A. A. Harpold


2021

DOI bib
Diel streamflow cycles suggest more sensitive snowmelt-driven streamflow to climate change than land surface modeling
Sebastian A. Krogh, Lucía Scaff, Gary Sterle, James W. Kirchner, Beatrice Gordon, A. A. Harpold, Sebastian A. Krogh, Lucía Scaff, Gary Sterle, James W. Kirchner, Beatrice Gordon, A. A. Harpold

Abstract. Climate warming may cause mountain snowpacks to melt earlier, reducing summer streamflow and threatening water supplies and ecosystems. Few observations allow separating rain and snowmelt contributions to streamflow, so physically based models are needed for hydrological predictions and analyses. We develop an observational technique for detecting streamflow responses to snowmelt using incoming solar radiation and diel (daily) cycles of streamflow. We measure the 20th percentile of snowmelt days (DOS20), across 31 watersheds in the western US, as a proxy for the beginning of snowmelt-initiated streamflow. Historic DOS20 varies from mid-January to late May, with warmer sites having earlier and more intermittent snowmelt-mediated streamflow. Mean annual DOS20 strongly correlates with the dates of 25 % and 50 % annual streamflow volume (DOQ25 and DOQ50, both R2 = 0.85), suggesting that a one-day earlier DOS20 corresponds with a one-day earlier DOQ25 and 0.7-day earlier DOQ50. Empirical projections of future DOS20 (RCP8.5, late 21st century), using space-for-time substitution, show that DOS20 will occur 11 ± 4 days earlier per 1 °C of warming, and that colder places (mean November–February air temperature, TNDJF <−8 °C) are 70 % more sensitive to climate change on average than warmer places (TNDJF > 0 °C). Moreover, empirical space-for-time based projections of DOQ25 and DOQ50 are about four and two times more sensitive to earlier streamflow than those from NoahMP-WRF. Given the importance of changing streamflow timing for headwater resources, snowmelt detection methods such as DOS20 based on diel streamflow cycles may constrain hydrological models and improve hydrological predictions.

DOI bib
Diel streamflow cycles suggest more sensitive snowmelt-driven streamflow to climate change than land surface modeling
Sebastian A. Krogh, Lucía Scaff, Gary Sterle, James W. Kirchner, Beatrice Gordon, A. A. Harpold, Sebastian A. Krogh, Lucía Scaff, Gary Sterle, James W. Kirchner, Beatrice Gordon, A. A. Harpold

Abstract. Climate warming may cause mountain snowpacks to melt earlier, reducing summer streamflow and threatening water supplies and ecosystems. Few observations allow separating rain and snowmelt contributions to streamflow, so physically based models are needed for hydrological predictions and analyses. We develop an observational technique for detecting streamflow responses to snowmelt using incoming solar radiation and diel (daily) cycles of streamflow. We measure the 20th percentile of snowmelt days (DOS20), across 31 watersheds in the western US, as a proxy for the beginning of snowmelt-initiated streamflow. Historic DOS20 varies from mid-January to late May, with warmer sites having earlier and more intermittent snowmelt-mediated streamflow. Mean annual DOS20 strongly correlates with the dates of 25 % and 50 % annual streamflow volume (DOQ25 and DOQ50, both R2 = 0.85), suggesting that a one-day earlier DOS20 corresponds with a one-day earlier DOQ25 and 0.7-day earlier DOQ50. Empirical projections of future DOS20 (RCP8.5, late 21st century), using space-for-time substitution, show that DOS20 will occur 11 ± 4 days earlier per 1 °C of warming, and that colder places (mean November–February air temperature, TNDJF <−8 °C) are 70 % more sensitive to climate change on average than warmer places (TNDJF > 0 °C). Moreover, empirical space-for-time based projections of DOQ25 and DOQ50 are about four and two times more sensitive to earlier streamflow than those from NoahMP-WRF. Given the importance of changing streamflow timing for headwater resources, snowmelt detection methods such as DOS20 based on diel streamflow cycles may constrain hydrological models and improve hydrological predictions.

