4.3 Article

Hydrological evidence and causes of seasonal low water levels in a large river-lake system: Poyang Lake, China

期刊

HYDROLOGY RESEARCH
卷 47, 期 -, 页码 24-39

出版社

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/nh.2016.044

关键词

hydrodynamic model; low water level; Poyang Lake; river-lake interaction; Yangtze River

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) [2012CB417003]
  2. Collaborative Innovation Center for Major Ecological Security Issues of Jiangxi Province and Monitoring Implementation [JXS-EW-00]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41301023, 41371062]
  4. Science Foundation of Nanjing Institute of Geography and Limnology, Chinese Academy of Sciences [NIGLAS2012135001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Seasonal variations in local catchments and connected rivers lead to complex hydrological behaviours in river-lake systems. Poyang Lake is a seasonally dynamic lake with frequent low levels in spring and autumn, which may be triggered by the local catchment and Yangtze River. Based on two typical years, a hydrodynamic model combined with long term hydrological observations was applied to quantify the spatiotemporal impacts of the local catchment and Yangtze River on spring and autumn low water levels in Poyang Lake. As a first attempt, this study explored the spatial differences of the two influences. Simulation results showed that the contributions of the catchment and the Yangtze River were approximately 70% and 30% in spring 1963, and 5% and 95% in autumn 2006, respectively. The area of catchment influence was mainly distributed in channels and southern floodplains, with relatively uniform water levels. The area impacted by the Yangtze River mainly spanned from the northern portion of the waterway to the central lake, with strong spatial variability. This study focused on two typical years; however, the results can be extended to explain common hydrological phenomena and improve future strategies of water resource management in this riverlake system.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据