4.7 Article

Palaeohydrology of lowland rivers in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia

Journal

QUATERNARY SCIENCE REVIEWS
Volume 200, Issue -, Pages 85-105

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.quascirev.2018.09.035

Keywords

Quaternary; Palaeochannel; Palaeoclimatology; Westerlies; Monsoon; River evolution

Funding

  1. ARC (Australian Research Council) LIEF [LE100100094]
  2. MU New Staff Grant (2010)
  3. MU RIBG (2010)
  4. MU New Staff Grant (Ralph)
  5. Australian Research Council [LE100100094] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study derives a new function describing the relationship of channel bankfull discharge (Q(bf)) to channel width in modern rivers of the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB) of southeastern Australia and applies this to dated palaeochannels of seven rivers to quantify late Quaternary discharge history in this important basin. All rivers show high MIS3 and MIS2 Q(bf), declining in the Holocene. The Q(bf) of modern MDB rivers is correlated with total catchment precipitation but comparison with palaeochannel Q(bf) estimates shows that while enhanced runoff efficiency is necessary to account for much larger late Pleistocene palaeochannels, either lower or higher precipitation rates could have prevailed. A strong association between relative palaeo- Q(bf) enhancement and temperature suggests a temperature-mediated mechanism controlling river discharge, such as the fraction of precipitation stored as snow and thawing in spring, the enhancement of orographic rainfall, or CO2 feedbacks with vegetation cover. Significantly enhanced MIS3 Q(bf) requires an additional mechanism, such as increased rainfall. These findings are consistent with others that increased moisture availability was associated with past colder climates, although this was not necessarily the result of enhanced precipitation. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available