The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
High‐flow and flood trends in a network of undisturbed catchments in the UK
Abstract
This study presents the results of trend tests applied to high‐flow and flood records from a network of catchments in the UK. These rivers have flow regimes which are relatively undisturbed by anthropogenic influences, enabling a characterization of natural, climate‐driven trends. Trend tests were applied to indicators of flood magnitude and frequency, and also indicators of high‐flow magnitude (10‐ and 30‐day maxima) and duration (prevalence of high‐flows). Significant positive trends over the 30–40 years leading up to 2003 were identified in all indicators, and these were primarily found in upland, maritime‐influenced catchments in northern and western areas of the UK. The results suggest a trend towards more protracted high‐flows and more spate conditions in northern and western areas, but trends in flood magnitude were less prevalent. Few compelling trends were found in the English lowlands, where significant high‐flow trends were influenced by a sequence of notable flood events through the exceptionally wet winter of 2000/1. The observed trends have parallels with some projections for extreme rainfall changes under climate change scenarios. However, high‐flow indicators for many northern and western catchments were correlated with the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), so recent increases are probably caused by a shift towards a more prevalent positive NAO since the 1960s. Six longer (>55 years) hydrometric records were used to place recent trends in a historical context; there was little evidence for trend in the longer time series, but fluctuations in the records suggest that recent trends may be influenced by multi‐decadal variability, which has important consequences for trend detection as the majority of UK gauging station records begin in a relatively quiescent period for high‐flows. Copyright © 2007 Royal Meteorological Society
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Bootstrap Methods and their Application
Davison, A. C., & Hinkley, D. V. (1997) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511802843 · Cited by 7,350
Cited by
Anthropogenic greenhouse gas contribution to flood risk in England and Wales in autumn 2000
Pall, P., Aina, T., Stone, D. A., Stott, P. A., Nozawa, T., Hilberts, A. G. J., Lohmann, D., & Allen, M. R. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature09762 · Cited by 871
Prosdocimi, I., Kjeldsen, T. R., & Miller, J. D. (2015) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1002/2015wr017065 · Cited by 213
Metadata
- Authors
- Hannaford, J., & Marsh, T. J.
- Venue
- International Journal of Climatology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-11-22
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1325-1338
- ISSN
- 0899-8418 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0088
- OpenAlex
- W2084217276
- Cited by
- 179
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.79
- 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: High‐flow and flood trends in a network of undisturbed catchments in the UK. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/joc.1643
- The paper
- Hannaford, J., & Marsh, T. J. (2008). High‐flow and flood trends in a network of undisturbed catchments in the UK. International Journal of Climatology. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.1643
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.