A comparison of similarity indices for catchment classification using a cross-regional dataset

Genevieve Ali, Doerthe Tetzlaff, Christopher Soulsby, Jeffery McDonnell, Rene Capell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

41 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

While there is currently much research activity on catchment classification, there is no agreement on relevant measures of catchment similarity. Here we investigate whether the use of different catchment characteristics as similarity measures leads to convergent catchment classification results. We fed a clustering algorithm called affinity propagation (AP) with different combinations of catchment forcing, form and function indicators collected over 36 Scottish sites (0.44–1712.10 km2). The AP algorithm was effective in determining the optimal number of groups needed to capture the most variability in each combination of variables. Catchment groupings obtained using physical properties only did not match those obtained using flow indices, mean transit times or storage estimates. The lack of correlation between flow-derived indicators and physical indicators was a surprising result. The combination of data which best approximated the interactions between catchment structural and functional properties included only topographic characteristics, soil properties and mean transit time estimates.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)11-22
Number of pages12
JournalAdvances in Water Resources
Volume40
Issue number-
Early online date3 Feb 2012
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2012

Fingerprint

similarity index
catchment
comparison
soil property
physical property
indicator

Keywords

  • catchment classification
  • catchment forcing
  • catchment form
  • catchment function
  • affinity propagation
  • Scotland

Cite this

A comparison of similarity indices for catchment classification using a cross-regional dataset. / Ali, Genevieve; Tetzlaff, Doerthe; Soulsby, Christopher; McDonnell, Jeffery; Capell, Rene.

In: Advances in Water Resources, Vol. 40, No. -, 05.2012, p. 11-22.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{eb6b28b4b8e64129a518df90af09faeb,
title = "A comparison of similarity indices for catchment classification using a cross-regional dataset",
abstract = "While there is currently much research activity on catchment classification, there is no agreement on relevant measures of catchment similarity. Here we investigate whether the use of different catchment characteristics as similarity measures leads to convergent catchment classification results. We fed a clustering algorithm called affinity propagation (AP) with different combinations of catchment forcing, form and function indicators collected over 36 Scottish sites (0.44–1712.10 km2). The AP algorithm was effective in determining the optimal number of groups needed to capture the most variability in each combination of variables. Catchment groupings obtained using physical properties only did not match those obtained using flow indices, mean transit times or storage estimates. The lack of correlation between flow-derived indicators and physical indicators was a surprising result. The combination of data which best approximated the interactions between catchment structural and functional properties included only topographic characteristics, soil properties and mean transit time estimates.",
keywords = "catchment classification, catchment forcing, catchment form, catchment function, affinity propagation, Scotland",
author = "Genevieve Ali and Doerthe Tetzlaff and Christopher Soulsby and Jeffery McDonnell and Rene Capell",
year = "2012",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.01.008",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "11--22",
journal = "Advances in Water Resources",
issn = "0309-1708",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "-",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of similarity indices for catchment classification using a cross-regional dataset

AU - Ali, Genevieve

AU - Tetzlaff, Doerthe

AU - Soulsby, Christopher

AU - McDonnell, Jeffery

AU - Capell, Rene

PY - 2012/5

Y1 - 2012/5

N2 - While there is currently much research activity on catchment classification, there is no agreement on relevant measures of catchment similarity. Here we investigate whether the use of different catchment characteristics as similarity measures leads to convergent catchment classification results. We fed a clustering algorithm called affinity propagation (AP) with different combinations of catchment forcing, form and function indicators collected over 36 Scottish sites (0.44–1712.10 km2). The AP algorithm was effective in determining the optimal number of groups needed to capture the most variability in each combination of variables. Catchment groupings obtained using physical properties only did not match those obtained using flow indices, mean transit times or storage estimates. The lack of correlation between flow-derived indicators and physical indicators was a surprising result. The combination of data which best approximated the interactions between catchment structural and functional properties included only topographic characteristics, soil properties and mean transit time estimates.

AB - While there is currently much research activity on catchment classification, there is no agreement on relevant measures of catchment similarity. Here we investigate whether the use of different catchment characteristics as similarity measures leads to convergent catchment classification results. We fed a clustering algorithm called affinity propagation (AP) with different combinations of catchment forcing, form and function indicators collected over 36 Scottish sites (0.44–1712.10 km2). The AP algorithm was effective in determining the optimal number of groups needed to capture the most variability in each combination of variables. Catchment groupings obtained using physical properties only did not match those obtained using flow indices, mean transit times or storage estimates. The lack of correlation between flow-derived indicators and physical indicators was a surprising result. The combination of data which best approximated the interactions between catchment structural and functional properties included only topographic characteristics, soil properties and mean transit time estimates.

KW - catchment classification

KW - catchment forcing

KW - catchment form

KW - catchment function

KW - affinity propagation

KW - Scotland

U2 - 10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.01.008

DO - 10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.01.008

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 11

EP - 22

JO - Advances in Water Resources

JF - Advances in Water Resources

SN - 0309-1708

IS - -

ER -