1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0304-3800(97)00204-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development and test of a spatially distributed hydrological/water quality model for mesoscale watersheds

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
246
0
13

Year Published

2000
2000
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 387 publications
(262 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
3
246
0
13
Order By: Relevance
“…The basic requirement of the hydrotype was that the distribution of land covers and elevations were known and that the hydrotype contributed runoff to a definable stream channel. Krysanova et al (1998) applied a three-level disaggregation scheme to model streamflow and sediment transport within a mesoscale catchment. The disaggregation process involved subdividing the mesoscale catchment into regional-scale sub-catchments.…”
Section: Catchment Regionalisation "Hydrotype" Classification: Progrementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The basic requirement of the hydrotype was that the distribution of land covers and elevations were known and that the hydrotype contributed runoff to a definable stream channel. Krysanova et al (1998) applied a three-level disaggregation scheme to model streamflow and sediment transport within a mesoscale catchment. The disaggregation process involved subdividing the mesoscale catchment into regional-scale sub-catchments.…”
Section: Catchment Regionalisation "Hydrotype" Classification: Progrementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The difference presented by the CRM was almost negligible (between -0.057 and -0.059), indicating a high correlation between the observed and simulated flows by the SWAT model. The COE value between 0.757 and 0.793 also indicates a satisfactory adjustment of the model, according to the criteria proposed by Krysanova et al (1998).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…O resultado do COE na verificação do modelo para vazão foi de 0,786 diário e 0,889 mensal e o CMR foi de -0,0921. Segundo Krysanova et al (1998), para considerar um bom ajuste do modelo os valores COE devem estar entre 0,7 e 0,8. Conforme descrito anteriormente, tanto para vazão como para produção de sedimentos, os resultados de COE obtidos nas etapas de calibração e verificação foram superiores a 0,8 (mensal), representando assim um ajuste satisfatório do modelo SWAT para a bacia do ribeirão Concórdia.…”
Section: Resultsunclassified