4.5 Article

An evaluation of the hysteresis in chemical concentration-discharge (C-Q) relationships from drained, intensively managed grasslands in southwest England

Journal

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02626667.2017.1313979

Keywords

C-Q relationships; hysteresis; hydrological processes; farm-scale hydrology

Funding

  1. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BBSRC BB/J004308/1]
  2. Education Trust Fund/Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria [ETF/OAU Staff Development]
  3. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BBS/E/C/00005190, BBS/E/C/000J0100] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. BBSRC [BBS/E/C/000J0100, BBS/E/C/00005190] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined the hysteresis exhibited in concentration-discharge (C-Q) relationships in the runoff from four hydrologically separated fields (catchments) at an intensively managed grassland. The objectives were to examine C-Q relationships constructed from high-resolution time series of flow, temperature, pH, conductivity, nitrate and turbidity, and their implications for hydrological processes. High-resolution datasets from the quality assured records of the Rothamsted Research North Wyke Farm Platform in the UK were examined using a graphical method and cross-correlation statistics. The study found that storm events based C-Q hysteresis reflects the cross-correlation that is generally hidden in time series analysis of large datasets, and that although Q and water quality variables can be effectively influenced by catchment size, the C-Q relationship is less significantly influenced. The dominant C-Q relationships of the water variables in the study area reflect that saturated overland flow was prevalent during the study period in the catchments, while the CCF results indicate coupled transfer of sediments and solute in the area at lag 0.EDITOR D. KoutsoyiannisASSOCIATE EDITOR M. D. Fidelibus

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available