Coupling hysteresis analysis with sediment and hydrological connectivity in three agricultural catchments in Navarre, Spain

  • Saskia D. Keesstra
  • Jason Davis
  • Rens Hein Masselink
  • Javier Casalí
  • Edwin T. H. M. Peeters
  • Roel Dijksma
Sediments, Sec 3 • Hillslope and River Basin Sediment Dynamics • Research Article



Rain storm events mobilise large proportions of fine sediments in catchment systems. Sediments from agricultural catchments are often adsorbed by nutrients, heavy metals and other (in)organic pollutants that may impact downstream environments. To mitigate erosion, sediment transport and associated pollutant transport, it is crucial to know the origin of the sediment that is found in the drainage system, and therefore, it is important to understand catchment sediment dynamics throughout the continuity of runoff events.

Materials and methods

To assess the impact of the state of a catchment on the transport of fine suspended sediment to catchment outlets, an algorithm has been developed which classifies rain storm events into simple (clockwise, counter-clockwise) and compound (figure-of-eight; complex) events. This algorithm is the first tool that uses all available discharge and suspended sediment data and analyses these data automatically. A total of 797 runoff events from three experimental watersheds in Navarre (Spain) were analysed with the help of long-term, high-resolution discharge and sediment data that was collected between 2000 and 2014.

Results and discussion

Morphological complexity and in-stream vegetation structures acted as disconnecting landscape features which caused storage of sediment along the transport cascade. The occurrence of sediment storage along transport paths was therefore responsible for clockwise hysteresis due to the availability of in-stream sediment which could cause the “first flush” affect. Conversely, the catchment with steeper channel gradients and a lower stream density showed much more counter-clockwise hysteresis due to better downstream and lateral surface hydrological connectivity. In this research, hydrological connectivity is defined as the actual and potential transfer paths in a catchment. The classification of event SSC-Q hysteresis provided a seasonal benchmark value to which catchment managers can compare runoff events in order to understand the origin and locations of suspended sediment in the catchment.


A new algorithm uses all available discharge and suspended sediment data to assess catchment sediment dynamics. From these analyses, the catchment connectivity can be assessed which is useful to develop catchment land management.


Headwater catchment Hydrological event Hysteresis Sediment connectivity Sediment dynamics 



This study was supported by the effective network that was created in COST Action CONNECTEUR (ES1306, Connecting European Connectivity Research). Furthermore, we would like to acknowledge the support of the Research Project CGL2015-64284-C2-1-R, founded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness.


