Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Indirect Methods to Elucidate Water Flows and Contaminant Transfer Pathways through Meso-scale Catchments – a Review

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Environmental Processes Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We provide a critical review of indirect methods to elucidate water flows and contaminant transfer pathways through meso-scale catchments, as the proliferation of such methods in recent years has made it very difficult for potential users to evaluate their relative merits. We focus on agricultural contaminants such as nitrogen, phosphorus, faecal bacteria and sediment, as there is a substantial risk for them to contaminate waterways wherever agriculture exists. While direct measurements may be feasible at the plot/farm scale, their high resource demands make them prohibitive at the catchment scale. Water flows converging at the catchment outlet offer the opportunity to employ indirect methods to interpret hydrological and/or chemical data observed there as integrative signatures reflecting the various pathways through a catchment. We focus on meso-scale catchments (≈ 10–103 km2) as the surface water monitoring data required for indirect methods is typically available at this scale. We reviewed the literature to provide an overview of the numerous methods used (e.g., hydrograph separation, concentration-discharge analysis, pollutograph/loadograph analysis, end-member mixing analysis). Particular attention is given to the spatial scale the methods have been applied to, and their data needs (type of data, required temporal and spatial resolution). Advantages and disadvantages in terms of data availability and underlying assumptions are highlighted to facilitate the selection of a suitable method. While no single indirect method will provide all the answers, well-informed selection of one or more has the potential to greatly advance our understanding of water flows and contaminant transfers at the catchment scale.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott BW, Baranov V, Mendoza-Lera C, Nikolakopoulou M, Harjung A, Kolbe T, Balasubramanian MN, Vaessen TN, Ciocca F, Campeau A (2016) Using multi-tracer inference to move beyond single-catchment ecohydrology. Earth Sci Rev 160:19–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams G, Cornish PS, Croke B, Hart MR, Hughes CE, Jakeman AJ A (2009) New look at uncertainty in end member mixing models for streamflow partitioning. In: Interfacing Modelling and Simulation with Mathematical and Computational Sciences: Proceedings of the 18th World IMACS Congress and MODSIM09 International Congress on Modelling and Simulation, Cairns, Australia, 13–17 July 2009, 2009. pp 3039–3045

  • Adams R, Quinn PF, Bowes MJ (2015) The Catchment Runoff Attenuation Flux Tool, a minimum information requirement nutrient pollution model. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 19:1641–1657. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-1641-2015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aksoy H, Kurt I, Eris E (2009) Filtered smoothed minima baseflow separation method. J Hydrol 372:94–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersen H, Pedersen M, Jorgensen O, Kronvang B (2001) Analysis of the hydrology and flow of nitrogen in 17 Danish catchments. Water Sci Technol 44:63–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Appleby FV (1970) Recession and the baseflow problem. Water Resour Res 6:1398–1403

    Google Scholar 

  • Archbold M, Deakin J, Bruen M, Desta M, Flynn R, Kelly-Quinn M, Gill L, Maher P, Misstear B, Mockler E (2016) Contaminant movement and attenuation along pathways from the land surface to aquatic receptors: the pathways project. Strive research report 2007-WQ-CD-1-S1. Johnstown Castle, Co. Wexford. Environmental Protection Agency

  • Arnold J, Allen P, Muttiah R, Bernhardt G (1995) Automated base flow separation and recession analysis techniques. Groundwater 33:1010–1018

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes BS (1939) The structure of discharge-recession curves. Eos Trans AGU 20:721–725. https://doi.org/10.1029/TR020i004p00721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barthold FK, Tyralla C, Schneider K, Vaché KB, Frede HG, Breuer L (2011) How many tracers do we need for end member mixing analysis (EMMA)? A sensitivity analysis. Water Resour Res 47:W08519. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR010604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barthold FK, Wu J, Vaché KB, Schneider K, Frede HG, Breuer L (2010) Identification of geographic runoff sources in a data sparse region: hydrological processes and the limitations of tracer-based approaches. Hydrol Process 24:2313–2327

    Google Scholar 

  • Basu NB, Destouni G, Jawitz JW, Thompson SE, Loukinova NV, Darracq A, Zanardo S, Yaeger M, Sivapalan M, Rinaldo A (2010) Nutrient loads exported from managed catchments reveal emergent biogeochemical stationarity. Geophys Res Lett 37:L23404. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL045168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basu NB, Thompson SE, Rao PSC (2011) Hydrologic and biogeochemical functioning of intensively managed catchments: a synthesis of top-down analyses. Water Resour Res 47:W00J15. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR010800

