Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 367

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Quantifying contributions to storm runoff through end‐member mixing analysis and hydrologic measurements at the Panola Mountain Research Watershed (Georgia, USA)

Burns, Douglas A., McDonnell, Jeffrey J., Hooper, Richard P., Peters, Norman E., Freer, James E., Kendall, Carol, Beven, Keith·2001·Hydrological Processes

Abstract

The geographic sources and hydrologic flow paths of stormflow in small catchments are not well understood because of limitations in sampling methods and insufficient resolution of potential end members. To address these limitations, an extensive hydrologic dataset was collected at a 10 ha catchment at Panola Mountain Research Watershed near Atlanta, GA, to quantify the contribution of three geographic sources of stormflow. Samples of stream water, runoff from an outcrop, and hillslope subsurface stormflow were collected during two rainstorms in the winter of 1996, and an end‐member mixing analysis model that included five solutes was developed. Runoff from the outcrop, which occupies about one‐third of the catchment area, contributed 50–55% of the peak streamflow during the 2 February rainstorm, and 80–85% of the peak streamflow during the 6–7 March rainstorm; it also contributed about 50% to total streamflow during the dry winter conditions that preceded the 6–7 March storm. Riparian groundwater runoff was the largest component of stream runoff (80–100%) early during rising streamflow and throughout stream recession, and contributed about 50% to total stream runoff during the 2 February storm, which was preceded by wet winter conditions. Hillslope runoff contributed 25–30% to peak stream runoff and 15–18% to total stream runoff during both storms. The temporal response of the three runoff components showed general agreement with hydrologic measurements from the catchment during each storm. Estimates of recharge from the outcrop to the riparian aquifer that were independent of model calculations indicated that storage in the riparian aquifer could account for the volume of rain that fell on the outcrop but did not contribute to stream runoff. The results of this study generally indicate that improvements in the ability of mixing models to describe the hydrologic response accurately in forested catchments may depend on better identification, and detailed spatial and temporal characterization of the mobile waters from the principal hydrologic source areas that contribute to stream runoff. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hyp.246

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 367

Metadata

Authors
Burns, D. A., McDonnell, J. J., Hooper, R. P., Peters, N. E., Freer, J. E., Kendall, C., & Beven, K.
Venue
Hydrological Processes
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2001-07
Volume
15
Issue
10
Pages
1903-1924
ISSN
  • 0885-6087 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1085
OpenAlex
W2155097344
Cited by
367
References
0
FWCI
17.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantifying contributions to storm runoff through end‐member mixing analysis and hydrologic measurements at the Panola Mountain Research Watershed (Georgia, USA). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/hyp.246
The paper
Burns, D. A., McDonnell, J. J., Hooper, R. P., Peters, N. E., Freer, J. E., Kendall, C., & Beven, K. (2001). Quantifying contributions to storm runoff through end‐member mixing analysis and hydrologic measurements at the Panola Mountain Research Watershed (Georgia, USA). Hydrological Processes. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.246

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.