  1. Aich V, Liersch S, Vetter T, Huang S, Tecklenburg J, Hoffmann P, Koch H, Fournet S, Krysanova V, Müller E, Hattermann FF (2014) Comparing impacts of climate change on streamflow in four large African river basins. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 18(4):1305–1321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bendjoudi H, Hubert P (2002) Le coefficient de compacité de Gravelius: analyse critique d'un indice de forme des bassins versants. Hydrological sciences journal, 47(6):921–930Google Scholar
  3. Bilotta GS, Brazier RE (2008) Understanding the influence of suspended solids on water quality and aquatic biota. Water Res 42:2849–2861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bird G, Brewer PA, Macklin MG, Nikolova M, Kotsev T, Mollov M, Swain C (2010) Quantifying sediment-associated metal dispersal using Pb isotopes: application of binary and multivariate mixing models at the catchment-scale. Environ Pollut 158(6):2158–2169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bracken LJ, Croke J (2007) The concept of hydrological connectivity and its contribution to understanding runofff-dominated geomorphic systems. Hydrol Process 21:1749–1763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bracken LJ, Turnbull L, Wainwright J, Bogaart P (2015) Sediment connectivity: a framework for understanding sediment transfer at multiple scales. Earth Surf Process Landf 40:177–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown LC, Foster GR (1987) Storm erosivity using idealized intensity distributions. Trans ASAE 30:379–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Casalí J, Gastesi R, Álvarez-Mozos J, De Santisteban LM, de Lersundi JDV, Giménez R, López JJ (2008) Runoff, erosion, and water quality of agricultural watersheds in central Navarre (Spain). Agric Water Manag 95:1111–1128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Casalí J, Giménez R, Díez J, Álvarez-Mozos J, de Lersundi JDV, Goñi M, López J (2010) Sediment production and water quality of watersheds with contrasting land use in Navarre (Spain). Agric Water Manag 97:1683–1694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Casalí J, Loizu J, Campo MA, De Santisteban LM, Álvarez-Mozos (2012) Runoff, erosion and water wuality of agricultural watersheds in central Navarre (Spain). Agric Water Manag 110:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cerdà A, Keesstra SD, Rodrigo-Comino J, Novara A, Pereira P, Brevik E, Giménez-Morera A, Fernández-Raga M, Pulido M, di Prima S, Jordán A (2017) Runoff initiation, soil detachment and connectivity are enhanced as a consequence of vineyards plantations. J Environ Manag 202:268–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cerdan O, et al. (2010) Rates and spatial variations of soil erosion in Europe: a study based on erosion plot data. Geomorphology, 122. Jg., Nr. 1-2, S. 167–177Google Scholar
  13. Cerro C, Bech J, Codina B, Lorente J (1998) Modeling rain erosivity using disdrometric techniques. Soil Sci Soc Am J 62:731–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cooper JR, Wainwright J, Parsons AJ, Onda Y, Fukuwara T, Obana, E, Hargrave, GH (2012) A new approach for simulating the redistribution of soil particles by water erosion: a marker-in-cell model. J Geophys Res Earth Surf 117(F4).
  15. Dash J, Mathur A, Foody GM, Curran PJ, Chipman JW, Lillesand TM (2007) Land cover classification using multi-temporal MERIS vegetation indices. Int J Remote Sens 28:1137–1159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eckhardt K (2005) How to construct recursive digital filters for baseflow separation. Hydrol Process 19:507–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Einstein HA (1943) Flow on a movable bed. Proc Hydraulic Conf Univ of Iowa Bulletin, pp 333–341Google Scholar
  18. Faulkner H (2008) Connectivity as a crucial determinant of badland morphology and evolution. Geomorphology 100:91–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gao P, Josefson M (2012) Temporal variations of suspended sediment transport in Oneida Creek watershed, central New York. J Hydrol 426-427:17–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gao P, Pasternack G (2007) Dynamics of suspended sediment transport at field-scale drain channels of irrigation-dominated watersheds in the Sonoran Desert, southeastern California. Hydrol Process 21:2081–2092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. García-Ruiz JM, Nadal-Romero E, Lana-Renault N, Beguería S (2013) Erosion in Mediterranean landscapes: changes and future challenges. Geomorphology 198:20–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gentile F, Bisantino T, Corbino R, Milillo F, Romano G, Liuzzi GT (2010) Monitoring and analysis of suspended sediment transport dynamics in the Carapelle torrent (southern Italy). Catena 80:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Heckmann T, Vericat D (2018) Computing spatially distributed sediment delivery ratios: inferring functional sediment connectivity from repeat high-resolution digital elevation models. Earth Surf Process Landf 43:1547–1554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Heidel SG (1956) The progressive lag of sediment concentration with flood waves. EOS 37:56–66Google Scholar
  25. Jansson MB (2002) Determining sediment source areas in a tropical river basin, Costa Rica. Catena 47:63–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Keesstra SD, van Dam O, Verstraeten G, van Huissteden J (2009) Changing sediment dynamics due to natural reforestation in the Dragonja catchment, SW Slovenia. Catena 78:60–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Keesstra S, Nunes JP, Saco P, Parsons T, Poeppl R, Masselink R, Cerdà A (2018) The way forward: can connectivity be useful to design better measuring and modelling schemes for water and sediment dynamics? Sci Total Environ 644:1557–1572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kjelland ME, Woodley CM, Swannack TM, Smith DL (2015) A review of the potential effects of suspended sediment on fishes: potential dredging-related physiological, behavioral, and transgenerational implications. Environ Syst Decis 35:334–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Klein M (1984) Anti clockwise hysteresis in suspended sediment concentration during individual storms: Holbeck Catchment; Yorkshire, England. Catena 11:251–257Google Scholar
  30. Langlois JL, Johnson DW, Mehuys GR (2005) Suspended sediment dynamics associated with snowmelt runoff in a small mountain stream of Lake Tahoe (Nevada). Hydrol Process 19:3569–3580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lawler DM, Petts GE, Foster ID, Harper S (2006) Turbidity dynamics during spring storm events in an urban headwater river system: the Upper Tame, West Midlands, UK. Sci Total Environ 360:109–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Linsley RK, Kohler MA (1951) Variations in storm rainfall over small areas. Eos, Transactions Am. Geophys Union 32:245–250Google Scholar
  33. Lloyd CEM, Freer JE, Johnes PJ, Collins AL (2015) Testing an improved index for analysing storm nutrient hysteresis. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions, 12(8):7875–7892Google Scholar