  • Bazemore DE, Eshleman KN, Hollenbeck KJ (1994) The role of soil water in stormflow generation in a forested headwater catchment: synthesis of natural tracer and hydrometric evidence. J Hydrol 162:47–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker MW (2006) Potential for satellite remote sensing of ground water. Groundwater 44:306–318

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergström S (1995) The HBV model. In: Singh VP (ed) Computer models of watershed hydrology. Water Resources Publications, Highlands Ranch, pp 443–476

    Google Scholar 

  • Bieroza M, Heathwaite A (2015) Seasonal variation in phosphorus concentration–discharge hysteresis inferred from high-frequency in situ monitoring. J Hydrol 524:333–347

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw SJ, Webb B (2010) Flow pathways in the Slapton Wood catchment using temperature as a tracer. J Hydrol 383:269–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.12.042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowes M, Jarvie H, Halliday S, Skeffington R, Wade A, Loewenthal M, Gozzard E, Newman J, Palmer-Felgate E (2015) Characterising phosphorus and nitrate inputs to a rural river using high-frequency concentration–flow relationships. Sci Total Environ 511:608–620

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowes MJ, Jarvie HP, Naden PS, Old GH, Scarlett PM, Roberts C, Armstrong LK, Harman SA, Wickham HD, Collins AL (2014) Identifying priorities for nutrient mitigation using river concentration–flow relationships: the Thames basin, UK. J Hydrol 517:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.03.063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brodie R, Hostetler S (2005) A review of techniques for analysing baseflow from stream hydrographs. In: Proceedings of the NZHS-IAH-NZSSS 2005 conference, 2005

  • Broughton WC (1993) A hydrograph-based model for estimating water yield of ungauged catchments. Institute of Engineers Australia National Conference. Publ. 93/14, 317–324

  • Burns DA, Boyer EW, Elliott EM, Kendall C (2009) Sources and transformations of nitrate from streams draining varying land uses: evidence from dual isotope analysis. J Environ Qual 38:1149–1159. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2008.0371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buttle J (1994) Isotope hydrograph separations and rapid delivery of pre-event water from drainage basins. Prog Phys Geogr 18:16–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Buttle J, Peters D (1997) Inferring hydrological processes in a temperate basin using isotopic and geochemical hydrograph separation: a re-evaluation. Hydrol Process 11:557–573

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey RO, Wollheim WM, Mulukutla GK, Mineau MM (2014) Characterizing storm-event nitrate fluxes in a fifth order suburbanizing watershed using in situ sensors. Environ Sci Technol 48:7756–7765

    Google Scholar 

  • Chanat JG, Rice KC, Hornberger GM (2002) Consistency of patterns in concentration-discharge plots. Water Resour Res 38:22-1–22-10

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman T (1999) A comparison of algorithms for stream flow recession and baseflow separation. Hydrol Process 13:701–714

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen B, Krajewski WF (2015) Recession analysis across scales: the impact of both random and nonrandom spatial variability on aggregated hydrologic response. J Hydrol 523:97–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Chow VT (1964) Handbook of applied hydrology. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Christophersen N, Neal C (1990) Linking hydrological, geochemical, and soil chemical processes on the catchment scale: an interplay between modeling and field work. Water Resour Res 26:3077–3086

    Google Scholar 

  • Clague J, Stenger R, Clough T (2013) The impact of relict organic materials on the denitrification capacity in the unsaturated–saturated zone continuum of three volcanic profiles. J Environ Qual 42:145–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Clague JC, Stenger R, Clough TJ (2015) Evaluation of the stable isotope signatures of nitrate to detect denitrification in a shallow ground water system in New Zealand. Agric Ecosyst Environ 202:188–197

    Google Scholar 

  • Close M, Abraham P, Humphries B, Lilburne L, Cuthill T, Wilson S (2016) Predicting groundwater redox status on a regional scale using linear discriminant analysis. J Contam Hydrol 191:19–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Collischonn W, Fan FM (2013) Defining parameters for Eckhardt's digital baseflow filter. Hydrol Process 27:2614–2622

