@article{BronstertCreutzfeldtGraeffetal.2012,
  author    = {Bronstert, Axel and Creutzfeldt, Benjamin and Gr{\"a}ff, Thomas and Hajnsek, Irena and Heistermann, Maik and Itzerott, Sibylle and Jagdhuber, Thomas and Kneis, David and Lueck, Erika and Reusser, Dominik and Zehe, Erwin},
  title     = {Potentials and constraints of different types of soil moisture observations for flood simulations in headwater catchments},
  series = {Natural hazards : journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards},
  volume    = {60},
  journal   = {Natural hazards : journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards},
  number    = {3},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {0921-030X},
  doi       = {10.1007/s11069-011-9874-9},
  pages     = {879 -- 914},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Flood generation in mountainous headwater catchments is governed by rainfall intensities, by the spatial distribution of rainfall and by the state of the catchment prior to the rainfall, e. g. by the spatial pattern of the soil moisture, groundwater conditions and possibly snow. The work presented here explores the limits and potentials of measuring soil moisture with different methods and in different scales and their potential use for flood simulation. These measurements were obtained in 2007 and 2008 within a comprehensive multi-scale experiment in the Weisseritz headwater catchment in the Ore-Mountains, Germany. The following technologies have been applied jointly thermogravimetric method, frequency domain reflectometry (FDR) sensors, spatial time domain reflectometry (STDR) cluster, ground-penetrating radar (GPR), airborne polarimetric synthetic aperture radar (polarimetric SAR) and advanced synthetic aperture radar (ASAR) based on the satellite Envisat. We present exemplary soil measurement results, with spatial scales ranging from point scale, via hillslope and field scale, to the catchment scale. Only the spatial TDR cluster was able to record continuous data. The other methods are limited to the date of over-flights (airplane and satellite) or measurement campaigns on the ground. For possible use in flood simulation, the observation of soil moisture at multiple scales has to be combined with suitable hydrological modelling, using the hydrological model WaSiM-ETH. Therefore, several simulation experiments have been conducted in order to test both the usability of the recorded soil moisture data and the suitability of a distributed hydrological model to make use of this information. The measurement results show that airborne-based and satellite-based systems in particular provide information on the near-surface spatial distribution. However, there are still a variety of limitations, such as the need for parallel ground measurements (Envisat ASAR), uncertainties in polarimetric decomposition techniques (polarimetric SAR), very limited information from remote sensing methods about vegetated surfaces and the non-availability of continuous measurements. The model experiments showed the importance of soil moisture as an initial condition for physically based flood modelling. However, the observed moisture data reflect the surface or near-surface soil moisture only. Hence, only saturated overland flow might be related to these data. Other flood generation processes influenced by catchment wetness in the subsurface such as subsurface storm flow or quick groundwater drainage cannot be assessed by these data. One has to acknowledge that, in spite of innovative measuring techniques on all spatial scales, soil moisture data for entire vegetated catchments are still today not operationally available. Therefore, observations of soil moisture should primarily be used to improve the quality of continuous, distributed hydrological catchment models that simulate the spatial distribution of moisture internally. Thus, when and where soil moisture data are available, they should be compared with their simulated equivalents in order to improve the parameter estimates and possibly the structure of the hydrological model.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GraeffZeheReusseretal.2009,
  author    = {Gr{\"a}ff, Thomas and Zehe, Erwin and Reusser, Dominik and Lueck, Erika and Schroeder, Boris and Wenk, Gerald and John, Hermann and Bronstert, Axel},
  title     = {Process identification through rejection of model structures in a mid-mountainous rural catchment : observations of rainfall-runoff response, geophysical conditions and model inter-comparison},
  issn      = {0885-6087},
  doi       = {10.1002/Hyp.7171},
  year      = {2009},
  abstract  = {The intention of the presented study is to gain a better understanding of the mechanisms that caused the bimodal rainfall-runoff responses which occurred up to the mid-1970s regularly in the Schafertal catchment and vanished after the onset of mining activities. Understanding, this process is a first step to understanding the ongoing hydrological change in this area. It is hypothesized that either subsurface stormflow, or fast displacement of groundwater, could cause the second delayed peak. A top-down analysis of rainfall-runoff data, field observations as well as process modelling are combined within a rejectionistic framework. A statistical analysis is used to test whether different predictors. which characterize the forcing. near surface water content and deeper subsurface store, allow the prediction of the type of rainfall-runoff response. Regression analysis is used with generalized linear models Lis they can deal with non-Gaussian error distributions Lis well its a non-stationary variance. The analysis reveals that the dominant predictors are the pre-event discharge (proxy of state of the groundwater store) and the precipitation amount, In the field campaign, the subsurface at a representative hillslope was investigated by means of electrical resistivity tomography in order to identify possible strata as flow paths for subsurface stormflow. A low resistivity in approximately 4 in depth-either due to a less permeable layer or the groundwater surface-was detected. The former Could serve as a flow path for subsurface stormflow. Finally, the physical-based hydrological model CATFLOW and the groundwater model FEFLOW are compared with respect to their ability to reproduce the bimodal runoff responses. The groundwater model is able to reproduce the observations, although it uses only an abstract representation of the hillslopes. Process model analysis as well Lis statistical analysis strongly suggest that fast displacement of groundwater is the dominant process underlying the bimodal runoff reactions.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BuergerReusserKneis2009,
  author    = {B{\"u}rger, Gerd and Reusser, Dominik and Kneis, David},
  title     = {Early flood warnings from empirical (expanded) downscaling of the full ECMWF Ensemble Prediction System},
  issn      = {0043-1397},
  doi       = {10.1029/2009wr007779},
  year      = {2009},
  language  = {en}
}