Hillslope characteristics as controls of subsurface flow variability

Hillslope hydrological dynamics, particularly subsurface flow (SSF), are highly variable and complex. A profound understanding of factors controlling this variability is needed. Therefore we investigated the relationship between variability of shallow water table dynamics and various hillslope characteristics. We ask whether measurable hillslope properties explain patterns of subsurface flow variability. To approach this question, shallow water table dynamics of three adjacent large-scale hillslopes were monitored with high spatial and temporal resolution over 18 months. The hillslopes are similar in terms of topography and parent material, but different in vegetation cover (grassland, coniferous forest, and mixed forest). We expect vegetation to be an important driver of water table dynamics at our study site, especially given the minor differences in topography. Various hillslope properties were determined in the field and via GIS analysis: common topography descriptors, well depth, soil properties via slug tests, and several vegetation parameters. Response variables characterizing the water table response per well were calculated for different temporal scales (entire time series, seasonal scale, event scale). Partial correlation analysis and a Random Forest machine learning approach were carried out to assess the explainability of SSF variability by measurable hillslope characteristics. We found a complex interplay of predictors, yet soil properties and topography showed the highest single explanatory power. Surprisingly, vegetation characteristics played a minor role. Solely throughfall and canopy cover exerted a slightly stronger control, especially in summer. Most importantly, the examined hillslope characteristics explained only a small proportion of the observed SSF variability. Consequently there must be additional important drivers not represented by current measurement techniques of the hillslope configuration (e.g. bedrock properties, preferential pathways). We also found interesting differences in explainability of SSF variability among temporal scales and between both forested hillslopes and the grassland hillslope.

[1]  M. J. Hvorslev.  Time lag and soil permeability in ground-water observations , 1951 .

[2]  H. Bouwer,et al.  A slug test for determining hydraulic conductivity of unconfined aquifers with completely or partially penetrating wells , 1976 .

[3]  S. Herwitz.  Infiltration‐excess caused by Stemflow in a cyclone‐prone tropical rainforest , 1986 .

[4]  Shoji Noguchi,et al.  Flow and solute transport through the soil matrix and macropores of a hillslope segment , 1994 .

[5]  J. A. Jones.  The role of natural pipeflow in hillslope drainage and erosion: Extrapolating from the Maesnant data , 1997 .

[6]  Justizministerium Baden-Württemberg.  IuK-Gesamtkonzept Baden-Württemberg , 1997 .

[7]  Shoji Noguchi,et al.  Morphological Characteristics of Macropores and the Distribution of Preferential Flow Pathways in a Forested Slope Segment , 1999 .

[8]  E. Matzner,et al.  The effect of beech stemflow on spatial patterns of soil solution chemistry and seepage fluxes in a mixed beech/oak stand , 2000 .

[9]  M. C. Roberts,et al.  The radar signatures and age of periglacial slope deposits, Central Highlands of Germany , 2001 .

[10]  Takahisa Mizuyama,et al.  Effects of pipeflow on hydrological process and its relation to landslide: a review of pipeflow studies in forested headwater catchments , 2001 .

[11]  Glenn De ' ath,et al.  MULTIVARIATE REGRESSION TREES: A NEW TECHNIQUE FOR MODELING SPECIES-ENVIRONMENT RELATIONSHIPS , 2002 .

[12]  Keith Beven,et al.  The role of bedrock topography on subsurface storm flow , 2002 .

[13]  E. O'Loughlin,et al.  A similarity approach to predict landscape saturation in catchments , 2002 .

[14]  G. De’ath.  MULTIVARIATE REGRESSION TREES: A NEW TECHNIQUE FOR MODELING SPECIES–ENVIRONMENT RELATIONSHIPS , 2002 .

[15]  T. Mizuyama,et al.  Effects of pipe flow and bedrock groundwater on runoff generation in a steep headwater catchment in Ashiu, central Japan , 2002 .