    Google Scholar 

  • Constantz J (1998) Interaction between stream temperature, streamflow, and groundwater exchanges in alpine streams. Water Resour Res 34:1609–1615

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies JA, Beven K (2015) Hysteresis and scale in catchment storage, flow and transport. Hydrol Process 29:3604–3615

    Google Scholar 

  • Deakin J, B BM, Murphy A, Dowling M, Flynn R (2010) Investigating water flow and contaminant pathways to rivers using chemical hydrograph separation, In: Procedding of Irish National Hydrology Conference, 16th November, Athlone: 43–55

  • Delsman JR, Essink GH, Beven KJ, Stuyfzand PJ (2013) Uncertainty estimation of end-member mixing using generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation (GLUE), applied in a lowland catchment. Water Resour Res 49:4792–4806

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng ZQ, de Lima JLMP, de Lima MIP, Singh VP (2006) A fractional dispersion model for overland solute transport. Water Resour Res 42:W03416. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005WR004146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan JM, Band LE, Groffman PM (2017a) Variable nitrate concentration–discharge relationships in a forested watershed. Hydrol Process 31:1817–1824. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.11136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan JM, Welty C, Kemper JT, Groffman PM, Band LE (2017b) Dynamics of nitrate concentration-discharge patterns in an urban watershed. Water Resour Res 53:7349–7365. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR020500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dupas R, Curie F, Gascuel-Odoux C, Moatar F, Delmas M, Parnaudeau V, Durand P (2013) Assessing N emissions in surface water at the national level: comparison of country-wide vs. regionalized models. Sci Total Environ 443:152–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupas R, Gascuel OC, Gilliet N, Grimaldi C, Gruau G (2015) Distinct export dynamics for dissolved and particulate phosphorus reveal independent transport mechanisms in an arable headwater catchment. Hydrol Process 29:3162–3178

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckhardt K (2005) How to construct recursive digital filters for baseflow separation. Hydrol Process 19:507–515

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckhardt K (2008) A comparison of baseflow indices, which were calculated with seven different baseflow separation methods. J Hydrol 352:168–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans C, Davies TD (1998) Causes of concentration/discharge hysteresis and its potential as a tool for analysis of episode hydrochemistry. Water Resour Res 34:129–137

    Google Scholar 

  • Foerster J, Milne-Home W (1995) Application of AGNPS to model nutrient generation rates under different farming management practices at the Gunnedah research Centre catchment. Aust J Exp Agric 35:961–967. https://doi.org/10.1071/EA9950961

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeze RA (1972) Role of subsurface flow in generating surface runoff: 1. Base flow contributions to channel flow. Water Resour Res 8:609–623

    Google Scholar 

  • Fröhlich K, Fröhlich W, Wittenberg H (1994) Determination of groundwater recharge by baseflow separation: regional analysis in northeast China. In: Seuna P, Gustard A, Arnell NW, Cole GA (eds) FRIEND: flow regimes from international experimental and network data. Proceedings of the Braunschweig conference, October 1993, IAHS Publ. No. 221, pp 69–76

  • Furey PR, Gupta VK (2001) A physically based filter for separating base flow from streamflow time series. Water Resour Res 37:2709–2722

    Google Scholar 

  • Genereux D (1998) Quantifying uncertainty in tracer-based hydrograph separations. Water Resour Res 34:915–919

    Google Scholar 

  • Godsey SE, Kirchner JW, Clow DW (2009) Concentration–discharge relationships reflect chemostatic characteristics of US catchments. Hydrol Process 23:1844–1864

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzales A, Nonner J, Heijkers J, Uhlenbrook S (2009) Comparison of different base flow separation methods in a lowland catchment. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 13:2055–2068

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorgoglione A, Gioia A, Iacobellis V, Piccinni AF, Ranieri E (2016) A rationale for pollutograph evaluation in ungauged areas, using daily rainfall patterns: case studies of the Apulian region in southern Italy. Appl Environ Soil Sci 2016:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/9327614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graszkiewicz Z, Murphy R, Hill P, Nathan R (2011) Review of techniques for estimating the contribution of baseflow to flood hydrographs. In: Proceedings of the 34th World Congress of the International Association for HydroEnvironment Research and Engineering: 33rd Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium and 10th Conference on Hydraulics in Water Engineering. Engineers Australia, pp. 138

  • Grunwald S, Norton L (2000) Calibration and validation of a non-point source pollution model. Agric Water Manag 45:17–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Goswami M, O'Connor KM (2010) A “monster” that made the SMAR conceptual model “right for the wrong reasons”. Hydrol Sci J 55(6):913–927

    Google Scholar 

  • Halford KJ, Mayer GC (2000) Problems associated with estimating ground water discharge and recharge from stream-discharge records. Groundwater 38:331–342

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall FR (1968) Base-flow recessions—a review. Water Resour Res 4:973–983. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR004i005p00973

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haregeweyn N, Yohannes F (2003) Testing and evaluation of the agricultural non-point source pollution model (AGNPS) on Augucho catchment, western Hararghe, Ethiopia. Agric Ecosyst Environ 99:201–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewlett JD, Hibbert AR (1967) Factors affecting the response of small watersheds to precipitation in humid areas. For Hydrol 1:275–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill AR (1996) Nitrate removal in stream riparian zones. J Environ Qual 25. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq1996.00472425002500040014x

    Google Scholar 

  • Holko L, Herrmann A, Uhlenbrook S, Pfister L, Querner EP (2002) Groundwater runoff separation - test of applicability of a simple separation method under varying natural conditions. FRIEND 2002- Regional Hydrology: Bridging the Gap Between Research and Practice:265–272

  • Holz G (2010) Sources and processes of contaminant loss from an intensively grazed catchment inferred from patterns in discharge and concentration of thirteen analytes using high intensity sampling. J Hydrol 383:194–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper RP, Christophersen N, Peters NE (1990) Modelling streamwater chemistry as a mixture of soilwater end-members—an application to the Panola Mountain catchment, Georgia, USA. J Hydrol 116:321–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper RP, Shoemaker CA (1986) A comparison of chemical and isotopic hydrograph separation. Water Resour Res 22:1444–1454

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornberger GM, Scanlon TM, Raffensperger JP (2001) Modelling transport of dissolved silica in a forested headwater catchment: the effect of hydrological and chemical time scales on hysteresis in the concentration–discharge relationship. Hydrol Process 15:2029–2038

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton RE (1933) The role of infiltration in the hydrologic cycle. Eos Trans AGU 14:446–460

    Google Scholar 

  • Hrachowitz M, Benettin P, Van Breukelen BM, Fovet O, Howden NJ, Ruiz L, Van Der Velde Y, Wade AJ (2016) Transit times—the link between hydrology and water quality at the catchment scale. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Water 3:629–657

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubert P, Marin E, Meybeck M, Olive ESP (1969) Aspects hydrologique, géochimique et sédimentologique de la crue exceptionnelle de la Dranse du Chablais du 22 septembre 1968. Arch Sci (Genève) 3(1969):581–604

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivanov VY, Vivoni ER, Bras RL, Entekhabi D (2004) Catchment hydrologic response with a fully distributed triangulated irregular network model. Water Resour Res 40:W11102. https://doi.org/10.1029/2004WR003218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakeman A, Hornberger G (1993) How much complexity is warranted in a rainfall-runoff model? Water Resour Res 29:2637–2649

    Google Scholar 

  • Jakeman AJ, Littlewood IG, Whitehead P (1990) Computation of the instantaneous unit hydrograph and identifiable component flows with application to two small upland catchments. J Hydrol 117:275–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(90)90097-H

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarvie DM, Hill RJ, Ruble TE, Pollastro RM (2007) Unconventional shale-gas systems: the Mississippian Barnett Shale of north-central Texas as one model for thermogenic shale-gas assessment. AAPG Bull 91:475–499

    Google Scholar 

  • Joerin C, Beven KJ, Iorgulescu I, Musy A (2002) Uncertainty in hydrograph separations based on geochemical mixing models. J Hydrol 255:90–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalbus E, Reinstorf F, Schirmer M (2006) Measuring methods for groundwater – surface water interactions: a review. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 10:873–887

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchner JW, Feng X, Neal C, Robson AJ (2004) The fine structure of water quality dynamics: the (high frequency) wave of the future. Hydrol Process 18:1353–1359

