the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
When and where does near-surface runoff occur in a pre-Alpine headwater catchment?
Abstract. Although runoff processes have been described for many locations worldwide, there has been a lack of studies for poorly drained soils where most of the runoff may occur near the soil surface. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to improve the understanding of near-surface processes across a small headwater catchment with low permeable gleysols, which is typical for the Swiss pre-Alpine environment. We installed 14 small (1 m x 3 m) bounded runoff plots to collect overland flow (including biomat flow; OF) and shallow subsurface flow through the permeable topsoil, which we refer to as topsoil interflow (TIF). The runoff plots were located at different topographic locations and had a range of vegetation covers. For 27 rainfall events during the summer of 2022, we determined the occurrence and amount of OF and TIF. OF and TIF occurred for approximately half of the events, but the frequency of occurrence depended on the topographic wetness index (TWI) and vegetation cover. The runoff ratios (ratio between runoff produced divided by the total precipitation) increased with increasing precipitation and antecedent wetness conditions but did not correlate with the maximum rainfall intensity. Runoff ratios were highly variable and were generally higher for TIF than OF. Runoff ratios for OF were larger than one for some plots, indicating the occurrence lateral inflow to the plot from outside. Runoff ratio did not change after removing the upper boundary of the plot, suggesting that the actual flow-path lengths over the surface are short. Overall, this study highlights the importance of fast near-surface processes in pre-Alpine catchments underlain by low permeability gleysols, and that these processes occur across a range of catchment locations and land covers.
- Preprint
(3734 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(5583 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on hess-2024-398', Anonymous Referee #1, 26 Feb 2025
I believe that this study will be interesting to many readers. The research was very well designed. It documented considerable variability in runoff response. The manuscript provides clear and detailed information for the readers to understand the results and make their own interpretation/conclusions.
- Reference to climate change in lines 72-73 is not needed, the topic is interesting in itself.
- l. 270 – I did not find figure S4 in the Supplement
- l. 310 mentions relations with TWI and local slope. It might be good to note that TWI considers slope as well.
- Fig. 5 shows that that there was quite a lot of “No data” for events with ASI+P smaller than approximately 38 mm. Could that have an influence on the interpretation of results?
- l. 337 - Is it possible to say why was namely event on August 30 chosen? Fig. S8 shows that there two events with total precipitation of 20 mm with enough data recorded. Is it possible/useful to comment on similarities/differences (and their probable reasons) of runoff ratios at the same plots during those two events?
- For the consistency with the main text it would be better to write figure captions in the Supplement below the figures as well.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-398-RC1 - AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Victor Gauthier, 06 Mar 2025
-
RC2: 'Comment on hess-2024-398', Anonymous Referee #2, 25 Mar 2025
This study used hydrological measurement network consisting of 14 small 60 runoff plots (1 m x 3 m) across the 20 ha Studibach catchment in the Alptal, Switzerland to analyze the occurrence of OF and TIF, their controlling factors and threshold. One of the major concerns is that at plot-scale, soil properties mainly governs the runoff dynamics, however, this study didn’t discuss role of soil characteristics (texture, hydraulic conductivity and parameters of soil water retention curve) in explaining variation of OF and TIF.
Further, It is not very clear how TIF was measured in the field. Please explain it.
Line 194: On what basis authors divided the low-, medium-, and high- intensity rainfall ranges.
Topsoil interflow (TIF): at what depth TIF takes place?
Line 435: “Indeed, the Spearman rank analysis indicates that ROF was negatively correlated to ASI for plots with a low TWI and positively correlated for plots with a high TWI (Figure S5)”: what would be the possible reason?
Line 490: The fast response of both flow pathways highlights the importance of preferential flow and suggests considerable interaction between OF and TIF. How the fast response of OF highlights the importance of preferential flow.
- Add legend titles to Figures 2 and 3.
- Add legend titles to Figures S8 and S9
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2024-398-RC2
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
142 | 37 | 7 | 186 | 19 | 11 | 8 |
- HTML: 142
- PDF: 37
- XML: 7
- Total: 186
- Supplement: 19
- BibTeX: 11
- EndNote: 8
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1