Refine
Year of publication
- 2024 (6)
- 2023 (17)
- 2022 (89)
- 2021 (92)
- 2020 (98)
- 2019 (80)
- 2018 (94)
- 2017 (48)
- 2016 (12)
- 2015 (11)
- 2014 (17)
- 2013 (51)
- 2012 (27)
- 2011 (21)
- 2010 (14)
- 2009 (54)
- 2008 (35)
- 2007 (29)
- 2006 (44)
- 2005 (45)
- 2004 (79)
- 2003 (92)
- 2002 (69)
- 2001 (66)
- 2000 (63)
- 1999 (68)
- 1998 (54)
- 1997 (32)
- 1996 (30)
- 1995 (60)
- 1994 (34)
- 1993 (24)
- 1992 (5)
- 1991 (4)
Document Type
- Article (1007)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (209)
- Doctoral Thesis (202)
- Postprint (68)
- Review (25)
- Master's Thesis (17)
- Other (15)
- Conference Proceeding (6)
- Habilitation Thesis (6)
- Report (6)
Language
- English (797)
- German (765)
- Spanish (3)
- Multiple languages (2)
- French (1)
Keywords
- climate change (38)
- Curriculum Framework (37)
- European values education (37)
- Europäische Werteerziehung (37)
- Lehrevaluation (37)
- Studierendenaustausch (37)
- Unterrichtseinheiten (37)
- curriculum framework (37)
- lesson evaluation (37)
- student exchange (37)
Institute
- Institut für Umweltwissenschaften und Geographie (1568) (remove)
The improvement of process representations in hydrological models is often only driven by the modelers' knowledge and data availability. We present a comprehensive comparison between two hydrological models of different complexity that is developed to support (1) the understanding of the differences between model structures and (2) the identification of the observations needed for model assessment and improvement. The comparison is conducted on both space and time and by aggregating the outputs at different spatiotemporal scales. In the present study, mHM, a process‐based hydrological model, and ParFlow‐CLM, an integrated subsurface‐surface hydrological model, are used. The models are applied in a mesoscale catchment in Germany. Both models agree in the simulated river discharge at the outlet and the surface soil moisture dynamics, lending their supports for some model applications (drought monitoring). Different model sensitivities are, however, found when comparing evapotranspiration and soil moisture at different soil depths. The analysis supports the need of observations within the catchment for model assessment, but it indicates that different strategies should be considered for the different variables. Evapotranspiration measurements are needed at daily resolution across several locations, while highly resolved spatially distributed observations with lower temporal frequency are required for soil moisture. Finally, the results show the impact of the shallow groundwater system simulated by ParFlow‐CLM and the need to account for the related soil moisture redistribution. Our comparison strategy can be applied to other models types and environmental conditions to strengthen the dialog between modelers and experimentalists for improving process representations in Earth system models.
A conundrum of trends
(2022)
This comment is meant to reiterate two warnings: One applies to the uncritical use of ready-made (openly available) program packages, and one to the estimation of trends in serially correlated time series. Both warnings apply to the recent publication of Lischeid et al. about lake-level trends in Germany.
Transverse dispersion, or tracer spreading orthogonal to the mean flow direction, which is relevant e.g, for quantifying bio-degradation of contaminant plumes or mixing of reactive solutes, has been studied in the literature less than the longitudinal one. Inferring transverse dispersion coefficients from field experiments is a difficult and error-prone task, requiring a spatial resolution of solute plumes which is not easily achievable in applications. In absence of field data, it is a questionable common practice to set transverse dispersivities as a fraction of the longitudinal one, with the ratio 1/10 being the most prevalent. We collected estimates of field-scale transverse dispersivities from existing publications and explored possible scale relationships as guidance criteria for applications. Our investigation showed that a large number of estimates available in the literature are of low reliability and should be discarded from further analysis. The remaining reliable estimates are formation-specific, span three orders of magnitude and do not show any clear scale-dependence on the plume traveled distance. The ratios with the longitudinal dispersivity are also site specific and vary widely. The reliability of transverse dispersivities depends significantly on the type of field experiment and method of data analysis. In applications where transverse dispersion plays a significant role, inference of transverse dispersivities should be part of site characterization with the transverse dispersivity estimated as an independent parameter rather than related heuristically to longitudinal dispersivity.
Rainfall erosivities as defined by the R factor from the universal soil loss equation were determined for all events during a two-year period at the station La Cuenca in western Amazonia. Three methods based on a power relationship between rainfall amount and erosivity were then applied to estimate event and daily rainfall erosivities from the respective rainfall amounts. A test of the resulting regression equations against an independent data set proved all three methods equally adequate in predicting rainfall erosivity from daily rainfall amount. We recommend the Richardson model for testing in the Amazon Basin, and its use with the coefficient from La Cuenca in western Amazonia.