    Google Scholar 

  • Klaus J, McDonnell J (2013) Hydrograph separation using stable isotopes: review and evaluation. J Hydrol 505:47–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Kollet SJ, Maxwell RM (2006) Integrated surface–groundwater flow modeling: a free-surface overland flow boundary condition in a parallel groundwater flow model. Adv Water Resour 29:945–958

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyllmar K, Carlsson C, Gustafson A, Ulén B, Johnsson H (2006) Nutrient discharge from small agricultural catchments in Sweden: characterisation and trends. Agric Ecosyst Environ 115:15–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladson AR, Brown R, Neal B, Nathan R (2013) A standard approach to baseflow separation using the Lyne and Hollick Filter. Australas J Water Res 17:25–34. https://doi.org/10.7158/13241583.2013.11465417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence G, Driscoll C (1990) Longitudinal patterns of concentration-discharge relationships in stream water draining the Hubbard Brook experimental Forest, New Hampshire. J Hydrol 116:147–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Linsley RK, Kohler MA, Paulhus JL (1949) Applied hydrology. The McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd C, Freer J, Johnes P, Collins A (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 543:388–404

    Google Scholar 

  • Longobardi A, Villani P (2015) Statistical methods to quantify environmental flow and its variability in a Mediterranean environment. Eur Water 49:33–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Longobardi LE, Liu L, Grimme S, Stephan DW (2016) Stable borocyclic radicals via frustrated Lewis pair hydrogenations. J Am Chem Soc 138:2500–2503

    Google Scholar 

  • Lott DA, Stewart MT (2013) A power function method for estimating base flow. Groundwater 51:442–451

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyne V, Hollick M (1979) Stochastic time-variable rainfall-runoff modelling. In: Institute of Engineers Australia National Conference, 1979. pp 89–93

  • Mandeville AN (2016) Insights gained from four component hydrograph separation. Hydrol Res 47:606–618. https://doi.org/10.2166/nh.2016.061

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell J, Bonell M, Stewart M, Pearce A (1990) Deuterium variations in storm rainfall: implications for stream hydrograph separation. Water Resour Res 26:455–458

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell JJ, Tanaka T, Mitchell MJ, Ohte N (2001) Hydrology and biogeochemistry of forested catchments. Hydrol Process 15:1673–1674

    Google Scholar 

  • McGlynn BL, McDonnell JJ (2003) Quantifying the relative contributions of riparian and hillslope zones to catchment runoff. Water Resour Res 39(11):1310. https://doi.org/10.1029/2003WR002091

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMillan H, Gueguen M, Grimon E, Woods R, Clark M, Rupp DE (2014) Spatial variability of hydrological processes and model structure diagnostics in a 50 km2 catchment. Hydrol Process 28:4896–4913. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.9988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMillan H, Tetzlaff D, Clark M, Soulsby C (2012) Do time-variable tracers aid the evaluation of hydrological model structure? A multimodel approach. Water Resour Res 48. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011wr011688

  • Mellander P-E, Melland AR, Jordan P, Wall DP, Murphy PNC, Shortle G (2012) Quantifying nutrient transfer pathways in agricultural catchments using high temporal resolution data. Environ Sci Pol 24:44–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2012.06.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meybeck M, Moatar F (2012) Daily variability of river concentrations and fluxes: indicators based on the segmentation of the rating curve. Hydrol Process 26:1188–1207

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller JR, Mackin G, Miller SMO (2015) Application of geochemical tracers to fluvial sediment. Springer International Publishing, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13221-1

    Google Scholar 

  • Moatar F, Abbott BW, Minaudo C, Curie F, Pinay G (2017) Elemental properties, hydrology, and biology interact to shape concentration-discharge curves for carbon, nutrients, sediment, and major ions. Water Resour Res 53:1270–1287. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR019635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mockler EM, O’Loughlin FE, Bruen M (2016) Understanding hydrological flow paths in conceptual catchment models using uncertainty and sensitivity analysis. Comput Geosci 90(Part B):66–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2015.08.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed H, Yohannes F, Zeleke G (2004) Validation of agricultural non-point source (AGNPS) pollution model in Kori watershed, south Wollo, Ethiopia. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 6:97–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery DR, Dietrich WE, Heffner JT (2002) Piezometric response in shallow bedrock at CB1: implications for runoff generation and landsliding. Water Resour Res 38:10-1–10-18. https://doi.org/10.1029/2002WR001429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgenstern U, Daughney CJ, Leonard G, Gordon D, Donath FM, Reeves R (2015) Using groundwater age and hydrochemistry to understand sources and dynamics of nutrient contamination through the catchment into Lake Rotorua, New Zealand. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 19:803–822. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-803-2015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musolff A, Schmidt C, Selle B, Fleckenstein JH (2015) Catchment controls on solute export. Adv Water Resour 86:133–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Nash JE (1960) A unit hydrograph study, with particular reference to British catchments. Proc Inst Civ Eng 17:249–282

