Moving beyond heterogeneity and process complexity: A new vision for watershed hydrology

Field studies in watershed hydrology continue to characterize and catalogue the enormous heterogeneity and complexity of rainfall runoff processes in more and more watersheds, in different hydroclimatic regimes, and at different scales. Nevertheless, the ability to generalize these findings to ungauged regions remains out of reach. In spite of their apparent physical basis and complexity, the current generation of detailed models is process weak. Their representations of the internal states and process dynamics are still at odds with many experimental findings. In order to make continued progress in watershed hydrology and to bring greater coherence to the science, we need to move beyond the status quo of having to explicitly characterize or prescribe landscape heterogeneity in our (highly calibrated) models and in this way reproduce process complexity and instead explore the set of organizing principles that might underlie the heterogeneity and complexity. This commentary addresses a number of related new avenues for research in watershed science, including the use of comparative analysis, classification, optimality principles, and network theory, all with the intent of defining, understanding, and predicting watershed function and enunciating important watershed functional traits.

[1]  Shoji Noguchi,et al.  Stormflow generation in steep forested headwaters: a linked hydrogeomorphic paradigm , 2000 .

[2]  Jeffrey J. McDonnell,et al.  Integrating tracer experiments with modeling to assess runoff processes and water transit times , 2007 .

[3]  M. Sivapalan.  Process complexity at hillslope scale, process simplicity at the watershed scale: is there a connection? , 2003 .

[4]  Keith Beven,et al.  A manifesto for the equifinality thesis , 2006 .

[5]  Jonathan D. Phillips,et al.  Laws, Contingencies, Irreversible Divergence, and Physical Geography* , 2004, The Professional Geographer.

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

[7]  Günter Blöschl,et al.  Hydrologic synthesis: Across processes, places, and scales , 2006 .

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

[9]  James M. Buttle,et al.  Hydrologic coupling of slopes, riparian zones and streams: an example from the Canadian Shield , 2004 .

[10]  Keith Beven,et al.  Towards an alternative blueprint for a physically based digitally simulated hydrologic response modelling system , 2002 .

[11]  J. Kirchner.  Getting the right answers for the right reasons: Linking measurements, analyses, and models to advance the science of hydrology , 2006 .

[12]  P. E. O'connell,et al.  IAHS Decade on Predictions in Ungauged Basins (PUB), 2003–2012: Shaping an exciting future for the hydrological sciences , 2003 .

[13]  Felix Naef,et al.  A process based assessment of the potential to reduce flood runoff by land use change , 2002 .

[14]  J. McDonnell,et al.  On the need for catchment classification , 2004 .

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

[16]  J. Welker,et al.  The role of topography on catchment‐scale water residence time , 2005 .

[17]  V. Singh,et al.  Mathematical models of large watershed hydrology , 2002 .

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

[19]  M. Budyko,et al.  Climate and life , 1975 .

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

[21]  K. Popper,et al.  Conjectures and refutations;: The growth of scientific knowledge , 1972 .

[22]  T. Dunne,et al.  Relation of field studies and modeling in the prediction of storm runoff , 1983 .

[23]  Keith Beven,et al.  Uniqueness of place and process representations in hydrological modelling , 2000 .

[24]  Murugesu Sivapalan,et al.  Conceptual examination of climate–soil controls upon rainfall partitioning in an open-fractured soil II: Response to a population of storms , 2007 .

[25]  R. Freeze,et al.  Blueprint for a physically-based, digitally-simulated hydrologic response model , 1969 .

[26]  K. Popper,et al.  Conjectures and refutations;: The growth of scientific knowledge , 1972 .

[27]  James C. I. Dooge,et al.  Looking for hydrologic laws , 1986 .

[28]  J. Kirchner.  A double paradox in catchment hydrology and geochemistry , 2003 .

[29]  Markus Weiler,et al.  An infiltration model based on flow variability in macropores: development, sensitivity analysis and applications , 2005 .

[30]  Murugesu Sivapalan,et al.  Field exploration of coupled hydrological and biogeochemical catchment responses and a unifying perceptual model , 2006 .

[31]  J. Martinec,et al.  Subsurface flow from snowmelt traced by tritium , 1975 .

[32]  V. Klemeš.  Conceptualization and scale in hydrology , 1983 .

[33]  Daniel G. Milchunas,et al.  Functional traits of graminoids in semi-arid steppes: a test of grazing histories , 2004 .

[34]  Kellie B. Vaché,et al.  A process‐based rejectionist framework for evaluating catchment runoff model structure , 2006 .

[35]  S. Attinger,et al.  Importance of spatial structures in advancing hydrological sciences , 2006 .

[36]  John Harte,et al.  Toward a Synthesis of the Newtonian and Darwinian Worldviews , 2002 .

[37]  C. Toebes,et al.  Representative and experimental basins, an international guide for research and practice. , 1970 .