English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Many sources of error in hydroclimatic data can affect hydrological modelling, yet the impact of streamflow data quality is poorly quantified. This work aims to investigate whether inconsistencies found in streamflow time series commonly available for hydrological studies (typically in national streamflow archives) have an impact on the efficiency and the parameter estimates of rainfall–runoff models. Hydroclimatic data were gathered at the hourly time step over the period 1998–2018 for a set of 30 catchments in France. Hydrological modelling was carried out with the lumped conceptual GR5H (standing for modèle du Génie Rural à 5 paramètres Horaire, i.e. Hourly 5-parameter rural engineering model) model. A typology of “realistic” suspicious streamflow was established to set up several error models in order to corrupt the data. Our results suggest that common suspicious streamflow data do not have a strong impact on model efficiency and parameter estimates overall, but may be an important source of instability and lack of robustness when working on a single catchment.

Impact of suspicious streamflow data on the efficiency and parameter estimates of rainfall–runoff models