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathan R, McMahon T (1990) Evaluation of automated techniques for base flow and recession analyses. Water Resour Res 26:1465–1473

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen SA, Hansen E (1973) Numerical simulation of the rainfall runoff process on a daily basis. Nord Hydrol 4:171–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Niu J, Phanikumar MS (2015) Modeling watershed-scale solute transport using an integrated, process-based hydrologic model with applications to bacterial fate and transport. J Hydrol 529:35–48

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien RJ, Misstear BD, Gill LW, Deakin JL, Flynn R (2013) Developing an integrated hydrograph separation and lumped modelling approach to quantifying hydrological pathways in Irish river catchments. J Hydrol 486:259–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.01.034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogunkoya O, Jenkins A (1993) Analysis of storm hydrograph and flow pathways using a three-component hydrograph separation model. J Hydrol 142:71–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Orr A (2014) Hydrogeological influences on the fate and transport of nitrate in groundwater. PhD Thesis, Architecture and Civil Engineering, Queen’s University Belfast

  • Pinder GF, Jones JF (1969) Determination of the groundwater component of peak discharge from the chemistry of total runoff. Water Resour Res 5:438–445

    Google Scholar 

  • Pionke H, Gburek W, Folmar G (1993) Quantifying stormflow components in a Pennsylvania watershed when 18O input and storm conditions vary. J Hydrol 148:169–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Ran Q, Su D, Li P, He Z (2012) Experimental study of the impact of rainfall characteristics on runoff generation and soil erosion. J Hydrol 424:99–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice KC, Hornberger GM (1998) Comparison of hydrochemical tracers to estimate source contributions to peak flow in a small, forested, headwater catchment. Water Resour Res 34:1755–1766

    Google Scholar 

  • Rimmer A, Hartmann A (2014) Optimal hydrograph separation filter to evaluate transport routines of hydrological models. J Hydrol 514:249–257

    Google Scholar 

  • Rode M, Frede H-G (1999) Testing AGNPS for soil erosion and water quality modelling in agricultural catchments in Hesse (Germany). Phys Chem Earth Pt B 24:297–301

    Google Scholar 

  • Seibert J, Grabs T, Köhler S, Laudon H, Winterdahl M, Bishop K (2009) Linking soil-and stream-water chemistry based on a riparian flow-concentration integration model. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 13:2287–2297

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellinger C (1996) Computer program for performing hydrograph separation using the rating curve method, US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Technical Memorandum ERL GLERL-100

  • Shamshad A, Leow CS, Ramlah A, Wan Hussin WMA, Mohd. Sanusi SA (2008) Applications of AnnAGNPS model for soil loss estimation and nutrient loading for Malaysian conditions. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 10:239–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2007.10.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen C, Phanikumar MS (2010) A process-based, distributed hydrologic model based on a large-scale method for surface–subsurface coupling. Adv Water Resour 33:1524–1541

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh SK, Zeddies M, Shankar U, Griffiths GA (2018) Potential groundwater recharge zones within New Zealand. Geosci Front. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsf.2018.05.018:1-9

  • Sklash M, Farvolden R, Fritz P (1976) A conceptual model of watershed response to rainfall, developed through the use of oxygen-18 as a natural tracer. Can J Earth Sci 13:271–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Sklash MG, Farvolden RN (1979) The role of groundwater in storm runoff. J Hydrol 43:45–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Sloto RA, Crouse MY (1996) HYSEP, a computer program for streamflow hydrograph separation and analysis. US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey

  • Smakhtin VU (2001) Low flow hydrology: a review. J Hydrol 240:147–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Soulsby C, Petry J, Brewer M, Dunn S, Ott B, Malcolm I (2003) Identifying and assessing uncertainty in hydrological pathways: a novel approach to end member mixing in a Scottish agricultural catchment. J Hydrol 274:109–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Soulsby C, Tetzlaff D, Rodgers P, Dunn S, Waldron S (2006) Runoff processes, stream water residence times and controlling landscape characteristics in a mesoscale catchment: an initial evaluation. J Hydrol 325:197–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.10.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spalding RF, Exner ME (1993) Occurrence of nitrate in groundwater—a review. J Environ Qual 22:392–402. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq1993.00472425002200030002x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stenger R, Clague J, Morgenstern U, Clough T (2018) Vertical stratification of redox conditions, denitrification and recharge in shallow groundwater on a volcanic hillslope containing relict organic matter. Sci Total Environ 639:1205–1219

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenger R, Clague JC, Woodward SJR, Moorhead B, Burbery L, Canard H (2012) Groundwater assimilative capacity – an untapped opportunity for catchment-scale nitrogen management? In: Currie LD, Christensen CL (eds) Advanced nutrient management: gains from the past – goals for the future. Occasional Report No. 25. Fertilizer and Lime Research Centre, Massey University, Palmerston North, p 10

  • Stenger R, Wilson S, Barkle G, Close M, Woodward S, Burbery L, Pang L, Rekker J, Wöhling T, Clague J (2016) Transfer Pathways Programme (TPP )– New research to determine pathway-specific contaminant transfers from the land to water bodies. In: Integrated nutrient and water management for sustainable farming. (Eds L.D. Currie and R. Singh). http://flrc.massey.ac.nz/publications.html. Occasional Report No. 29. Fertilizer and Lime Research Centre, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand. 6 pages

  • Stewart M (2015) Promising new baseflow separation and recession analysis methods applied to streamflow at Glendhu catchment, New Zealand. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 19:2587–2603

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoelzle M, Stahl K, Weiler M (2013) Are streamflow recession characteristics really characteristic? Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 17:817–828

    Google Scholar 

  • Su C-H, Peterson TJ, Costelloe JF, Western AW (2016) A synthetic study to evaluate the utility of hydrological signatures for calibrating a base flow separation filter. Water Resour Res 52:6526–6540. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR018177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramanya K (1994) Engineering hydrology. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, New York. https://books.google.co.nz/books?id=URaFZvATAcEC. Accessed 20 July 2018

  • Szilagyi J, Parlange MB (1998) Baseflow separation based on analytical solutions of the Boussinesq equation. J Hydrol 204:251–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(97)00132-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tallaksen L (1995) A review of baseflow recession analysis. J Hydrol 165:349–370

    Google Scholar 

  • Tardy Y, Bustillo V, Boeglin J-L (2004) Geochemistry applied to the watershed survey: hydrograph separation, erosion and soil dynamics. A case study: the basin of the Niger River, Africa. Appl Geochem 19:469–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2003.07.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesoriero AJ, Duff JH, Wolock DM, Spahr NE, Almendinger JE (2009) Identifying pathways and processes affecting nitrate and orthophosphate inputs to streams in agricultural watersheds. J Environ Qual 38:1892–1900. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2008.0484

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas BF, Vogel RM, Famiglietti JS (2015) Objective hydrograph baseflow recession analysis. J Hydrol 525:102–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas BF, Vogel RM, Kroll CN, Famiglietti JS (2013) Estimation of the base flow recession constant under human interference. Water Resour Res 49:7366–7379

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson S, Basu N, Lascurain J, Aubeneau A, Rao P (2011) Relative dominance of hydrologic versus biogeochemical factors on solute export across impact gradients. Water Resour Res 47:W00J05. https://doi.org/10.1029/2010WR009605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tucker G, Lancaster S, Gasparini N, Bras R (2001) The Channel-Hillslope Integrated Landscape Development Model (CHILD). In: Harmon RS, Doe WW (eds) Landscape erosion and evolution modeling. Springer, Boston, pp 349–388. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0575-4_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Turner J, Macpherson D, Stokes R (1987) The mechanisms of catchment flow processes using natural variations in deuterium and oxygen-18. J Hydrol 94:143–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Uhlenbrook S, Frey M, Leibundgut C, Maloszewski P (2002) Hydrograph separations in a mesoscale mountainous basin at event and seasonal timescales. Water Resour Res 38:31-1–31-14. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001WR000938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uhlenbrook S, Hoeg S (2003) Quantifying uncertainties in tracer-based hydrograph separations: a case study for two-, three- and five-component hydrograph separations in a mountainous catchment. Hydrol Process 17:431–453

