.
Ciarapica, L. and Todini, E.: TOPKAPI: A model for the representation of the
rainfall–runoff process at different scales, Hydrol. Process., 16, 207–229, 2002.
Clark, M. P., Slater, A. G., Rupp, D. E., Woods, R. A., Vrugt, J. A., Gupta,
H. V., Wagener, T., and Hay, L. E.: Framework for Understanding Structural
Errors (FUSE): A modular framework to diagnose differences between
hydrological models, Water Resour. Res., 44, W00B02, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006735, 2008.
Coxon, G., Freer, J., Wagener, T., Odoni, N. A., and Clark, M.: Diagnostic
evaluation of multiple hypotheses of hydrological behaviour in a
limits-of-acceptability framework for 24 UK catchments, Hydrol. Process., 28, 6135–6150, 2014.
Coxon, G., Freer, J., Lane, R., Dunne, T., Knoben, W. J. M., Howden, N. J. K., Quinn, N., Wagener, T., and Woods, R.: DECIPHeR v1: Dynamic fluxEs and ConnectIvity for Predictions of HydRology, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2285–2306, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2285-2019, 2019.
Crave, A. and Gascuel-Odoux, C.: The Influence of topography on time and
space distribution of soil surface water content, Hydrol. Process., 11,
203–210, 1997.
Crawford, N. H. and Burges, S. J.: History of the Stanford watershed
model, Water Resour. Impact, 6, 1–3, 2004.
Davies, J. and Beven, K. J.: Hysteresis and scale in catchment storage, flow,
and transport, Hydrol. Process., 29, 3604–3615, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10511, 2015.
Duan, J. and Miller, N. L.: A generalized power function for the subsurface
transmissivity profile in TOPMODEL, Water Resour. Res., 33, 2559–2562, 1997.
Ducharne, A.: Reducing scale dependence in TOPMODEL using a dimensionless topographic index, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 13, 2399–2412, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-13-2399-2009, 2009.
Dunne, T. and Black, R. D.: Partial area contributions to storm runoff in a
small New England watershed, Water Resour. Res., 6, 1296–1311, 1970.
Eagleson, P. S.: Dynamics of flood frequency, Water Resour. Res., 8, 878–898, 1972.
Essery, R. L. H., Best, M. J., Betts, R. A., Cox, P. M., and Taylor, C. M.:
Explicit representation of subgrid heterogeneity in a GCM land surface
scheme, J. Hydrometeorol., 4, 530–543, 2003.
Famiglietti, J. and Wood, E. F.: Multiscale modeling of spatially variable
water and energy balance process, Water Resour. Res., 30, 3061–3078,
https://doi.org/10.1029/94WR01498, 1994.
Fenicia, F., Kavetski, D., and Savenije, H. H. G.: Elements of a flexible
approach for conceptual hydrological modeling: 1. Motivation and theoretical
development, Water Resour. Res., 47, W11510, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR010748, 2011.
Fisher, J. I. and Beven, K. J.: Modelling of streamflow at Slapton Wood using
TOPMODEL within an uncertainty estimation framework, Field Studies Journal, 8, 577–584, 1996.
Franchini, M., Wendling, J., Obled, C., and Todini, E.: Physical interpretation and sensitivity analysis of the TOPMODEL, J. Hydrol., 175,
293–338, 1996.
Franks, S., Beven, K. J., Quinn, P. F., and Weight, I.: On the sensitivity of soil-vegetation-atmosphere transfer (SVAT) schemes: equifinality and the
problem of robust calibration, Agr. For. Meteorol., 86, 63–75, 1997.
Franks, S. W., Gineste, P., Beven, K. J., and Merot, P.: On constraining the
predictions of a distributed model: the incorporation of fuzzy estimates of
saturated areas into the calibration process, Water Resour. Res., 34, 787–797, 1998
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, 1996.
Freer, J., McDonnell, J., Beven, K. J., Brammer, D., Burns, D., Hooper, R. P., and Kendal, C.: Topographic controls on subsurface stormflow at the hillslope scale for two hydrologically distinct small catchments, Hydrol. Process., 11, 1347–1352, 1997.
Freer, J., McDonnell, J., Beven, K. J., Peters, N. E., Burns, D., Hooper, R. P., Aulenbach, B., and Kendal, C.: The role of bedrock topography on subsurface stormflow, Water Resour. Res., 38, W01269, 10.1029/2001WR000872, 2002.
