Search for: All records

We develop a conceptual framework for geo-evolutionary feedbacks which de- scribes the mutual interplay between landscape change and the evolution of traits of organisms residing on the landscape, with an emphasis on contempo- rary timeframes. Geo-evolutionary feedbacks can be realized via the direct evo- lution of geomorphic engineering traits or can be mediated by the evolution of trait variation that affects the population size and distribution of the specific geo- morphic engineering organisms involved. Organisms that modify their local envi- ronments provide the basis for patch-scale geo-evolutionary feedbacks, whereas spatial self-organization provides a mechanism for geo-evolutionary feedbacks at the landscape scale. Understanding these likely prevalent geo- evolutionary feedbacks, that occur at timescales similar to anthropogenic cli- mate change, will be essential to better predict landscape adaptive capacity and change. 

Evaluating whether hydrological models are right for the right reasons demands reproducible model benchmarking and diagnostics that evaluate not just statistical predictive model performance but also internal processes. Such model benchmarking and diagnostic efforts will benefit from standardized methods and ready-to-use toolkits. Using the Jupyter platform, this work presents HydroBench, a model-agnostic benchmarking tool consisting of three sets of metrics: 1) common statistical predictive measures, 2) hydrological signature-based process metrics, including a new time-linked flow duration curve and 3) information-theoretic diagnostics that measure the flow of information among model variables. As a test case, HydroBench was applied to compare two model products (calibrated and uncalibrated) of the National Hydrologic Model - Precipitation Runoff Modeling System (NHM-PRMS) at the Cedar River watershed, WA, United States. Although the uncalibrated model has the highest predictive performance, particularly for high flows, the signature-based diagnostics showed that the model overestimates low flows and poorly represents the recession processes. Elucidating why low flows may have been overestimated, the information-theoretic diagnostics indicated a higher flow of information from precipitation to snowmelt to streamflow in the uncalibrated model compared to the calibrated model, where information flowed more directly from precipitation to streamflow. This test case demonstrated the capability of HydroBench in process diagnostics and model predictive and functional performance evaluations, along with their tradeoffs. Having such a model benchmarking tool not only provides modelers with a comprehensive model evaluation system but also provides an open-source tool that can further be developed by the hydrological community. 

Abstract How precipitation (P) is translated into streamflow (Q) and over what timescales (i.e., “memory”) is difficult to predict without calibration of site‐specific models or using geochemical approaches, posing barriers to prediction in ungauged basins or advancement of general theories. Here, we used a data‐driven approach to identify regional patterns and exogenous controls on P–Q interactions. We applied an information flow analysis, which quantifies uncertainty reduction, to a daily time series of P and Q from 671 watersheds across the conterminous United States. We first demonstrated that information transfer from P to Q primarily reflects the quickflow component of water‐budgets, based on a watershed model. Readily quantifiable information flows show a functional relationship with model parameters, suggesting utility for model calibration. Second, applied to real watersheds, P–Q information flows exhibit seasonally varying behavior within regions in a manner consistent with dominant runoff generation mechanisms. However, the timing and the magnitude of information flows also reflect considerable subregional heterogeneity, likely attributable to differences in watershed size, baseflow contributions, and variation in aerial coverage of preferential flow paths. A regression analysis showed that a combination of climate and watershed characteristics are predictive of P–Q information flows. Though information flows cannot, in most cases, uniquely determine dominant runoff mechanisms, they provide a means to quantify the heterogeneous outcomes of those mechanisms within regions, thereby serving as a benchmarking tool for models developed at the regional scale. Last, information flows characterize regionally specific ways in which catchment connectivity changes from the wet to dry season.