    Google Scholar 

  • Uhlenbrook S, Roser S, Tilch N (2004) Hydrological process representation at the meso-scale: the potential of a distributed, conceptual catchment model. J Hydrol 291:278–296

    Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (2006) Addendum to the July 2002 Lindane reregistration eligibility decision. Online at: https://archive.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/web/pdf/lindane_red_addendum.pdf

  • VanderKwaak JE (1999) Numerical simulation of flow and chemical transport in integrated surface-subsurface hydrologic systems. University of Waterloo

  • Weiler M, McGlynn BL, McGuire KJ, McDonnell JJ (2003) How does rainfall become runoff? A combined tracer and runoff transfer function approach. Water Resour Res 39. https://doi.org/10.1029/2003WR002331

  • Weill S, Mazzia A, Putti M, Paniconi C (2011) Coupling water flow and solute transport into a physically-based surface–subsurface hydrological model. Adv Water Resour 34:128–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Wels C, Cornett RJ, Lazerte BD (1991) Hydrograph separation: a comparison of geochemical and isotopic tracers. J Hydrol 122:253–274

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead PG, Wilson E, Butterfield D (1998) A semi-distributed integrated nitrogen model for multiple source assessment in catchments (INCA): part I—model structure and process equations. Sci Total Environ 210:547–558

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson S, Close M, Abraham P (2018) Applying linear discriminant analysis to predict groundwater redox conditions conducive to denitrification. J Hydrol 556:611–624

    Google Scholar 

  • Winston W, Criss R (2002) Geochemical variations during flash flooding, Meramec River basin, may 2000. J Hydrol 265:149–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter TC (1998) Ground water and surface water: a single resource, vol 1139. DIANE Publishing Inc.

  • Woodward SJ, Stenger R, Hill RB (2016) Flow stratification of river water quality data to elucidate nutrient transfer pathways in mesoscale catchments. Trans ASABE 59:545–551

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodward SJR, Stenger R (2018) Bayesian chemistry-assisted hydrograph separation (BACH) and nutrient load partitioning from monthly stream phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations. Stoch Env Res Risk A:1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-018-1612-3

  • Woodward SJR, Stenger R, Bidwell VJ (2013) Dynamic analysis of stream flow and water chemistry to infer subsurface water and nitrate fluxes in a lowland dairying catchment. J Hydrol 505:299–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.07.044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward SJR, Wöhling T, Rode M, Stenger R (2017) Predicting nitrate discharge dynamics in mesoscale catchments using the lumped StreamGEM model and Bayesian parameter inference. J Hydrol 552:684–703

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeh G-T, Shih D-S, Cheng J-RC (2011) An integrated media, integrated processes watershed model. Comput Fluids 45:2–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Young R, Onstad C, Bosch D, Anderson W (1989) AGNPS: a nonpoint-source pollution model for evaluating agricultural watersheds. J Soil Water Conserv 44:168–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J, Zhang Y, Song J, Cheng L (2017) Evaluating relative merits of four baseflow separation methods in eastern Australia. J Hydrol 549:252–263

    Google Scholar 

  • Zheng H, Wang Z, Deng X, Herbert S, Xing B (2013) Impacts of adding biochar on nitrogen retention and bioavailability in agricultural soil. Geoderma 206:32–39

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was funded as an output from the Sources & Flows programme of the Our Land and Water National Science Challenge (New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment contract C10X1507). The authors are also grateful for many fruitful discussions with colleagues in the Transfer Pathways Programme (LVLX1502). The authors would like to thank the editor and four anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Christchurch, New Zealand

    Shailesh Kumar Singh

  2. Lincoln Agritech Ltd, Hamilton, New Zealand

    Roland Stenger

Authors
  1. Shailesh Kumar Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roland Stenger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shailesh Kumar Singh.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

None.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Singh, S.K., Stenger, R. Indirect Methods to Elucidate Water Flows and Contaminant Transfer Pathways through Meso-scale Catchments – a Review. Environ. Process. 5, 683–706 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40710-018-0331-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40710-018-0331-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation