4.6 Article

Evaluation of spatial variability in snow water equivalent for a high mountain catchment

期刊

HYDROLOGICAL PROCESSES
卷 18, 期 3, 页码 435-453

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/hyp.1319

关键词

snow water equivalent; digital terrain analysis; spatial distribution; mountain area; snow accumulation; snow ablation; Pyrenees

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multivariate statistical analysis was used to explore relationships between catchment topography and spatial variability in snow accumulation and melt processes in a small headwater catchment in the Spanish Pyrenees. Manual surveys of snow depth and density provided information on the spatial distribution of snow water equivalent (SWE) and its depletion over the course of the 1997 and 1998 melt seasons. A number of indices expressing the topographic control on snow processes were extracted from a detailed digital elevation model of the catchment. Bivariate screening was used to assess the relative importance of these topographic indices in controlling snow accumulation at the start of the melt season, average melt rates and the timing of snow disappearance. This suggested that topographic controls on the redistribution of snow by wind are the most important influence on snow distribution at the start of the melt season. Furthermore, it appeared that spatial patterns of snow disappearance were largely determined by the distribution of snow water equivalent (SWE) at the start of the melt season, rather than by spatial variability in melt rates during the melt season. Binary regression tree models relating snow depth and disappearance date to terrain indices were then constructed. These explained 70-80% of the variance in the observed data. As well as providing insights into the influence of topography on snow processes, it is suggested that the techniques presented herein could be used in the parameterization of distributed snowmelt models, or in the design of efficient stratified snow surveys. Copyright (C) 2003 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

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

4.6
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