Freer, J. E., Beven, K. J., and Peters, N. E.: Multivariate seasonal period
model rejection within the generalised likelihood uncertainty estimation
procedure, in: Calibration of Watershed Models, edited by: Duan, Q., Gupta, H., Sorooshian, S., Rousseau, A. N., and Turcotte, R., AGU Books, Washington, 69–87, 2003.
Freer, J., McMillan, H., McDonnell, J. J., and Beven, K. J.: Constraining Dynamic TOPMODEL responses for imprecise water table information using fuzzy rule based performance measures, J. Hydrol., 291, 254–277, 2004.
Freeman, T. G.: Calculating catchment area with divergent flow based on a
regular grid, Comput. Geosci., 17, 413–422, 1991.
Freeze, R. A. and Harlan, R. L.: Blueprint for a physically-based,
digitally-simulated hydrologic response model, J. Hydrol., 9, 237–258, 1969.
Fu, X., Luo, L., Pan, M., Yu, Z., Tang, Y., and Ding, Y.: Evaluation of
TOPMODEL-based land surface–atmosphere transfer scheme (TOPLATS) through a
soil moisture simulation, Earth Interact., 22, 1–19, 2018.
Gallart, F., Latron, J., Llorens, P., and Beven, K. J.: Using internal catchment
information to reduce the uncertainty of discharge and baseflow predictions,
Adv. Water Res., 30, 808–823, 2007
Gallart, F., Latron, J., Llorens, P., and Beven, K. J.: Upscaling discrete
internal observations for obtaining catchment-averaged TOPMODEL parameters
in a small Mediterranean mountain basin, Phys. Chem. Earth, 33, 1090–1094, 2008.
Gao, J., Holden, J., and Kirkby, M.: A distributed TOPMODEL for modelling
impacts of landcover change on river flow in upland peatland catchments,
Hydrol. Process, 29, 2867–2879, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.10408, 2015.
Gao, J., Holden, J., and Kirkby, M.: The impact of land-cover change on flood
peaks in peatland basins, Water Resour. Res., 52, 3477–3492, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017667, 2016.
Gao, J., Holden, J., and Kirkby, M.: Modelling impacts of agricultural
practice on flood peaks in upland catchments: An application of the
distributed, TOPMODEL, Hydrol. Process., 31, 4206–4216, 2017.
Gharari, S., Hrachowitz, M., Fenicia, F., and Savenije, H. H. G.: Hydrological landscape classification: investigating the performance of HAND based landscape classifications in a central European meso-scale catchment, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 15, 3275–3291, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-3275-2011, 2011.
Graham, C. B., Woods, R. A., and McDonnell, J. J.: Hillslope threshold response to rainfall. (1) A field based forensic approach, J. Hydrol., 393, 65–76, 2010.
Güntner, A., Uhlenbrook, S., Seibert, J., and Leibundgut, C.:
Multi-criterial validation of TOPMODEL in a mountainous catchment,
Hydrol. Process., 13, 1603–1620, 1999.
Habets, F. and Saulnier, G. M.: Subgrid runoff parameterization, Phys. Chem. Earth Pt.B, 26, 455–459, 2001.
Hjerdt, K. N., McDonnell, J. J., Seibert, J., and Rodhe, A.: A new
topographic index to quantify downslope controls on local drainage, Water Resour. Res., 40, 1–6, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004WR003130, 2004.
Hollaway, M. J., Beven, K. J., Benskin, C. McW. H., Collins, A. L., Evans, R., Falloon, P. D., Forber, K. J., Hiscock, K. M., Kahana, R., Macleod, C. J. A., Ockenden, M. C., Villamizar, M. L., Wearing, C., Withers, P. J. A., Zhou, J. G., and Haygarth, P. M.: Evaluating a processed based water quality model on a UK headwater catchment: what can we learn from a “limits of acceptability” uncertainty framework?, J. Hydrol., 558, 607–624, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2018.01.063, 2018.
Hopp, L. and McDonnell, J. J.: Connectivity at the hillslope scale:
Identifying interactions between storm size, bedrock permeability, slope
angle and soil depth, J. Hydrol., 376, 378–391, 2009.
Hornberger, G. M. and Spear, R. C.: An approach to the preliminary analysis
of environmental systems, J. Environ. Manag., 12, 7–18, 1981.
Horton, R. E.: Maximum groundwater levels, EOS T. Am. Geophys. Un., 17, 344–357, 1936.
Huang, J.-C., Lee, T.-Y., and Kao, S.-J.: Simulating typhoon-induced storm hydrographs in subtropical mountainous watershed: an integrated 3-layer TOPMODEL, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 13, 27–40, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-13-27-2009, 2009.
Ibbitt, R. P. and O'Donnell, T.: Fitting methods for conceptual catchment
models, J. Hydraul. Diov. ASCE., 97, 1331–1342, 1971.
Ibbitt, R. P. and O'Donnell, T.: Designing conceptual catchment models for
automatic fitting methods, IAHS-AISH P., 101, 461–475, 1974.
Ibbitt, R. P. and Woods, R.: Re-scaling the topographic index to improve the
representation of physical processes in catchment models, J. Hydrol., 293,
205–218, 2004.
Jencso, K. G. and McGlynn, B. L.: Hierarchical controls on runoff
generation: Topographically driven hydrologic connectivity, geology, and
vegetation, Water Resour. Res., 47, W11527, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR010666, 2011.
Iorgulescu, I. and Musy, A.: Generalization of TOPMODEL for a power law
transmissivity profile, Hydrol. Process., 11, 1353–1355, 1997.
Johnston, P. R. and Pilgrim, D. H.: Parameter optimization for watershed
models, Water Resour. Res., 12, 477–486, 1976.
Kirchner, J. W.: Getting the right answers for the right reasons: Linking
measurements, analyses, and models to advance the science of
hydrology, Water Resour. Res., 42, W03S04, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004362, 2006.
Kirkby, M.: Hydrograph modelling strategies, in: Processes in Human and Physical Geography, edited by: Peel, R., Chisholm, M., and Haggett, P., Heinemann, London, 69–90, 1975.
Kirkby, M.: Implications for sediment transport, in: Hillslope Hydrology, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, 325–363, 1978.
Kirkby, M. J.: A runoff simulation model based on hillslope topography, in:
Scale problems in Hydrology: runoff generation and response, edited by: Gupta, V. K., Rodriguez-Iturbe, I., and Wood, E. F., Reidel, Dordrecht, 39–56, 1986.
Kirkby, M. J.: Topmodel: a personal view, Hydrol. Process., 11, 1087–1098, 1997
Klemeš, V.: Dilettantism in hydrology: Transition or destiny?, Water Resour. Res., 22, 177S–188S, 1986.
Knoben, W. J. M., Freer, J. E., Fowler, K. J. A., Peel, M. C., and Woods, R. A.: Modular Assessment of Rainfall–Runoff Models Toolbox (MARRMoT) v1.2: an open-source, extendable framework providing implementations of 46 conceptual hydrologic models as continuous state-space formulations, Geosci. Model Dev., 12, 2463–2480, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-12-2463-2019, 2019.
Lamb, R.: Calibration of a conceptual rainfall-runoff model for flood
frequency estimation by continuous simulation, Water Resour. Res., 35, 3103–3114, 1999.
Lamb, R. and Beven, K.: Using interactive recession curve analysis to specify a general catchment storage model, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 1, 101–113, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-1-101-1997, 1997.
Lamb, R., Beven, K. J., and Myrabø, S.: Discharge and water table predictions using a generalised TOPMODEL formulation, Hydrol. Process., 11, 1145–1168, 1997.
Lamb, R., Beven, K. J., and Myrabø, S.: Use of spatially distributed
water table observations to constrain uncertainty in a rainfall-runoff
model, Adv. Water Res., 22, 305–317, 1998.
Lan, T., Lin, K. R., Liu, Z. Y., He, Y. H., Xu, C. Y., Zhang, H. B., and
Chen, X. H.: A clustering preprocessing framework for the subannual
calibration of a hydrological model considering climate-land surface
variations, Water Resour. Res., 54, 10034–10052,
https://doi.org/10.1029/2018WR023160, 2018.
Lane, S. N., Brookes, C. J., Kirkby, M. J., and Holden, J.: A
network-index-based version of TOPMODEL for use with high-resolution digital
topographic data, Hydrol. Process., 18, 191–201, 2004.
Lane, S. N. and Milledge, D. G.: Impacts of upland open drains upon runoff
generation: a numerical assessment of catchment-scale impacts, Hydrol. Process., 27, 1701–1726, 2013.
Lane, S. N., Reaney, S. M., and Heathwaite, A. L.: Representation of landscape hydrological connectivity using a topographically driven surface flow index, Water Resour. Res., 45, W08423, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008WR007336, 2009.
Larsen, J. E., Sivapalan, M., Coles, N. A., and Linnet, P. E.: Similarity
analysis of runoff generation processes in real-world catchments, Water Resour. Res., 30, 1641–1652, 1994.
Liu, Y., Freer, J. E., Beven, K. J., and Matgen, P.: Towards a limits of
acceptability approach to the calibration of hydrological models: extending
observation error, J. Hydrol., 367, 93–103, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.01.016, 2009.
Liu, Z. and Todini, E.: Assessing the TOPKAPI non-linear reservoir cascade
approximation by means of a characteristic lines solution, Hydrol. Process., 19, 1983–2006, 2005.
Liu, Z., Martina, M. L. V., and Todini, E.: Flood forecasting using a fully distributed model: application of the TOPKAPI model to the Upper Xixian Catchment, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 9, 347–364, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-9-347-2005, 2005.
Loritz, R., Gupta, H., Jackisch, C., Westhoff, M., Kleidon, A., Ehret, U., and Zehe, E.: On the dynamic nature of hydrological similarity, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 3663–3684, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-3663-2018, 2018.
Marthews, T. R., Dadson, S. J., Lehner, B., Abele, S., and Gedney, N.: High-resolution global topographic index values for use in large-scale hydrological modelling, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19, 91–104, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-91-2015, 2015.
McDonnell, J. J. and Beven, K. J.: 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, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR015141, 2014.
Metcalfe, P., Beven, K. J., and Freer, J.: Dynamic Topmodel: a new
implementation in R and its sensitivity to time and space steps,
Environ. Modell. Softw., 72, 155–172, 2015.
Metcalfe, P., Beven, K. J., Hankin, B., and Lamb, R.: A modelling framework for evaluation of the hydrological impacts of nature-based approaches to flood risk management, with application to in-channel interventions across a
29-km2 scale catchment in the United Kingdom, Hydrol. Process., 31, 1734–1748, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11140, 2017.
Michel, C, Perrin, C, and Andréassian, V.: The exponential store: a correct formulation for rainfall—runoff modelling, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 48, 109–124, 2003.
Milledge, D. G., Lane, S. N., Heathwaite, A. L., and Reaney, S. M.: A Monte Carlo approach to the inverse problem of diffuse pollution risk in agricultural catchments, Sci. Total Environ., 433, 434–449, 2012.
Montgomery, D. R. and Dietrich, W. E.: A physically based model for the
topographic control on shallow landsliding, Water Resour. Res., 30, 1153–1171, 1994.
Montgomery, D. R. and Dietrich, W. E.: Runoff generation in a steep,
soil-mantled landscape, Water Resour. Res., 38, 7–17, 2002.
Moore, I. D., O'Loughlin, E. M., and Burch, G. J.: A contour-based topographic model for hydrological and ecological applications, Earth Surf. Proc. Land., 13, 305–320, 1988.
Moore, R. D. and Thompson, J. C.: Are water table variations in a shallow
forest soil consistent with the TOPMODEL concept?, Water Resour. Res., 32, 663–669, 1996.
Morris, D. G. and Heerdegen, R. G.: Automatically derived catchment boundaries and channel networks and their hydrological
applications, Geomorphology, 1, 131–141, 1988.
O'Loughlin E. M.: Saturation regions in catchments and their relation to soil
and topographic properties, J. Hydrol., 53, 229–246, 1981.
O'Loughlin, E. M.: Prediction of surface saturation zones in natural
catchments by topographic analysis, Water Resour. Res., 22, 794–804, 1986.
Pan, F., Peters-Lidard, C. D., Sale, M. J., and King, A. W.: A comparison of
geographical information systems–based algorithms for computing the
TOPMODEL topographic index, Water Resour. Res., 40, W06303, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004WR003069, 2004.
Pappenberger, F., Frodsham, K., Beven, K., Romanowicz, R., and Matgen, P.: Fuzzy set approach to calibrating distributed flood inundation models using remote sensing observations, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 739–752, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-11-739-2007, 2007.
Pauwels, V. R. N. and Wood, E. F.: A soil-vegetation-atmosphere transfer
scheme for the modeling of water and energy balance process in high
latitudes: 2. Application and validation, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 27823–27839, https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD900004, 1999.
Peters N. E., Freer J. E., and Beven K. J.: Modelling hydrologic responses in
a small forested catchment (Panola Mountain, Georgia, USA): A comparison of
the original and a new dynamic TOPMODEL, Hydrol. Process., 17, 345–362, 2003.
Peters-Lidard, C. D., Zion, M. S., and Wood, E. F.: A
soil-vegetation-atmosphere transfer scheme for modeling spatially variable
water and energy balance process, J. Geophys. Res., 102, 4303–4324, https://doi.org/10.1029/96JD02948, 1997.
Piñol, J., Beven, K. J., and Freer, J.: Modelling the hydrological response of mediterranean catchments, Prades, Catalonia – the use of distributed models as aids to hypothesis formulation, Hydrol. Process., 11, 1287–1306, 1997.
Porter, K. D., Reaney, S. M., Quilliam, R. S., Burgess, C., and Oliver, D. M.: Predicting diffuse microbial pollution risk across catchments: The
performance of SCIMAP and recommendations for future development, Sci. Total Environ., 609, 456–465, 2017.
Pradhan, N. R., Tachikawa, Y., and Takara, K.: A downscaling method of
topographic index distribution for matching the scales of model application
and parameter identification, Hydrol. Process., 20, 1385–1405, 2006.
Pradhan, N. R., Ogden, F. L., Tachikawa, Y., and Takara, K.: Scaling of slope, upslope area, and soil water deficit: Implications for transferability and regionalization in topographic index modeling, Water Resour. Res., 44, W12421, https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006667, 2008.
Quinn, P. F., Beven, K. J., Chevallier, P., and Planchon, O.: The Prediction of Hillslope Flow paths for distributed hydrological modelling using digital
terrain models, Hydrol. Process., 5, 59–79, 1991.
Quinn, P., Beven, K. J., and Lamb, R.: The ln(a∕tanβ) index: how to
calculate it and how to use it within the TOPMODEL framework,
Hydrol. Process., 9, 161–182, 1995a.
Quinn, P., Beven, K. J., and Culf, A.: The introduction of macroscale
hydrological complexity into land surface-atmosphere transfer models and the
effect of planetary boundary layer development, J. Hydrol., 166, 421–444, 1995b.
Quinn, P. F., Ostendorf, B., Beven, K., and Tenhunen, J.: Spatial and temporal predictions of soil moisture patterns and evaporative losses using TOPMODEL and the GASFLUX model for an Alaskan catchment, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 2, 51–64, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2-51-1998, 1998.
Reggiani, P. and Rientjes, T. H. M.: Flux parameterization in the
representative elementary watershed approach: Application to a natural
basin, Water Resour. Res., 41, W04013, https://doi.org/10.1029/2004WR003693, 2005.
Rennó, C. D., Nobre, A. D., Cuartas, L. A., Soares, J. V., Hodnett, M.
G., Tomasella, J., and Waterloo, M. J.: HAND, a new terrain descriptor using
SRTM-DEM: Mapping terra-firme rainforest environments in Amazonia, Remote Sens. Environ., 112, 3469–3481, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2008.03.018, 2008.
Robson, A., Beven, K. J., and Neal, C.: Towards identifying sources of
subsurface flow: a comparison of components identified by a physically-based
runoff model and those determined by chemical mixing techniques,
Hydrol. Process., 6, 199–214, 1992.
Romanowicz, R., Beven, K. J., and Tawn, J.: Evaluation of predictive uncertainty in non-linear hydrological models using a Bayesian approach, in: Statistics for the Environment II. Water Related Issues, edited by: Barnett, V. and Turkman, K. F., Wiley, Chichester, 297–317, 1994.
Saulnier, G. M., Obled, C., and Beven, K.: Analytical compensation between dtm grid resolution and effective values of saturated hydraulic conductivity
within the Topmodel framework, Hydrol. Process., 11, 1331–1346, 1997a.
Saulnier, G. M., Beven, K., and Obled, C.: Digital elevation analysis for
distributed hydrological modeling: Reducing scale dependence in effective
hydraulic conductivity values, Water Resour. Res., 33, 2097–2101, 1997b.
Saulnier, G.-M., Beven, K. J., and Obled, C..: Including spatially variable soil depths in TOPMODEL, J. Hydrol., 202, 158–172, 1997c.
Saulnier, G. M. and Datin, R.: Analytical solution to a bias in the TOPMODEL
framework balance, Hydrol. Process., 18, 1195–1218, 2004.
Scanlon, T. M., Raffensperger, J. P., Hornberger, G. M., and Clapp, R. B.:
Shallow subsurface storm flow in a forested headwater catchment:
Observations and modeling using a modified TOPMODEL, Water Resour. Res., 36, 2575–2586, 2000.
Seibert, J., Bishop, K., and Nyberg, L.: Testing TOPMODEL's ability to
predict spatially distributed groundwater levels, Hydrol. Process., 11, 1131–1144, 1997.
Seibert, J., Bishop, K., Rodhe, A., and McDonnell, J. J.: Groundwater dynamics along a hillslope: A test of the steady state hypothesis, Water Resour. Res., 39, 1014, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002WR001404, 2003.
Shreve, R. L.: Infinite topologically random channel networks, J. Geology, 75, 178–186, 1967.
Sivapalan, M., Beven, K. J., and Wood, E.F.: On Hydrologic Similarity 2: A
scaled model of storm runoff production, Water Resour. Res., 23, 2266–2278, 1987.
Sivapalan, M., Wood, E. F., and Beven, K. J.: On Hydrologic Similarity, 3. A
dimensionless flood frequency distribution, Water Resour. Res., 26, 43–58, 1990.
Sorensen, R. and Seibert, J.: Effects of DEM resolution on the
calculation of topographical indices: TWI and its components, J. Hydrol., 347, 79–89, 2007.
Tague, C. L. and Band, L. E.: RHESSys: Regional Hydro-Ecologic Simulation
System – An object-oriented approach to spatially distributed modeling of
carbon, water, and nutrient cycling, Earth Interact., 8, 1–42, 2004.
Tarboton, D. G.: A new method for the determination of flow directions and
upslope areas in grid digital elevation models, Water Resour. Res., 33, 309–319, 1997.
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, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR014147, 2014.
Thomas Jr., W. O.: An evaluation of flood frequency estimates based on
rainfall/runoff modelling, J. Am. Water Resour. As., 18, 221–229, 1982.
Todini, E.: New trends in modelling soil processes from hillslope to GCM
scales, in: The Role of Water and the Hydrological Cycle in Global Change, edited by: Oliver, H. R. and Oliver, S. A., Global Environmental Change, NATO ASI Series, Series I, vol. 31, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 317–347, 1995.
Vincendon, B., Ducrocq, V., Bouilloudd, L., Saulnier, G.-M., Chancibaulte, K., Habets, F. and Noilhan, J.: Benefit of coupling the ISBA land surface model with a TOPMODEL hydrological model version dedicated to Mediterranean flash floods, J. Hydrol., 394, 256–266, 2010.
Walter, M. T., Steenhuis, T. S., Mehta, V. K., Thongs, D., Zion, M., and
Schneiderman, E.: Refined conceptualization of TOPMODEL for shallow
subsurface flows, Hydrol. Process., 16, 2041–2046, 2002.
Weyman, D. R.: Throughflow on hillslopes and its relation to the stream
hydrograph, Hydrol. Sci. B., 15, 25–33, 1970.
Weyman, D. R.: Measurements of the downslope flow of water in a
soil, J. Hydrol., 20, 267–288, 1973.
Western, A. W., Grayson, R. B., Blöschl, G., Willgoose, G. R.,
and McMahon, T. A.: Observed spatial organisation of soil moisture and its
relation to terrain indices, Water Resour. Res., 35, 797–810, https://doi.org/10.1029/1998WR900065, 1999.
Wigmosta, M. S., Vail, L. W., and Lettenmaier, D. P.: A distributed
hydrology-vegetation model for complex terrain, Water Resour. Res., 30, 1665–1679, 1994.
Wolock, D. M. and McCabe Jr., G. J.: Comparison of single and multiple flow
direction algorithms for computing topographic parameters in
TOPMODEL, Water Resour. Res., 31, 1315–1324, 1995.
Wood, E. F., Sivapalan, M., Beven, K. J., and Band, L.: Effects of spatial
variability and scale with implications to hydrologic modelling, J. Hydrol., 102, 29–47, 1988.
Woods, R. A., Sivapalan, M., and Robinson, J. S.: Modeling the spatial
variability of subsurface runoff using a topographic index, Water Resour. Res., 33, 1061–1073, 1997.
Zulkafli, Z., Buytaert, W., Onof, C., Lavado, W., and Guyot, J. L.: A critical assessment of the JULES land surface model hydrology for humid tropical environments, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 17, 1113–1132, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-1113-2013, 2013.
Short summary
The theory that forms the basis of TOPMODEL was first outlined by Mike Kirkby some 45 years ago. This paper recalls some of the early developments: the rejection of the first journal paper, the early days of digital terrain analysis, model calibration and validation, the various criticisms of the simplifying assumptions, and the relaxation of those assumptions in the dynamic forms of TOPMODEL, and it considers what we might do now with the benefit of hindsight.
The theory that forms the basis of TOPMODEL was first outlined by Mike Kirkby some 45 years ago....
Special issue