[16]  Joseph Holden,et al.  Piping and pipeflow in a deep peat catchment , 2002 .

[17]  C. Paniconi,et al.  Hillslope‐storage Boussinesq model for subsurface flow and variable source areas along complex hillslopes: 1. Formulation and characteristic response , 2003 .

[18]  Felix Naef,et al.  An experimental tracer study of the role of macropores in infiltration in grassland soils , 2003 .

[19]  H. Schume,et al.  Factors controlling soil water-recharge in a mixed European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.)–Norway spruce [Picea abies (L.) Karst.] stand , 2004, European Journal of Forest Research.

[20]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[21]  R. Uijlenhoet,et al.  Similarity analysis of subsurface flow response of hillslopes with complex geometry , 2004 .

[22]  Hannes Flühler,et al.  Inferring flow types from dye patterns in macroporous soils , 2004 .

[23]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  Virtual experiments: a new approach for improving process conceptualization in hillslope hydrology , 2004 .

[24]  C. Beierkuhnlein,et al.  Slope deposits and water paths in a spring catchment, Frankenwald, Bavaria, Germany , 1998, Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems.

[25]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  The role of lateral pipe flow in hillslope runoff response: an intercomparison of non-linear hillslope response , 2005 .

[26]  R. F. Keima,et al.  Temporal persistence of spatial patterns in throughfall , 2005 .

[27]  A. Prasad,et al.  Newer Classification and Regression Tree Techniques: Bagging and Random Forests for Ecological Prediction , 2006, Ecosystems.

[28]  Ramón Díaz-Uriarte,et al.  Gene selection and classification of microarray data using random forest , 2006, BMC Bioinformatics.

[29]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  Threshold relations in subsurface stormflow: 2. The fill and spill hypothesis , 2006 .

[30]  J. McDonnell,et al.  A virtual experiment on the effects of evaporation and intensity smoothing by canopy interception on subsurface stormflow generation , 2006 .

[31]  John L. Nieber,et al.  Enhancement of seepage and lateral preferential flow by biopores on hillslopes , 2006, Biologia.

[32]  H. Elsenbeer,et al.  The influence of land-use changes on soil hydraulic properties: Implications for runoff generation , 2006 .

[33]  N. Verhoest,et al.  Spatial variability and temporal stability of throughfall water under a dominant beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) tree in relationship to canopy cover , 2006 .

[34]  Murugesu Sivapalan,et al.  Pattern, Process and Function: Elements of a Unified Theory of Hydrology at the Catchment Scale , 2006 .

[35]  P. Troch,et al.  Curvature distribution within hillslopes and catchments and its effect on the hydrological response , 2006 .

[36]  T. Mizuyama,et al.  Water flow processes in weathered granitic bedrock and their effects on runoff generation in a small headwater catchment , 2006 .

[37]  Delphis F. Levia,et al.  Variability of throughfall volume and solute inputs in wooded ecosystems , 2006 .

[38]  R. Woods,et al.  Catchment Classification and Hydrologic Similarity , 2006, Geography Compass.

[39]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  On the interrelations between topography, soil depth, soil moisture, transpiration rates and species distribution at the hillslope scale , 2006 .

[40]  Andy Liaw,et al.  Classification and Regression by randomForest , 2007 .

[41]  W. Liang,et al.  Heterogeneous Soil Water Dynamics around a Tree Growing on a Steep Hillslope , 2007 .

[42]  J. McDonnell,et al.  Effect of bedrock permeability on subsurface stormflow and the water balance of a trenched hillslope at the Panola Mountain Research Watershed, Georgia, USA , 2007 .

[43]  Richard P. Hooper,et al.  Moving beyond heterogeneity and process complexity: A new vision for watershed hydrology , 2007 .

[44]  Markus Weiler,et al.  Conceptualizing lateral preferential flow and flow networks and simulating the effects on gauged and ungauged hillslopes , 2007 .

