Fluvial landscapes are dissected by channels, and at their upstream termini are channel heads. reconstruction of the fluvial domain is fundamental to understanding runoff generation, storm , sediment transport, biogeochemical cycling, and landscape evolution. Many methods have been for predicting channel head locations using topographic data, yet none have been tested against robust field data set of mapped channel heads across multiple landscapes. In this study, four methods of head prediction were tested against field data from four sites with high-resolution DEMs: slope-area relationships; two techniques based on landscape tangential curvature; and a new method presented , which identifies the change from channel to hillslope topography along a profile using a transformed coordinate system. Our method requires only two user-defined parameters, via independent statistical analysis. Slope-area plots are traditionally used to identify the fluvial-hillslope , but we observe no clear relationship between this transition and field-mapped channel . Of the four methods assessed, one of the tangential curvature methods and our new method most reproduce the measured channel heads in all four field sites (Feather River CA, Mid Bailey Run , Indian Creek OH, Piedmont VA), with mean errors of 211, 27, 5, and 224 m and 34, 3, 12, and 258 m, . Negative values indicate channel heads located upslope of those mapped in the field. Importantly, two independent methods produce mutually consistent estimates, providing two tests of channel locations based on independent topographic signatures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Clubb et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: