A coupled hydraulic–hydrologic modelling approach to deriving a water balance model for a complex floodplain wetland system

Rayburg, Scott; Thoms, Martín

doi:10.2166/nh.2009.110

Cited by 20 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has regional, national and international importance as a Ramsar Convention site and 5.5 km 2 (2 %) of the floodplain landscape is managed as National Park. The local drainage area of the Narran floodplain is small (50 km 2 ); therefore, the Narran floodplain is not inundated as a result of local rainfall but from flows in the Narran River (Rayburg and Thoms, 2009). Local rainfall is highly variable, with annual rainfall ranging from 144 mm (2002) to 957 mm (1950) at Collarenebri, and occurs mainly in the summer months (November-February) associated with tropical monsoonal activity.…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With a mean annual evaporation of 2250 mm the Narran floodplain landscape is dry most of the time. The Narran floodplain is geomorphologically complex with numerous lakes, channel networks and dissected floodplain surfaces (Rayburg and Thoms, 2009).…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Flows exceeding 13 000 ML day −1 (MLD) at Wilby Wilby result in overbank flows and inundation of the Narran floodplain (Rayburg and Thoms, 2009). These flows have an average recurrence interval of 1.5 years.…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2) hold water for different periods of time. Narran Lake (51.95 km 2 ) has a capacity of 122 500 ML and retains water for up to 12-15 months following a flood event but is dry 60 % of the time (Rayburg and Thoms, 2009). Clear Lake (5.86 km 2 ), Back Lake (0.97 km 2 ) and Long Arm (0.72 km 2 ) have a combined capacity of 17 500 ML and retain water for 4-12 months .…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The northern part of the floodplain fills in sequence through Clear Lake, Back Lake, Long Arm ( Fig. 2) and Narran Lake from flow in the Narran River (Rayburg and Thoms, 2009). The wetting and drying of the Narran floodplain has been severely impacted by water resource development in the upper catchment.…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Adaptive cycles of floodplain vegetation response to flooding and drying

Thapa¹,

Thoms²,

Parsons³

et al. 2016

Earth Surf. Dynam.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.Flooding is a key driver of floodplain vegetation productivity. Adaptive cycles provide a model for examining the productivity of semi-arid floodplain vegetation in response to hydrology. We examined the response of vegetation productivity (measured as NDVI) through a hypothesised adaptive cycle to determine whether the cycle repeats over time and how it is affected by differently sized flood events. The area of floodplain inundation was associated with an adaptive cycle that repeated in four flood events through the following phases: wetting (exploitation phase), wet (conservation phase), drying (release phase) and dry (reorganisation phase). Vegetation productivity responses corresponded to these phases. The area and quality of floodplain vegetation productivity followed the hypothesised pattern of higher-quality vegetation vigour in the wetting and wet phases, lower vigour in the drying phase and lowest vigour in the dry phase. There were more transitions between NDVI classes in the wet phase, which was dominated by two-way transitions. Overall, the wetting, wet and drying phases were dominated by smaller-probability class changes, whereas in the dry phase, higher-probability class changes were more prominent. Although the four flood events exhibited an adaptive cycle the duration of the adaptive-cycle phases, and the nature of vegetation productivity response, differed with the character of the flood event. Vegetation response in two of the adaptive-cycle phases -the release and reorganisation phases -were as hypothesised, but in the exploitation and conservation phases, changes in vegetation productivity were more dynamic. The character of vegetation response through the adaptive cycle also indicates that semi-arid floodplain vegetation productivity is more vulnerable to changing state during the conservation and release phases and not during the exploitation and reorganisation phases as resilience theory suggests. Overall, the adaptive cycle represents a new model to improve our understanding of the complexity of change in semi-arid floodplain vegetation productivity through cycles of flooding and drying. Changes in vegetation productivity could initiate structural changes in floodplain vegetation communities, with commensurate influences on floodplain sediment dynamics.

show abstract

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Adaptive cycles of floodplain vegetation response to flooding and drying

Thapa¹,

Thoms²,

Parsons³

et al. 2016

Earth Surf. Dynam.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

An adaptive cycle hypothesis of semi‐arid floodplain vegetation productivity in dry and wet resource states

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatial and temporal variability in flooding plays a significant role in the productivity of semi‐arid floodplain ecosystems. Floodplains may be perceived as boom–bust systems, but this model does not account for transitions that may occur between wet and dry floodplain states. This study used the concept of adaptive cycles to examine how floodplain vegetation productivity changes in response to wetting and drying. Floodplain vegetation productivity was tracked through a wet and dry state using the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI). Floodplain inundation revealed complex vegetation productivity responses to resource availability. There was low NDVI in the dry phase, whereas vegetation vigour increased and decreased through the wetting, wet and drying phases. There was a marked difference in NDVI class area, number of transitions, direction of transitions, probability of transitions and NDVI class diversity between the dry phase and the combined wetting, wet and drying phases of floodplain inundation. The distribution of transition probabilities was platykurtic in the dry phase and bimodal during the wetting, wet and drying phases. Overall, anti‐clockwise hysteresis was the dominant direction of hysteresis. All vegetation productivity measures demonstrated a switch in direction during the wet phase. The hysteresis observed in this study indicates the cyclic nature of vegetation response to floodplain inundation through dry, wetting, wet and drying phases. We propose that vegetation productivity response follows an adaptive cycle and that this is an appropriate model for understanding the complexity of semi‐arid floodplain vegetation response to wetting and drying. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Do adaptive cycles of floodplain vegetation response to inundation differ among vegetation communities?

Thapa

Thoms

Reid

et al. 2019

River Research & Apps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flooding is a key driver of floodplain vegetation productivity. Adaptive cycles provide a model for examining the productivity of floodplain vegetation communities in response to hydrology. Accordingly, floodplain inundation drives vegetation productivity responses through an adaptive cycle of wetting (exploitation phase), wet (conservation phase), drying (release phase), and dry (reorganization phase). We examined changes in the productivity of four floodplain vegetation communities (lignum, coolibah, grass, and poplar box) through the four phases of an adaptive cycle and explore the various strategies used by these vegetation communities to cope with variation in water availability. All four vegetation communities showed significant differences in productivity, as indicated by changes in the normalized difference vegetation index between the adaptive cycle phases. Differences were evident in the total area of vegetation that showed a productivity response, the quality or the vigour of the response, the trajectory of change overtime (i.e., towards higher or lower productivity), and the probability of change. Although the four vegetation communities exhibited response patterns in relation to flooding and drying that fit the adaptive cycle model, differences were evident in the timing of transitions between the four phases and the duration spent in those phases for each vegetation community. Poplar box and coolibah communities showed a higher productivity response during the drying or release phase. By comparison, the highest productivity response for the grassland and lignum shrubland was observed during the wetting or exploitation phase.Overall, the results showed that the four vegetation communities are sensitive to the degree of wetting at different phases in the adaptive cycle. Knowledge of floodplain vegetation response in each phase of an adaptive cycle will enable better management of floodplains, as management activities can be tailored to adaptive phase patterns associated with each community.

show abstract

A coupled hydraulic–hydrologic modelling approach to deriving a water balance model for a complex floodplain wetland system

Cited by 20 publications

References 15 publications

Adaptive cycles of floodplain vegetation response to flooding and drying

Adaptive cycles of floodplain vegetation response to flooding and drying

An adaptive cycle hypothesis of semi‐arid floodplain vegetation productivity in dry and wet resource states

Do adaptive cycles of floodplain vegetation response to inundation differ among vegetation communities?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About