  34. Lloyd CEM, Freer JE, Johnes PJ, Collins AL (2016) Using hysteresis analysis of high resolution water quality monitoring data, including uncertainty, to infer controls on nutrient and sediment transfer in catchments. Sci Total Environ 543:388–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. López-Tarazón JA, Batalla RJ, Vericat D, Francke T (2009) Suspended sediment transport in a highly erodible catchment: the River Isábena (Southern Pyrenees). Geomorphology 109:210–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mano V, Nemery J, Belleudy P, Poirel A (2009) Assessment of suspended sediment transport in four alpine watersheds (France): influence of the climatic regime. Hydrol Process 23(5):777–792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Masselink RJH, Keesstra SD, Temme AJAM, Seeger M, Giménez R, Casalí J (2016) Modelling discharge and sediment yield at catchment scale using connectivity components. Land Degrad Dev 27:933–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Masselink RJH, Temme AJAM, Giménez R, Casalí J, Keesstra SD (2017) Assessing hillslope-channel connectivity in an agricultural catchment using rare-earth oxide tracers and random forests models | Valorando la conectividad ladera-cauce en una cuenca agrícola, utilizando óxidos de tierras raras como trazadores y modelos de Cuad. Investig Geogr 43:19–39Google Scholar
  39. Monsalve Sáenz, G. (1999). Hidrología en la Ingeniería. Alfaomega, ColombiaGoogle Scholar
  40. Morgan RPC (2005) Soil erosion and conservation. Longman Group Limited, UK, pp 63–74Google Scholar
  41. Nathan RJ, McMahon TA (1990) Evaluation of automated techniques for base flow and recession analyses. Water Resour Res 26:1465–1473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Owens PN, Walling DE (2002) The phosphorus content of fluvial sediment in rural and industrialized river basins. Water Res 36:685–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Parsons AJ, Wainwright J, Brazier RE, Powell DM (2006) Is sediment delivery a fallacy? Earth Surf Process Landf 31:1325–1328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Parsons AJ, Bracken L, Poeppl RE, Wainwright J, Keesstra SD (2015) Introduction to special issue on connectivity in water and sediment dynamics. Earth Surf Process Landf 40:1275–1277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Poeppl RE, Keesstra SD, Maroulis J (2017) A conceptual connectivity framework for understanding geomorphic change in human-impacted fluvial systems. Geomorphology 277:237–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Regüés D, Guàrdia R, Gallart F (2000) Geomorphic agents versus vegetation spreading as causes of badland occurence in a Mediterranean subhumid mountainous area. Catena 40:173–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Roehl JE (1962) Sediment source areas, delivery ratios and influencing morphological factors. Int Assoc Hydrol Sci Publ 59:202–213Google Scholar
  48. Rovira A, Batalla RJ (2006) Temporal distribution of suspended sediment transport in a Mediterranean basin: the lower Tordera (NE Spain). Geomorphology 79:58–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Seeger M, Errea MP, Begueria S, Arnáez J, Marti C, García-Ruiz JM (2004) Catchment soil moisture and rainfall characteristics as determinant factors for discharge/suspended sediment hysteretic loops in a small headwater catchment in the Spanish Pyrenees. J Hydrol 288:299–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sherriff SC, Rowan JS, Melland AR, Jordan P, Fenton O, Huallachain DO (2015) Investigating suspended sediment dynamics in contrasting agricultural catchments using ex situ tubidity-based suspended sediment monitoring. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 19:3349–3363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sith R, Yamamoto T, Watanabe A, Nakamura T, Nadaoka K (2017) Analysis of red soil sediment yield in a small agricultural watershed in Ishigaki Island, Japan, using long–term and high resolution monitoring data. Environ Process 4:333–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sloto RA, Crouse MY (1996) HYSEP, a computer program for streamflow hydrograph separation and analysis. US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey 96(4040):96 Google Scholar
  53. Smith HG, Dragovich D (2009) Interpreting sediment delivery processes using suspended sediment-discharge hysteresis patterns from nested upland catchments, south-eastern Australia. Hydrol Process 23:2415–2426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Song Y, Ji J, Yang Z, Yuan X, Mao C, Frost RL, Ayoko GA (2011) Geochemical behavior assessment and apportionment of heavy metal contaminants in the bottom sediments of lower reach of Changjiang River. Catena 85:73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Stubblefield AP, Reuter JE, Dahlgren RA, Goldman CR (2007) Use of turbidometry to characterize suspended sediment and phosphorus fluxes in the Lake Tahoe basin, California, USA. Hydrol Process 21:281–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ter Braak CJF, Smilauer P (2012) CANOCO. Biometris, Wageningen, p 5Google Scholar
  57. Wainwright J, Turnbull L, Ibrahim TG, Lexartza-Artza I, Thornton SF, Brazier RE (2011) Linking environmental regimes, space and time: interpretations of structural and functional connectivity. Geomorphology 126:387–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Williams GP (1989) Sediment concentration versus water discharge during single hydrologic events in rivers. Journal of Hydrology, 111(1-4):89–106Google Scholar
  59. Wotling G, Bouvier CH (2002) Impact of urbanization on suspended sediment and organic matter fluxes from small catchments in Tahiti. Hydrol Process 16:1745–1756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zabaleta A, Martínez M, Uriarte JA, Antigüedad I (2007) Factors controlling suspended sediment yield during runoff events in small headwater catchments of the Basque Country. Catena 71:179–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ziegler AD, Benner SG, Tantasirin C, Wood SH, Sutherland RA, Sidle RC, Jachowski N, Nullet M, Xi LX, Snidvongs A, Giambelluca TW, Fox JF (2014) Turbidity-based sediment monitoring in northern Thailand: hysteresis, variability, and uncertainty. J Hydrol 519:2020–2039CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Team Soil Water and Land UseWageningen Environmental Research, Wageningen URWageningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Civil, Surveying and Environmental EngineeringThe University of NewcastleCallaghanAustralia
  3. 3.Soil Physics and Land Management GroupWageningen UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of EngineeringPublic University of NavarrePamplonaSpain
  5. 5.Aquatic Ecology and Water Quality Management GroupWageningen UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands
  6. 6.Department of Hydrology and Quantitative Water ManagementWageningen UniversityWageningenNetherlands

Personalised recommendations