A New Efficient Method to Solve the Stream Power Law Model Taking Into Account Sediment Deposition
(2019)
The stream power law model has been widely used to represent erosion by rivers but does not take into account the role played by sediment in modulating erosion and deposition rates. Davy and Lague (2009, ) provide an approach to address this issue, but it is computationally demanding because the local balance between erosion and deposition depends on sediment flux resulting from net upstream erosion. Here, we propose an efficient (i.e., O(N) and implicit) method to solve their equation. This means that, unlike other methods used to study the complete dynamics of fluvial systems (e.g., including the transition from detachment-limited to transport-limited behavior), our method is unconditionally stable even when large time steps are used. We demonstrate its applicability by performing a range of simulations based on a simple setup composed of an uplifting region adjacent to a stable foreland basin. As uplift and erosion progress, the mean elevations of the uplifting relief and the foreland increase, together with the average slope in the foreland. Sediments aggrade in the foreland and prograde to reach the base level where sediments are allowed to leave the system. We show how the topography of the uplifting relief and the stratigraphy of the foreland basin are controlled by the efficiency of river erosion and the efficiency of sediment transport by rivers. We observe the formation of a steady-state geometry in the uplifting region, and a dynamic steady state (i.e., autocyclic aggradation and incision) in the foreland, with aggradation and incision thicknesses up to tens of meters.
Quantifying the extremeness of heavy precipitation allows for the comparison of events. Conventional quantitative indices, however, typically neglect the spatial extent or the duration, while both are important to understand potential impacts. In 2014, the weather extremity index (WEI) was suggested to quantify the extremeness of an event and to identify the spatial and temporal scale at which the event was most extreme. However, the WEI does not account for the fact that one event can be extreme at various spatial and temporal scales. To better understand and detect the compound nature of precipitation events, we suggest complementing the original WEI with a “cross-scale weather extremity index” (xWEI), which integrates extremeness over relevant scales instead of determining its maximum.
Based on a set of 101 extreme precipitation events in Germany, we outline and demonstrate the computation of both WEI and xWEI. We find that the choice of the index can lead to considerable differences in the assessment of past events but that the most extreme events are ranked consistently, independently of the index. Even then, the xWEI can reveal cross-scale properties which would otherwise remain hidden. This also applies to the disastrous event from July 2021, which clearly outranks all other analyzed events with regard to both WEI and xWEI.
While demonstrating the added value of xWEI, we also identify various methodological challenges along the required computational workflow: these include the parameter estimation for the extreme value distributions, the definition of maximum spatial extent and temporal duration, and the weighting of extremeness at different scales. These challenges, however, also represent opportunities to adjust the retrieval of WEI and xWEI to specific user requirements and application scenarios.
Quantifying the extremeness of heavy precipitation allows for the comparison of events. Conventional quantitative indices, however, typically neglect the spatial extent or the duration, while both are important to understand potential impacts. In 2014, the weather extremity index (WEI) was suggested to quantify the extremeness of an event and to identify the spatial and temporal scale at which the event was most extreme. However, the WEI does not account for the fact that one event can be extreme at various spatial and temporal scales. To better understand and detect the compound nature of precipitation events, we suggest complementing the original WEI with a “cross-scale weather extremity index” (xWEI), which integrates extremeness over relevant scales instead of determining its maximum.
Based on a set of 101 extreme precipitation events in Germany, we outline and demonstrate the computation of both WEI and xWEI. We find that the choice of the index can lead to considerable differences in the assessment of past events but that the most extreme events are ranked consistently, independently of the index. Even then, the xWEI can reveal cross-scale properties which would otherwise remain hidden. This also applies to the disastrous event from July 2021, which clearly outranks all other analyzed events with regard to both WEI and xWEI.
While demonstrating the added value of xWEI, we also identify various methodological challenges along the required computational workflow: these include the parameter estimation for the extreme value distributions, the definition of maximum spatial extent and temporal duration, and the weighting of extremeness at different scales. These challenges, however, also represent opportunities to adjust the retrieval of WEI and xWEI to specific user requirements and application scenarios.
The precise and accurate assessment of carbon dioxide (CO2) exchange is crucial to identify terrestrial carbon (C) sources and sinks and for evaluating their role within the global C budget. The substantial uncertainty in disentangling the management and soil impact on measured CO2 fluxes are largely ignored especially in cropland. The reasons for this lies in the limitation of the widely used eddy covariance as well as manual and automatic chamber systems, which either account for short-term temporal variability or small-scale spatial heterogeneity, but barely both. To address this issue, we developed a novel robotic chamber system allowing for dozens of spatial measurement repetitions, thus enabling CO2 exchange measurements in a sufficient temporal and high small-scale spatial resolution. The system was tested from 08th July to 09th September 2019 at a heterogeneous field (100 m x 16 m), located within the hummocky ground moraine landscape of northeastern Germany (CarboZALF-D). The field is foreseen for a longer-term block trial manipulation experiment extending over three erosion induced soil types and was covered with spring barley. Measured fluxes of nighttime ecosystem respiration (R-eco) and daytime net ecosystem exchange (NEE) showed distinct temporal patterns influenced by crop phenology, weather conditions and management practices. Similarly, we found clear small-scale spatial differences in cumulated (gap-filled) R-eco, gross primary productivity (GPP) and NEE fluxes affected by the three distinct soil types. Additionally, spatial patterns induced by former management practices and characterized by differences in soil pH and nutrition status (P and K) were also revealed between plots within each of the three soil types, which allowed compensating for prior to the foreseen block trial manipulation experiment. The results underline the great potential of the novel robotic chamber system, which not only detects short-term temporal CO2 flux dynamics but also reflects the impact of small-scale spatial heterogeneity.