Optimal Baseflow Separation Through Chemical Mass Balance: Comparing the Usages of Two Tracers, Two Concentration Estimation Methods, and Four Baseflow Filters
{"title":"Optimal Baseflow Separation Through Chemical Mass Balance: Comparing the Usages of Two Tracers, Two Concentration Estimation Methods, and Four Baseflow Filters","authors":"Yiwen Mei, Dagang Wang, Jinxin Zhu, Guoping Tang, Chenkai Cai, Xinyi Shen, Yi Hong, Xinxuan Zhang","doi":"10.1029/2023wr036386","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Optimizing empirical baseflow filters using environmental tracers (e.g., specific electrical conductance (SEC), turbidity) is an effective and efficient way to quantify the contribution of baseflow to total flow. To execute this baseflow separation, three key components are needed: The tracer, the method to estimate tracer concentration in different flow components, and the empirical baseflow filter. However, a comprehensive evaluation of the various combinations of these components, especially with a large sample of catchments, is currently lacking in the literature. Therefore, our study assembles 16 hybrid baseflow filters from two tracers, two concentration estimation methods, and four empirical baseflow filters, and evaluated their performance in baseflow separation and producing two long-term baseflow signatures for 1,100 catchments in the Contiguous United States. Our results suggest that SEC is a superior tracer to turbidity for baseflow separation. Additionally, using monthly maximum and minimum values to represent tracer concentration in flow components produces better separation than using a power function relationship between flow rate and concentration. The four empirical baseflow filters offer a similar level of performance, regardless of the other options used. Yet, some of these filters produce inconsistent results in calculating the baseflow signatures for the catchments. Our analysis shed light on the optimization of hybrid baseflow filters for the accurate quantification of baseflow contribution.","PeriodicalId":23799,"journal":{"name":"Water Resources Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Water Resources Research","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1029/2023wr036386","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Optimizing empirical baseflow filters using environmental tracers (e.g., specific electrical conductance (SEC), turbidity) is an effective and efficient way to quantify the contribution of baseflow to total flow. To execute this baseflow separation, three key components are needed: The tracer, the method to estimate tracer concentration in different flow components, and the empirical baseflow filter. However, a comprehensive evaluation of the various combinations of these components, especially with a large sample of catchments, is currently lacking in the literature. Therefore, our study assembles 16 hybrid baseflow filters from two tracers, two concentration estimation methods, and four empirical baseflow filters, and evaluated their performance in baseflow separation and producing two long-term baseflow signatures for 1,100 catchments in the Contiguous United States. Our results suggest that SEC is a superior tracer to turbidity for baseflow separation. Additionally, using monthly maximum and minimum values to represent tracer concentration in flow components produces better separation than using a power function relationship between flow rate and concentration. The four empirical baseflow filters offer a similar level of performance, regardless of the other options used. Yet, some of these filters produce inconsistent results in calculating the baseflow signatures for the catchments. Our analysis shed light on the optimization of hybrid baseflow filters for the accurate quantification of baseflow contribution.
期刊介绍:
Water Resources Research (WRR) is an interdisciplinary journal that focuses on hydrology and water resources. It publishes original research in the natural and social sciences of water. It emphasizes the role of water in the Earth system, including physical, chemical, biological, and ecological processes in water resources research and management, including social, policy, and public health implications. It encompasses observational, experimental, theoretical, analytical, numerical, and data-driven approaches that advance the science of water and its management. Submissions are evaluated for their novelty, accuracy, significance, and broader implications of the findings.