2019

DOI bib
Twenty-three unsolved problems in hydrology (UPH) – a community perspective
Günter Blöschl, Marc F. P. Bierkens, António Chambel, Christophe Cudennec, Georgia Destouni, Aldo Fiori, James W. Kirchner, Jeffrey J. McDonnell, H. H. G. Savenije, Murugesu Sivapalan, Christine Stumpp, Elena Toth, Elena Volpi, Gemma Carr, Claire Lupton, José Luis Salinas, Borbála Széles, Alberto Viglione, Hafzullah Aksoy, Scott T. Allen, Anam Amin, Vazken Andréassian, Berit Arheimer, Santosh Aryal, Victor R. Baker, W.E. Bardsley, Marlies Barendrecht, Alena Bartošová, Okke Batelaan, Wouter R. Berghuijs, Keith Beven, Theresa Blume, Thom Bogaard, Pablo Borges de Amorim, Michael E. Böttcher, Gilles Boulet, Korbinian Breinl, Mitja Brilly, Luca Brocca, Wouter Buytaert, Attilio Castellarin, Andrea Castelletti, Xiaohong Chen, Yangbo Chen, Yuanfang Chen, Peter Chifflard, Pierluigi Claps, Martyn Clark, Adrian L. Collins, Barry Croke, Annette Dathe, Paula Cunha David, Felipe P. J. de Barros, Gerrit H. de Rooij, Giuliano Di Baldassarre, Jessica M. Driscoll, Doris Duethmann, Ravindra Dwivedi, Ebru Eriş, William Farmer, James Feiccabrino, Grant Ferguson, Ennio Ferrari, Stefano Ferraris, Benjamin Fersch, David C. Finger, Laura Foglia, Keirnan Fowler, Б. И. Гарцман, Simon Gascoin, Éric Gaumè, Alexander Gelfan, Josie Geris, Shervan Gharari, Tom Gleeson, Miriam Glendell, Alena Gonzalez Bevacqua, María P. González-Dugo, Salvatore Grimaldi, A.B. Gupta, Björn Guse, Dawei Han, David M. Hannah, A. A. Harpold, Stefan Haun, Kate V. Heal, Kay Helfricht, Mathew Herrnegger, Matthew R. Hipsey, Hana Hlaváčiková, Clara Hohmann, Ladislav Holko, Christopher Hopkinson, Markus Hrachowitz, Tissa H. Illangasekare, Azhar Inam, Camyla Innocente dos Santos, Erkan Istanbulluoglu, Ben Jarihani, Zahra Kalantari, Andis Kalvāns, Sonu Khanal, Sina Khatami, Jens Kiesel, M. J. Kirkby, Wouter Knoben, Krzysztof Kochanek, Silvia Kohnová, Alla Kolechkina, Stefan Krause, David K. Kreamer, Heidi Kreibich, Harald Kunstmann, Holger Lange, Margarida L. R. Liberato, Eric Lindquist, Timothy E. Link, Junguo Liu, Daniel P. Loucks, Charles H. Luce, Gil Mahé, Olga Makarieva, Julien Malard, Shamshagul Mashtayeva, Shreedhar Maskey, Josep Mas‐Pla, Maria Mavrova-Guirguinova, Maurizio Mazzoleni, Sebastian H. Mernild, Bruce Dudley Misstear, Alberto Montanari, Hannes Müller‐Thomy, Alireza Nabizadeh, Fernando Nardi, Christopher M. U. Neale, Nataliia Nesterova, Bakhram Nurtaev, Vincent Odongo, Subhabrata Panda, Saket Pande, Zhonghe Pang, Georgia Papacharalampous, Charles Perrin, Laurent Pfister, Rafael Pimentel, María José Polo, David Post, Cristina Prieto, Maria‐Helena Ramos, Maik Renner, José Eduardo Reynolds, Elena Ridolfi, Riccardo Rigon, Mònica Riva, David Robertson, R. Rosso, Tirthankar Roy, João Henrique Macedo Sá, Gianfausto Salvadori, Melody Sandells, Bettina Schaefli, Andreas Schumann, Anna Scolobig, Jan Seibert, Éric Servat, Mojtaba Shafiei, Ashish Sharma, Moussa Sidibé, Roy C. Sidle, Thomas Skaugen, Hugh G. Smith, Sabine M. Spiessl, Lina Stein, Ingelin Steinsland, Ulrich Strasser, Zhongbo Su, Ján Szolgay, David G. Tarboton, Flavia Tauro, Guillaume Thirel, Fuqiang Tian, Rui Tong, Kamshat Tussupova, Hristos Tyralis, R. Uijlenhoet, Rens van Beek, Ruud van der Ent, Martine van der Ploeg, Anne F. Van Loon, Ilja van Meerveld, Ronald van Nooijen, Pieter van Oel, Jean‐Philippe Vidal, Jana von Freyberg, Sergiy Vorogushyn, Przemysław Wachniew, Andrew J. Wade, Philip J. Ward, Ida Westerberg, Christopher J. White, Eric F. Wood, Ross Woods, Zongxue Xu, Koray K. Yılmaz, Yongqiang Zhang
Hydrological Sciences Journal, Volume 64, Issue 10

This paper is the outcome of a community initiative to identify major unsolved scientific problems in hydrology motivated by a need for stronger harmonisation of research efforts. The procedure involved a public consultation through online media, followed by two workshops through which a large number of potential science questions were collated, prioritised, and synthesised. In spite of the diversity of the participants (230 scientists in total), the process revealed much about community priorities and the state of our science: a preference for continuity in research questions rather than radical departures or redirections from past and current work. Questions remain focused on the process-based understanding of hydrological variability and causality at all space and time scales. Increased attention to environmental change drives a new emphasis on understanding how change propagates across interfaces within the hydrological system and across disciplinary boundaries. In particular, the expansion of the human footprint raises a new set of questions related to human interactions with nature and water cycle feedbacks in the context of complex water management problems. We hope that this reflection and synthesis of the 23 unsolved problems in hydrology will help guide research efforts for some years to come.
Search
Co-authors
Venues