the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
The general formulation for runoff components estimation and attribution at mean annual time scale
Abstract. Estimating runoff components, including surface flow, baseflow and total runoff is essential for understanding precipitation partition and runoff generation and facilitating water resource management. However, a general framework to quantify and attribute runoff components is still lacking. Here, we propose a general formulation through observational data analysis and theoretical derivation based on the two-stage Ponce-Shetty model (named as the MPS model). The MPS model characterizes mean annual runoff components as a function of available water with one parameter. The model is applied over 662 catchments across China and the contiguous United States. Results demonstrate that the model well depicts the spatial variability of runoff components with R2 exceeding 0.81, 0.44 and 0.80 for fitting surface flow, baseflow and total runoff, respectively. The model effectively simulates multi-year runoff components with R2 exceeding 0.97, and the proportion of runoff components relative to precipitation with R2 exceeding 0.94. By using this conceptual model, we elucidate the responses of surface flow and baseflow to available water and environmental factors for the first time. The surface flow is jointly controlled by precipitation and environmental factors, while baseflow is mainly influenced by environmental factors in most catchments. The universal and concise MPS model offers a new perspective on the long-term catchment water balance, facilitating broader application in large-sample investigations without complex parameterizations and providing an efficient tool to explore future runoff variations and responses under changing climate.
- Preprint
(4644 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (extended)
-
RC1: 'Comment on hess-2024-349', Anonymous Referee #1, 07 Jun 2025
reply
Greetings. The manuscript entitled “The general formulation for runoff components estimation and attribution at mean annual time scale” with the issue of estimating the various flow components for water resources management purposes. The structure and goals are clear, and the results are consistent with data. This paper can certainly be published after some major adjustments, listed below. I limited the previous revision to the Introduction and Methodology part, I think these need to be fixed before further going down the publication way. These itemized improvements would make the work more scientifically sound and robust. These considerations come from my expertise as a hydrogeologist, so they will pertain to this sphere of competency. Furthermore, I recommend incorporating ‘recommended references’ and at least having a quick glimpse at ‘further reading’ for a more precise framing of the work. Best regards.
- From line 36 on: the description and the classification of these different baseflow components are pretty gross. I understand that the purpose of the work is to categorize all of them as baseflow hydrograph volume portions, but putting in the ‘same box’ phenomena that are much different from each other doesn’t sound good to me. Please discern (from below): deep leakage (if any, if conceptualized); groundwater flow; subsurface (hyporheic) flow; snowmelt. Moreover, these can be caused by highly varying flow sources. We need a strong specification of phenomena and how to consider them here. At least, we should say that there may be geological and climatic (not in the sense of climate change, but yearly-decadal climate cycle) causes. Groundwater flows and similar ones are related to the local aquifers’ geology as the main uncertainty source (see e.g., Schiavo, 2023), while the heterogeneous recharge has a negligible impact (see e.g., D’Oria et al., 2018). Snowmelt is due to yearly-decadal climatic cycles.
- As a ‘groundwater guy’, I usually think that the common ways of defining baseflow from the viewpoint of surface hydrographs partition lack precision (Cheng et al., 2022) or even conceptual correctness (Cartwright et al., 2014).
- An important point in baseflow estimation is that the structure of the aquifer is not deterministically achievable; rather than it can be assessed in a Monte Carlo framework. Hence, groundwater baseflow (or, simply, groundwater discharges) should be assessed by achieving multiple realizations upon varying geological conditions (Schiavo, 2023). Where does the role of homogeneous/heterogeneous aquifers may be appraised? At least, one should take the spatial average of the Monte Carlo runs as the most feasible discharge estimation. I think this introductory/discussion point should be incorporated into the work.
- From line 78 on: one may argue that the aridity index and the estimation of potential evaporation are ‘subjective’, hence no robust estimations are provided: how to answer this point?
- Table 1. I usually prefer to retrieve parameters from numerical calibration or so. What about the exponent b and the catchment storage capacity? How have they been inferred in the various models? If they are empirically based, do they find any confirmation in numerical applications?
- I would strongly recommend somehow connecting the baseflow estimations to previous numerical estimations; otherwise, the initial groundwater abstraction ‘lambda’ indices are pretty vaguely defined. Maybe also the work done by Zuecco et al. (2019) can be helpful.
- Another major issue is that it has been clear to the scientific community for at least 5 years that groundwater flow is highly spatially heterogeneous, as it is conveyed in preferential pathways where discharges are much higher than elsewhere. Any idea of how to incorporate this viewpoint?
Recommended references:
Cheng et al., 2022. Evaluation of baseflow separation methods with real and synthetic streamflow data from a watershed. Journal of Hydrology, 613, Part A, 128279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.128279
Schiavo, M., 2023. The role of different sources of uncertainty on the stochastic quantification of subsurface discharges in heterogeneous aquifers. J. Hydrol. 617 (4), 128930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.128930
Further reading:
Cartwright, I., Gilfedder, B., and Hofmann, H.: Contrasts between estimates of baseflow help discern multiple sources of water contributing to rivers, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 15–30, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-15-2014, 2014.
D’Oria et al., 2018. Quantifying the impacts of climate change on water resources in northern Tuscany, Italy, using high-resolution regional projections. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.13378
Zuecco et al., 2019. Quantification of subsurface hydrologic connectivity in four headwater catchments using graph theory. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.269
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-349-RC1
Data sets
hydro-meteorological data of the catchments across China Yufen He, Changming Li, and Hanbo Yang https://zenodo.org/records/11058118
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
243 | 48 | 22 | 313 | 15 | 26 |
- HTML: 243
- PDF: 48
- XML: 22
- Total: 313
- BibTeX: 15
- EndNote: 26
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1