[45]  Younes Alila,et al.  Dye staining and excavation of a lateral preferential flow network. , 2008 .

[46]  H. Elsenbeer,et al.  Soil organic carbon concentrations and stocks on Barro Colorado Island — Digital soil mapping using Random Forests analysis , 2008 .

[47]  Achim Zeileis,et al.  Conditional variable importance for random forests , 2008, BMC Bioinformatics.

[48]  Philippe Cattan,et al.  Spatially Distributed Water Fluxes in an Andisol under Banana Plants: Experiments and Three‐Dimensional Modeling , 2008 .

[49]  Felix Naef,et al.  Subsurface storm flow formation at different hillslopes and implications for the ‘old water paradox’ , 2008 .

[50]  Markus Weiler,et al.  Hillslope dynamics modeled with increasing complexity , 2008 .

[51]  M. Tani,et al.  Effects of hillslope topography on hydrological responses in a weathered granite mountain, Japan: comparison of the runoff response between the valley-head and the side slope , 2008 .

[52]  Niko E. C. Verhoest,et al.  Rainfall partitioning into throughfall, stemflow, and interception within a single beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) canopy: influence of foliation, rain event characteristics, and meteorology , 2008 .

[53]  Skalenübergreifende Prozess-Studien zur Abflussbildung in Gebieten mit periglazialen Deckschichten (Sauerland, Deutschland) , 2008 .

[54]  Gunnar Nützmann,et al.  Controls of land use and soil structure on water movement: lessons for pollutant transfer through the unsaturated zone. , 2009 .

[55]  G. Tutz,et al.  An introduction to recursive partitioning: rationale, application, and characteristics of classification and regression trees, bagging, and random forests. , 2009, Psychological methods.

[56]  J. McDonnell,et al.  A virtual experiment on the effect of canopy and forest floor interception on subsurface flow behaviour , 2009 .

[57]  H. Elsenbeer,et al.  Rainfall redistribution in a tropical forest: Spatial and temporal patterns , 2009 .

[58]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  Connectivity at the hillslope scale: identifying interactions between storm size, bedrock permeability, slope angle and soil depth. , 2009 .

[59]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  Hillslope threshold response to rainfall: (1) A field based forensic approach , 2010 .

[60]  Hubert H. G. Savenije,et al.  Spatial and temporal variability of canopy and forest floor interception in a beech forest , 2010 .

[61]  M. Gerrits,et al.  The role of interception in the hydrological cycle , 2010 .

[62]  R. Kodešová,et al.  A Numerical Study of the Impact of Precipitation Redistribution in a Beech Forest Canopy on Water and Aluminum Transport in a Podzol , 2010 .

[63]  Wei-Yin Loh,et al.  Classification and regression trees , 2011, WIREs Data Mining Knowl. Discov..

[64]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  Examining the role of throughfall patterns on subsurface stormflow generation , 2011 .

[65]  D. Levia,et al.  Throughfall and Stemflow in Wooded Ecosystems , 2011 .

[66]  M. Loos,et al.  Topographic controls on overland flow generation in a forest - An ensemble tree approach , 2011 .

[67]  W. Liang,et al.  Soil water dynamics around a tree on a hillslope with or without rainwater supplied by stemflow , 2011 .

[68]  J. Nimmo.  Preferential flow occurs in unsaturated conditions , 2012 .

[69]  A. Guswa,et al.  Effect of throughfall variability on recharge: application to hemlock and deciduous forests in western Massachusetts , 2012 .

[70]  Peter A. Troch,et al.  Intercomparing hillslope hydrological dynamics: Spatio‐temporal variability and vegetation cover effects , 2012 .

[71]  Hubert H. G. Savenije,et al.  The effect of spatial throughfall patterns on soil moisture patterns at the hillslope scale , 2012 .

[72]  G. Markart,et al.  A hillslope scale comparison of tree species influence on soil moisture dynamics and runoff processes during intense rainfall , 2012 .